What's the alternative? Write software with a complile-time choice between GTK2 and QT? That leads to a huge amount of duplication, as it's not just a matter of replacing one library call with another; there are major things the two do differently. Sometimes it's a lot easier to write a clean version from scratch. So write everything in plain X calls? Way more duplication (this time of the whole windowing api). It would be great if we had just one really good windowing api with spirtited development, but we don't and it's not just a matter of deciding to stop.
Cooking is viable alternative for many people, but there are some things you don't consider:
Not having the facilities to cook.
Not having the facilities to store leftovers.
Cooking takes longer than fast food.
So if I have to take a lot of time I could be working and spend it first on buying cooking supplies and a refrigerator I probably can't afford, and then regularly spend time later cooking, fast food starts to sound like a better deal
Do you remember the old adds of "Do you Yahoo"? Yahoo put a lot of effort into branding, but didn't do nearly as well because their search just wasn't as good.
It's in the same league, but not quite the same, as calling the UK "England" or -oppositely- calling the US "America"
Calling the UK "England" is quite similar, except many people who say it think that England really is all there is to the UK. This is different from "America" for the USA because "America" is just short for "United States of America" and few people think that the US comprises all of either North America or the Americas. Also note that while there is a place called "England" which is different from "the UK", there is no such place called "America" to be confused about.
But forget money for a second and think about Free software. Suppose it were no longer against the law to copy people's creative work however you wanted. Why, you could download a bunch of source code and put your own name on it. Wow, the AC Compiler. AC Linux. AC UNIX. AC Office.Org. And so on.
But I can do that already! If I wanted to I could take each of the programs you mention and do exactly what you said.
What would the authors of those packages do? They'd quit writing Free software, that's what. Would *you* write something for someone else to claim? I wouldn't.
You're telling me that my simple renaming will make these authors quit writing? Why would they care? Everyone knows the programs by their current names, and my renaming would be insignificant.
There is already a prevailing feeling (among the people I talk to, anyway) that even downloading is not morally acceptable.
Morally? The morality here is pretty complicated but I don't see how uploading could be imoral but downloading not. The real question to me (and the courts) is the legality. In a simple electronic upload/download transfer, where and when does the illegal copy happen?
10 year old Pentium PCs that have Windows 95 (infected, of course) on a 1G hard drive and can't boot CDs.
For these, Knoppix is not the best tool. Debian would work well though. Knoppix is designed as a demonstration tool and is unbelievably slow on old machines. Debian allows you to cut out the parts of the install you don't need, something completely nessicary when dealing with limited memory and hard-drive space.
Perhaps because that is an illogical feature? Who is on my buddly list should be completely up to me to decide. If you don't want to talk to me you can block me.
But that's my point: you can read it, so your literacy is good. If you could only read perfect spelling, you wouldn't be as literate. Having "language abusers" helps keep your mind sharp.
Firefox is impervious... to the specific exploit you linked to. The security advantage of Firefox is that it has fewer exploits and they are generally quickly fixed.
How many people have gone and copied complete poems? How many have gone and copied complete journal articles? How many have copied sections of books? What people copy is a factor of technology not morality. Think about where things were five years ago. People shared songs, not movies, and maybe they shared some movie clips. The only difference with the library is that there the technology is not improving.
if one considers that the copies of works in a person's shared folder(s) are ultimately just that, copies, and since they are being offered for availability to other people, no argument can be made for the premise that those copies are for personal and private use
I don't see how that follows. If I rip all my music CDs to my computer into a music folder for convenience and backup, the copying is covered under fair use. If I later start running a p2p program and share my music folder, I am not making a second copy, am I? Does a library make copies when they put out a copy machine? Am I doing more?
I am perfectly fine with long startup times: I have the programs I use the most start with my box. What matters to me is how snappy the program is when loaded, and whether it uses more and more resources as time goes on.
Sure, 5 voice conversations is dificult, but 5 IM conversations is ideal. When I talk to you, we can both talk relatively fast, and we listen at the same speed we talk. But in IM, most people read much faster than they type. Having lots of conversations at once helps compensate, so each person can be almost always typing.
The ideal number of active conversations to be having is then [(reading + thinking)/(typing))], where reading, thinking, and typing are all in messages per unit time. Round down to apear responsive (and to avoid fractional conversations).
Re:look at the blackboard in the background
on
SCO.com Defaced
·
· Score: 1
Looks like "reallocl" to me. TSOR doesn't show up anything related between this and "reallocl" or "reallock", though.
What would be more useful (and currently not possible) is a "be anonymous" button that when pressed toggled the browser into a full privacy mode. In this mode, sites would not be well trusted (javascript disabled, plugins don't load), the Refered_By HTTP header would not be set, and nothing would be stored (history, autocomplete).
Slashdot Mirror
What's the alternative? Write software with a complile-time choice between GTK2 and QT? That leads to a huge amount of duplication, as it's not just a matter of replacing one library call with another; there are major things the two do differently. Sometimes it's a lot easier to write a clean version from scratch. So write everything in plain X calls? Way more duplication (this time of the whole windowing api). It would be great if we had just one really good windowing api with spirtited development, but we don't and it's not just a matter of deciding to stop.
So if I have to take a lot of time I could be working and spend it first on buying cooking supplies and a refrigerator I probably can't afford, and then regularly spend time later cooking, fast food starts to sound like a better deal
I would fill it with 300GB drives.
Do you remember the old adds of "Do you Yahoo"? Yahoo put a lot of effort into branding, but didn't do nearly as well because their search just wasn't as good.
Calling the UK "England" is quite similar, except many people who say it think that England really is all there is to the UK. This is different from "America" for the USA because "America" is just short for "United States of America" and few people think that the US comprises all of either North America or the Americas. Also note that while there is a place called "England" which is different from "the UK", there is no such place called "America" to be confused about.
But I can do that already! If I wanted to I could take each of the programs you mention and do exactly what you said.
What would the authors of those packages do? They'd quit writing Free software, that's what. Would *you* write something for someone else to claim? I wouldn't.
You're telling me that my simple renaming will make these authors quit writing? Why would they care? Everyone knows the programs by their current names, and my renaming would be insignificant.
Morally? The morality here is pretty complicated but I don't see how uploading could be imoral but downloading not. The real question to me (and the courts) is the legality. In a simple electronic upload/download transfer, where and when does the illegal copy happen?
For these, Knoppix is not the best tool. Debian would work well though. Knoppix is designed as a demonstration tool and is unbelievably slow on old machines. Debian allows you to cut out the parts of the install you don't need, something completely nessicary when dealing with limited memory and hard-drive space.
Perhaps because that is an illogical feature? Who is on my buddly list should be completely up to me to decide. If you don't want to talk to me you can block me.
Because there are some people worth talking to that use AIM.
But that's my point: you can read it, so your literacy is good. If you could only read perfect spelling, you wouldn't be as literate. Having "language abusers" helps keep your mind sharp.
Basic literacy is not being distroyed, it is being improved. Notice that you are now able to read better. Why fight it?
How perceptive!
Firefox is impervious... to the specific exploit you linked to. The security advantage of Firefox is that it has fewer exploits and they are generally quickly fixed.
I could make my spyware uninstall Windows
I'm pretty sure that what you saw was this, which involved implanted electrodes, not detection through the skull.
How many people have gone and copied complete poems? How many have gone and copied complete journal articles? How many have copied sections of books? What people copy is a factor of technology not morality. Think about where things were five years ago. People shared songs, not movies, and maybe they shared some movie clips. The only difference with the library is that there the technology is not improving.
I don't see how that follows. If I rip all my music CDs to my computer into a music folder for convenience and backup, the copying is covered under fair use. If I later start running a p2p program and share my music folder, I am not making a second copy, am I? Does a library make copies when they put out a copy machine? Am I doing more?
But you already have the search box in the corner for that. Why duplicate it?
I am perfectly fine with long startup times: I have the programs I use the most start with my box. What matters to me is how snappy the program is when loaded, and whether it uses more and more resources as time goes on.
I would just like to add that we do it discretely as well.
The ideal number of active conversations to be having is then [(reading + thinking)/(typing))], where reading, thinking, and typing are all in messages per unit time. Round down to apear responsive (and to avoid fractional conversations).
Looks like "reallocl" to me. TSOR doesn't show up anything related between this and "reallocl" or "reallock", though.
It looks like a very good idea. Of course it's no good on a public machine, because anyone could have modified the source, but it's still a good idea.
What would be more useful (and currently not possible) is a "be anonymous" button that when pressed toggled the browser into a full privacy mode. In this mode, sites would not be well trusted (javascript disabled, plugins don't load), the Refered_By HTTP header would not be set, and nothing would be stored (history, autocomplete).