Then I was reading freebsd-question mailing list, and there was this fellow who wanted to install freebsd the gentoo way. People were genuinly bewildered - not because they had anything against gentoo, but because they didn't know how it works, so they had him explaining it. He basically said that he wants everything built from source optimized and all from the ground up. They told him to install the OS and then rebuild everything. He said no no no, he wants to build the kernel before installing, he wants to build the toolchain before installing and so on. The idea was so... well, how shall I put it... strange, that poor folks at first thought that they don't understand the bloke properly. And if you come to think of it: the guy instead of wanting to have a sytem with basic functionality (xfree, a wm, a browser, networking, email, whatnot) up and running in ten minutes, and then rebuilding everything from source in the background (while posting gentoo roxorz messages on./) he wanted to have an unusable system for hours if not half a day - for what reason?
I was always stuck by the sheer senselessness of the install procedure (even starting from stage3) - it seems to me that gentoo has it backwards: instead of installing the damn thing and have the ability to read your emails in 10 minutes while having the choice to optimize when it suits you, you are (or you were, I'm not aware of the current status) forced to fumble with the system for hours just to get it installed.
Hát én errõl még sose gondolkodtam így. Nagyon elgondolkodtató, és úgy vélem jól látja a dolgot. Az angol szókincse pedig nagyon elegánsan Brittes. Kellett nekem nyamvadt Kanadaba kikerülnöm... "But what can you do, eh?" (Az "eh" az egy tipikus Kanadai-angol-izmus; kevesek egyike.)
I've installed over a dozen packages (kde, openoffice, firefox, dia, lyx, et al) on my days old Gentoo 2005.0 setup and I am yet to see a warning that anything has to be updated manually in/etc/
You state your opinion in a wholly unconvincing manner.
Whether a story is sci-fi, fantasy, realism, or magic-realism is of no consequence to the quality of the game. I did not dislike KOTOR because it was a stupid Star Wars story. I hated it because it was a poor excuse for an RPG game.
Opera may be better, but it isn't portable for embedded environment use.
Firefox can be trimmed down for uses with 32MB memory or less. However, some sacrifices have to be made (sans JAVA, smaller window manager).
Also, Gentoo is a tough one for cross-environment development but attainable.
FreeBSD? Stable, but not keeping with the trend.
I see there are a good few of us. Where do you hail from? Did you reply in English out of courtesy for others, or are just not much used to typing in Hungarian?
The one part I don't much understand is your saying "FreeBSD? Stable, but not keeping with the trend." What trend?
I never thought KOTOR was all that spectacular. I found it rather pathetic actually how limited the game was:
- can fight only those the game let you
- can kill only those the game lets you
- can travel only where the game lets you
And I'm not talking about sensible limitations. I am talking about limitations relating to what menu options are available.
If the game does not think character X is an enemy, you cannot attack him. ?!?!
In Morrowind, The Best RPG I've known thus far, you can:
- fight anyone--though people you're not (yet) meant to fight will almost certainly kill you (but, at least you can try)
- kill anyone--or try anyways; if the character was crucial to the story line, you are informed and encouraged to restore to an earlier save (but you can do it, and if you are *re*-playing, you very well may want to)
- travel anywhere--though places you're not (yet) meant to travel to probably contain creatures that can finish you off quickly
In short, a worthwhile RPG should not have to cheat. If you don't want a guy to do something, but some *natural* obstacles in his way--and if he decides to and manages to "break the game", GOOD! It's more value to the game that suddenly new possibilities are open.
Games of the KOTOR sort, to me, just seem lazily done by less than brilliant story-tellers and programmers. "Hey, here's the three less than brilliant options we thought of; choose one--our game can't handle anything else so we've programmatically prevented you from even trying other stuff."
If Jade Empire is anything like it... thanks, but I'll pass. (Actually, until reading this review and seeing the references to KOTOR, I was looking forward to getting this game.)
Lehet túl régen vagyok már távol otthonról... de csak most kezdem kapisgálni.
Firefox lassú--az Opera viszont jól mûködött az Ön lassúcska gépén?
Persze nem lehet kemény bizonyítéknak elfogadni innen onnan jövõ történeteket (saját elkövetkezõ mesémet is ideszámítom)... de én azt mondom hogy hiszek Önnek meg neki is.
A Gentoo alatt, ha nem gyors, de (szubjektív felhasználói élményt tekintve) rögtönösen reagált a Firefox majd mindig a Pentium II 300 MHz-es (bár 256+ MB rammal) gépemen. És nem vélem lassúnak a mostani újraszületését se az ugyanez gépen levõ Windows XP Pro-n. (Bár be kell vallanom hogy nem tudok Internet Explorer összehasonlítást ajánlani, mivel nem használom és az asszonynak se hagyom hogy tegye.)
Tömegesen olvastam én már mind "A Firefox hû de lassú" és "A Firefox hû de gyors" vallomásokat is. Furcsállom, mert el nem tudom képzelni mi lehet a nyitja... de úgy vélem hogy környezetétõl függõen a Firefox lehet nagyon jó de nagyon rossz is.
Te egyébként FreeBSD-s vagy? Viszonylag gondmentes rendszer?
No reiserfs (appearantly because "reiserfs = teh suck")--the disturbance in the force you may have detected is the apathy that thousands of Gentoo users suddenly developed for the Gentoo Installer.
If people around the world can use reiserfs without notable injury (or, as in my case and in the case of everyone I personally know, no injury at all), then surely someone vying to provide such a choice and highly visible piece of software to a leading linux distribution could have put in a bit of extra effort and get partitioning properly working with all popularly used filesystems.
My disappointement and disdain on this account is practically tangible. The Gentoo installation process is thoroughly automatable. There are a limited set of choices during the process, all of which can be effortlessly foreseen and mapped/planned out. (Talking about installing "by the handbook", of course.) ext3 is 6 years old, reiserfs is 4--we're not talking cutting edge. Not bothering to support reiserfs just seems like lazily taking the easy way out of something certainly solvable. I hope that, in time, someone more capable will take over the Gentoo Installer project or overtake it with a better installer.
We explained to the parents that 127.0.0.1 was the local PC's IP address and any attacks directed against this IP would actually be on the launching computer. We told them to go to a computer store and confirm what we were saying. We never heard back from the parents and the kid never returned to the class.
I can't believe that was the end of it. I'm sure most parents would get a little ticked off if someone tricked their kid like that.
"Judge--the instructor is clearly an evil immoral man. He gave information to our son which caused our son's criminal activities to be unintendedly directed against our own computer instead of the computers belonging to the school!"
It may not have been the end of it--but unless the parents are mental deficients, it should have been the end of their moronic indignation.
Doesn't matter. Doing good in one field doesn't give you carte blache expert status in every field. I wouldn't trust RMS to do open heart surgery on anyone, for example. One of the biggest/best strengths anyone can have is to know when they aren't an expert and to defer to others. Just because he is great in software doesn't make him an expert in economics (this isn't to say that he can't be an expert in economics, I just highly doubt it). Similarly, anyone who bestows trusted status on someone in all things simply because that person did something good in one thing is also a fool.
RMS is perfectly capable of being a brilliant programmer and a complete idiot, just like anyone else. I would be surprised if there wasn't at least one subject where my knowledge in the subject exceeds his just as there are subjects that he has more knowledge than I do. He is just a man. He is not a god.
You said nothing that in any way furthered your argument. The fact that he is not a god, does not make him an idiot in the particular "field" that you are suggesting.
His ideas are quite simple and quite profound. You may ultimately disagree with them. But calling him an idiot for them seems rather suspect of personal prejudice.
For crying out loud. Software does "not" have rights and freedoms. It is a thing and it is property of someone protected by copyright law. People have "rights" and "freedoms". The GPL does "not" protect individual "rights" and "freedoms".
Nobody said software has rights and freedoms. It is exactly people's rights and freedoms (no need for quotation marks) that the GPL protects with regards to software.
If you don't get that... than FOSS is not a topic you should argue about.
Sorry what exactly am I delusional about? That OSS software usually have horrible UI's and documentation? That freedom of speech and freedom are not intrinsically the domain of OSS? That RMS is a raving lunatic who is causing more harm than good with his rhetoric and hypocrisy? What about my belief that open standards are far more important that open source software? I believe this is especially true for average users who could care less if source is available.
No problem. Mostly. Yes (though you misspelled ***F***OSS). Yes. Mostly.
A lot of FOSS software has perfectly fine UI and documentation (just about all the programs I use on my Gentoo desktop at home and at work). And, of course, one need not search long to find less than stellar non-FOSS UIs and documentation.
Freedom is intrinsically a part of FOSS, FS being the original thing, and OSS being a slight altering and renaming to make matters look more attractive to people who find the prospect of ethical considerations repulsive.
RMS is not a raving lunatic, he does not cause harm, and I'd be astonished if you could bring forward a sensible argument about his alleged "hypocrisy". Oh, and not unimportantly, he was so bloody thoroughly right in the BitKeeper business... that you're reaction really does suggest a very deep delusion.
Open Standards are important because they allow for interoperability. Of course, closed source software makers in monopoly positions could choose to ignore such an option. While FOSS, by its very nature, provides what people need.
Hence, I would say open standards' greatest value lies in making FOSS more viable. Of course, FOSS itself promotes Open Standards... so this may degenerate into a chicken and the egg riddle. For all intents and purposes, I'd say they are virtually equally important... and I'm not sure which one would be *more* important since they are pretty intertwined.
And the average user may one day find it would be nice if a certain customisation could be implemented for his work usage. His company may well find it easier, cheaper, and nicer to pay a programming for a few paltry hours of time than to switch software or pay for another round of Microsoft upgrades. So while they may not obsess about the source being available... they certainly can benefit under some fairly simple and plausible scenarios.
>Free in Free Software refers to liberty, not cost.
Of course. And the nimrods in this forum seem to think that developers should eat those nice high software development costs and then make no money off it. Yes, you can sell services... on small percentage of the apps one could conceivably write. There's a great deal of software that needs to simply work and go away. That is, no support mechanism behind it and if it needs support it's fundamentally flawed.
Putting up a paypal donate button doesn't sound like a solid way to generate income for a full time engineering team.
Of course, you're argument has no bearing at all on the real meaning of the popularly used term "Free Software".
RMS may be a brilliant programmer but he's a complete idiot when it comes to anything else other than maybe playing that flute of his. If it weren't for commercial software, we'd still be in the comparative stone age of computing as to what we have today. What do you think fuels the industry? It's money. Money encourages development in both software and hardware. More software encourages more hardware and vice versa.
You should offer to educate him.
And post on slashdot the number of minutes it takes for him to stop laughing his ass of.
What have you accomplished in your life? Is it even remotely comparable to what RMS has?
Again RMS sticks to his ``principles''. And there is some reality to his comments about McVoy. Looks like he's the only one who profited from the whole BK issue. Now, if Linus wants to move away from BK, he can move away - or so I guess. It's his kernel afterall. But wait! It's no longer his ``own'' kernel, isn't it?
Damn! In your utter brilliance you found a gaping loophole.
You are right. Linus Torvalds *should* own all the code produced by the thousands (tens of thousands?) of programmers that contributed and continue to contribute code to the Linux kernel.
Now run, call Ms. DiDio or something about this outrageous injustice...
Software should be Open Source as much as possible, but there is no reason at all that _all_ software should be _Free_. Anyone who says so is a hypocrit (don't conform! er, uh, conform to what I say!).
Your brilliant arguments utterly convinced me, Sir.
This whole incident is why software should be 100% free.
Comments like this baffle me. Why is it software should be free? Are all programmers supposed to just donate all their time for the greater good? It's all well and good to advocate giving stuff away when you don't make your living writing it.
Clearly, you don't get it even on the most basic level.
Free in Free Software refers to liberty, not cost.
Slashdot Mirror
Who could start a *class* action lawsuit perhaps? ;-)
Let's just send you instead!!
'Cause, you know... I figure two birds with one stone.
But do I send 300 emails, or just one big one with the split rars containing all 300 copies?
I've installed over a dozen packages (kde, openoffice, firefox, dia, lyx, et al) on my days old Gentoo 2005.0 setup and I am yet to see a warning that anything has to be updated manually in /etc/
;)
I believe this is a something to do with 2005.0.
Will you come back now?
You state your opinion in a wholly unconvincing manner.
Whether a story is sci-fi, fantasy, realism, or magic-realism is of no consequence to the quality of the game. I did not dislike KOTOR because it was a stupid Star Wars story. I hated it because it was a poor excuse for an RPG game.
The one part I don't much understand is your saying "FreeBSD? Stable, but not keeping with the trend." What trend?
I never thought KOTOR was all that spectacular. I found it rather pathetic actually how limited the game was:
- can fight only those the game let you
- can kill only those the game lets you
- can travel only where the game lets you
And I'm not talking about sensible limitations. I am talking about limitations relating to what menu options are available.
If the game does not think character X is an enemy, you cannot attack him. ?!?!
In Morrowind, The Best RPG I've known thus far, you can:
- fight anyone--though people you're not (yet) meant to fight will almost certainly kill you (but, at least you can try)
- kill anyone--or try anyways; if the character was crucial to the story line, you are informed and encouraged to restore to an earlier save (but you can do it, and if you are *re*-playing, you very well may want to)
- travel anywhere--though places you're not (yet) meant to travel to probably contain creatures that can finish you off quickly
In short, a worthwhile RPG should not have to cheat. If you don't want a guy to do something, but some *natural* obstacles in his way--and if he decides to and manages to "break the game", GOOD! It's more value to the game that suddenly new possibilities are open.
Games of the KOTOR sort, to me, just seem lazily done by less than brilliant story-tellers and programmers. "Hey, here's the three less than brilliant options we thought of; choose one--our game can't handle anything else so we've programmatically prevented you from even trying other stuff."
If Jade Empire is anything like it... thanks, but I'll pass. (Actually, until reading this review and seeing the references to KOTOR, I was looking forward to getting this game.)
Lehet túl régen vagyok már távol otthonról... de csak most kezdem kapisgálni.
Firefox lassú--az Opera viszont jól mûködött az Ön lassúcska gépén?
Persze nem lehet kemény bizonyítéknak elfogadni innen onnan jövõ történeteket (saját elkövetkezõ mesémet is ideszámítom)... de én azt mondom hogy hiszek Önnek meg neki is.
A Gentoo alatt, ha nem gyors, de (szubjektív felhasználói élményt tekintve) rögtönösen reagált a Firefox majd mindig a Pentium II 300 MHz-es (bár 256+ MB rammal) gépemen. És nem vélem lassúnak a mostani újraszületését se az ugyanez gépen levõ Windows XP Pro-n. (Bár be kell vallanom hogy nem tudok Internet Explorer összehasonlítást ajánlani, mivel nem használom és az asszonynak se hagyom hogy tegye.)
Tömegesen olvastam én már mind "A Firefox hû de lassú" és "A Firefox hû de gyors" vallomásokat is. Furcsállom, mert el nem tudom képzelni mi lehet a nyitja... de úgy vélem hogy környezetétõl függõen a Firefox lehet nagyon jó de nagyon rossz is.
Te egyébként FreeBSD-s vagy? Viszonylag gondmentes rendszer?
No reiserfs (appearantly because " reiserfs = teh suck ")--the disturbance in the force you may have detected is the apathy that thousands of Gentoo users suddenly developed for the Gentoo Installer.
If people around the world can use reiserfs without notable injury (or, as in my case and in the case of everyone I personally know, no injury at all), then surely someone vying to provide such a choice and highly visible piece of software to a leading linux distribution could have put in a bit of extra effort and get partitioning properly working with all popularly used filesystems.
My disappointement and disdain on this account is practically tangible. The Gentoo installation process is thoroughly automatable. There are a limited set of choices during the process, all of which can be effortlessly foreseen and mapped/planned out. (Talking about installing "by the handbook", of course.) ext3 is 6 years old, reiserfs is 4--we're not talking cutting edge. Not bothering to support reiserfs just seems like lazily taking the easy way out of something certainly solvable. I hope that, in time, someone more capable will take over the Gentoo Installer project or overtake it with a better installer.
Kedves honfitárs, maga érte vagy ellene próbál érvelni evvel a posttal?
It may not have been the end of it--but unless the parents are mental deficients, it should have been the end of their moronic indignation.
What do you figure they should/could have done???
His ideas are quite simple and quite profound. You may ultimately disagree with them. But calling him an idiot for them seems rather suspect of personal prejudice.
If you don't get that... than FOSS is not a topic you should argue about.
A lot of FOSS software has perfectly fine UI and documentation (just about all the programs I use on my Gentoo desktop at home and at work). And, of course, one need not search long to find less than stellar non-FOSS UIs and documentation.
Freedom is intrinsically a part of FOSS, FS being the original thing, and OSS being a slight altering and renaming to make matters look more attractive to people who find the prospect of ethical considerations repulsive.
RMS is not a raving lunatic, he does not cause harm, and I'd be astonished if you could bring forward a sensible argument about his alleged "hypocrisy". Oh, and not unimportantly, he was so bloody thoroughly right in the BitKeeper business... that you're reaction really does suggest a very deep delusion.
Open Standards are important because they allow for interoperability. Of course, closed source software makers in monopoly positions could choose to ignore such an option. While FOSS, by its very nature, provides what people need.
Hence, I would say open standards' greatest value lies in making FOSS more viable. Of course, FOSS itself promotes Open Standards... so this may degenerate into a chicken and the egg riddle. For all intents and purposes, I'd say they are virtually equally important... and I'm not sure which one would be *more* important since they are pretty intertwined.
And the average user may one day find it would be nice if a certain customisation could be implemented for his work usage. His company may well find it easier, cheaper, and nicer to pay a programming for a few paltry hours of time than to switch software or pay for another round of Microsoft upgrades. So while they may not obsess about the source being available... they certainly can benefit under some fairly simple and plausible scenarios.
Maybe RMS is living in a dream world; but you are wildly delusional.
If you purposely set out to fail to understand a post, why waste time by replying to it?
And post on slashdot the number of minutes it takes for him to stop laughing his ass of.
What have you accomplished in your life? Is it even remotely comparable to what RMS has?
You are right. Linus Torvalds *should* own all the code produced by the thousands (tens of thousands?) of programmers that contributed and continue to contribute code to the Linux kernel.
Now run, call Ms. DiDio or something about this outrageous injustice...
Sorry--but your post was just plain dumb.
Free in Free Software refers to liberty, not cost.