You are still a troll fred, the ideal is for hardware to be detected automatically regardless of when it was plugged, That's the ideal and you know it. Now, no one is demanding perfection from Windows, but you across as trying to blame Slackware for a Windows' error.
Please, less trolling and more lurking, thank you.
Actually learning that Wayland is being developed by former X developers removed most of my ancieties about it. Now I just want to know when it's going to be production ready and if it is going to support my craphics card.
Indeed i wanted to ask, is it hard to switch between Mint Cinnamon and Mint Mate? I want to give Cinnamon a good try, (for about 2-3 months) but I don't want to reinstall the OS just to run Mate in case I don't feel at home in Cinnamon.
I would also like to try a recent Gnome 3 build. I remember when it used to be easy switching desktop environments. back in the days of KDE3 and Gnome 2.
The concern here is that the task is bad so let's assume so.
Is the fact that you are getting paid to do something excempts you from any ethical repercutions?
No I don't think so. I don't accept so.
Are you allowed to do a subpar job?
Yes. One is never obligated be perfect. Nor are we obligated to do our best effort, You can do the worst possible job the client will still accept.
So one can do a bad job. But can you do it on purpose?
For the most part the legality of an action depends on the action, not intent. Some proffesions do make requirements about intent. Doctors for instance make an oath to do no harm (intentionally). Judges, Presidents and other public servants make an oath to do their job to their best of their abilities. Do programmers make such oath? Well... Do insurance agent make them? do real state agents? Do bankers? And, do they actually follow them up?
The answer no in every case. So no. Unless you make an oath to serve to the best of your abilities, you have a right to do the worst possible job that still satisfies your contract. And abilities imply responsability so I'd say you must. However don't be outspoken about it. The law is unfair and I can see some lawyers finding a way to implicate that you do have such an obligation.
Because of lack of marketing and because of lack of OEM support. Remember, people buyed their OS from boxes in those days. And there was no Internet. If it wasn't in the store it didn't exist.
The situations is extremelly dire indeed. There are basically three ways to administer the goverment.
a) Little to no taxes,
Such goverment will wither down, unable to sustain social programs. The country will decend into chaos. No tap water. No public roads. No public libraries or public education. No firefighters and no healthcare. And very weak police, mostly at the service of rich.
Basically what we already have, only much worse. Libertarians want exactly this. Libertarians are morons; disconnected from reality, not realizing that world where corporations can work together but the people can't is not going to be a good world for the people. The people need work together.
b) Raise taxes equally.
This was tried, it's kind of the current situation really. What ends up happening is that the rich get all sorts of subsides to accomplish work they... don't actually accomplish, and from which get to profit even more, completely draining the public of wealth.
c) Progressive taxation. Taxing the rich more than poor.
The system we supposedly have now. The rational is that the rich are the ones who need the infrastructure the more and since they end up getting the mayority of subsides it makes sense that the money comes from them. Except it doesn't happen this way, because the rich simply use their laverage to get around paying the taxes.
So you can't lower taxes, you can't raise them, and leaving them as they are is destroying the nation.
The problem of course is the corruption of the government. Most people realize it, but their ideas on how to fix it are terrible. Some want to get rid of it completelly. Other think that if we select people nice enough or religious enough they'll fix it. Personally i think representative democracy has run it's course. We are giving governors power to make choices they don't have to live with. THAT is the problem. They can make whatever shit decisions they want because they don't affect them. We need some for of direct democracy, or directer-er democracy, and we need it yesterday.
What Linux needs the most are a) advertising, and b) be the default OS of gray/white box machines.
The main problem with Linux is that it arrived too late. The core of Linux is just as good when not better than Windows' but it lacks 3rd party applications because... nobody uses Linux. It's a chicken and eggs problem.
Not that I like defending Microsoft and AV vendors but the virus infested envorinment isn't their fault. Net worms and OS exploits do exist, but are a minority compared to trojans malware that people install because they wanted to do something else. Warez oviously plays a role but you can get root kits from "legitime" vendors like Sony. Nothing is safe.
The only solution is fine grained control and there isn't such thing in the market. Android is the most secure design I can think of and it's still not enough for me but it's close. Basically there isn't an OS that treats local apps the way Computers treat other nodes in the network. As completely untrustable. Until we have that we will have AV software.
Unless the Walled Garden masters win and user software dies. Then AV will stop being widespread. Malware will still exist of course but AV won't be much good then.
Re:what is the point of forking a distro ?
on
Mageia 3 Released
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Some do, obviously. There is value to consolidation.
The key question here is "what is the point?" If there is a point, then that point is the answer. If there isn't a point. Then indeed the distro is nothing but another point in the charts of desktop Linux fragmentation. It is bad for desktop Linux as a whole, it makes Linux less attractive as a platform.
On the other hand desktop Linux is so fragmented already that it's nothing serious, and the Mageia are having so much fun by their own admition, that Mageia turns out to be a positive thing overall.
Now if the Mageia guys could have fun making a better interface for the GIMP or optimizing LibreOffice, that would be much better for desktop Linux. But you can't choose what makes you have fun.
I'm undecided about switching to LMDE, aptosid, or just plain sid. On the one hand I like the idea of not ever having to reinstall the OS for upgrades, on the other hand I feel that eventually I'll have to because of an accumulation of botched installs.
Meanwhile the fuckers at Valve decided that only Ubuntu deserves Steam. But then again TF2 runs like molass in linux with an AMD setup.
Yes, but it cuts both ways. LP's are done for love not profit, but aren't games supposed to be done at least to some degree out of love? What fucking Nintendo is saying here is that the have absolutely zero interest in their games apart from profit. That's... off putting to say the least. "Thanks for your hard work advertising our game! What's this you make a measly return? Let us take that from you too! Keep up the good work!"
Personally I recommend people to remove those videos. There's a limit to how much greed I can tolerate. What disgusts me the most is people defending this sociopathinc behavior. Unlimited greed is not only being tolerated, it's defended as the ultimate moral course.
As Hatta explained, some parts of gnomes really are useless, others code for genes and others provide structure. And indeed this chaos displays the lack of foresight evident in organically evolved systems. The word "junk" not a problem unless you want to argue that every gene in all genomes is there according to some intelligent design, which of course, it's what members of the Abrahamic religions are so desperate to pass for science.
I'm pretty sure the forum and the decryption tool maker are liable too, for "aiding in copyright infringement". There is the "letter of the law" method of interpretation and the "spirit of the law"way of interpretation and judges generally prefer to interpret the law according to who is buying their next yacht.
The government should not be determining what is fair compensation rates, should not be defining the relationship structures, and should not be defining business models.
I don't want the government prosecuting contract violations, and I don't want the government building a bureaucracy to force a specific payment structure to corporate behemoths. I want passive governmental regulations, not an active role.
How is that hypocritical exactly?
At the risk of feeding a troll I'll reply once. Copyrights are unnatural, they limit our natural rights to use our hardware as we please in the privacy of our own homes.
That's not the problem though, unnatural doesn't mean bad, but it means there are no clear boundaries for it. What is a reasonable length term for copyright protections? 14 years? 30 years? Forever minus a day? It's arbitrary and its set by the government. This in effect means that the government sets the price of copyrighted works indirectly. If copyrights lasted for a year, people would still go to the movie theaters, but the tickets/food would have to be much more cheap or people would just wait a year and watch it a home later.
The point I am rising is that this is arbitrary and set by the government. Compulsory licensing is no different. You can argue that you don't like it, but your justification can't be that you don't want the government imposing arbitrary limits on the people because you already *want* the government imposing arbitrary limits on the people, as long as you agree on any set term length.
I just noticed you are just a Holywood shill. Took me a while.
You make very stupid arguments. Like, really stupid arguments. Ok let's say EME goes into HTML5 and now every browser in the market has to implement restrictions on who (and when, where and how) a piece of media is loaded into your browser.
Does that help you mythical Netflix competitor? Nope, your device is lacking the required CDM game over. The CDM has to be provided some other way, either by hardware (like TiVo) or software (like silverlight). You managed to waste everybody's time to achieve absolutely nothing.
Why should the government be involved at all in the distribution of media?
Fucking hypocrite. "Intellectual Properties" only exist because of governmental intervention. Without a government to make it illegal you can't prevent me from doing whatever I want with the information and hardware I payed for.
Even after introducing laws for copyrights and patents there's still the question of how long does the terms last and that affects the price. Term length is the only reason we have to pay licensing for modern stuff but not for Shakespeare.
The government is THE fundamental cog piece in the information economy, and if they can tell us what to do with our hardware, they for sure can tell you to how much you can charge for stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet I think we aren't selling programming enough to teenagers.
You are still a troll fred, the ideal is for hardware to be detected automatically regardless of when it was plugged, That's the ideal and you know it. Now, no one is demanding perfection from Windows, but you across as trying to blame Slackware for a Windows' error.
Please, less trolling and more lurking, thank you.
Actually learning that Wayland is being developed by former X developers removed most of my ancieties about it. Now I just want to know when it's going to be production ready and if it is going to support my craphics card.
I may have posted this already but it's still relevant.
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2961#comic.
Indeed i wanted to ask, is it hard to switch between Mint Cinnamon and Mint Mate? I want to give Cinnamon a good try, (for about 2-3 months) but I don't want to reinstall the OS just to run Mate in case I don't feel at home in Cinnamon.
I would also like to try a recent Gnome 3 build. I remember when it used to be easy switching desktop environments. back in the days of KDE3 and Gnome 2.
The concern here is that the task is bad so let's assume so.
Is the fact that you are getting paid to do something excempts you from any ethical repercutions?
No I don't think so. I don't accept so.
Are you allowed to do a subpar job?
Yes. One is never obligated be perfect. Nor are we obligated to do our best effort, You can do the worst possible job the client will still accept.
So one can do a bad job. But can you do it on purpose?
For the most part the legality of an action depends on the action, not intent. Some proffesions do make requirements about intent. Doctors for instance make an oath to do no harm (intentionally). Judges, Presidents and other public servants make an oath to do their job to their best of their abilities. Do programmers make such oath? Well... Do insurance agent make them? do real state agents? Do bankers? And, do they actually follow them up?
The answer no in every case. So no. Unless you make an oath to serve to the best of your abilities, you have a right to do the worst possible job that still satisfies your contract. And abilities imply responsability so I'd say you must. However don't be outspoken about it. The law is unfair and I can see some lawyers finding a way to implicate that you do have such an obligation.
Because of lack of marketing and because of lack of OEM support. Remember, people buyed their OS from boxes in those days. And there was no Internet. If it wasn't in the store it didn't exist.
The situations is extremelly dire indeed. There are basically three ways to administer the goverment.
a) Little to no taxes,
Such goverment will wither down, unable to sustain social programs. The country will decend into chaos. No tap water. No public roads. No public libraries or public education. No firefighters and no healthcare. And very weak police, mostly at the service of rich.
Basically what we already have, only much worse. Libertarians want exactly this. Libertarians are morons; disconnected from reality, not realizing that world where corporations can work together but the people can't is not going to be a good world for the people. The people need work together.
b) Raise taxes equally.
This was tried, it's kind of the current situation really. What ends up happening is that the rich get all sorts of subsides to accomplish work they... don't actually accomplish, and from which get to profit even more, completely draining the public of wealth.
c) Progressive taxation. Taxing the rich more than poor.
The system we supposedly have now. The rational is that the rich are the ones who need the infrastructure the more and since they end up getting the mayority of subsides it makes sense that the money comes from them. Except it doesn't happen this way, because the rich simply use their laverage to get around paying the taxes.
So you can't lower taxes, you can't raise them, and leaving them as they are is destroying the nation.
The problem of course is the corruption of the government. Most people realize it, but their ideas on how to fix it are terrible. Some want to get rid of it completelly. Other think that if we select people nice enough or religious enough they'll fix it. Personally i think representative democracy has run it's course. We are giving governors power to make choices they don't have to live with. THAT is the problem. They can make whatever shit decisions they want because they don't affect them. We need some for of direct democracy, or directer-er democracy, and we need it yesterday.
I'd give you points if I had them.
What Linux needs the most are a) advertising, and b) be the default OS of gray/white box machines.
The main problem with Linux is that it arrived too late. The core of Linux is just as good when not better than Windows' but it lacks 3rd party applications because... nobody uses Linux. It's a chicken and eggs problem.
Proof that geckos are bad ass!
I think the Lizards ate half the mice.
Not that I like defending Microsoft and AV vendors but the virus infested envorinment isn't their fault. Net worms and OS exploits do exist, but are a minority compared to trojans malware that people install because they wanted to do something else. Warez oviously plays a role but you can get root kits from "legitime" vendors like Sony. Nothing is safe.
The only solution is fine grained control and there isn't such thing in the market. Android is the most secure design I can think of and it's still not enough for me but it's close. Basically there isn't an OS that treats local apps the way Computers treat other nodes in the network. As completely untrustable. Until we have that we will have AV software.
Unless the Walled Garden masters win and user software dies. Then AV will stop being widespread. Malware will still exist of course but AV won't be much good then.
Some do, obviously. There is value to consolidation.
The key question here is "what is the point?" If there is a point, then that point is the answer. If there isn't a point. Then indeed the distro is nothing but another point in the charts of desktop Linux fragmentation. It is bad for desktop Linux as a whole, it makes Linux less attractive as a platform.
On the other hand desktop Linux is so fragmented already that it's nothing serious, and the Mageia are having so much fun by their own admition, that Mageia turns out to be a positive thing overall.
Now if the Mageia guys could have fun making a better interface for the GIMP or optimizing LibreOffice, that would be much better for desktop Linux. But you can't choose what makes you have fun.
No one else has posted this? Good. http://chainsawsuit.com/2013/02/27/two-magic-words/
I'm undecided about switching to LMDE, aptosid, or just plain sid. On the one hand I like the idea of not ever having to reinstall the OS for upgrades, on the other hand I feel that eventually I'll have to because of an accumulation of botched installs.
Meanwhile the fuckers at Valve decided that only Ubuntu deserves Steam. But then again TF2 runs like molass in linux with an AMD setup.
What about a Safari hack?
Yes, but it cuts both ways. LP's are done for love not profit, but aren't games supposed to be done at least to some degree out of love? What fucking Nintendo is saying here is that the have absolutely zero interest in their games apart from profit. That's... off putting to say the least. "Thanks for your hard work advertising our game! What's this you make a measly return? Let us take that from you too! Keep up the good work!"
Personally I recommend people to remove those videos. There's a limit to how much greed I can tolerate. What disgusts me the most is people defending this sociopathinc behavior. Unlimited greed is not only being tolerated, it's defended as the ultimate moral course.
As Hatta explained, some parts of gnomes really are useless, others code for genes and others provide structure. And indeed this chaos displays the lack of foresight evident in organically evolved systems. The word "junk" not a problem unless you want to argue that every gene in all genomes is there according to some intelligent design, which of course, it's what members of the Abrahamic religions are so desperate to pass for science.
I'm pretty sure the forum and the decryption tool maker are liable too, for "aiding in copyright infringement". There is the "letter of the law" method of interpretation and the "spirit of the law"way of interpretation and judges generally prefer to interpret the law according to who is buying their next yacht.
The motherfucker is going to ruin Mars forver too?
No, that comes standard with Windows these days.
The government should not be determining what is fair compensation rates, should not be defining the relationship structures, and should not be defining business models.
I don't want the government prosecuting contract violations, and I don't want the government building a bureaucracy to force a specific payment structure to corporate behemoths. I want passive governmental regulations, not an active role.
How is that hypocritical exactly?
At the risk of feeding a troll I'll reply once. Copyrights are unnatural, they limit our natural rights to use our hardware as we please in the privacy of our own homes.
That's not the problem though, unnatural doesn't mean bad, but it means there are no clear boundaries for it. What is a reasonable length term for copyright protections? 14 years? 30 years? Forever minus a day? It's arbitrary and its set by the government. This in effect means that the government sets the price of copyrighted works indirectly. If copyrights lasted for a year, people would still go to the movie theaters, but the tickets/food would have to be much more cheap or people would just wait a year and watch it a home later.
The point I am rising is that this is arbitrary and set by the government. Compulsory licensing is no different. You can argue that you don't like it, but your justification can't be that you don't want the government imposing arbitrary limits on the people because you already *want* the government imposing arbitrary limits on the people, as long as you agree on any set term length.
I always though that was a stupid idea.
I just noticed you are just a Holywood shill. Took me a while.
You make very stupid arguments. Like, really stupid arguments. Ok let's say EME goes into HTML5 and now every browser in the market has to implement restrictions on who (and when, where and how) a piece of media is loaded into your browser.
Does that help you mythical Netflix competitor? Nope, your device is lacking the required CDM game over. The CDM has to be provided some other way, either by hardware (like TiVo) or software (like silverlight). You managed to waste everybody's time to achieve absolutely nothing.
Why should the government be involved at all in the distribution of media?
Fucking hypocrite. "Intellectual Properties" only exist because of governmental intervention. Without a government to make it illegal you can't prevent me from doing whatever I want with the information and hardware I payed for.
Even after introducing laws for copyrights and patents there's still the question of how long does the terms last and that affects the price. Term length is the only reason we have to pay licensing for modern stuff but not for Shakespeare.
The government is THE fundamental cog piece in the information economy, and if they can tell us what to do with our hardware, they for sure can tell you to how much you can charge for stuff.