Every non-commercial BSD system is an "either" as well.
I'm not bashing GNOME with this, just stating the facts. Personally I don't think ANY non-newbie system should have a default. People who think an enterprise distro needs a default desktop because enterprise sysadmins are can't handle choice are clearly off their rocker.
Re:Once you beat the bottlenecks, it's very snappy
on
GNOME 2.8 Released
·
· Score: 1
GTK+ depends upon this ability greatly.
GTK+ depends on the proprietary nvidia driver? That's news to me!
I mean, I can run Office, IE and Outlook together SMOOTHLY on a WinXP box with 128M RAM.
What's your secret? My office workstation has a gig of ram, and and it's the sluggish laggingest P.O.S. I've ever used. And I even have Luna turned off! The exact same machine dual boots, and I can run OpenOffice, Konqeror and KMail simultaneous and have utterly smooth performance.
Now before you go telling me my WinXP problems are due to a misconfiguration, let me warn you that I'll merely respond that you've got GNOME, OpenOffice and Firefox similarly misconfigured...
In high school we used to pick the cheap locks on the classroom cabinets all the time. The purpose was to steal the rival club's flag then extort community charity work out of them to get it back. My brother got pretty good at locks.
Then we visited Germany for a month. The house where my brother was staying had a locked closet with a key missing from before the war. No one had opened it in over fifty years. But it was an absurdly easy lock and my brother had the closet open five minutes after being apprised of the problem (four minutes to find a suitably stiff paperclip).
To this day I believe there's still a family in Germany firmly convinced that US students are taught lockpicking and safecracking and other feats of criminal legerdemain.
p.s. No valuables found in closet beyond old moth-eaten coats the wife's old love letters. Ah, how sweet:-)
The first round of layoffs in my company happened in December 2000. At that time the handwriting was on the wall for all to see. The rocket was reaching apogee and only idiots said the ecnomy wasn't going to nose dive within a couple of months. Before you start laying people off you first stop hiring them. Your graph clearly shows a significant slowdown in hiring before Bush took office. Take a good close look at your graph. That skyrocketing slope of the dot.com was changing BEFORE even the election! At the time the graph starts nosing downwards, Bush had not been in office long enough to enact one single policy.
My dad recalls that the first he heard of the panic was the next morning's newspaper. It certainly didn't happen in his city. I guess the midwesterners were more sensible than those living in Grover's Mill.
The reason bush is to blame is simply all the tax breaks to companies that outsource
I work for a huge multinational corporation based in Europe. Is Bush to blame for the outsourcing we're doing in Germany? For the outsourcing we're doing in France and the Netherlands? In England?
What about my other question to you, are you saying that nothing Bush did in the last four years had any effect on the economy whatsoever?
Of course he had an effect. But that's largely irrelevant, because we're talking about a market correction. You can't put air back in the burst balloon. If Gore had been president he couldn't have done it either. If Kerry went back in time and became president he couldn't do it either. The bubble burst. You can't put it back the way it was because the market won't let you.
One post on this thread implies that the Bush tax cuts prolonged this correction. Maybe they did and maybe they didn't. But what if there were Bush tax increases instead? Or even worse, what if he did nothing? No matter what Bush did, people like you would be blaming him for the economy. Which is weird, because the economy really ain't that bad.
Good to see some people are doing good.
Not some, but a lot. A lot of people are doing good. It just doesn't happen to be the overpriced coder. My company is hiring people so fast I can't even book a room for a code review because they're all being used for job interviews. Our conference room is being converted into cubicles next week. But these new hires aren't coders, they're project managers, process auditors, supply managers, etc. We probably have more non-manufacturing jobs now than we did during the dot.com. They might not be coding jobs, but they are good jobs nonetheless.
Unemployment rate only measures people actively looking for jobs. It does not measure people who have given up or people who have left the economy altogether.
Pray tell, why should we count those people? Two major groups in the overlooked "unemployed" are the retired and the student. If I were a a Javascript programmer who dropped out of junior college to join the dot.com boom, believe me I would be back in school too trying to finish my education.
But what the fuck, those people probably deserved to lose their jobs. As long as you and your friends are doing good who the fuck cares.
If you want to go through live hating other people for your own misfortune, be my guest. But I'm choosing to live in reality. And in my reality it isn't hell on earth over here like you guys make it out to be.
Let me repeat my earlier statement. I do not like Bush. But I am not going to lay every misfortune in the world upon his shoulders.
Wow four years later and it's still Clinton's fault huh? Nothing Bush did in the last four years had any effect on the economy whatsoever huh?
First, I didn't say it was Clinton's fault, I only said it happened during his tenure. Second, the effects of a market correction do not occur instantly, so you cannot expect all economic influences from the time of Clinton to cease the day Bush took office.
I know the chic thing to do is to blame Bush for the bad economy, but from where I stand the economy isn't doing too badly. If the voters follow their pocket books, he'll win the election. The programming side of the tech sector got hit hard, and that probably affets you, but otherwise we're looking at a pretty good unemployment rate.
To put a personal spin on things, I don't have any friends, relatives or neighbors that are unemployed. A coworker whose contract ran out last month has already found a new permanant non-contractor job at a higher salary.
Thanks to Bush we no longer have to put up with booming markets, pool tables and laundramats in the workplace or those silly 75K salaries.
If you were like me, you milked those years for all they were worth. But don't imagine for a minute that it represented the normal state of a healthy economy. Complaining about Bush not restoring a speculative market bubble is rather silly.
I live just a few miles south of you, but I really do belive that you guys in San Fransisco live in a different universe. You do a lot of finger pointing up there, but none of it is pointing at the real problem, yourselves. San Fransisco is the most expensive place to live west of New York, yet you living the same economy the rest of us are. So it's no wonder that you have high unemployment. Most businesses can't afford to locate there so they don't, so you're stuck with the established businesses trying to survive in the face of increasing costs.
Besides which, don't thank George, thank Bill. The dot.com bubble happened on his watch, and it began imploding while Bill was still in office. You're living in fantasy land if you expected George to bring back the unreality of dot.com boom.
Stop believing the myth the media is feeding you. While there will always be poor people, their situation in this country has been steadily improving since its founding.
I was born and raised in a county that not too long ago had the nations highest rate of unemployment. It has those shabby trailer parks. It is a POOR county of POOR towns inhabited by POOR people. But the poor there are doing better today than they did when I was a kid. The barrios are gone. The "bad" side of town isn't that bad anymore. It's true that there's still a heck of a lot of welfare there, but it must be pretty good welfare because they're driving new cars and their kids have new bikes. The high school graduates are going off to college because their ethnicity and economic status makes student aid automatic.
The poverty may remain, but the destitution that I recall as a child has disappeared completely from my home town. And it STILL ranks as a pretty damned poor town. It may be liberal chic to claim that the poor are getting poorer, but it simply isn't true.
Considering that the dot.bomb came out of the Clinton administration, I really can't blame Bush too much. I know that will cost me karma, but my honesty won't let me blame him just because it's the karma-enhancing thing to do.
I'm not a Bush supporter. I did not vote for him last time and will not vote for him this time. But that doesn't mean I have to kick him in the nads for something he didn't do. The tech industry crash might not have been caused by Clinton, but it started on his watch. Considering that it was a market correction, I can't blame Bush for not getting us back into an artifical bubble of paper millionaires.
Our IT jobs are going overseas because we spent most of the Clinton years wallowing in six-digit salaries and stock options while the average worker didn't have half our income. We priced ourselves out of the market. We demanded pool tables and laundramats in our workplace, and we got them. I'm not talking about the top people in the field, I'm talking about Joe-Schoe the code monkey. Starting salaries were in the $50-75 range.
I'm not blaming Bush, I'm blaming the collective "we".
Normally I would agree with you. But there's enough technical language in the report already that I think they were being literal. If they were merely comparing hashes they wouldn't have bothered mentioning it. Please read that quote in context. It very much appears to me that the plaintext password is appearing in the debugger at the point of comparison.
...there are people over at debian who have slapped the GNU tool set on both NetBSD and FreeBSD kernels, and called it GNU/FreeBSD and GNU/NetBSD. This precedence seems to push myself towards the conclusion that changing the toolset does, indeed, warrant a name change.
Your logic doesn't make any sense to me. What the hell does Debian have to do with this? Do you just automatically agree with anyone who calls something "GNU/Something"? What Debian does with their own stuff is Debian's business, and does not justify anyone else's naming convention.
I'm not getting my panties in a bunch over this, but I am trying to battle this stupid idea that everything that touches GNU software has to be gnamed "GNU". It's gone beyond silly and become annoying.
Because the @stake article says so: "the software does a compare between the stored password and the supplied password". That could be merely a gross simplification, but considering that this is in a security advisory and not a ZDNet fluff piece for PHBs, I seriously doubt it.
...the password can be seen in plain text within memory when the software does a compare between the stored password and the supplied password.
Are these guys stupid or what? It boggles my mind that such a scheme ever made it to the marketplace. I have this strong urge to go over there and whack them with a big clue stick. They deserve all the flack they get over this.
We weren't talking about LiGnuX, we were talking about someone installing GNU software on Solaris. Big difference. You don't install software on top of one operating system and wind up with a second operating system of a different name. That's silly.
I'd like to hear from fellow slashdotters if they've faced similar problems in converting people to firefox.
Maybe you should stop trying to convert them. They treat you this way because you're more annoying than the neighbor trying to get them to join Amway. This isn't a religion, so stop trying to peddle Firefox like it's the Watchtower or something...
Slashdot Mirror
Every non-commercial BSD system is an "either" as well.
I'm not bashing GNOME with this, just stating the facts. Personally I don't think ANY non-newbie system should have a default. People who think an enterprise distro needs a default desktop because enterprise sysadmins are can't handle choice are clearly off their rocker.
GTK+ depends upon this ability greatly.
GTK+ depends on the proprietary nvidia driver? That's news to me!
I mean, I can run Office, IE and Outlook together SMOOTHLY on a WinXP box with 128M RAM.
What's your secret? My office workstation has a gig of ram, and and it's the sluggish laggingest P.O.S. I've ever used. And I even have Luna turned off! The exact same machine dual boots, and I can run OpenOffice, Konqeror and KMail simultaneous and have utterly smooth performance.
Now before you go telling me my WinXP problems are due to a misconfiguration, let me warn you that I'll merely respond that you've got GNOME, OpenOffice and Firefox similarly misconfigured...
Actually it's in the BSD *AND* Linux sections.
In high school we used to pick the cheap locks on the classroom cabinets all the time. The purpose was to steal the rival club's flag then extort community charity work out of them to get it back. My brother got pretty good at locks.
:-)
Then we visited Germany for a month. The house where my brother was staying had a locked closet with a key missing from before the war. No one had opened it in over fifty years. But it was an absurdly easy lock and my brother had the closet open five minutes after being apprised of the problem (four minutes to find a suitably stiff paperclip).
To this day I believe there's still a family in Germany firmly convinced that US students are taught lockpicking and safecracking and other feats of criminal legerdemain.
p.s. No valuables found in closet beyond old moth-eaten coats the wife's old love letters. Ah, how sweet
The first round of layoffs in my company happened in December 2000. At that time the handwriting was on the wall for all to see. The rocket was reaching apogee and only idiots said the ecnomy wasn't going to nose dive within a couple of months. Before you start laying people off you first stop hiring them. Your graph clearly shows a significant slowdown in hiring before Bush took office. Take a good close look at your graph. That skyrocketing slope of the dot.com was changing BEFORE even the election! At the time the graph starts nosing downwards, Bush had not been in office long enough to enact one single policy.
My dad recalls that the first he heard of the panic was the next morning's newspaper. It certainly didn't happen in his city. I guess the midwesterners were more sensible than those living in Grover's Mill.
Anyone else see a trend here?
The trend I don't see is the trend for people to stop saying that there's no hope against the Microsoft monopoly.
I didn't say it was Clinton's policies, only that it happened during Clinton's watch.
The reason bush is to blame is simply all the tax breaks to companies that outsource
I work for a huge multinational corporation based in Europe. Is Bush to blame for the outsourcing we're doing in Germany? For the outsourcing we're doing in France and the Netherlands? In England?
What about my other question to you, are you saying that nothing Bush did in the last four years had any effect on the economy whatsoever?
Of course he had an effect. But that's largely irrelevant, because we're talking about a market correction. You can't put air back in the burst balloon. If Gore had been president he couldn't have done it either. If Kerry went back in time and became president he couldn't do it either. The bubble burst. You can't put it back the way it was because the market won't let you.
One post on this thread implies that the Bush tax cuts prolonged this correction. Maybe they did and maybe they didn't. But what if there were Bush tax increases instead? Or even worse, what if he did nothing? No matter what Bush did, people like you would be blaming him for the economy. Which is weird, because the economy really ain't that bad.
Good to see some people are doing good.
Not some, but a lot. A lot of people are doing good. It just doesn't happen to be the overpriced coder. My company is hiring people so fast I can't even book a room for a code review because they're all being used for job interviews. Our conference room is being converted into cubicles next week. But these new hires aren't coders, they're project managers, process auditors, supply managers, etc. We probably have more non-manufacturing jobs now than we did during the dot.com. They might not be coding jobs, but they are good jobs nonetheless.
Unemployment rate only measures people actively looking for jobs. It does not measure people who have given up or people who have left the economy altogether.
Pray tell, why should we count those people? Two major groups in the overlooked "unemployed" are the retired and the student. If I were a a Javascript programmer who dropped out of junior college to join the dot.com boom, believe me I would be back in school too trying to finish my education.
But what the fuck, those people probably deserved to lose their jobs. As long as you and your friends are doing good who the fuck cares.
If you want to go through live hating other people for your own misfortune, be my guest. But I'm choosing to live in reality. And in my reality it isn't hell on earth over here like you guys make it out to be.
Let me repeat my earlier statement. I do not like Bush. But I am not going to lay every misfortune in the world upon his shoulders.
Wow four years later and it's still Clinton's fault huh? Nothing Bush did in the last four years had any effect on the economy whatsoever huh?
First, I didn't say it was Clinton's fault, I only said it happened during his tenure. Second, the effects of a market correction do not occur instantly, so you cannot expect all economic influences from the time of Clinton to cease the day Bush took office.
I know the chic thing to do is to blame Bush for the bad economy, but from where I stand the economy isn't doing too badly. If the voters follow their pocket books, he'll win the election. The programming side of the tech sector got hit hard, and that probably affets you, but otherwise we're looking at a pretty good unemployment rate.
To put a personal spin on things, I don't have any friends, relatives or neighbors that are unemployed. A coworker whose contract ran out last month has already found a new permanant non-contractor job at a higher salary.
Thanks to Bush we no longer have to put up with booming markets, pool tables and laundramats in the workplace or those silly 75K salaries.
If you were like me, you milked those years for all they were worth. But don't imagine for a minute that it represented the normal state of a healthy economy. Complaining about Bush not restoring a speculative market bubble is rather silly.
I live just a few miles south of you, but I really do belive that you guys in San Fransisco live in a different universe. You do a lot of finger pointing up there, but none of it is pointing at the real problem, yourselves. San Fransisco is the most expensive place to live west of New York, yet you living the same economy the rest of us are. So it's no wonder that you have high unemployment. Most businesses can't afford to locate there so they don't, so you're stuck with the established businesses trying to survive in the face of increasing costs.
Besides which, don't thank George, thank Bill. The dot.com bubble happened on his watch, and it began imploding while Bill was still in office. You're living in fantasy land if you expected George to bring back the unreality of dot.com boom.
Stop believing the myth the media is feeding you. While there will always be poor people, their situation in this country has been steadily improving since its founding.
I was born and raised in a county that not too long ago had the nations highest rate of unemployment. It has those shabby trailer parks. It is a POOR county of POOR towns inhabited by POOR people. But the poor there are doing better today than they did when I was a kid. The barrios are gone. The "bad" side of town isn't that bad anymore. It's true that there's still a heck of a lot of welfare there, but it must be pretty good welfare because they're driving new cars and their kids have new bikes. The high school graduates are going off to college because their ethnicity and economic status makes student aid automatic.
The poverty may remain, but the destitution that I recall as a child has disappeared completely from my home town. And it STILL ranks as a pretty damned poor town. It may be liberal chic to claim that the poor are getting poorer, but it simply isn't true.
Considering that the dot.bomb came out of the Clinton administration, I really can't blame Bush too much. I know that will cost me karma, but my honesty won't let me blame him just because it's the karma-enhancing thing to do.
I'm not a Bush supporter. I did not vote for him last time and will not vote for him this time. But that doesn't mean I have to kick him in the nads for something he didn't do. The tech industry crash might not have been caused by Clinton, but it started on his watch. Considering that it was a market correction, I can't blame Bush for not getting us back into an artifical bubble of paper millionaires.
Our IT jobs are going overseas because we spent most of the Clinton years wallowing in six-digit salaries and stock options while the average worker didn't have half our income. We priced ourselves out of the market. We demanded pool tables and laundramats in our workplace, and we got them. I'm not talking about the top people in the field, I'm talking about Joe-Schoe the code monkey. Starting salaries were in the $50-75 range.
I'm not blaming Bush, I'm blaming the collective "we".
OPEC is a very bad example, as its members are in fact governments. Oil is not a free market, because governments decide on its production and price.
Microsoft is the best known "monopoly".
Normally I would agree with you. But there's enough technical language in the report already that I think they were being literal. If they were merely comparing hashes they wouldn't have bothered mentioning it. Please read that quote in context. It very much appears to me that the plaintext password is appearing in the debugger at the point of comparison.
...there are people over at debian who have slapped the GNU tool set on both NetBSD and FreeBSD kernels, and called it GNU/FreeBSD and GNU/NetBSD. This precedence seems to push myself towards the conclusion that changing the toolset does, indeed, warrant a name change.
Your logic doesn't make any sense to me. What the hell does Debian have to do with this? Do you just automatically agree with anyone who calls something "GNU/Something"? What Debian does with their own stuff is Debian's business, and does not justify anyone else's naming convention.
I'm not getting my panties in a bunch over this, but I am trying to battle this stupid idea that everything that touches GNU software has to be gnamed "GNU". It's gone beyond silly and become annoying.
How do you know what the software does?
Because the @stake article says so: "the software does a compare between the stored password and the supplied password". That could be merely a gross simplification, but considering that this is in a security advisory and not a ZDNet fluff piece for PHBs, I seriously doubt it.
...the password can be seen in plain text within memory when the software does a compare between the stored password and the supplied password.
Are these guys stupid or what? It boggles my mind that such a scheme ever made it to the marketplace. I have this strong urge to go over there and whack them with a big clue stick. They deserve all the flack they get over this.
We weren't talking about LiGnuX, we were talking about someone installing GNU software on Solaris. Big difference. You don't install software on top of one operating system and wind up with a second operating system of a different name. That's silly.
I'm running "Mozilla Moondog" right now. Actually that's a pretty cool name, much better than yesterday's "Wateremu".
I am really impressed, as it is the first time I convert someone over 30.
I'm impressed as hell. I'm forty and I'm still trying to figure out this new fangled mouse thingy...
I'd like to hear from fellow slashdotters if they've faced similar problems in converting people to firefox.
Maybe you should stop trying to convert them. They treat you this way because you're more annoying than the neighbor trying to get them to join Amway. This isn't a religion, so stop trying to peddle Firefox like it's the Watchtower or something...