XML has a lot of cruft. Look at the difference in size between a JSON file and an XML file containing the same data. The same thing would apply to style sheets written in XML.
Assuming you use a standard 'format' for human readability in your CSS files, they should not be but a tiny bit larger than your CSS files. Otherwise you made the XML wrong.
First, you lose credibility for linking w3schools.com. Professional web developers wouldn't be caught dead referencing them. [w3fools.com]
Let me give you a hint.
Professionals link to the information that presents their view point. Children make ignorant blanket comments about websites with clear useful practical value.
You're statement proves you're just an arrogant prick who knows less than you pretend you do. When you start insulting perfectly valid reference material as if its beneath you, you make it clear you're over compensating for your own lack of ability.
If you're insulting a site intended for beginners because its beneath you, that generally indicates you feel inferior to it. So basically, all your comment is doing is letting us know that you aren't even confident that you know more than a beginners tutorial website.
Your statements reflect badly on you, your attitude and your abilities. In short, you've made it clear that you don't actually know if you know what you're talking about. You're just a newbie trying to pretend to be more than you are.
Insulting people using valid reference material just makes you look ignorant and unskilled.
And that really shows that while you understand the concepts of MVC, you don't understand what HTML actually is or how MVC exists in the real world.
HTML is both data and view. CSS is just sorta view. and javascript is just control (usually coupled with a backend component to complete this part of MVC).
The real world and the theoretical/ideal are entirely different.
The point is to get a job done. You're just adding unneeded semantics based on a broken philosophy. CSS is not better in several instances. Table based layouts are the proof of that. Instead of recognizing shortcomings, you're ignorance shows through as you just keep parroting the same old tired line... which just goes to illustrate that you are having a religious debate about your preferred language rather than a discussion of technical merits.
Unfortunately, such folks fall into categories like "clients", "customers" or "target audience" and its not such a good idea to tell them "piss off and come back when you've got a decent web browser".
A few years ago, I'd agree with you. Now? You can let those 3 clients go, you won't miss them that much. If you tell them to go piss off, they'll come back, no one else is going to support them either.
IF your business depends on old IE users for survival, you're fucked anyway, by definition.
Uhm, if your allowing company data to be stored on iCloud, you have already failed at your job. Not being able to remote wipe it is simple a side effect of your previous failure.
jQuery does it, CSS is just the way jQuery is interfacing with the browser. CSS isn't really doing anything but making the situation more complicated and convoluted actually.
CSS + jQuery, like most things on the web now days was stumbled on, not designed. It was stumbled on because no one bothers to think about what they are putting into HTML and how it affects the future, they only pay attention to what they want in their browser for today. The end result is that most of the system is decidedly BAD, with occasional highlights using weird tricks popping up to sustain it.
If you think HTML+CSS+jQuery is good... you don't know what 'good' is. Its a horrible excuse for a development environment.
A casino makes money on slots because if it takes in $100, it only pays out $90. It doesn't have to cheat because the game is designed so that the house wins over time no matter what. They don't have to do anything out of the ordinary because in order for someone to get paid $100, they've taken in $110. More winnings means more money for them because the rules are designed in their favor, and these rules are up front and public, every game is required to tell you how it pays.
The problem is that this guy figured out that if he played a machine that had multiple games on it, and played game A until he was given the opportunity to double his bet, that he could exit the game, go play B (on the same machine) and in that one play for a higher dollar amount (win or lose doesn't matter) then he could switch back to game A... where it didn't bother to notice he had left without finishing his last game... and to not notice that it used the same shared memory location in both cames for the 'how much was bet' values... so now, he played game A for $1 until it won, then he tricked it into thinking he had been playing for $10 and paying out based on that.
It was sloppying coding that allowed a software exploitable bug he used to cheat and not play by the agreed on rules.
Even the casino's play by the agreed on rules, they may be not so fair, but they are what everyone agrees to. They don't flat out lie to you, he was.
He's exploiting the interaction between two different software modules to his advantage. While from a technical perspective he didn't write any assembly to exploit a buffer overflow, he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software. The software was not clearing out memory it reused for like purposes between two different games, by exploiting this, he was able to increase his winnings by 10x.
He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software. He just isn't using your typical UI to enter and run the hack but he really is exploiting a software bug like metasploit would, or any other attack vector.
This isn't your typical hacking applied to some object that just happens to have a processor. He is hacking the software, and more so, a specific version of the software with specific features enabled. This is no different than an attack targeted at Chrome or Safari, it just seems that way because the UI isn't a terminal window.
Bluffing is a known aspect of the game of poker. Its actually part of the game. Everyone playing poker in a casino is fully aware of 'the bluff'.
What this guy did was took advantage of a software bug that caused UNINTENDED AND UNEXPECTED interactions between two DIFFERENT games that ran on the same machine. Its like if you played WoW for hours to get a loot box to drop... then switched over to GTA V, and placed a super high bet in a gambling game in GTA V... knowing that by doing so, you could switch back to WoW and have to multiple the loot in the drop by 10 times.
Its not supposed to work that way, and everyone knows it. Its not that he his following the 'letter of the law' when it comes to the rules, he's actually breaking the rules, using a flaw in the machine to do so.
Under the law, the have no such right. Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines.
Oh yes they are. Both parties are responsible for reporting and appropriately dealing with KNOWN issues. Both sides are granted legal immunity for UNKNOWN issues, but they BOTH require ALL plays AND pays to become void. Everyone goes back to their 'pre-play' state financially. What you're claiming is legal is exactly when it becomes fraud, when they continue taking advantage of the game they KNOW is not working properly.
Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule.
Because by definition, that would not be malfunctioning. If it followed the published schedule, he wouldn't have been getting 10x what the published schedule said, would he?
They wanted very badly to have him get up so that they could take the machine out of service, and after a short while enticed him to do so, much to his later (and more sober) regret.
You watch too many movies. They can, will, and DO move people off of machines to service them. The only time it is 'good' for you to 'stay' on a machine is if it is malfunctioning. It does not offer you any advantage to continue to play on a machine over time, regardless of time since last pay out. The odds don't actually work like you think they do. There is no pattern of timing that will allow you to get batter than break even odds out of a slot machine. This is a popular misconception of what 'odds' actually mean. 1 in 100 does not mean that if you throw 100 times, its going to happen once.
When it involves $400k... it tends to become something that the feds get involved in, even if its just to ask the local cops what help they might need as its big enough to warrants the experience of higher level investigators.
Malfunction voids the game. That goes both directions. They MUST refund any money they can. They MUST report it to the gaming board, and the board will decide how to handle the situation further... like deal with a situation where its been happening for too long to possibly find and refund money to all players. In the end, the casino will NOT get to keep the money and MAY get fined/sanctioned.
Casino's don't just do whatever suits them in this aspect, gambling is a tightly regulated industry in the US. While they can legally take your money for you being stupid and handing it too them, the states require them to be VERY precise. They can not mislead you even a little bit, even unintentionally.
They don't need to do anything sleezy believe it or not, people will be happy to throw money at them with everything out in the open and up front about it.
They have a machine...he didn't sigh any EULA or agreements about how to use it.
God you must be some fucking asshole.
Do you really want to live in a world where people have to have no respect for your wishes unless you get them to put their signature on paper? Do you want to end internet commerce as you know it? Do want all of the Internet to suddenly disappear because a whole bunch of shit suddenly becomes impractical to do because everyone spends a bunch of time waiting for the mailman to show up with signed documents?
Fortunately, assholes like you do not YET, rule the world.
When you walk into the casino... and EVERY SLOT MACHINE has a sign on it stating various FACTS and LAWS... then you lose your argument completely.
Just because you try to say 'well I didn't know I wasn't allowed to take the extra money it gave me that I didn't think I wont and you didn't make me agree to anything like that' doesn't mean anyone gives a shit.
You haven't made me sign a document stating that I won't kill you while you sleep... so I guess its okay if I do then? I think everyone would agree the world would benefit from that.
Do you sign a document or NDA before going into walmart and stealing money from their cash register? Is that how you get by with it?
If you see no problem with what he did, you are truly morally deficient. I mean it in the most sincere way, you need counseling. There is something wrong with your sense of right and wrong.
You took more money than you should have gotten. The machine is not aware of the error. You are. Its no different than any other type of fraud.
You're trying to pretend its OK to do it because you're not doing it in front of a person, but none the less you are taking advantage of someone elses ignorance.
The first time, you didn't know you were doing it. Thats okay in every way. The second time you did it, it was intentional. Thats not okay in any way.
You have deceived the bank by taking $40 when you told them you were taking $20.
If you believe in physics as the ruler of our universe, then everyone has the same odds, so even though randomness is a factor, it won't effect the outcome of a poker players career, though it may effect the outcome of a single game.
You blame the customer who throws a skeleton key (concrete brick) through the window and takes shit without paying... and you're arguing that you don't do anything to the customer because he should have known the customer could throw a brick so its the vendor's fault.
The rules of the game are clear. Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine. You agreed to that by playing.
Its not like these are rules for posted are not well known in advance, they are clearly written EVERYWHERE in vegas.
so far all I see is a bunch of catchy tunes, and there butthurt jealousy of Linux's popularity, meanwhile complaining about how some distros have non-free firmware, and how unfree the GPL, along with some prophesizing about how OpenBSD is going to take over the world. Then some bashing of RMS as a hypocrit.
Show me where Theo tells about OBSD taking over the world, I'm fairly positive thats exactly the opposite of his goals. Otherwise, it seems more like your statement is you projecting your own feelings on openbsd. RMS is not a hypocrite, just a fucking douche you're too stupid to recognize as using you to further his own political agenda.
What they miss is the only reason that either RedHat, or IBM, or SuSE call what they sell "linux" and various distros are vaugely compatible with each other is because of the GPL.
What you call 'vaguely' compatible, the rest of us call a joke. Its why no commercial vendors put real effort into targeting Linux, because what you call compatible, real developers call 'a fucking mess with no organization'. Distros BARELY remain compatible with the 'standard linux base', all of them come with random versions of libraries and different sets, in different places, effectively making the only common aspect amoung them to be names like Linux and GPL.
There are plenty of proprietary BSD-based OSs with their code. Mabey if the GPL'd back in the 1990s, people would using "MacBSD" instead of OSX or iOS. I am sorry but the BSD license is self-defeating, and they worked their way to oblivion, despite putting in undeniable hard work.
No, we wouldn't have MacBSD if it was GPL, we'd have something else not compatible at all. BSD did EXACTLY WHAT WAS INTENDED here, it allowed a commercial OS to use a common code base. THIS MEANS COMPATIBILITY. You don't get any more compatible than actually running the exact same code. This is why your shitty little fanboy OS actually can talk to a windows box, because... everyone... used.... BSD code... for networking.
What we have now is... Mac(h)/BSD... so basically, we got what you said we would have got with GPL... without GPL... BSD also got a metric fuckton of code in return. You pretty much picked 'the example' that is used to disprove your retarded 'BSD doesnt' get contributions back' argument as Apple has given back arguably more than they took in the first place.
The Internet as you know it would not exist if it weren't for BSD. We would most likely still be arguing over which network vendor was the mostest awesomest and still not have systems that talk to each other in a common way. At best there would be the half implemented GPL version that everyone says is fucking awesomer than awesome... but no one uses but a handful of geeks because some moron thinks that using vi to edit config files is acceptable, and god forbid how evil it is for a company to use your code without you immediately getting access to all of their work as well. Thats pretty fucking hypocritical. You call it 'free', you wouldn't knwo free if it hit you in the ass.
In the linux sphere, we made the corporations who enter give back. So yes, Linux go the devs and is now the most advanced Free UNIX clone, in part because we have 100x the devs working on it, and more people basing their projects on Linux, because of this.
No, you didn't. You don't even realize it. Its not the most advanced on several levels, ZFS being a prime example but certainly not the only example. How advanced can you be when you have a political ideology making decisions which should be based on technical merit? It IS NOT a 'free' UNIX clone, you don't even know what the word means. UNIX is a specification that Linux does not meet. It is not a clone. It doesn't work tha
You think this is unique to PC-BSD? Have you used the others because the summary tells you there are prebuilt binaries for OpenBSD and FreeBSD has packages as well... As does NetBSD.
I don't use NetBSD, and I don't use OpenBSD packages, but FreeBSD has had packages for at least 10 years, so since before PC-BSD forked...
Why do people bring up this kind of shit as if its not common to all BSDs?
If you have to ask, OpenBSD is not for you. That is by design, the project lead wants it that way. If you can't use Google to answer the questions you have asked, then OpenBSD is not for you. Let me take it one step further than that, if you DIDN'T GOOGLE IT FIRST, then OpenBSD is not for you in any way.
It is not intended for people who expect ANY hand holding as you WILL NOT GET ANY.
Yes, because the USA is the only country in the world that offers a way to transfer money between two parties.
IF that were actually true, you'd have bigger problems than anything related to Assange.
There are almost 200 countries in the world, yet you blame all your problems on only one of them.
There are multiple trivial ways in multiple countries that the US has no control over that they could use. Its just a whole lot more fun to blame your enemy than to actually make a change.
When you bring up Wikileaks not being able to get money you just show how ignorant you actually are of reality, and more important that you aren't even going to bother putting an even minor amount of critical thought into the process so you could see how retarded of a statement you just made.
Columbian drug dealers move BILLIONS OF DOLLARS and wikileaks can't get funding?
Seriously? Thats your story? Thats what you expect people to believe? Do you not understand why the general public no longer gives a shit about wikileaks? This kind of shit is why, it makes it blindingly clear that wikileaks is just pushing their agenda against specific people. They are EXACTLY WHAT THEY CLAIM TO BE AGAINST, the control information and use it to manipulate other people into forwarding their own political agenda.
Congratulations, you care so much about not being a government tool that you are now just Assange's tool instead. Clearly you're better off than before.
Any good channel had no problem dealing with mIRC lusers, it wasn't exactly difficult to weed out the ignorant masses. For fucks sake a simple botnet deals with the whole CTC/ASL issue.
The wheel is old too, but calling it outdated just makes you look like you don't understand how it works. Same here.
IRC is fine, its only problem was shitty clients. EFnet was dumb on a number of levels for trying so ridiculously hard to remain the wild wild west of chat (which ironically is why I stayed there) but there is nothing about any modern chat network that makes it inheriently better for 'chat' than any thing current until you start talking about voice chat.
Slashdot Mirror
I should add, its ironic that ultraliberal California doesn't consider this illegal, but Ruby Red North Carolina prevents such discrimination.
Anything less than equal treatment is discrimination.
Men are being discriminated against by not getting the same amount of leave to spend with their newborn children.
This has both physical and psychological effects on all parties involved.
XML has a lot of cruft. Look at the difference in size between a JSON file and an XML file containing the same data. The same thing would apply to style sheets written in XML.
Assuming you use a standard 'format' for human readability in your CSS files, they should not be but a tiny bit larger than your CSS files. Otherwise you made the XML wrong.
First, you lose credibility for linking w3schools.com. Professional web developers wouldn't be caught dead referencing them. [w3fools.com]
Let me give you a hint.
Professionals link to the information that presents their view point. Children make ignorant blanket comments about websites with clear useful practical value.
You're statement proves you're just an arrogant prick who knows less than you pretend you do. When you start insulting perfectly valid reference material as if its beneath you, you make it clear you're over compensating for your own lack of ability.
If you're insulting a site intended for beginners because its beneath you, that generally indicates you feel inferior to it. So basically, all your comment is doing is letting us know that you aren't even confident that you know more than a beginners tutorial website.
Your statements reflect badly on you, your attitude and your abilities. In short, you've made it clear that you don't actually know if you know what you're talking about. You're just a newbie trying to pretend to be more than you are.
Insulting people using valid reference material just makes you look ignorant and unskilled.
And that really shows that while you understand the concepts of MVC, you don't understand what HTML actually is or how MVC exists in the real world.
HTML is both data and view. CSS is just sorta view. and javascript is just control (usually coupled with a backend component to complete this part of MVC).
The real world and the theoretical/ideal are entirely different.
You're confusing the point.
The point is to get a job done. You're just adding unneeded semantics based on a broken philosophy. CSS is not better in several instances. Table based layouts are the proof of that. Instead of recognizing shortcomings, you're ignorance shows through as you just keep parroting the same old tired line ... which just goes to illustrate that you are having a religious debate about your preferred language rather than a discussion of technical merits.
Unfortunately, such folks fall into categories like "clients", "customers" or "target audience" and its not such a good idea to tell them "piss off and come back when you've got a decent web browser".
A few years ago, I'd agree with you. Now? You can let those 3 clients go, you won't miss them that much. If you tell them to go piss off, they'll come back, no one else is going to support them either.
IF your business depends on old IE users for survival, you're fucked anyway, by definition.
Uhm, if your allowing company data to be stored on iCloud, you have already failed at your job. Not being able to remote wipe it is simple a side effect of your previous failure.
No, not really.
jQuery does it, CSS is just the way jQuery is interfacing with the browser. CSS isn't really doing anything but making the situation more complicated and convoluted actually.
CSS + jQuery, like most things on the web now days was stumbled on, not designed. It was stumbled on because no one bothers to think about what they are putting into HTML and how it affects the future, they only pay attention to what they want in their browser for today. The end result is that most of the system is decidedly BAD, with occasional highlights using weird tricks popping up to sustain it.
If you think HTML+CSS+jQuery is good ... you don't know what 'good' is. Its a horrible excuse for a development environment.
No.
Casino's are surprisingly honest, by law.
A casino makes money on slots because if it takes in $100, it only pays out $90. It doesn't have to cheat because the game is designed so that the house wins over time no matter what. They don't have to do anything out of the ordinary because in order for someone to get paid $100, they've taken in $110. More winnings means more money for them because the rules are designed in their favor, and these rules are up front and public, every game is required to tell you how it pays.
The problem is that this guy figured out that if he played a machine that had multiple games on it, and played game A until he was given the opportunity to double his bet, that he could exit the game, go play B (on the same machine) and in that one play for a higher dollar amount (win or lose doesn't matter) then he could switch back to game A ... where it didn't bother to notice he had left without finishing his last game ... and to not notice that it used the same shared memory location in both cames for the 'how much was bet' values ... so now, he played game A for $1 until it won, then he tricked it into thinking he had been playing for $10 and paying out based on that.
It was sloppying coding that allowed a software exploitable bug he used to cheat and not play by the agreed on rules.
Even the casino's play by the agreed on rules, they may be not so fair, but they are what everyone agrees to. They don't flat out lie to you, he was.
Read the article.
He's exploiting the interaction between two different software modules to his advantage. While from a technical perspective he didn't write any assembly to exploit a buffer overflow, he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software. The software was not clearing out memory it reused for like purposes between two different games, by exploiting this, he was able to increase his winnings by 10x.
He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software. He just isn't using your typical UI to enter and run the hack but he really is exploiting a software bug like metasploit would, or any other attack vector.
This isn't your typical hacking applied to some object that just happens to have a processor. He is hacking the software, and more so, a specific version of the software with specific features enabled. This is no different than an attack targeted at Chrome or Safari, it just seems that way because the UI isn't a terminal window.
No.
Bluffing is a known aspect of the game of poker. Its actually part of the game. Everyone playing poker in a casino is fully aware of 'the bluff'.
What this guy did was took advantage of a software bug that caused UNINTENDED AND UNEXPECTED interactions between two DIFFERENT games that ran on the same machine. Its like if you played WoW for hours to get a loot box to drop ... then switched over to GTA V, and placed a super high bet in a gambling game in GTA V ... knowing that by doing so, you could switch back to WoW and have to multiple the loot in the drop by 10 times.
Its not supposed to work that way, and everyone knows it. Its not that he his following the 'letter of the law' when it comes to the rules, he's actually breaking the rules, using a flaw in the machine to do so.
Under the law, the have no such right. Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines.
Oh yes they are. Both parties are responsible for reporting and appropriately dealing with KNOWN issues. Both sides are granted legal immunity for UNKNOWN issues, but they BOTH require ALL plays AND pays to become void. Everyone goes back to their 'pre-play' state financially. What you're claiming is legal is exactly when it becomes fraud, when they continue taking advantage of the game they KNOW is not working properly.
Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule.
Because by definition, that would not be malfunctioning. If it followed the published schedule, he wouldn't have been getting 10x what the published schedule said, would he?
They wanted very badly to have him get up so that they could take the machine out of service, and after a short while enticed him to do so, much to his later (and more sober) regret.
You watch too many movies. They can, will, and DO move people off of machines to service them. The only time it is 'good' for you to 'stay' on a machine is if it is malfunctioning. It does not offer you any advantage to continue to play on a machine over time, regardless of time since last pay out. The odds don't actually work like you think they do. There is no pattern of timing that will allow you to get batter than break even odds out of a slot machine. This is a popular misconception of what 'odds' actually mean. 1 in 100 does not mean that if you throw 100 times, its going to happen once.
When it involves $400k ... it tends to become something that the feds get involved in, even if its just to ask the local cops what help they might need as its big enough to warrants the experience of higher level investigators.
The LAW is clear.
Malfunction voids the game. That goes both directions. They MUST refund any money they can. They MUST report it to the gaming board, and the board will decide how to handle the situation further ... like deal with a situation where its been happening for too long to possibly find and refund money to all players. In the end, the casino will NOT get to keep the money and MAY get fined/sanctioned.
Casino's don't just do whatever suits them in this aspect, gambling is a tightly regulated industry in the US. While they can legally take your money for you being stupid and handing it too them, the states require them to be VERY precise. They can not mislead you even a little bit, even unintentionally.
They don't need to do anything sleezy believe it or not, people will be happy to throw money at them with everything out in the open and up front about it.
They have a machine...he didn't sigh any EULA or agreements about how to use it.
God you must be some fucking asshole.
Do you really want to live in a world where people have to have no respect for your wishes unless you get them to put their signature on paper? Do you want to end internet commerce as you know it? Do want all of the Internet to suddenly disappear because a whole bunch of shit suddenly becomes impractical to do because everyone spends a bunch of time waiting for the mailman to show up with signed documents?
Fortunately, assholes like you do not YET, rule the world.
When you walk into the casino ... and EVERY SLOT MACHINE has a sign on it stating various FACTS and LAWS ... then you lose your argument completely.
Just because you try to say 'well I didn't know I wasn't allowed to take the extra money it gave me that I didn't think I wont and you didn't make me agree to anything like that' doesn't mean anyone gives a shit.
You haven't made me sign a document stating that I won't kill you while you sleep ... so I guess its okay if I do then? I think everyone would agree the world would benefit from that.
Do you sign a document or NDA before going into walmart and stealing money from their cash register? Is that how you get by with it?
If you see no problem with what he did, you are truly morally deficient. I mean it in the most sincere way, you need counseling. There is something wrong with your sense of right and wrong.
You took more money than you should have gotten. The machine is not aware of the error. You are. Its no different than any other type of fraud.
You're trying to pretend its OK to do it because you're not doing it in front of a person, but none the less you are taking advantage of someone elses ignorance.
The first time, you didn't know you were doing it. Thats okay in every way. The second time you did it, it was intentional. Thats not okay in any way.
You have deceived the bank by taking $40 when you told them you were taking $20.
If you believe in physics as the ruler of our universe, then everyone has the same odds, so even though randomness is a factor, it won't effect the outcome of a poker players career, though it may effect the outcome of a single game.
You blame the customer who throws a skeleton key (concrete brick) through the window and takes shit without paying ... and you're arguing that you don't do anything to the customer because he should have known the customer could throw a brick so its the vendor's fault.
The rules of the game are clear. Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine. You agreed to that by playing.
Its not like these are rules for posted are not well known in advance, they are clearly written EVERYWHERE in vegas.
so far all I see is a bunch of catchy tunes, and there butthurt jealousy of Linux's popularity, meanwhile complaining about how some distros have non-free firmware, and how unfree the GPL, along with some prophesizing about how OpenBSD is going to take over the world. Then some bashing of RMS as a hypocrit.
Show me where Theo tells about OBSD taking over the world, I'm fairly positive thats exactly the opposite of his goals. Otherwise, it seems more like your statement is you projecting your own feelings on openbsd. RMS is not a hypocrite, just a fucking douche you're too stupid to recognize as using you to further his own political agenda.
What they miss is the only reason that either RedHat, or IBM, or SuSE call what they sell "linux" and various distros are vaugely compatible with each other is because of the GPL.
What you call 'vaguely' compatible, the rest of us call a joke. Its why no commercial vendors put real effort into targeting Linux, because what you call compatible, real developers call 'a fucking mess with no organization'. Distros BARELY remain compatible with the 'standard linux base', all of them come with random versions of libraries and different sets, in different places, effectively making the only common aspect amoung them to be names like Linux and GPL.
There are plenty of proprietary BSD-based OSs with their code. Mabey if the GPL'd back in the 1990s, people would using "MacBSD" instead of OSX or iOS. I am sorry but the BSD license is self-defeating, and they worked their way to oblivion, despite putting in undeniable hard work.
No, we wouldn't have MacBSD if it was GPL, we'd have something else not compatible at all. BSD did EXACTLY WHAT WAS INTENDED here, it allowed a commercial OS to use a common code base. THIS MEANS COMPATIBILITY. You don't get any more compatible than actually running the exact same code. This is why your shitty little fanboy OS actually can talk to a windows box, because ... everyone ... used .... BSD code ... for networking.
What we have now is ... Mac(h)/BSD ... so basically, we got what you said we would have got with GPL ... without GPL ... BSD also got a metric fuckton of code in return. You pretty much picked 'the example' that is used to disprove your retarded 'BSD doesnt' get contributions back' argument as Apple has given back arguably more than they took in the first place.
The Internet as you know it would not exist if it weren't for BSD. We would most likely still be arguing over which network vendor was the mostest awesomest and still not have systems that talk to each other in a common way. At best there would be the half implemented GPL version that everyone says is fucking awesomer than awesome ... but no one uses but a handful of geeks because some moron thinks that using vi to edit config files is acceptable, and god forbid how evil it is for a company to use your code without you immediately getting access to all of their work as well. Thats pretty fucking hypocritical. You call it 'free', you wouldn't knwo free if it hit you in the ass.
In the linux sphere, we made the corporations who enter give back. So yes, Linux go the devs and is now the most advanced Free UNIX clone, in part because we have 100x the devs working on it, and more people basing their projects on Linux, because of this.
No, you didn't. You don't even realize it. Its not the most advanced on several levels, ZFS being a prime example but certainly not the only example. How advanced can you be when you have a political ideology making decisions which should be based on technical merit? It IS NOT a 'free' UNIX clone, you don't even know what the word means. UNIX is a specification that Linux does not meet. It is not a clone. It doesn't work tha
You think this is unique to PC-BSD? Have you used the others because the summary tells you there are prebuilt binaries for OpenBSD and FreeBSD has packages as well ... As does NetBSD.
I don't use NetBSD, and I don't use OpenBSD packages, but FreeBSD has had packages for at least 10 years, so since before PC-BSD forked ...
Why do people bring up this kind of shit as if its not common to all BSDs?
OpenBSD is not for noobies or the lazy.
If you have to ask, OpenBSD is not for you. That is by design, the project lead wants it that way. If you can't use Google to answer the questions you have asked, then OpenBSD is not for you. Let me take it one step further than that, if you DIDN'T GOOGLE IT FIRST, then OpenBSD is not for you in any way.
It is not intended for people who expect ANY hand holding as you WILL NOT GET ANY.
Yes, because the USA is the only country in the world that offers a way to transfer money between two parties.
IF that were actually true, you'd have bigger problems than anything related to Assange.
There are almost 200 countries in the world, yet you blame all your problems on only one of them.
There are multiple trivial ways in multiple countries that the US has no control over that they could use. Its just a whole lot more fun to blame your enemy than to actually make a change.
When you bring up Wikileaks not being able to get money you just show how ignorant you actually are of reality, and more important that you aren't even going to bother putting an even minor amount of critical thought into the process so you could see how retarded of a statement you just made.
Columbian drug dealers move BILLIONS OF DOLLARS and wikileaks can't get funding?
Seriously? Thats your story? Thats what you expect people to believe? Do you not understand why the general public no longer gives a shit about wikileaks? This kind of shit is why, it makes it blindingly clear that wikileaks is just pushing their agenda against specific people. They are EXACTLY WHAT THEY CLAIM TO BE AGAINST, the control information and use it to manipulate other people into forwarding their own political agenda.
Congratulations, you care so much about not being a government tool that you are now just Assange's tool instead. Clearly you're better off than before.
Any good channel had no problem dealing with mIRC lusers, it wasn't exactly difficult to weed out the ignorant masses. For fucks sake a simple botnet deals with the whole CTC/ASL issue.
The wheel is old too, but calling it outdated just makes you look like you don't understand how it works. Same here.
IRC is fine, its only problem was shitty clients. EFnet was dumb on a number of levels for trying so ridiculously hard to remain the wild wild west of chat (which ironically is why I stayed there) but there is nothing about any modern chat network that makes it inheriently better for 'chat' than any thing current until you start talking about voice chat.