While Ubuntu Netbook Remix (soon to be "Edition") owns Moblin in most graphs the reason I switched to moblin was because of its fast start up, about about 20 seconds.
Another distro xPUD boots in about 10 seconds, but flash doesn't work out of the box.
However, while youtube runs beautifully in moblin (including fullscreen!) other flash games are too slow and there is still no shockwave, so what I want is a linux that boots fast, runs flash ok and runs shockwave somehow (maybe with wine?) and the more of these features that run out of the box the better, for anything else I can use the terminal.
Should MS worry? Just take a look at all the MS shills and astroturfers around.
Just notice the gazillion claims that if you mod your xbox it violates the Xlive TOS and you have no legal recourse. How many times does it has to be repeated that they went far and beyond their legal ground banning offline abilities aswell until they stop saying this?
The answer is null, these commenters are not going to get that because they are paid not to get that.
I think the question is it ethical to do so? Yes, this, like the fucked up Google results are one of those cases where you could suggest that the people of China are better served by a government manipulated service than no service at all, but what about us? What does it say about us?
I would refuse to work for a company that made such compromises on freedom at all, I mean what do these guys tell their friends/family/kids?
- What you do you do daddy? - Well I make sure the young population of china never gets a feeling of independence or self worth outside remaining subservient to the state honey.
I didn't misunderstand what you said, I know very well that what is bloat for someone might be a must for someone else, that's why extension are for, it allows you to have features in your browser that most users wouldn't like by defalut. The point is that, there being a perfect tool for extending and configuring Firefox, Firefox dev use, why? Even if you *Reapman* don't mind it someone else... lots of someone elses, do mind.
Actually I think you are the one missing the point saying that people can't say Firefox is bloated, you are taking a users are wrong approach, if enough users think your app is bloated then it is bloated. Or rather ask, what right you have to say it isn't bloated? Just because it is fine for you it doesn't mean it is fine for everybody.
Note that personally I don't find Firefox to bee too bloated, is just that I think the "core + default extensions" is the right way to go at this point in the life-cycle of Firefox.
No no no, I think he's right, images, toolbars, panes, tabs are necessary infrastructure, RSS is not, the awesome bar is not, bookmarks are not, the question is, does this look like an extension? then why not make it a *default* extension? That way disabling the "bloat" would be easy for those who care and invisible for those who don't.
Put differently, why don't firefox devs learn to write extensions?
Sadly that is relevant and not enough attention is paid to that problem.
The abridged version is that MS did promise not to sue mono over any patents it owns SO LONG AS IT OWNS THEM. MS can sell those patents to a patent troll voiding the promise.
People have asked for actual licenses but MS and its apologists always reply that the promise is sufficient and that MS does not intend to sell said patents, sure...
After the inventing the Chrome browser (not related to Mozilla's chrome://browser) and the Closure compiler (not related the Clojure compiler) I have some suggestions for original names:
1) Zool 2) Venkman 3) Javaskript 4) Firebug (you can't tell me there is a Firebug programming language) 5) Pie-Ton 6) Ruvy 7).com (since MS got away with.net) 8) www. (while we are at it...) 9) Sea++ (but the compiler would be called Seaside...) 10) Small talk (why not?)
At a "newspaper website", why would you expect that every participant is an adult?
Because it is more sane to expect parents, who already are supposed to control their children's access to TV, alcohol, phone... etc to also take responsibility for their children's net access, than for the rest of the world to throw draconian measures of authentication, banishing privacy and anonymity from the net in the process.
I don't know what you mean precisely by "serious crime", though.
I'd say serious enough to triumph over the First Amendment, I'm sorry, I'm not fluent in legalese.
The comments at the heart of the case came at the end of a series of posts between Hipcheck16 and Stone[the Mom and public figure]'s son, who was concerned about online remarks the teen regarded as critical of his mother.
At one point, the teen asked to know the poster's identity and challenged him to debate the issues in person.
Declining an invitation to pay a visit, Hipcheck16 posted a response that said, according to court documents, "Seems like you're very willing to invite a man you only know from the Internet over to your house -- have you done it before, or do they usually invite you to their house?"
The post then continues with references to the boy's "mommy," saying that statements made by her son may cause her political problems after her election, according to court records.
Stone said the comments crossed the line.
"I would like to hear the explanation for the innocent part of that," she said. "There was no joke, there was no punch line."
Stone is obviously playing dumb, it's a clear rhetoric question implying "you should not invite strangers to your house, it does not look on records for your mommy"
i guess you'll still insist this is not enough information, maybe "mommy" is a secret code for "I'll kill you" between Stone and an third party, undisclosed, so Stone herself must verify the commenter's identity.
You said "The bar for this order being appropriate is pretty high", but the way you present it it seems like Stone (or any other claimant) is the only one who can judge whether we have anonymity in the web at all.
If I was a US citizen, I'd pressure to move the bar higher. Death threats and spam seem better metrics rather than simply asking "do you invite strangers home?" that's a pretty low bar to me.
Firstly, I don't buy that *she* has to know the identity of the commenter, the judge or some independent party can decide if the commenter really gained anything from the comment.
Secondly, I don't buy that --restriction orders not withstanding-- the identity of the commenter should matter, nor what he gains from it, if he gains a penny, or a buck, or a thousand, you are supposed to sue from the damage you get, not from the gain they get.
Isn't this why the MAFIAA can sue for hundreds of thousands of dollars on damages?
The Internet already protects you from being stabbed during a heated debate, and now we are supposed to protect you from being called names?
Also the Internet operates under the idea that all peers are that, peers. That means either everybody is an adult or everybody is a child. Considering that the Internet can take you faster than a car to places further than a passport can, it should be safe to assume every peer is an adult.
Also, its easier and makes more sense for parents to be responsible for their children net access than to expect *everyone else* to make sure they are not talking to a kid.
Also, is being gay something so horrible that entertaining the notion that you might be gay is a serious crime?
Also, if the politician "mom" wants to use the legal system to sue for damages, she can sue "john doe" the only reason to get the commenter's name is to act outside of the legal system, why should we allow it?
When you steal you prevent someone from using their property, that's why its wrong.
When you patent trivial algorithms you prevent someone from using their rights, if people come up with the same algorithms independently I don't see how can you morally prevent them from using them.
Actually I don't know what the government does to you if you refuse to pay your debts when you could afford to pay them if you sued your family, isn't it like tax evasion? Can the government sue your family in name for your old possessions? Ideally you could simply declare yourself bankrupt I guess.
Actually even if they are not allowed to have him removed from life support I can't expect the family to be forced to pay for it. Then it's up to the state to decide for how long it is going to support these kinds of patients. After that person is revived he can sue his family to get his stuff back, not unlike when a missing person comes out to be alive after several years . The state then can sue him to pay for his medical debts. Or he can choose not pay for the bills and go to prison or commit suicide or both.
It sounds crazy and heartless but it is the way I'd hope the government managed these cases.
I don't see a problem, Mozilla is a web browser, the "chrome" in the Jargon file is an outdated slang term, Chrome is *also* a web browser, it's a context problem.
If you tell people, that Firefox bug allows running code with chrome privileges they'll wonder if they have to uninstall Chrome. Before, searching for "Firefox chrome" gave you documentation, now it gives you browser benchmarks and reviews.
What bugs me is that they are partners with Mozilla, they know Firefox, intimately, and they STILL named their browser Chrome, not just despite the conflict, but I suspect because of the conflict.
It as if Mozilla renamed bespin to wave, wanna have real time collaboration on wave? wait Mozilla's or Google's? Except of course Mozilla can't throw its weight around like that like a heavy monopolist like Google can.
They are continuing with the work they started with the "Chrome" browser, making sure nobody find out that Mozilla invented "chrome://" or what it can do with that.
Interestingly, pain is good for you as it decreases the amount of exposure to danger you are willing to take, so evolution would select against people that don't hate (or even enjoy) pain.
Of course, too much sensitivity and you run into some other evolutionary problems, I think we've got it about right, most of us.
This is proof slashdot is biased, do you notice how slashdoters like to pick on Windows? You'd never see an article talking about people having problems with Ubun... wait... fuck...
Slashdot Mirror
While Ubuntu Netbook Remix (soon to be "Edition") owns Moblin in most graphs the reason I switched to moblin was because of its fast start up, about about 20 seconds.
Another distro xPUD boots in about 10 seconds, but flash doesn't work out of the box.
However, while youtube runs beautifully in moblin (including fullscreen!) other flash games are too slow and there is still no shockwave, so what I want is a linux that boots fast, runs flash ok and runs shockwave somehow (maybe with wine?) and the more of these features that run out of the box the better, for anything else I can use the terminal.
Should MS worry? Just take a look at all the MS shills and astroturfers around.
Just notice the gazillion claims that if you mod your xbox it violates the Xlive TOS and you have no legal recourse. How many times does it has to be repeated that they went far and beyond their legal ground banning offline abilities aswell until they stop saying this?
The answer is null, these commenters are not going to get that because they are paid not to get that.
Now shills, let the flaming begin.
So this is what it feels like to be the first one to post?
I think the question is it ethical to do so? Yes, this, like the fucked up Google results are one of those cases where you could suggest that the people of China are better served by a government manipulated service than no service at all, but what about us? What does it say about us?
I would refuse to work for a company that made such compromises on freedom at all, I mean what do these guys tell their friends/family/kids?
- What you do you do daddy?
- Well I make sure the young population of china never gets a feeling of independence or self worth outside remaining subservient to the state honey.
Ok, ok, I'll fix that...
There! Are you happy? I had to take that letter from elewhere!
If I had mod point I'd mod you FUNNY.
I didn't misunderstand what you said, I know very well that what is bloat for someone might be a must for someone else, that's why extension are for, it allows you to have features in your browser that most users wouldn't like by defalut. The point is that, there being a perfect tool for extending and configuring Firefox, Firefox dev use, why? Even if you *Reapman* don't mind it someone else... lots of someone elses, do mind.
Actually I think you are the one missing the point saying that people can't say Firefox is bloated, you are taking a users are wrong approach, if enough users think your app is bloated then it is bloated. Or rather ask, what right you have to say it isn't bloated? Just because it is fine for you it doesn't mean it is fine for everybody.
Note that personally I don't find Firefox to bee too bloated, is just that I think the "core + default extensions" is the right way to go at this point in the life-cycle of Firefox.
No no no, I think he's right, images, toolbars, panes, tabs are necessary infrastructure, RSS is not, the awesome bar is not, bookmarks are not, the question is, does this look like an extension? then why not make it a *default* extension? That way disabling the "bloat" would be easy for those who care and invisible for those who don't.
Put differently, why don't firefox devs learn to write extensions?
Indeed TPB case proves the Scandinavian law can operate on green.
Sadly that is relevant and not enough attention is paid to that problem.
The abridged version is that MS did promise not to sue mono over any patents it owns SO LONG AS IT OWNS THEM. MS can sell those patents to a patent troll voiding the promise.
People have asked for actual licenses but MS and its apologists always reply that the promise is sufficient and that MS does not intend to sell said patents, sure...
After the inventing the Chrome browser (not related to Mozilla's chrome://browser) and the Closure compiler (not related the Clojure compiler) I have some suggestions for original names:
1) Zool .com (since MS got away with .net)
2) Venkman
3) Javaskript
4) Firebug (you can't tell me there is a Firebug programming language)
5) Pie-Ton
6) Ruvy
7)
8) www. (while we are at it...)
9) Sea++ (but the compiler would be called Seaside...)
10) Small talk (why not?)
At a "newspaper website", why would you expect that every participant is an adult?
Because it is more sane to expect parents, who already are supposed to control their children's access to TV, alcohol, phone... etc to also take responsibility for their children's net access, than for the rest of the world to throw draconian measures of authentication, banishing privacy and anonymity from the net in the process.
I don't know what you mean precisely by "serious crime", though.
I'd say serious enough to triumph over the First Amendment, I'm sorry, I'm not fluent in legalese.
Since you keep repeating "we don't know enough" I guess you haven't read it, the source can be found in TFA adn here in slashdot.
From http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/11/trustee-may-learn-identify-of-anonymous-internet-poster.html
Stone is obviously playing dumb, it's a clear rhetoric question implying "you should not invite strangers to your house, it does not look on records for your mommy"
i guess you'll still insist this is not enough information, maybe "mommy" is a secret code for "I'll kill you" between Stone and an third party, undisclosed, so Stone herself must verify the commenter's identity.
You said "The bar for this order being appropriate is pretty high", but the way you present it it seems like Stone (or any other claimant) is the only one who can judge whether we have anonymity in the web at all.
If I was a US citizen, I'd pressure to move the bar higher. Death threats and spam seem better metrics rather than simply asking "do you invite strangers home?" that's a pretty low bar to me.
Firstly, I don't buy that *she* has to know the identity of the commenter, the judge or some independent party can decide if the commenter really gained anything from the comment.
Secondly, I don't buy that --restriction orders not withstanding-- the identity of the commenter should matter, nor what he gains from it, if he gains a penny, or a buck, or a thousand, you are supposed to sue from the damage you get, not from the gain they get.
Isn't this why the MAFIAA can sue for hundreds of thousands of dollars on damages?
Indeed. There are so much things wrong here...
The Internet already protects you from being stabbed during a heated debate, and now we are supposed to protect you from being called names?
Also the Internet operates under the idea that all peers are that, peers. That means either everybody is an adult or everybody is a child. Considering that the Internet can take you faster than a car to places further than a passport can, it should be safe to assume every peer is an adult.
Also, its easier and makes more sense for parents to be responsible for their children net access than to expect *everyone else* to make sure they are not talking to a kid.
Also, is being gay something so horrible that entertaining the notion that you might be gay is a serious crime?
Also, if the politician "mom" wants to use the legal system to sue for damages, she can sue "john doe" the only reason to get the commenter's name is to act outside of the legal system, why should we allow it?
I disagree.
When you steal you prevent someone from using their property, that's why its wrong.
When you patent trivial algorithms you prevent someone from using their rights, if people come up with the same algorithms independently I don't see how can you morally prevent them from using them.
I *still* think they should have renamed it "Suzaku".
Actually I don't know what the government does to you if you refuse to pay your debts when you could afford to pay them if you sued your family, isn't it like tax evasion? Can the government sue your family in name for your old possessions? Ideally you could simply declare yourself bankrupt I guess.
Actually even if they are not allowed to have him removed from life support I can't expect the family to be forced to pay for it. Then it's up to the state to decide for how long it is going to support these kinds of patients. After that person is revived he can sue his family to get his stuff back, not unlike when a missing person comes out to be alive after several years . The state then can sue him to pay for his medical debts. Or he can choose not pay for the bills and go to prison or commit suicide or both.
It sounds crazy and heartless but it is the way I'd hope the government managed these cases.
A joystick would work great in a keyboard. Like a track point but more comfortable.
I have iron bars over my windows you insensitive clod.
I don't see a problem, Mozilla is a web browser, the "chrome" in the Jargon file is an outdated slang term, Chrome is *also* a web browser, it's a context problem.
If you tell people, that Firefox bug allows running code with chrome privileges they'll wonder if they have to uninstall Chrome. Before, searching for "Firefox chrome" gave you documentation, now it gives you browser benchmarks and reviews.
What bugs me is that they are partners with Mozilla, they know Firefox, intimately, and they STILL named their browser Chrome, not just despite the conflict, but I suspect because of the conflict.
It as if Mozilla renamed bespin to wave, wanna have real time collaboration on wave? wait Mozilla's or Google's? Except of course Mozilla can't throw its weight around like that like a heavy monopolist like Google can.
They are continuing with the work they started with the "Chrome" browser, making sure nobody find out that Mozilla invented "chrome://" or what it can do with that.
Interestingly, pain is good for you as it decreases the amount of exposure to danger you are willing to take, so evolution would select against people that don't hate (or even enjoy) pain.
Of course, too much sensitivity and you run into some other evolutionary problems, I think we've got it about right, most of us.
This is proof slashdot is biased, do you notice how slashdoters like to pick on Windows? You'd never see an article talking about people having problems with Ubun... wait... fuck...