I guess those children brought along by their families willfully chose to have their parents or parent bring them into the USA through undocumented immigration. Why do you insist on calling these people illegals when they're just as law-abiding as you and I, except they were brought here underage and only found out they were undocumented when they got into High School or College? They are not criminals, they did not knowingly break any laws. Most of the time they don't even speak Spanish, so deporting them to Mexico where they can't speak the language and they don't know any of their family there is exceptionally cruel punishment for someone who ultimately didn't do anything except get brought over by an authority figure early on in life.
It's not a soft friendly PC name calling them undocumented immigrants, it's being realistic about the fact that not every single one of them committed any crime willingly or otherwise. Calling them illegals is absolutely pejorative, and it has no purpose other than to paint the "illegals" as nothing more than criminals. The world isn't so black-and-white, and there are a lot of privileged people who simply cannot fathom that maybe some undocumented people in America aren't here because they decided to cross the border one day, as they had little choice in the matter once their immediate family says "This is what we're doing" and the children don't even yet understand what is happening.
Not every undocumented immigrant comes to America this way, of course, but there are many who do, and to call them criminals via blanket statements is, frankly, ignorant. A child being brought over the border illegally by his/her family has two choices: Go with your family or go live on the streets. They're presented with these choices when they're often times not even old enough to comprehend anything about what's going on, other than "We're moving". I really hope you can begin to consider that maybe everyone you call "illegal" did nothing at all to earn that mean and inaccurate label. It's a pejorative term used to dehumanize the actual people involved, and there are better ways to describe this swath of people without the stigma of "Illegals".
"Affected by current laws" makes it sound like they had the unfortunate accident of being dropped in this country by mistake rather than choosing, willfully, to be in violation of the law.
It's staring you right in the face in the opening of your post, but for some reason it eludes you. There actually are a lot of people who absolutely were not brought here willingly or at an age of understanding.
The guy laughs at the most inappropriate moments, a lot. Recalling a horrible cruel prank on a gay person back in college? Haha! Talking about a situation where his wife could have died? Haha! Talking about the Seamus-on-his-car-roof-in-a-kennel incident? Haha! Talking about your father closing a factory in Michigan and moving it to Wisconsin and there was a mishap with the band playing the wrong song? Haha!
Romney's laughter isn't an indicator of sincerity. It's an indicator of extreme nervousness and discomfort meant to distract. And the sad thing is that it apprently works on people.
I can't imagine why a jagoff like you gets downvoted on Reddit. Oh wait, I can, it's because you take a lot of text and time to say a lot of bullpucky amounting to nothing of real value. The fact that you got modded up for posting conspiratorial drivel is kind of worrying, but I guess a lot of people here on/. really do want to think they're being silenced by "the man", whoever or whatever "the man" may be for a particular website. Honestly, you're not nearly as important to the people that run the site or the various sub-reddits that you seem to believe you are.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong or anything but that sounds the exact opposite of how the Square pre-release is on Linux platforms right now. HW Accel is only supported in the 32-bit flash and is supposed to be available for 64-bit users when the next Flash release is finalized. If it's the other way around, then I find it pretty strange that I still don't have 1-5% CPU usage with 1080p under Linux w/NVidia while I have no issue whatsoever under Windows w/NVidia. As it is I can expect a 1080p flash video to eat about 40% of one of my four cores under Linux. Actually, just tested now in my Chromium nightly (32-bit) with the latest Flash and I'm getting about 10-20% CPU usually for the 1080p playback.
If things are really that way in Mac-land, the opposite of how it is in Linux-land, congratulations on having a better 64-bit plugin than the 32-bit plugin. Seems you are unable to really make use of it though.
On Saturday a WikiLeaks spokesman, who said he uses the name Daniel Schmitt in order to protect his identity, told The Associated Press that the group had requested help from NATO to check the files prior to publication to ensure the lives of civilians were not put at risk.
"For this reason, we conveyed a request to the White House prior to the publication, asking that the International Security Assistance Force provide us with reviewers," Schmitt said. "That request remains open. However, the Pentagon has stated that it is not interested in 'harm minimization' and has not contacted us, directly, or indirectly to discuss this offer."
If the government/NATO wants to protect civilians that assisted them then they should do what's right and help Wikileaks to redact such names from the documents. This is exactly the same thing that happened with the leaked cables -- Wikileaks asks the government to, if it wishes, tell them what names need to be redacted from these documents, and the government refuses to do so. The recklessness is coming from NATO and the government, not from Wikileaks which has shown every interest in addressing this particular issue.
And if you don't think they're serious about cooperating for redactions, I would remind you that the ball is not in Wikileaks court regarding such redactions. Anyone that does die because of these leaks (something that has not been proven anywhere) dies because the government refused to shield them, when it should be doing the right thing and focusing on damage control. The stuff is out there and it's going to be released, it's only responsible to try to make sure that innocent people who aided your efforts won't get hurt because you want to play the role of tough guy.
I honestly think if more people knew about NX they would never use VNC unless it was absolutely the only solution available, period. VNC just blows chunks way too bad, and NX makes things so easy when bandwidth is important. Anyone who has not tried NX and uses VNC should seriously give it a try because the difference is night and day.
Ext4 doesn't have online defrag yet, it is planned. Btrfs has an fsck tool but it is not capable of fixing any problems on the disk, it can apparently only let you know there are problems (I say apparently because while I've used btrfs I haven't before had to fsck it thanks to lots of luck with not running into any hiccups during my usage). They say as much on the front page of the Btrfs wiki. To quote the main page of this wiki:
Btrfs is under heavy development, but every effort is being made to keep the filesystem stable and fast. As of 2.6.31, we only plan to make forward compatible disk format changes, and many users have been experimenting with Btrfs on their systems with good results. Please email the Btrfs mailing list if you have any problems or questions while using Btrfs.
Note that Btrfs does not yet have a fsck tool that can fix errors. While Btrfs is stable on a stable machine, it is currently possible to corrupt a filesystem irrecoverably if your machine crashes or loses power on disks that don't handle flush requests correctly. This will be fixed when the fsck tool is ready.
So not only are you railing against ext4 for a fsck operation which should take a long time (5TB? Come on, most people don't have 1TB in their box, and we're talking about desktop users), but you are unawares of the features and capabilities of both filesystems you are discussing. Btrfs is great, but it's not something Average Joe should be using just yet either in production or on their desktop. I have used it before and I will use it again in the future, but it is not complete yet.
If I had any mod points I probably just would have modded up ratboy666's reply because he did a fantastic job of explaining the whole situation.
WoW and most MMOs are under constant development, and while early development could be interpreted as "during alpha/beta" it could also be interpreted to mean "early on in the game's lifetime".
It wasn't even really a trick of wording though, because the patch notes linked by KingMotley explains the change in more depth. The change was drastically for the better, as the patch notes explained it allows for more freedom in exploring aspects of gameplay aside from level grinding. Before, you had a set amount of time before your XP was diminished significantly. After the modification, the only thing that was really impacted by being rested was level grinding. This change gave users the freedom to not have to worry about spending the first few hours grinding, and they could play at their own pace.
So your point really doesn't stand because much more of the gameplay was changed than "oh the rested mechanism works slightly different but pretty much the same" because it's an oversimplifcation. If you don't see the very real and very drastic differences between how it worked and how it's been tweaked to work, you aren't trying very hard or you haven't played the game for a significant amount of time.
I already posted a follow-up response to my own comment that stated that XP did work like this in Beta, and how it's not really honest to present it like the game was ever functioning like that once it was released to the public.
As a small addendum I forgot to mention: In the beta the XP gains worked differently. Beta was a long time ago and gamers don't generally consider discussions of Beta stages to be relevant to the game at-and-post-launch. TBH your description is similar to how things worked in Beta, but it's not like there was widespread outrage because WoW didn't exactly have a huge public beta test (Or any public beta test that I can remember).
World of Warcraft was never like that. If you spend any time, logged out or logged in, inside a major city or an inn at a minor city/outpost then you become "rested". While you are rested you gain a bonus to your XP gains, This mechanism has never been modified and has been in place since launch, and I do not remember ever hearing anyone raising a stink over getting to log out for the night in town and come back in the morning with half a level or more rested so that your leveling is in fact highly accelerated.
The results from html5test have my Chromium nightly leading the pack with a score of 241 with 8 bonus points out of a total of 300. For comparison, in order of most "compliant" to least:
Chromium 7.0.531.0 (60152): 241/8
Chrome 7.0.517.8 dev: 231/12
Firefox 4 (Minefield nightly): 207/9
Opera 10.61 build 3484: 159/7
Firefox 3.6.10: 139/4
Internet Explorer 9 beta: 96/5
So the IE9 beta does lag pretty far behind the competition on this test for html5 support, and I don't think anyone would be surprised to see Chromium/Chrome in the lead with FF4 gaining ground. The point is, though, that no browser is completely standards compliant yet, much less with html5 and/or CSS3.
SRWare Iron was created for the sole purpose of earning the "creator" some money on ad revenue. To borrow from my previous post on the subject:
Everyone mentioning SRWare Iron should know about this little tidbit: The story of Iron. The article and the linked IRC log tell a very interesting story about a guy less concerned with having a good reason to fork and more concerned with making money off of adsense and publicity for creating a "privacy-respecting" Chrome which is basically a perpetually outdated Chromium with a few checkboxes in "Under the Hood" defaulting to off.
The guy who runs that blog does not try to hide the fact that he's a Chrome developer, and he admits that there is the highly unlikely possibility that the person who was asking these questions was not the person who went on to release Iron. I was skeptical as well until I checked out the log file itself and quite honestly it would have to be an incredible coincidence for this guy to be asking such questions and providing the information that he does in his attempts to glean information on the right way to advertise his product as well as how to go about renaming the executable. There's more that makes it very reasonable to believe this is the guy who went on to release Iron, so please don't dismiss it until you've checked out the log file in detail. If this was a supremely unnecessary and elaborate hoax it sure is pulled off convincingly.
Using Iron after reading this information made me feel like I was supporting the wrong guy here and I couldn't do it anymore, it was just too uncomfortable seeing that this guy was looking for adsense revenue and to make a name for himself. The attitude of this developer is not one I would encourage at all.
Yes, it is. GNOME is a product (software project) that is included with various other products into a meta-product (for-pay distributions, as well as distros that offer support contracts). Matter of fact, a product doesn't have to cost money or be proprietary in order to be considered a product, but the GNOME project has to push their product or they risk losing relevance, market share and mind share if they appear to be dragging their feet and lagging in progress.
Its delay proves gross incompetence to whom?
The core GNOME developers and maintainers of the project along with various sub-projects which have fallen behind schedule quite a bit are to blame.
I'm not personally of the mindset that any of these delays constitutes anything more than very bad management and planning.
Isn't this what open source was suppose to be about? No shareholders to answer to, the software is realeased when it's done?
No, it's not what OSS was supposed to be about and it's not what it is about. The shareholders in the F/OSS world are not only the community members but any businesses which have a significant stake in releasing a solid product. Don't think that if GNOME falls far behind KDE or anything else that major distributions won't drop support for it, or simply remove it entirely from its repositories. Case in point -- Slackware. GNOME failed as a product to satisfy the Slackware developers (Meaning Patrick Volkerding, primarily, if I recall correctly) and was thus dropped in favor of KDE. If it becomes a pain in the butt for RedHat to support a GNOME desktop on RHEL because GNOME feels old and/or crusty they will look for other options.
In short, GNOME can take as long as they want getting to 3.0, but other software projects (especially desktop environments and window managers) are not stopping and waiting for them to play catch-up. The lesson to take away from this is to be a little more conservative about estimates for getting projects needing more attention out the door. Maybe they lost a few or many developers or volunteers, but the most likely explanation to a lot of people will appear to be that they underestimated how much time and how many developers and testers were needed.
FWIW, as someone who wants to see GNOME Shell and 3.0 finished, I am at least glad they have recognized publicly that GNOME Shell is absolutely nowhere near ready. I've tried it out a few times in various distros and it's about as disappointing as can be as far as performance and stability. If they would have stuck to their original release schedule this would have been far worse than the reaction to KDE4 when it landed. It would be like the Four Yorkshiremen skit with the GNOME 3.0 early adopters scoffing at how much easier the KDE 4.0 early adopters had it.
We shouldn't need to give examples of wingnuts claiming we need censorship for particular things, it should be common knowledge that wingnuts on both sides are fond of calling for censorship of opposing viewpoints. The Left does this, the Right does this, everyones shit stinks figuratively speaking. Censoring books in libraries that deal with homosexuality to any degree (except in a negative light) is something that the Right is guilty of. Being the first to implement what has become known as 'free speech zones' is something the Left (if you really want to insist that the Left is represented by the DNC, which I will accept for the purposes of this discussion but don't necessarily agree with) is guilty of. Insisting that one religion be propped up at the expense of another on public grounds (The courthouse 10 commandments case, Alabama I believe) is something the Right is guilty of.
I am not saying the Left doesn't mess up, and I'm not saying the Right are the ones always messing up. I am just pointing out what should be obvious to everyone but partisans, that neither side can claim to be on a pedestal of anti-censorship and pro-free-thought. If you want to start slamming the Left for censoring opposing viewpoints, you are being disingenuous if you refuse to acknowledge that the Right is guilty as well, just for different reasons. Certainly we can agree on the point that both sides of the political spectrum are populated largely by average Joe Sixpacks who make mistakes in judgement on a wide variety of issues, including what should and shouldn't be censored or banned?
P.S. -- I really don't agree at all with the logic that it costs so much more to have ballots printed in multiple languages when we are and should be moving to make it as electronic as possible, while at the same time ensuring as well as we can the integrity of elections. I will however grant you that some people legitimately feel that this is a good reason to mandate a national language, even if I think it's a futile solution in search of a problem. (How much does it really cost anyways to provide these few printings in different languages, seeing as how it would be rather daft to print equal amounts of each language knowing that demand is not equal? A drop of water in a well I am sure)
I was unaware of anyone who wanted there to be a law against the Piss Christ. I know that a lot of people protested that their tax dollars were used to fund "art" that they considered offensive. I'm not sure how instituting an official national language (even if fluency in it is required for residency) is an attempt to make it a crime to offend someone.
Do you really expect the media outlets to go out of their way to find the people who would support such a ban? I don't have an article to link to where someone flat-out states that art or depictions like Piss Christ should be banned, but you are fooling yourself if you honestly don't think that there were fundies who wanted it banned.
As for the official national language, how does it not come down to the supporters being offended that any other language is considered equal to English in the USA? Supporters are offended that some people place more cultural value on where they are from (Russia, Ukraine, Middle East, Mexico, Spain, I could go on and on) and they would rather force these people to assimilate by legislating that English is the language one must speak in this country.
Can you give me an example where religious fundies(non-Muslim) attempted to limit free speech in the same vein as the Taliban? You do understand that the left in the US has actually instituted limits on speech in areas where they have institutional control.
I just gave multiple examples that you attempted to deflect as irrelevant because you were unable to discern the connections. Let's see then, if you want a solid concrete example of religious fundies attempting to impose their will how about looking at the groups that support the murdering of abortion doctors? I believe it was Richard Dawkins who interviewed a friend of the murderer of Dr. Tiller, and that man is certainly not alone in thinking that Biblical law is above the government. There are plenty of people who feel this way, and just because they aren't plastered over the media day in and day out doesn't mean they don't exist and feel the way they do.
Furthermore, I am well aware of the disgusting practice of creating 'free speech zones' and I am also well aware that they are utilized by both the Left and Right in this country, while you are content to act like only the Left does it. Disingenuous much? Both sides are dirty in this regard, stop pretending the Left is the only side with idiots who support 'free speech zones'.
Yeah, because nobody on the Right in America wants to "make it a crime to offend someone." Two words -- Piss Christ. There are plenty of other examples, but neither side has a monopoly on trying to shut the other up over offending feelings.
In case someone wants to try to argue about the NEA funding for Piss Christ (as if that should make a lick of difference) how about trying to institute a national language and require fluency in it for residency? How about the religious fundies the Right picks up in droves to boost poll numbers who would absolutely love the same limits to free speech in the same vein as say, the Taliban. But no, it's the Left and the evil Political Correctness machine that's determined to put a gag on free speech. It couldn't possibly be caused by a problem that both sides have, which are wingnuts and extremists.
If you have a shitty high school science teacher who doesn't mention anything about evolution, you probably learned about evolution on your own when you were interested in dinosaurs as a kid. If not, you'll learn it in your introductory biology classes in undergrad. You'll come across it at some point. It's not like high school is the only place learning goes on.
It often seems like very few people spend any amount of time outside of school (when enrolled currently or not) doing any sort of learning that they don't feel they need to do for their career or hobby. I very seriously doubt that your average high-school graduate American would at any point during their life after graduation take a critical look at evolution if they were never educated about it in school. Most high-school graduates who don't go on to some form of higher education think that they've done their time and a surprisingly large amount of the population on a whole places very little value on reading. Self-education is a logical extension to this severe lack of interest in reading, and indeed many people object quite strongly to reading.
I talk specifically about Americans merely because it's the culture that I'm familiar with, but around here most people do not consider reading something to do for leisure. All of this being considered, I don't think that we can afford to abdicate the responsibility of educating students properly in the hopes that they will educate themselves on their own time.
"When even the x264 developers comment that it's very similar to H.264 you can bet that some of the 1000+ patents on H.264 apply."
Why would you trust an x264 developer to not have a biased opinion about something like this? How is this not exactly the same as Microsoft claiming that Linux infringes on so many patents yet at the same time nobody making such claims want to specify what exactly the problem is? Not that any of it should matter because (software) patents are BS and made to be abused, but why is it that we have all these people (I'm especially looking at Steve Jobs here) taking this one developers word as gospel truth, his comparisons without flaw. We should all be wary of who is telling us what, and it's important for a lot of people to realize that yes, there are probably some infringements, but when everyone infringes on everyone else the system is broken beyond repair. To pretend that H.264's shit doesn't stink, to borrow a crude phrase to describe the situation, is beyond ridiculous.
I mean seriously, this kind of blustering is expected for stuff like political discourse in many parts of the world. Why do we have to tolerate it when it comes to innovation and the progress of mankind? I of course realize that governments tolerate it because representatives get money, but we as "ordinary people" should not allow such discourse poisoning at our level.
I guess it all comes down to what us here at Slashdot were continually saying during the whole SCO fiasco -- Put up or shut up. If MPEG LA is going to sue over Theora and VP8, do it already. I would endorse direct intervention on the part of the state dictating that if people don't stop wasting time on this garbage, hindering many fields and pursuits, then the window of opportunity has passed or will pass shortly. It's not like Theora or Dirac or VP8 or x/h264 are completely unknown beasts, and it's not like any involved company who would have a direct financial interest in protecting their IP hasn't had more than enough time to pull a case together to present to a court of law. This is on the level of schoolyard bickering and it needs to be mediated. It's obvious to us observers that the buildup is either for increased financial payout in the end or to merely try to FUD things to death. The law can (and maybe does) care to make such distinctions, but we as people definitely should even if the law does not (and work to change it so the law does).
Slashdot Mirror
I guess those children brought along by their families willfully chose to have their parents or parent bring them into the USA through undocumented immigration. Why do you insist on calling these people illegals when they're just as law-abiding as you and I, except they were brought here underage and only found out they were undocumented when they got into High School or College? They are not criminals, they did not knowingly break any laws. Most of the time they don't even speak Spanish, so deporting them to Mexico where they can't speak the language and they don't know any of their family there is exceptionally cruel punishment for someone who ultimately didn't do anything except get brought over by an authority figure early on in life.
It's not a soft friendly PC name calling them undocumented immigrants, it's being realistic about the fact that not every single one of them committed any crime willingly or otherwise. Calling them illegals is absolutely pejorative, and it has no purpose other than to paint the "illegals" as nothing more than criminals. The world isn't so black-and-white, and there are a lot of privileged people who simply cannot fathom that maybe some undocumented people in America aren't here because they decided to cross the border one day, as they had little choice in the matter once their immediate family says "This is what we're doing" and the children don't even yet understand what is happening.
Not every undocumented immigrant comes to America this way, of course, but there are many who do, and to call them criminals via blanket statements is, frankly, ignorant. A child being brought over the border illegally by his/her family has two choices: Go with your family or go live on the streets. They're presented with these choices when they're often times not even old enough to comprehend anything about what's going on, other than "We're moving". I really hope you can begin to consider that maybe everyone you call "illegal" did nothing at all to earn that mean and inaccurate label. It's a pejorative term used to dehumanize the actual people involved, and there are better ways to describe this swath of people without the stigma of "Illegals".
It's staring you right in the face in the opening of your post, but for some reason it eludes you. There actually are a lot of people who absolutely were not brought here willingly or at an age of understanding.
The guy laughs at the most inappropriate moments, a lot. Recalling a horrible cruel prank on a gay person back in college? Haha! Talking about a situation where his wife could have died? Haha! Talking about the Seamus-on-his-car-roof-in-a-kennel incident? Haha! Talking about your father closing a factory in Michigan and moving it to Wisconsin and there was a mishap with the band playing the wrong song? Haha! Romney's laughter isn't an indicator of sincerity. It's an indicator of extreme nervousness and discomfort meant to distract. And the sad thing is that it apprently works on people.
I can't imagine why a jagoff like you gets downvoted on Reddit. Oh wait, I can, it's because you take a lot of text and time to say a lot of bullpucky amounting to nothing of real value. The fact that you got modded up for posting conspiratorial drivel is kind of worrying, but I guess a lot of people here on /. really do want to think they're being silenced by "the man", whoever or whatever "the man" may be for a particular website. Honestly, you're not nearly as important to the people that run the site or the various sub-reddits that you seem to believe you are.
Still think that way?
Sadly, he probably does.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong or anything but that sounds the exact opposite of how the Square pre-release is on Linux platforms right now. HW Accel is only supported in the 32-bit flash and is supposed to be available for 64-bit users when the next Flash release is finalized. If it's the other way around, then I find it pretty strange that I still don't have 1-5% CPU usage with 1080p under Linux w/NVidia while I have no issue whatsoever under Windows w/NVidia. As it is I can expect a 1080p flash video to eat about 40% of one of my four cores under Linux. Actually, just tested now in my Chromium nightly (32-bit) with the latest Flash and I'm getting about 10-20% CPU usually for the 1080p playback.
If things are really that way in Mac-land, the opposite of how it is in Linux-land, congratulations on having a better 64-bit plugin than the 32-bit plugin. Seems you are unable to really make use of it though.
To quote your linked article:
If the government/NATO wants to protect civilians that assisted them then they should do what's right and help Wikileaks to redact such names from the documents. This is exactly the same thing that happened with the leaked cables -- Wikileaks asks the government to, if it wishes, tell them what names need to be redacted from these documents, and the government refuses to do so. The recklessness is coming from NATO and the government, not from Wikileaks which has shown every interest in addressing this particular issue.
And if you don't think they're serious about cooperating for redactions, I would remind you that the ball is not in Wikileaks court regarding such redactions. Anyone that does die because of these leaks (something that has not been proven anywhere) dies because the government refused to shield them, when it should be doing the right thing and focusing on damage control. The stuff is out there and it's going to be released, it's only responsible to try to make sure that innocent people who aided your efforts won't get hurt because you want to play the role of tough guy.
I honestly think if more people knew about NX they would never use VNC unless it was absolutely the only solution available, period. VNC just blows chunks way too bad, and NX makes things so easy when bandwidth is important. Anyone who has not tried NX and uses VNC should seriously give it a try because the difference is night and day.
Ext4 doesn't have online defrag yet, it is planned. Btrfs has an fsck tool but it is not capable of fixing any problems on the disk, it can apparently only let you know there are problems (I say apparently because while I've used btrfs I haven't before had to fsck it thanks to lots of luck with not running into any hiccups during my usage). They say as much on the front page of the Btrfs wiki. To quote the main page of this wiki:
So not only are you railing against ext4 for a fsck operation which should take a long time (5TB? Come on, most people don't have 1TB in their box, and we're talking about desktop users), but you are unawares of the features and capabilities of both filesystems you are discussing. Btrfs is great, but it's not something Average Joe should be using just yet either in production or on their desktop. I have used it before and I will use it again in the future, but it is not complete yet.
If I had any mod points I probably just would have modded up ratboy666's reply because he did a fantastic job of explaining the whole situation.
WoW and most MMOs are under constant development, and while early development could be interpreted as "during alpha/beta" it could also be interpreted to mean "early on in the game's lifetime".
It wasn't even really a trick of wording though, because the patch notes linked by KingMotley explains the change in more depth. The change was drastically for the better, as the patch notes explained it allows for more freedom in exploring aspects of gameplay aside from level grinding. Before, you had a set amount of time before your XP was diminished significantly. After the modification, the only thing that was really impacted by being rested was level grinding. This change gave users the freedom to not have to worry about spending the first few hours grinding, and they could play at their own pace.
So your point really doesn't stand because much more of the gameplay was changed than "oh the rested mechanism works slightly different but pretty much the same" because it's an oversimplifcation. If you don't see the very real and very drastic differences between how it worked and how it's been tweaked to work, you aren't trying very hard or you haven't played the game for a significant amount of time.
That's funny because I remember posting that what he was describing was how things were at one point in the Beta.
I already posted a follow-up response to my own comment that stated that XP did work like this in Beta, and how it's not really honest to present it like the game was ever functioning like that once it was released to the public.
As a small addendum I forgot to mention: In the beta the XP gains worked differently. Beta was a long time ago and gamers don't generally consider discussions of Beta stages to be relevant to the game at-and-post-launch. TBH your description is similar to how things worked in Beta, but it's not like there was widespread outrage because WoW didn't exactly have a huge public beta test (Or any public beta test that I can remember).
See this for more details on the situation how it was in Beta, and then scroll up to see how it's been ever since..
World of Warcraft was never like that. If you spend any time, logged out or logged in, inside a major city or an inn at a minor city/outpost then you become "rested". While you are rested you gain a bonus to your XP gains, This mechanism has never been modified and has been in place since launch, and I do not remember ever hearing anyone raising a stink over getting to log out for the night in town and come back in the morning with half a level or more rested so that your leveling is in fact highly accelerated.
The results from html5test have my Chromium nightly leading the pack with a score of 241 with 8 bonus points out of a total of 300. For comparison, in order of most "compliant" to least:
So the IE9 beta does lag pretty far behind the competition on this test for html5 support, and I don't think anyone would be surprised to see Chromium/Chrome in the lead with FF4 gaining ground. The point is, though, that no browser is completely standards compliant yet, much less with html5 and/or CSS3.
Right you are, I didn't notice at first that minute difference.
Works fine over here on Chrome 6.0.472.62 beta, the Acid2 test looks exactly like the reference.
SRWare Iron was created for the sole purpose of earning the "creator" some money on ad revenue. To borrow from my previous post on the subject:
Everyone mentioning SRWare Iron should know about this little tidbit: The story of Iron. The article and the linked IRC log tell a very interesting story about a guy less concerned with having a good reason to fork and more concerned with making money off of adsense and publicity for creating a "privacy-respecting" Chrome which is basically a perpetually outdated Chromium with a few checkboxes in "Under the Hood" defaulting to off.
The guy who runs that blog does not try to hide the fact that he's a Chrome developer, and he admits that there is the highly unlikely possibility that the person who was asking these questions was not the person who went on to release Iron. I was skeptical as well until I checked out the log file itself and quite honestly it would have to be an incredible coincidence for this guy to be asking such questions and providing the information that he does in his attempts to glean information on the right way to advertise his product as well as how to go about renaming the executable. There's more that makes it very reasonable to believe this is the guy who went on to release Iron, so please don't dismiss it until you've checked out the log file in detail. If this was a supremely unnecessary and elaborate hoax it sure is pulled off convincingly.
Using Iron after reading this information made me feel like I was supporting the wrong guy here and I couldn't do it anymore, it was just too uncomfortable seeing that this guy was looking for adsense revenue and to make a name for himself. The attitude of this developer is not one I would encourage at all.
I don't think it should deviate the way it has so far with Shell on desktops, and have other hopes for GNOME 3.0. :)
Yes, it is. GNOME is a product (software project) that is included with various other products into a meta-product (for-pay distributions, as well as distros that offer support contracts). Matter of fact, a product doesn't have to cost money or be proprietary in order to be considered a product, but the GNOME project has to push their product or they risk losing relevance, market share and mind share if they appear to be dragging their feet and lagging in progress.
The core GNOME developers and maintainers of the project along with various sub-projects which have fallen behind schedule quite a bit are to blame.
I'm not personally of the mindset that any of these delays constitutes anything more than very bad management and planning.
No, it's not what OSS was supposed to be about and it's not what it is about. The shareholders in the F/OSS world are not only the community members but any businesses which have a significant stake in releasing a solid product. Don't think that if GNOME falls far behind KDE or anything else that major distributions won't drop support for it, or simply remove it entirely from its repositories. Case in point -- Slackware. GNOME failed as a product to satisfy the Slackware developers (Meaning Patrick Volkerding, primarily, if I recall correctly) and was thus dropped in favor of KDE. If it becomes a pain in the butt for RedHat to support a GNOME desktop on RHEL because GNOME feels old and/or crusty they will look for other options.
In short, GNOME can take as long as they want getting to 3.0, but other software projects (especially desktop environments and window managers) are not stopping and waiting for them to play catch-up. The lesson to take away from this is to be a little more conservative about estimates for getting projects needing more attention out the door. Maybe they lost a few or many developers or volunteers, but the most likely explanation to a lot of people will appear to be that they underestimated how much time and how many developers and testers were needed.
FWIW, as someone who wants to see GNOME Shell and 3.0 finished, I am at least glad they have recognized publicly that GNOME Shell is absolutely nowhere near ready. I've tried it out a few times in various distros and it's about as disappointing as can be as far as performance and stability. If they would have stuck to their original release schedule this would have been far worse than the reaction to KDE4 when it landed. It would be like the Four Yorkshiremen skit with the GNOME 3.0 early adopters scoffing at how much easier the KDE 4.0 early adopters had it.
We shouldn't need to give examples of wingnuts claiming we need censorship for particular things, it should be common knowledge that wingnuts on both sides are fond of calling for censorship of opposing viewpoints. The Left does this, the Right does this, everyones shit stinks figuratively speaking. Censoring books in libraries that deal with homosexuality to any degree (except in a negative light) is something that the Right is guilty of. Being the first to implement what has become known as 'free speech zones' is something the Left (if you really want to insist that the Left is represented by the DNC, which I will accept for the purposes of this discussion but don't necessarily agree with) is guilty of. Insisting that one religion be propped up at the expense of another on public grounds (The courthouse 10 commandments case, Alabama I believe) is something the Right is guilty of.
I am not saying the Left doesn't mess up, and I'm not saying the Right are the ones always messing up. I am just pointing out what should be obvious to everyone but partisans, that neither side can claim to be on a pedestal of anti-censorship and pro-free-thought. If you want to start slamming the Left for censoring opposing viewpoints, you are being disingenuous if you refuse to acknowledge that the Right is guilty as well, just for different reasons. Certainly we can agree on the point that both sides of the political spectrum are populated largely by average Joe Sixpacks who make mistakes in judgement on a wide variety of issues, including what should and shouldn't be censored or banned?
P.S. -- I really don't agree at all with the logic that it costs so much more to have ballots printed in multiple languages when we are and should be moving to make it as electronic as possible, while at the same time ensuring as well as we can the integrity of elections. I will however grant you that some people legitimately feel that this is a good reason to mandate a national language, even if I think it's a futile solution in search of a problem. (How much does it really cost anyways to provide these few printings in different languages, seeing as how it would be rather daft to print equal amounts of each language knowing that demand is not equal? A drop of water in a well I am sure)
Do you really expect the media outlets to go out of their way to find the people who would support such a ban? I don't have an article to link to where someone flat-out states that art or depictions like Piss Christ should be banned, but you are fooling yourself if you honestly don't think that there were fundies who wanted it banned.
As for the official national language, how does it not come down to the supporters being offended that any other language is considered equal to English in the USA? Supporters are offended that some people place more cultural value on where they are from (Russia, Ukraine, Middle East, Mexico, Spain, I could go on and on) and they would rather force these people to assimilate by legislating that English is the language one must speak in this country.
I just gave multiple examples that you attempted to deflect as irrelevant because you were unable to discern the connections. Let's see then, if you want a solid concrete example of religious fundies attempting to impose their will how about looking at the groups that support the murdering of abortion doctors? I believe it was Richard Dawkins who interviewed a friend of the murderer of Dr. Tiller, and that man is certainly not alone in thinking that Biblical law is above the government. There are plenty of people who feel this way, and just because they aren't plastered over the media day in and day out doesn't mean they don't exist and feel the way they do.
Furthermore, I am well aware of the disgusting practice of creating 'free speech zones' and I am also well aware that they are utilized by both the Left and Right in this country, while you are content to act like only the Left does it. Disingenuous much? Both sides are dirty in this regard, stop pretending the Left is the only side with idiots who support 'free speech zones'.
Yeah, because nobody on the Right in America wants to "make it a crime to offend someone." Two words -- Piss Christ. There are plenty of other examples, but neither side has a monopoly on trying to shut the other up over offending feelings.
In case someone wants to try to argue about the NEA funding for Piss Christ (as if that should make a lick of difference) how about trying to institute a national language and require fluency in it for residency? How about the religious fundies the Right picks up in droves to boost poll numbers who would absolutely love the same limits to free speech in the same vein as say, the Taliban. But no, it's the Left and the evil Political Correctness machine that's determined to put a gag on free speech. It couldn't possibly be caused by a problem that both sides have, which are wingnuts and extremists.
It often seems like very few people spend any amount of time outside of school (when enrolled currently or not) doing any sort of learning that they don't feel they need to do for their career or hobby. I very seriously doubt that your average high-school graduate American would at any point during their life after graduation take a critical look at evolution if they were never educated about it in school. Most high-school graduates who don't go on to some form of higher education think that they've done their time and a surprisingly large amount of the population on a whole places very little value on reading. Self-education is a logical extension to this severe lack of interest in reading, and indeed many people object quite strongly to reading.
I talk specifically about Americans merely because it's the culture that I'm familiar with, but around here most people do not consider reading something to do for leisure. All of this being considered, I don't think that we can afford to abdicate the responsibility of educating students properly in the hopes that they will educate themselves on their own time.
Why would you trust an x264 developer to not have a biased opinion about something like this? How is this not exactly the same as Microsoft claiming that Linux infringes on so many patents yet at the same time nobody making such claims want to specify what exactly the problem is? Not that any of it should matter because (software) patents are BS and made to be abused, but why is it that we have all these people (I'm especially looking at Steve Jobs here) taking this one developers word as gospel truth, his comparisons without flaw. We should all be wary of who is telling us what, and it's important for a lot of people to realize that yes, there are probably some infringements, but when everyone infringes on everyone else the system is broken beyond repair. To pretend that H.264's shit doesn't stink, to borrow a crude phrase to describe the situation, is beyond ridiculous.
I mean seriously, this kind of blustering is expected for stuff like political discourse in many parts of the world. Why do we have to tolerate it when it comes to innovation and the progress of mankind? I of course realize that governments tolerate it because representatives get money, but we as "ordinary people" should not allow such discourse poisoning at our level.
I guess it all comes down to what us here at Slashdot were continually saying during the whole SCO fiasco -- Put up or shut up. If MPEG LA is going to sue over Theora and VP8, do it already. I would endorse direct intervention on the part of the state dictating that if people don't stop wasting time on this garbage, hindering many fields and pursuits, then the window of opportunity has passed or will pass shortly. It's not like Theora or Dirac or VP8 or x/h264 are completely unknown beasts, and it's not like any involved company who would have a direct financial interest in protecting their IP hasn't had more than enough time to pull a case together to present to a court of law. This is on the level of schoolyard bickering and it needs to be mediated. It's obvious to us observers that the buildup is either for increased financial payout in the end or to merely try to FUD things to death. The law can (and maybe does) care to make such distinctions, but we as people definitely should even if the law does not (and work to change it so the law does).
Fuck off AC, you don't even post any goddamn links.