Actually, it was even worse. There was no security model in win98, FAT doesn't have permissions, and all users are the same. The login dialog allowed you to login onto a network, and to load a custom wallpaper and some other user-based preferences.
When m$ migrated everything to NT-based systems, they did introduce file permissions and user-based auth, but it's still totally insecure and easily bypassed.
Did you really think m$ was going to do better on the mobile version of their os?
I replied to you because it's the right thing to do. I never run away from a discussion. I foe-ed you because that's how I keep track of/.ers who I consider are detriment to the well being of society (i.e religion-defenders, privative software advocates, people that is pro software patents, racists, re=publicans, etc.).
And even if I had done it stupidly, you can't compare a stupid little thing done on faith (like buying lottery tickets) with something as terrible as religion. Not quite on the same level, you know?
What I truly wonder is, why do you need to believe so badly? It's obvious that you don't truly believe in god, but you pretend that you do because you can't afford to accept that there is no god. What happened in your life that made you so weak?
We are talking about god because someone proposed his existence. Before this proposal, there was no record or evidence of him.
In this proposal, there are many affirmations, among them:
- god created the whole universe in 6 days - god created man and woman out of dirt - god is in the sky
Our work:
- We have proven that the universe took billions of years to create, so did the earth. - man evolved from other species. We have DNA and fossils to prove this. - We've already been up there "in the sky" and beyond. god wasn't there.
That's it. There is no god. If you want any further prove, religious people is prove that god doesn't exist. All intelligent people in this world hates you. No intelligent being (i.e. god) would allow you to exist.
Also, when we have a guy that is psychotic and delusional, we put him on a mental institution. There is no need to disprove his stupid delusions. Psychology/Psychiatry is enough to prove that he is delusional. Freud already explained religion. You are all delusional. There is no need to debunk your claims, science, through Psychology, already proves you are all fucking crazy.
Dude, you won't be able to talk your way out of this one.
You present an hypothetical, fantasy world, and pretend to move the discussion to that world where logic doesn't apply. Guess what? We are not in a fantasy world. Logic does apply. Your argument is invalid, and so is god.
There are no gods, and religion is dangerous and detrimental to the human race ALWAYS, no exceptions, no special cases, it's always a bad thing. It is not "embraced" or anything similar. Religion is a DISEASE. It's mental illness, just like any other hallucination. The sooner we eradicate it, the better.
You are making a proposition for which you hold NO evidence. What I said is that the evidence FOR a god is less than the evidence AGAINST a god.
You are making a ridiculous, illogic proposition and you have no evidence whatsoever. Just another "What if". I can reply with my "What if you are a retard from a parallel universe that traveled here to post this with the power of your stupidity". Since we are discussing whatifs, mine is just as valid as yours.
Now, there is NO evidence that points to the existence of a god. None. At all. And there is historic evidence that shows how religions were invented, historic evidence that shows that the histories on holy books are wrong, and full of errors and contradictions. We have physics that prove that a god isn't possible.
Basically, we've shown that there are no gods (for most definitions of god) long long ago, the problem is that you keep either changing your definition of god or ignoring our progress.
For example, when the bible was written, nobody thought humans would ever fly, or leave the earth at all, so they said god was in the sky. Simple, no? They put him our of reach of people. No, they didn't explain that he was immaterial and invisible or that he was in a different definition of "the fucking sky". Therefore, when we managed to fly high enough, and found no god there, we proved that there is no god (at least for that particular god defined in the bible) since all the evidence for-a-god was the bible, and we proven it wrong. Of course, all you did was change your definition of where is this "sky". But, remember, the bible also said things like all the bullshit regarding the ark of noah, that stars where candles put in crystal holders, and countless other stupid shit. We've already proven all of that wrong too. If the bible is the fucking word of your god, and therefore perfect, and we've proven it wrong, even if it's the tiniest mistake, that's enough to show that there is no god.
But this was NEVER about explaining or understanding things. Never about discovery. It's just a stupid fantasy you people have, and you'll just keep changing your wet dream to put it away of the eyes of science. You are all delusional, and there is no point in trying to explain that to you. Free lobotomies and lots of antipsychotics for all religious guys, that would be easier.
Yes we can my friend. Actually, it was already done ~2300 years ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Yup, I remember the episode. Great reference. I think it's on "The Bible is Bullshit".
And I agree 100%, religion should be considered a mental illness, just like the rest.
If you show up dressed in tinfoil saying that green man from Mars are going to come to earth and destroy us all, you go straight to the funny house. I don't understand why we make an exception for religious folks, they are equally delusional. They are not any less crazy just because there are many of them and they all share the same hallucinations.
Please check the domain names of both articles linked. "beliefnet" and "scienceandreligion". Check some articles in each. All bullshit.
This is obviously biased. What kind of "scientists" did they interview? Mathematicians? Chemists? Physics? Biologists?
I'm sure you'll find more Atheists among Biologists and Quantum Physicists than among Mathematicians.
But, regardless of their findings, and differently from religion, truth is not a poll, and that's not how science works. It doesn't matter what many people "think" or "believe" about it. There is no compelling evidence in favor of the existence of god, and lots of evidence against it. The mere idea violates many fundamental laws of physics. It defies logic. Therefore, There are NO gods. The scientific method leads us to understand that there are no gods. Many different areas of science confirm the same finding (for example, History explains how gods where invented, Psychology explains why, Physics explains why god isn't possible, Biology, Archeology and Quantum Physics explains what really happened).
I can't stress this enough. The scientific method doesn't take polls into account. It doesn't matter if 99% of the people believe the earth is flat. Evidence shows otherwise, and that's all that matters./In one of the linked sites, there is an article titled "How old do you think the world is?"//Who cares what you think about it? It is ~4.5 billion years old. What you believe doesn't matter, and doesn't change the truth.///Also, regarding aggression against religion, it is NOT a bad thing. We need to be more aggressive against them, as aggressive as they are against reason.
The A4 is just an ARM9 processor with a few modifications, and the hardware is mostly compatible with the iPhone. And GNU/Linux already runs fine on iPhone... so it should run perfectly fine on an iPad.
It didn't take long to get GNU/Linux running on the iPhone, and certainly won't take long to see either Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu remix or some other GNU/Linux-based distro running on the iPad.
How the fuck is this flamebait? A MAJOR hardware manufacturer. Probably the most relevant and biggest hardware making in history is willing to support an open standard. And one of the biggest players in the industry is the one pushing that open standard (Google). It's already supported by all relevant Free Software packages (i.e: ffmpeg), Out of the 5 major browsers, 3 already implemented it, and another (no one but MS's IE) said it'll support it if you have it installed.
That's what I call a FUCKING MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH. This is the closest we've ever been to having an actually open, compatible web. And my comment is flamebait? I'm just fucking happy that this is happening, and I'm just recognizing an incipient victory when I see it.
Thank you for playing, H.264. Microsoft, Apple, it was nice having you.
But open, patent free standards have prevailed. I am not stupidly praising google or buying the do no evil crap. I am just saying, in this case they did the right thing.
Google is the ONLY major player around HTML5 that is playing fair, and that is something we have to recognize. Maybe there's some hope for the future...
Except it's not the OS that doesn't support those apps, it's the apps that don't support the OS.
Get it? Windows doesn't have a single driver. Microsoft doesn't provide a single driver to you. Your manufacturer does. That same manufacturer doesn't support some great OSes, for example, GNU/Linux. So, GNU/Linux has its own set of drivers, that support 99.9% of all the hardware out there.
So, basically, when an app or a device come with their own support for a given OS, it doesn't count as the OS "supporting" that device or app, it's the other way around.
Want a comparison?
Hardware supported by windows: 0% Hardware supported by GNU/Linux: 99%
Software supported by windows: 0 (windows doesn't provide any specific support for any app) GNU/Linux: Thousands (it provides out of the box tons of emulators and compat layers like wine to run thousands of different software from many different platforms.
I think you should shut the fuck up.
And, BTW, mention ONE, just ONE mainstream piece of hardware that currently doesn't work on GNU/Linux. I double dare you.
And you truly think netbooks developed from there?
Subnetbooks have been around for ages. What started the netbook revolution was the new availability of very cheap and small LCD displays, and the appearance of cheap and power-efficient x86 processors that could work well enough while being cheap and not requiring huge heat-sinks (like the Atom, some VIA chips, etc).
Do you think Apple, Dell, HP, or the damn OLPC project actually develop anything? They develop casings, at best. They just stay on top of whatever new crap is coming cheaply out of China. That's it. You can find cheap and small mobos with embedded ARM processors in China for under 30 dollars. Boards very similar in specs to the one Apple is using on the iPad can be found for ~70 dollars in China, including 900mhz ARM processors. Embedded Wifi and 3G for +20 dollars.
Things don't get to the market when they are invented, they come out when the Chinese have managed to produce the technology required to assemble them cheaply.
1 - If it'll only be done 'god willing', then we have a problem because there is no god. 2 - We've already seen what happened to the OLPC project. It's a nice idea, but this guys are just circle jerking, Negroponte dreams, but can't deliver. 3 - The market is already heading there. There is no need for the OLPC. There are already countless netbooks for well under 100 dollars in China. There are 100 dollar touchpads. I think the foundation should focus on the hardest part, step 2: Getting governments, the UN, or whoever to invest in this stuff, and just import the best and cheapest alternative from China and install proper software on it.
He said that the only way to write in the disk was with "divine intervention at Hell's main furnace". Since there is no god, and there is no hell, it would be impossible to write to the disk.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, we start our life by getting out of one, and spend the rest trying to get back in there. Into any womb.
I can fit my first HD 102400 times into my current HD, and yet my current HD would physically fit ~4 times into my first one.
Actually, it was even worse. There was no security model in win98, FAT doesn't have permissions, and all users are the same. The login dialog allowed you to login onto a network, and to load a custom wallpaper and some other user-based preferences.
When m$ migrated everything to NT-based systems, they did introduce file permissions and user-based auth, but it's still totally insecure and easily bypassed.
Did you really think m$ was going to do better on the mobile version of their os?
I replied to you because it's the right thing to do. I never run away from a discussion. I foe-ed you because that's how I keep track of /.ers who I consider are detriment to the well being of society (i.e religion-defenders, privative software advocates, people that is pro software patents, racists, re=publicans, etc.).
And even if I had done it stupidly, you can't compare a stupid little thing done on faith (like buying lottery tickets) with something as terrible as religion. Not quite on the same level, you know?
Yes they did. They've hurt all of humanity.
What I truly wonder is, why do you need to believe so badly? It's obvious that you don't truly believe in god, but you pretend that you do because you can't afford to accept that there is no god. What happened in your life that made you so weak?
There is no god. Prove me wrong.
See how stupid that is? That's all you are doing.
That doesn't make it any more truth. There are no gods. Period. Asshole.
We are talking about god because someone proposed his existence. Before this proposal, there was no record or evidence of him.
In this proposal, there are many affirmations, among them:
- god created the whole universe in 6 days
- god created man and woman out of dirt
- god is in the sky
Our work:
- We have proven that the universe took billions of years to create, so did the earth.
- man evolved from other species. We have DNA and fossils to prove this.
- We've already been up there "in the sky" and beyond. god wasn't there.
That's it. There is no god. If you want any further prove, religious people is prove that god doesn't exist. All intelligent people in this world hates you. No intelligent being (i.e. god) would allow you to exist.
Also, when we have a guy that is psychotic and delusional, we put him on a mental institution. There is no need to disprove his stupid delusions. Psychology/Psychiatry is enough to prove that he is delusional. Freud already explained religion. You are all delusional. There is no need to debunk your claims, science, through Psychology, already proves you are all fucking crazy.
Dude, you won't be able to talk your way out of this one.
You present an hypothetical, fantasy world, and pretend to move the discussion to that world where logic doesn't apply. Guess what? We are not in a fantasy world. Logic does apply. Your argument is invalid, and so is god.
There are no gods, and religion is dangerous and detrimental to the human race ALWAYS, no exceptions, no special cases, it's always a bad thing. It is not "embraced" or anything similar. Religion is a DISEASE. It's mental illness, just like any other hallucination. The sooner we eradicate it, the better.
Again with the same crap ...
You are making a proposition for which you hold NO evidence. What I said is that the evidence FOR a god is less than the evidence AGAINST a god.
You are making a ridiculous, illogic proposition and you have no evidence whatsoever. Just another "What if". I can reply with my "What if you are a retard from a parallel universe that traveled here to post this with the power of your stupidity". Since we are discussing whatifs, mine is just as valid as yours.
Now, there is NO evidence that points to the existence of a god. None. At all. And there is historic evidence that shows how religions were invented, historic evidence that shows that the histories on holy books are wrong, and full of errors and contradictions. We have physics that prove that a god isn't possible.
Basically, we've shown that there are no gods (for most definitions of god) long long ago, the problem is that you keep either changing your definition of god or ignoring our progress.
For example, when the bible was written, nobody thought humans would ever fly, or leave the earth at all, so they said god was in the sky. Simple, no? They put him our of reach of people. No, they didn't explain that he was immaterial and invisible or that he was in a different definition of "the fucking sky". Therefore, when we managed to fly high enough, and found no god there, we proved that there is no god (at least for that particular god defined in the bible) since all the evidence for-a-god was the bible, and we proven it wrong. Of course, all you did was change your definition of where is this "sky". But, remember, the bible also said things like all the bullshit regarding the ark of noah, that stars where candles put in crystal holders, and countless other stupid shit. We've already proven all of that wrong too. If the bible is the fucking word of your god, and therefore perfect, and we've proven it wrong, even if it's the tiniest mistake, that's enough to show that there is no god.
But this was NEVER about explaining or understanding things. Never about discovery. It's just a stupid fantasy you people have, and you'll just keep changing your wet dream to put it away of the eyes of science. You are all delusional, and there is no point in trying to explain that to you. Free lobotomies and lots of antipsychotics for all religious guys, that would be easier.
Yes we can my friend. Actually, it was already done ~2300 years ago:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Epicurus.
Yup, I remember the episode. Great reference. I think it's on "The Bible is Bullshit".
And I agree 100%, religion should be considered a mental illness, just like the rest.
If you show up dressed in tinfoil saying that green man from Mars are going to come to earth and destroy us all, you go straight to the funny house. I don't understand why we make an exception for religious folks, they are equally delusional. They are not any less crazy just because there are many of them and they all share the same hallucinations.
I deny the holy spirit. Fuck jesus. fuck your god. fuck all gods.
Please check the domain names of both articles linked. "beliefnet" and "scienceandreligion". Check some articles in each. All bullshit.
This is obviously biased. What kind of "scientists" did they interview? Mathematicians? Chemists? Physics? Biologists?
I'm sure you'll find more Atheists among Biologists and Quantum Physicists than among Mathematicians.
But, regardless of their findings, and differently from religion, truth is not a poll, and that's not how science works. It doesn't matter what many people "think" or "believe" about it. There is no compelling evidence in favor of the existence of god, and lots of evidence against it. The mere idea violates many fundamental laws of physics. It defies logic. Therefore, There are NO gods. The scientific method leads us to understand that there are no gods. Many different areas of science confirm the same finding (for example, History explains how gods where invented, Psychology explains why, Physics explains why god isn't possible, Biology, Archeology and Quantum Physics explains what really happened).
I can't stress this enough. The scientific method doesn't take polls into account. It doesn't matter if 99% of the people believe the earth is flat. Evidence shows otherwise, and that's all that matters. /In one of the linked sites, there is an article titled "How old do you think the world is?" //Who cares what you think about it? It is ~4.5 billion years old. What you believe doesn't matter, and doesn't change the truth. ///Also, regarding aggression against religion, it is NOT a bad thing. We need to be more aggressive against them, as aggressive as they are against reason.
Except the A4 is just an ARM9 processor. The only reason they are making that chip is to be incompatible with Android and other competing software.
The A4 is just an ARM9 processor with a few modifications, and the hardware is mostly compatible with the iPhone. And GNU/Linux already runs fine on iPhone ... so it should run perfectly fine on an iPad.
It didn't take long to get GNU/Linux running on the iPhone, and certainly won't take long to see either Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu remix or some other GNU/Linux-based distro running on the iPad.
BTW: Great signature ;)
What the fuck mods?
How the fuck is this flamebait? A MAJOR hardware manufacturer. Probably the most relevant and biggest hardware making in history is willing to support an open standard. And one of the biggest players in the industry is the one pushing that open standard (Google). It's already supported by all relevant Free Software packages (i.e: ffmpeg), Out of the 5 major browsers, 3 already implemented it, and another (no one but MS's IE) said it'll support it if you have it installed.
That's what I call a FUCKING MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH.
This is the closest we've ever been to having an actually open, compatible web. And my comment is flamebait? I'm just fucking happy that this is happening, and I'm just recognizing an incipient victory when I see it.
Now, go ahead an mod this down too if you want.
Thank you for playing, H.264. Microsoft, Apple, it was nice having you.
But open, patent free standards have prevailed. I am not stupidly praising google or buying the do no evil crap. I am just saying, in this case they did the right thing.
Google is the ONLY major player around HTML5 that is playing fair, and that is something we have to recognize. Maybe there's some hope for the future ...
Except it's not the OS that doesn't support those apps, it's the apps that don't support the OS.
Get it? Windows doesn't have a single driver. Microsoft doesn't provide a single driver to you. Your manufacturer does. That same manufacturer doesn't support some great OSes, for example, GNU/Linux. So, GNU/Linux has its own set of drivers, that support 99.9% of all the hardware out there.
So, basically, when an app or a device come with their own support for a given OS, it doesn't count as the OS "supporting" that device or app, it's the other way around.
Want a comparison?
Hardware supported by windows: 0%
Hardware supported by GNU/Linux: 99%
Software supported by windows: 0 (windows doesn't provide any specific support for any app)
GNU/Linux: Thousands (it provides out of the box tons of emulators and compat layers like wine to run thousands of different software from many different platforms.
I think you should shut the fuck up.
And, BTW, mention ONE, just ONE mainstream piece of hardware that currently doesn't work on GNU/Linux. I double dare you.
STILL a solid operating system?
It was never solid to begin with. Well, actually, it isn't an operating system either ...
And you truly think netbooks developed from there?
Subnetbooks have been around for ages. What started the netbook revolution was the new availability of very cheap and small LCD displays, and the appearance of cheap and power-efficient x86 processors that could work well enough while being cheap and not requiring huge heat-sinks (like the Atom, some VIA chips, etc).
Do you think Apple, Dell, HP, or the damn OLPC project actually develop anything? They develop casings, at best. They just stay on top of whatever new crap is coming cheaply out of China. That's it. You can find cheap and small mobos with embedded ARM processors in China for under 30 dollars. Boards very similar in specs to the one Apple is using on the iPad can be found for ~70 dollars in China, including 900mhz ARM processors. Embedded Wifi and 3G for +20 dollars.
Things don't get to the market when they are invented, they come out when the Chinese have managed to produce the technology required to assemble them cheaply.
1 - If it'll only be done 'god willing', then we have a problem because there is no god.
2 - We've already seen what happened to the OLPC project. It's a nice idea, but this guys are just circle jerking, Negroponte dreams, but can't deliver.
3 - The market is already heading there. There is no need for the OLPC. There are already countless netbooks for well under 100 dollars in China. There are 100 dollar touchpads. I think the foundation should focus on the hardest part, step 2: Getting governments, the UN, or whoever to invest in this stuff, and just import the best and cheapest alternative from China and install proper software on it.
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/windows-vista.htm
Oh Really?
'imperative to earn the trust of society, not just by meeting expectations but by exceeding them.
If you want to earn the trust of society, you should just do the right thing.
Explicitly stating that you want to earn the trust of the society is something you do in front of the shareholders, not publicly.
We already know you want our trust, and we already know what you'll do with it if you ever get it back.
Wooooosh.
I was implying that there is no god.
He said that the only way to write in the disk was with "divine intervention at Hell's main furnace". Since there is no god, and there is no hell, it would be impossible to write to the disk.
Well, your idea is a little bit complex to implement, but certainly more logical than using windows and batch files.