Superior control is still a large part of this. If you are good at anticipation but suck at driving, you still crash into things. Same as if things were reversed.
You need superior control, situational awareness, good reflexes, the ability to stay awake & alert and probably a dozen other things. But still, superior control is a part of the correct mix.
> if your behavior isn't predictable then it is bad behavior
I do not turn a light when changing lanes when there is no one directly in front or behind of me. This means I am acting against the law, but I maintain a slightly better grip on the steering wheel than others.
Similarly, I always drive between two lanes when there is no other traffic. Against the law, but I can swerve in _both_ directions if something happens.
A U-turn may be forbidden 24/7, but at 0300 there is no one who cares. Allowed != appropriate.
> you are not maintaining "superior control" of your vehicle
Uh, OK? The one is a legal aspect, the other a technical one. I can drive at 150 km/h through a street that is winding and limited to 30 km/h. Superior control of the car (as others can not do it at that speed), but forbidden.
Question: With asshattery, were you also talking about yourself?;)
> Do you realize that traffic rules were designed _specifically_ to minimize the impact of drivers' mistakes? And that if your 'best drivers' actually obeyed the laws, they'd have most probably avoided accidents. Even the ones caused by other drivers.
Do you realize that if you never test the limits, you are less likely to be able to control a situation which approaches your limits? Oh, and in the one accident I was involved in, I was standing and already in reverse to make room for the other car that came from the left? I did not get out of its path in time, but I know two people (including myself) who would be fast enough to react like that. We both speed. Correlation does not imply causation etc, but it definitely does not disprove anything.
I find that I often space out while driving, not being able to remember actually driving. I take the correct turns, etc.
The one thing that always surprises me is that I space in _fast_ when anything is out of the norm. Braking light five cars ahead of me? Sure thing.
Of course, I can not reliably determine if I do _not_ space in when X happens as, obviously, I would simply be spaced out. But I drive _a lot_ and did not have an accident, yet.
What do they do to Dutch people who fail the driving test at least three times in a row? -- They force them to put yellow licence plates onto their cars!
No, I didn't. At least, I did not check and cross-reference every poster's name. For this, I am deeply sorry and leave the thread with this:
richih@titanium ~ % grep "Not that I say it is" || echo nope, RichiH is right They buy stuff in Washington so they pay sales tax. They buy homes in Washington so they pay property taxes. They buy stuff so people have jobs selling stuff and those people buy more stuff paying sales and property taxes.... If a state doesn't have personal income tax then they make the money from sales and property taxes. a lack of a personal income tax doesn't mean tax free. Then you have the other companies that are in Washington because Microsoft was there. If Microsoft pulled out of Washington it would cost the state a lot more than that one billion dollars in additional taxes they may or may not manage to get from Microsoft. ^D nope, RichiH is right richih@titanium ~ %
While you are technically correct in that you did not make a statement about what is right or wrong, statements of fact without anything to show otherwise, usually are not without context. They usually imply on opinion. I fear you are mistaking failure to provide context with misinterpretation.
You are right in your assessment of politicians, though.
What you are saying is that because the indirect effects that are caused by every other business on earth are caused by Microsoft as well, they should be exempt from playing by the same rules as the laundry shop next door? Interesting..
Of course, the implied threat that MS might leave the area in your post makes it OK to not play fair. The bullies are always right, after all. "I did not punch you in the face and you still complain that I took your lunch money? Maybe I should mash you into pulp after $educational_institute is over." - The killer (literally;) argument of modern business.
In contrast to the billions of dollars spent on Tokamak fusion (think ITER), LPP is conducting their research on a budget around a million dollars. Yet, if it works, it will provide nuclear fusion with much simpler equipment and much less cost.
So let me get this straight: You have a budget of _three orders of magnitude_ less and the technology you are developing cheaper tech?
I am not saying this is not a good thing, but ewsnow sure has a funny way of putting (or thinking about) things.
What I meant is "where did it come from originally". The point you are missing is that while Qt syncs WebKit from upstream on a more or less regular basis, but they keep the right to have their own local modifications. Just as WebKit did with KHTML.
> No, the point is, you're trying to slag off apple saying that they don't give back the source code in any usable form, and yet, there, sat right in front of you is apple's svn server containing the authoritative source for WebKit.
No, I am saying that for years, they went fuck all and did _not give a damn about anyone except themselves_. There was no public SVN. All there was were monolithic tarballs every time OS X was released in a new version. Things may have changed, and in fact, they have. But there is no reason to forget the past. Apple is not the bunch of nice altruists you want to make them appear as. They play hard ball when they think it benefits them (iTunes, iPhone, iPod, WebKit in former times) and play nice when they think it benefits them (WebKit today, Grand Central).
It is their privilege do so as they are a distinct entity on the marketplace with internal decision processes. This may not be the best for the community or humanity at large, but it is their privilege to do so.
Same as it is the privilege of the community at large to remember this fact and base future decisions on the past behaviour of other entities, be they Apple, MS or Oracle.
> People keep spreading FUD about how much of a bad citizen apple is being with WebKit, and yet, there are at least two companies (nokia and google) and a large open source project (Qt) interacting with them quite happily.
Au contraire. I refuse to to stop spreading factual and easily proven facts about Apple's _past behaviour_ when people seem to forget what history WebKit has. Counting Nokia and Qt separately does not make sense, btw;)
In any case, this will be my last post regarding this topic as we clearly will not be able to agree on anything.
Where do you think WebKit from Apple comes from? Oh yes... KDE's svn servers >.
The point is that while Apple, Qt, Google etc will certainly work together, the code level I care about and with which I am familiar with when it comes to community, reporting, etc is Qt, not Apple. Apple may or may not merge back what Qt does to fix WebKit from KDE's pov, but as Apple has been known to make strange usability decisions, I'd rather not bet onto it.
As an aside, no one would have stopped Apple from contributing to KHTML. Instead, they decided to fork the codebase before doing anything else. Maybe understandably so from a business level, but certainly not so much from a code level.
Which is, by the way, the reason why I don't care for Apple's WebKit, either: They did not extend the same courtesy to "us".
a) How am I pretending it has never improved? I even say so in what you quoted:) b) KHTML was very successful and widely in use before WebKit forked off c) Endlessly? Others would say I am pointing something relevant and new out in a discussion about a particular topic, but hey.. d) A few months? While poor Apple was setting up stuff? Reread what I said about several releases.
Do I get a prize for being trolled by an Apple fanboy, now? I think this was my first time..
While it's true that some signs point to KDE migrating to WebKit at some point,
a) KHTML will _not_ be removed before KDE 5 b) WebKit has still a long way to go. I just submitted half a dozen bugs to Qt. c) KDE will move to WebKit from Qt, not Apple
Not sure how your Google comment relates to anything I said, though. Unless you missed me talking to the past tense in the earlier post;)
Webkit is kinda special. For ages, Apple did nothing other than releasing the full source every time they released binaries.
They did _not_ release anything under SCM control, which meant tracking patches etc was _literally_ impossible for the KDE team. No matter what the KDE team did or how often they asked, this did not change. This is a large part of why KHTML and Webkit are as different as they are now. Using both KHTML and the Webkit Kpart in KDE 4.3.2, I can tell you that there are a lot of little differences in rendering and, that is where it hurts, usability. Sucks.
So while Apple followed the letter of the license, they went against its spirit in every possible way for a long time. This may have changed somewhat (iPod, iTunes...?), but one should be aware of the history.
The Mersenne primes are useless for this task, though. They are so long and so far in between that you can guess which of them are involved by just looking at the length of any given key. Which would be _way_ too long to handle, anyway. And they could just use ECC instead.
So no, I am not sure that is the reason. In fact, I am sure that can't be the reason.
That being said, if anyone has any ideas, please share them:)
I did not read the link, but I know him _very_ well. He is shunned by pretty much everyone. As are a lot of other well-known bullies, be they sexist, racist or whateverist.
There will always be loud idiots blaring their mis-guided crap into the air. But that does _not_ mean that their blabbering is relevant to a given community.
The main thing, imo, is the latent "porn-is-cool" attitude in many FLOSS communities. But, as unfortunate as this may be, unless a lot of these people get laid on a regular basis, this will not change.
Slashdot Mirror
Superior control is still a large part of this. If you are good at anticipation but suck at driving, you still crash into things. Same as if things were reversed.
You need superior control, situational awareness, good reflexes, the ability to stay awake & alert and probably a dozen other things. But still, superior control is a part of the correct mix.
You forgot to mention the flamethrower, the stink bombs and the nukes. Also, the kid is a terrorist and has AIDS. Worst of all, it is unpatriotic.
Long story short: Your analogy is better. Your extremely overdoing said analogy is not.
> if your behavior isn't predictable then it is bad behavior
I do not turn a light when changing lanes when there is no one directly in front or behind of me. This means I am acting against the law, but I maintain a slightly better grip on the steering wheel than others.
Similarly, I always drive between two lanes when there is no other traffic. Against the law, but I can swerve in _both_ directions if something happens.
> for when a U-Turn is allowed or appropriate
A U-turn may be forbidden 24/7, but at 0300 there is no one who cares. Allowed != appropriate.
> you are not maintaining "superior control" of your vehicle
Uh, OK? The one is a legal aspect, the other a technical one. I can drive at 150 km/h through a street that is winding and limited to 30 km/h. Superior control of the car (as others can not do it at that speed), but forbidden.
Question: With asshattery, were you also talking about yourself? ;)
> Do you realize that traffic rules were designed _specifically_ to minimize the impact of drivers' mistakes? And that if your 'best drivers' actually obeyed the laws, they'd have most probably avoided accidents. Even the ones caused by other drivers.
Do you realize that if you never test the limits, you are less likely to be able to control a situation which approaches your limits?
Oh, and in the one accident I was involved in, I was standing and already in reverse to make room for the other car that came from the left? I did not get out of its path in time, but I know two people (including myself) who would be fast enough to react like that. We both speed.
Correlation does not imply causation etc, but it definitely does not disprove anything.
> Any factor which is correlated with driving _more_ but is uncorrelated with driving ability will show up with increased risk of a claim.
Not true. In Germany, you get cheaper insurance if you drive at least 20,000 km per year.
I find that I often space out while driving, not being able to remember actually driving. I take the correct turns, etc.
The one thing that always surprises me is that I space in _fast_ when anything is out of the norm. Braking light five cars ahead of me? Sure thing.
Of course, I can not reliably determine if I do _not_ space in when X happens as, obviously, I would simply be spaced out. But I drive _a lot_ and did not have an accident, yet.
That would be me, then.
Seriously, it does.
What do they do to Dutch people who fail the driving test at least three times in a row? -- They force them to put yellow licence plates onto their cars!
No, I didn't. At least, I did not check and cross-reference every poster's name. For this, I am deeply sorry and leave the thread with this:
richih@titanium ~ % grep "Not that I say it is" || echo nope, RichiH is right
They buy stuff in Washington so they pay sales tax. They buy homes in Washington so they pay property taxes.
They buy stuff so people have jobs selling stuff and those people buy more stuff paying sales and property taxes....
If a state doesn't have personal income tax then they make the money from sales and property taxes. a lack of a personal income tax doesn't mean tax free.
Then you have the other companies that are in Washington because Microsoft was there. If Microsoft pulled out of Washington it would cost the state a lot more than that one billion dollars in additional taxes they may or may not manage to get from Microsoft.
^D
nope, RichiH is right
richih@titanium ~ %
While you are technically correct in that you did not make a statement about what is right or wrong, statements of fact without anything to show otherwise, usually are not without context. They usually imply on opinion.
I fear you are mistaking failure to provide context with misinterpretation.
You are right in your assessment of politicians, though.
What you are saying is that because the indirect effects that are caused by every other business on earth are caused by Microsoft as well, they should be exempt from playing by the same rules as the laundry shop next door? Interesting..
Of course, the implied threat that MS might leave the area in your post makes it OK to not play fair. The bullies are always right, after all. ;) argument of modern business.
"I did not punch you in the face and you still complain that I took your lunch money? Maybe I should mash you into pulp after $educational_institute is over." - The killer (literally
Maybe if the leading commercial DB company did not indirectly buy the leading OS DB company, this whole thing would have been done with ages ago?
It's not as if the EU hadn't jumped up and down yelling "Sell MySQL" all the time. If Elliot wants to play hardball.. Well, the EU can play it better.
Please sprinkle some grammar over the above :)
In contrast to the billions of dollars spent on Tokamak fusion (think ITER), LPP is conducting their research on a budget around a million dollars. Yet, if it works, it will provide nuclear fusion with much simpler equipment and much less cost.
So let me get this straight: You have a budget of _three orders of magnitude_ less and the technology you are developing cheaper tech?
I am not saying this is not a good thing, but ewsnow sure has a funny way of putting (or thinking about) things.
What I meant is "where did it come from originally". The point you are missing is that while Qt syncs WebKit from upstream on a more or less regular basis, but they keep the right to have their own local modifications. Just as WebKit did with KHTML.
> No, the point is, you're trying to slag off apple saying that they don't give back the source code in any usable form, and yet, there, sat right in front of you is apple's svn server containing the authoritative source for WebKit.
No, I am saying that for years, they went fuck all and did _not give a damn about anyone except themselves_. There was no public SVN. All there was were monolithic tarballs every time OS X was released in a new version.
Things may have changed, and in fact, they have. But there is no reason to forget the past. Apple is not the bunch of nice altruists you want to make them appear as.
They play hard ball when they think it benefits them (iTunes, iPhone, iPod, WebKit in former times) and play nice when they think it benefits them (WebKit today, Grand Central).
It is their privilege do so as they are a distinct entity on the marketplace with internal decision processes. This may not be the best for the community or humanity at large, but it is their privilege to do so.
Same as it is the privilege of the community at large to remember this fact and base future decisions on the past behaviour of other entities, be they Apple, MS or Oracle.
> People keep spreading FUD about how much of a bad citizen apple is being with WebKit, and yet, there are at least two companies (nokia and google) and a large open source project (Qt) interacting with them quite happily.
Au contraire. I refuse to to stop spreading factual and easily proven facts about Apple's _past behaviour_ when people seem to forget what history WebKit has. Counting Nokia and Qt separately does not make sense, btw ;)
In any case, this will be my last post regarding this topic as we clearly will not be able to agree on anything.
Where do you think WebKit from Apple comes from? Oh yes... KDE's svn servers >.
The point is that while Apple, Qt, Google etc will certainly work together, the code level I care about and with which I am familiar with when it comes to community, reporting, etc is Qt, not Apple. Apple may or may not merge back what Qt does to fix WebKit from KDE's pov, but as Apple has been known to make strange usability decisions, I'd rather not bet onto it.
As an aside, no one would have stopped Apple from contributing to KHTML. Instead, they decided to fork the codebase before doing anything else. Maybe understandably so from a business level, but certainly not so much from a code level.
Which is, by the way, the reason why I don't care for Apple's WebKit, either: They did not extend the same courtesy to "us".
Several projects used it, but yes WebKit made usage explode. Still, KHTML has been successful before WebKit, as well.
a) How am I pretending it has never improved? I even say so in what you quoted :)
b) KHTML was very successful and widely in use before WebKit forked off
c) Endlessly? Others would say I am pointing something relevant and new out in a discussion about a particular topic, but hey..
d) A few months? While poor Apple was setting up stuff? Reread what I said about several releases.
Do I get a prize for being trolled by an Apple fanboy, now? I think this was my first time..
While it's true that some signs point to KDE migrating to WebKit at some point,
a) KHTML will _not_ be removed before KDE 5
b) WebKit has still a long way to go. I just submitted half a dozen bugs to Qt.
c) KDE will move to WebKit from Qt, not Apple
Not sure how your Google comment relates to anything I said, though. Unless you missed me talking to the past tense in the earlier post ;)
The FLOSS community gives all their mailing lists, internal processes, every single commit along with the commit message to Apple.
Apple (this has improved) gave the FLOSS community one huge source tarball without any context with every OS X release.
Those bad, bad FLOSS zealots, look at all the win/win they received!
Webkit is kinda special. For ages, Apple did nothing other than releasing the full source every time they released binaries.
They did _not_ release anything under SCM control, which meant tracking patches etc was _literally_ impossible for the KDE team. No matter what the KDE team did or how often they asked, this did not change. This is a large part of why KHTML and Webkit are as different as they are now. Using both KHTML and the Webkit Kpart in KDE 4.3.2, I can tell you that there are a lot of little differences in rendering and, that is where it hurts, usability. Sucks.
So while Apple followed the letter of the license, they went against its spirit in every possible way for a long time. This may have changed somewhat (iPod, iTunes...?), but one should be aware of the history.
The Mersenne primes are useless for this task, though. They are so long and so far in between that you can guess which of them are involved by just looking at the length of any given key. Which would be _way_ too long to handle, anyway. And they could just use ECC instead.
So no, I am not sure that is the reason. In fact, I am sure that can't be the reason.
That being said, if anyone has any ideas, please share them :)
I did not read the link, but I know him _very_ well. He is shunned by pretty much everyone. As are a lot of other well-known bullies, be they sexist, racist or whateverist.
There will always be loud idiots blaring their mis-guided crap into the air. But that does _not_ mean that their blabbering is relevant to a given community.
The main thing, imo, is the latent "porn-is-cool" attitude in many FLOSS communities. But, as unfortunate as this may be, unless a lot of these people get laid on a regular basis, this will not change.
I am not sure it's a good idea to pick Theo as an example of unbiased and logical flaming^Wdiscussion.