Apparently you didn't even bother to read the very article you linked to. Here are the two opening paragraphs:
Portable Document Format (PDF) is an open file format created and controlled by Adobe Systems, for representing two-dimensional documents in a device independent and resolution independent fixed-layout document format. Each PDF file encapsulates a complete description of a 2D document (and, with the advent of Acrobat 3D, embedded 3D documents) that includes the text, fonts, images, and 2D vector graphics that compose the document. PDF files do not encode information that is specific to the application software, hardware, or operating system used to create or view the document. This feature ensures that a valid PDF will render exactly the same regardless of its origin or destination (but depending on font availability).
Anyone may create applications that read and write PDF files without having to pay royalties to Adobe Systems; Adobe holds a number of patents relating to the PDF format and claims that it is an open standard, licensing them on a royalty-free basis for use in developing software that complies with its PDF specification.[1]
Since it is an open format that anyone complying with the specification can use for free, there are many different free software implementations to create and read PDFs; in particular, PDFLaTeX and XPDF come to mind.
Actually, that's a pretty tendentious view of "freedom". It is akin to the idea that freedom really must amount to the ability to do whatever you want, whenever you want, with no constraints whatsoever. Most of us recognize that to EXERCIZE rights, there has to be constraints. (For example, you aren't free to use my head for target practice or make my car into a pinata, and I'm not free to sneak into your house and beat you with a playstation in the middle of the night.) Since some people's exercize of freedom, at least on occassion (like the examples I just cited), is essentially tied to the *limitation* of the freedom of others, some constraints on freedom yield greater freedom overall. (See, for example, John Stuart Mill's defense of the harm principle in _On Liberty_)
So, the GPL says "You're free to do what you want with this, so long as you preserve that freedom for others." (Just like the harm principle says that "you may do what you wish so long as you do not harm others.") This is not exactly Dr. Evil style, vainglorious efforts for world domination---let alone hypocritical nutjobery. (Especially since RMS doesn't make anyone use his software or his license, and other licenses are Free as well.)
If you're going to be pedantic you should at least bother to look the damn word up.
`moot':
"has three Standard meanings: "discussable, debatable"; "under discussion, being disputed"; and "without practical significance, academic." Thus a moot question may be open to discussion, in the process of being discussed, or not worth discussing at all, depending on the sense dictated by context."
Columbia Guide to Standard American English (http://www.bartleby.com/68/42/3942.html).
You also could have used "define:moot" at google and seen that the word has many accepted and acceptable meanings. Which, of course, makes your point moot.
Yeah, it is really annoying that people on slashdot post on subject that they find interesting, and that their interests persist through time. I mean, have you seen that Bruce Perens guy?
But anyway, you know what's REALLY tiresome: dumbasses who want to exclaim about what is tiresome but don't want to post as anything else as anonymous cowards. Now THAT'S tiresome.
Totally correct, which is why I didn't argue that guns were the problem or the solution. My point was rather that Texans have this "I love my gun and it keeps me safe" thing going that is just delusional. I don't know that I'm pro-gun or pro-gun-control (maybe one from each column!), but I do think that public policy requires careful attention to facts rather than doctrinaire and cowboy-inspired "solutions".
I should add that I lived in DC for quite some time (including when Marion Barry was mayor), and that the issues in DC have at least something to do with structural things that are unique to DC's governance structure (as well as significant problems with racism and poverty). DC has little control over its own governance (though that is slowly changing), and much of its governance comes from the congressional representatives from the states. These congressmen and -women, for example, refused to fund the counting of votes for a referrendum the District had on decriminalizing marijuana because THEY didn't want the District to decriminalize it. (I believe the votes were later tallied unofficially, and the referendum passed by a supermajority.) In many ways, the District is the frankenstein monster of public planning by legislators who hail from far away with lots of pet ideas about how other people should live.
Of course, in Texas you need to defend yourself given the fact that it regularly ranks in the top 10-15 crime plagued states; for example, in 2004 it was 12th:
This is precisely why I'm getting the F*CK out of Texas; too many "self-defense" happy Texans who have utterly no clue about the reality of how to handle crime.
I don't know if you were seeking general input, but I'll throw my 2 cents in. (YMMV, see your Slashdot is-not-a-lawyer for details, not trying to start a big thing here)
I learned LaTeX while writing my dissertation; I had started with a wordprocessor (MS Word), but switched to LaTeX for a ton of reasons (many of them mentioned by other posters in this forum). So, I've been using LaTeX for a while (well before I'd heard of docbook), and the syntax seems fine to me. But I also don't need to produce many different formats (usually just pdf, sometimes rtf, rarely html), and I work in philosophy (so much of the stuff in docbook that would really help with, e.g., documentation writing is wasted on me).
Every so often I think about taking up docbook, but I'm put off of it each time by a few different things. The biggest thing, for me, is that each of the tagged elements has to have an opening and closing tag---styles, section indicators, paragraphs, etc. I get (or at least think I get) why docbook works this way and I think the philosophy behind it is great, but it gets in the way of how I work. I find the tags visually clutter the screen, and I find it gets in the way of my cutting and pasting pieces of text in lots of places. (Of course, if you're coming to LaTeX from a word processor, you'll probably feel the same way.)
Of course, you might find this not to be a problem, and you might like the docbook toolsets; XML might work with your aesthetic sensibilities, and you might prefer the docbook or XML editors (or text editor plugins) more than I do.
Not defending the charges in this case (which do seem 100% bogus), but I have found that if you respect the police, they will respect you.
It may depend on who you are, where you live, and what you look like. The experience of my African American friends is completely at odds with yours, and my experience varies depending on whether I look like I'm a college professor or Sid Vicious. (No matter how I dress, I behave like the former.) I also get treated better NOW (no matter how I dress) than I did as a youth (under similar circumstances).
This isn't to say that all cops are evil jerks, just that I think your experiences here represent a kind of privilege that doesn't hold for everyone.
Actually I don't think we disagree too much here; I was thinking not that people hyperventilate (which obviously isn't good!) but that there's a tendency NOT to breathe frequently enough---if you're having racing thoughts and are overwhelmed, breathing frequency AND depth can go down. But you're right, you can get too much O2.
But if a person's panic attacks are caused/exacerbated by stimulation, closing one's eyes and moving to a darkened quiet room can be very soothing. (And if you're in a crowded lecture hall, closing your eyes means you don't look around Of course, if you're standing up or driving, I recommend that you sit down or pull over first.
Sorry to hear about this; while I've never had an attack while taking an exam, but I have had my share of panic attacks.
Short term strategies (for when they hit):
1) If you have some benzos (xanax, valium, and the like), take one. Xanax takes about 20 minutes to hit, and it is possible to take a dose that cuts the attack without making you a drooling idiot. Really, having these around (esp. legally) will make a difference in your anxiety levels.
2) Close your eyes and breathe deeply---FOCUSING on breathing. You want to get more oxygen to your brain; apparently the shallow breathing of anxiety increases anxiety.
3) If you can get to a water fountain, a cold drink might help. I find that cold, sugary drinks are soothing---just no caffeine.
4) If you can get to a quiet, relatively isolated place, that might help too.
5) Keep reminding yourself that this really sucks, but it is just a panic attack and you're not going crazy and you're not going to have a heart attack.
Long term:
1) Get enough sleep, eat properly, exercize, and cut back on caffeine. (Sorry, this is what works. I was hoping for smoking, boozing, downing Krispe Kreme donuts and freebasing chocolate covered espresso, but no such luck.) As an aside: if you're smoking pot (especially if you're a habitual user), you may find it necessary to stop.
2) If the attacks continue, you'll want to get with a therapist who can help you figure out what your triggers are and how to work through them.
3) If you have panic with depression, I recommend meds. They have their downsides, to be sure, but they have made a huge difference. (Be forewarned that the first med you've been prescribed will work quite right.)
Of course, I'm not an MD---just a Ph.D. (in philosophy) who has some personal experience with this. YMMV, and be sure to get professional help if this becomes more than a one-off.
Slashdot Mirror
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/
Lucky you---when *I* was a kid we didn't even have representations . . . .
Actually, that's a pretty tendentious view of "freedom". It is akin to the idea that freedom really must amount to the ability to do whatever you want, whenever you want, with no constraints whatsoever. Most of us recognize that to EXERCIZE rights, there has to be constraints. (For example, you aren't free to use my head for target practice or make my car into a pinata, and I'm not free to sneak into your house and beat you with a playstation in the middle of the night.) Since some people's exercize of freedom, at least on occassion (like the examples I just cited), is essentially tied to the *limitation* of the freedom of others, some constraints on freedom yield greater freedom overall. (See, for example, John Stuart Mill's defense of the harm principle in _On Liberty_)
So, the GPL says "You're free to do what you want with this, so long as you preserve that freedom for others." (Just like the harm principle says that "you may do what you wish so long as you do not harm others.") This is not exactly Dr. Evil style, vainglorious efforts for world domination---let alone hypocritical nutjobery. (Especially since RMS doesn't make anyone use his software or his license, and other licenses are Free as well.)
Yeah, totally! That'd be like participating in an online forum as an anonymous coward!
Insert joke about "how there are some things a rat just won't do" here.
If you're going to be pedantic you should at least bother to look the damn word up.
`moot':
"has three Standard meanings: "discussable, debatable"; "under discussion, being disputed"; and "without practical significance, academic." Thus a moot question may be open to discussion, in the process of being discussed, or not worth discussing at all, depending on the sense dictated by context."
Columbia Guide to Standard American English (http://www.bartleby.com/68/42/3942.html).
You also could have used "define:moot" at google and seen that the word has many accepted and acceptable meanings. Which, of course, makes your point moot.
Yeah, it is really annoying that people on slashdot post on subject that they find interesting, and that their interests persist through time. I mean, have you seen that Bruce Perens guy?
But anyway, you know what's REALLY tiresome: dumbasses who want to exclaim about what is tiresome but don't want to post as anything else as anonymous cowards. Now THAT'S tiresome.
Um, yeah, irony called; apparently you missed it.
"Stop, or I'll yell stop again!"
You mean you use a window manager? I mean, you can do just about everything without a windowing system; just use screen + links2, vim, muttng, etc!
I think if you can't type "safely navigate" while sitting still, 12.5 mph still might be too fast . . . .
I keed, I keed.
Yeah, I was gonna say noscript: http://www.noscript.net/whats
Um, that "hippie with his head in the clouds" is responsible for an organization that has created some of the most widely used computer tools.
What the hell have you, the hard headed realist that you are, done?
Put down the hatorade and go write some code or something.
Be there women in this outside world you speak of?
What of donuts?
Totally correct, which is why I didn't argue that guns were the problem or the solution. My point was rather that Texans have this "I love my gun and it keeps me safe" thing going that is just delusional. I don't know that I'm pro-gun or pro-gun-control (maybe one from each column!), but I do think that public policy requires careful attention to facts rather than doctrinaire and cowboy-inspired "solutions".
I should add that I lived in DC for quite some time (including when Marion Barry was mayor), and that the issues in DC have at least something to do with structural things that are unique to DC's governance structure (as well as significant problems with racism and poverty). DC has little control over its own governance (though that is slowly changing), and much of its governance comes from the congressional representatives from the states. These congressmen and -women, for example, refused to fund the counting of votes for a referrendum the District had on decriminalizing marijuana because THEY didn't want the District to decriminalize it. (I believe the votes were later tallied unofficially, and the referendum passed by a supermajority.) In many ways, the District is the frankenstein monster of public planning by legislators who hail from far away with lots of pet ideas about how other people should live.
Of course, in Texas you need to defend yourself given the fact that it regularly ranks in the top 10-15 crime plagued states; for example, in 2004 it was 12th:
http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html
This is precisely why I'm getting the F*CK out of Texas; too many "self-defense" happy Texans who have utterly no clue about the reality of how to handle crime.
Good luck to you and your pistol.
I don't know if you were seeking general input, but I'll throw my 2 cents in. (YMMV, see your Slashdot is-not-a-lawyer for details, not trying to start a big thing here)
I learned LaTeX while writing my dissertation; I had started with a wordprocessor (MS Word), but switched to LaTeX for a ton of reasons (many of them mentioned by other posters in this forum). So, I've been using LaTeX for a while (well before I'd heard of docbook), and the syntax seems fine to me. But I also don't need to produce many different formats (usually just pdf, sometimes rtf, rarely html), and I work in philosophy (so much of the stuff in docbook that would really help with, e.g., documentation writing is wasted on me).
Every so often I think about taking up docbook, but I'm put off of it each time by a few different things. The biggest thing, for me, is that each of the tagged elements has to have an opening and closing tag---styles, section indicators, paragraphs, etc. I get (or at least think I get) why docbook works this way and I think the philosophy behind it is great, but it gets in the way of how I work. I find the tags visually clutter the screen, and I find it gets in the way of my cutting and pasting pieces of text in lots of places. (Of course, if you're coming to LaTeX from a word processor, you'll probably feel the same way.)
Of course, you might find this not to be a problem, and you might like the docbook toolsets; XML might work with your aesthetic sensibilities, and you might prefer the docbook or XML editors (or text editor plugins) more than I do.
Life ain't nothin' but packets and money.
I don't know. How many entertainment industry groups would be interested in suing 12 yearl old girls living in the projects?
Yeah, no doubt! But what really makes me feel better is the xanax . . . .
Well, what I want to know is when science can evict variance; what are tenant's rights in scienceland?
Actually I don't think we disagree too much here; I was thinking not that people hyperventilate (which obviously isn't good!) but that there's a tendency NOT to breathe frequently enough---if you're having racing thoughts and are overwhelmed, breathing frequency AND depth can go down. But you're right, you can get too much O2.
But if a person's panic attacks are caused/exacerbated by stimulation, closing one's eyes and moving to a darkened quiet room can be very soothing. (And if you're in a crowded lecture hall, closing your eyes means you don't look around Of course, if you're standing up or driving, I recommend that you sit down or pull over first.
Hi.
Sorry to hear about this; while I've never had an attack while taking an exam, but I have had my share of panic attacks.
Short term strategies (for when they hit):
1) If you have some benzos (xanax, valium, and the like), take one. Xanax takes about 20 minutes to hit, and it is possible to take a dose that cuts the attack without making you a drooling idiot. Really, having these around (esp. legally) will make a difference in your anxiety levels.
2) Close your eyes and breathe deeply---FOCUSING on breathing. You want to get more oxygen to your brain; apparently the shallow breathing of anxiety increases anxiety.
3) If you can get to a water fountain, a cold drink might help. I find that cold, sugary drinks are soothing---just no caffeine.
4) If you can get to a quiet, relatively isolated place, that might help too.
5) Keep reminding yourself that this really sucks, but it is just a panic attack and you're not going crazy and you're not going to have a heart attack.
Long term:
1) Get enough sleep, eat properly, exercize, and cut back on caffeine. (Sorry, this is what works. I was hoping for smoking, boozing, downing Krispe Kreme donuts and freebasing chocolate covered espresso, but no such luck.) As an aside: if you're smoking pot (especially if you're a habitual user), you may find it necessary to stop.
2) If the attacks continue, you'll want to get with a therapist who can help you figure out what your triggers are and how to work through them.
3) If you have panic with depression, I recommend meds. They have their downsides, to be sure, but they have made a huge difference. (Be forewarned that the first med you've been prescribed will work quite right.)
Of course, I'm not an MD---just a Ph.D. (in philosophy) who has some personal experience with this. YMMV, and be sure to get professional help if this becomes more than a one-off.