If the problem is in the kernel, you can at least go back to the previous image (you do save the previous image, don't you?). Also, if the new kernel fails, and you were installing/compiling from source, you might have some idea of the problem. Howdoes one do this in Windows?
Why should regular users need to understand their radial arm saw?
One of the dumber statements/. has accepted in recent history. Sheesh...
I think you missed the poster's intent. He was not suggesting that one use power tools in such a manner, he was criticizing the previous poster. I believe this technique is called "sarcasm".
Because in Linux (and I would guess *BSD) the OS tools don't break. Even if your mess up your system with bad/etc files, it's not too hard to toss in a Live CD, fire up a text editor, and fix the problem. The fact that the base configuration is stored in plain text files is a feature, not a bug.
If I had a hardware fault, I might consider replacing the machine (though I would prefer to replace the part). For a software fault, I'd rather try to repair the system.
And, it is easy, if possibly expensive, to move from one car to another. The same can not be said of computer operating systems. This is because even if one bought a new computer, one would need copy over all one's data, get the same programs for that computer/OS or get a replacement program and convert the data to a format suitable for said replacement. And even then, one will have to learn to use the O/S and program, essentially having to learn to drive all over again.
That would be true if one were moving between Linux and Microsoft Windows, but not between different Linux distributions. Keep all your your personal data in/home/$user, all stuff not likely to be on a distribution in/usr/local (remember to have/home and/usr/local as separate partitions), then install the new distribution, without reformatting/home and/usr/local.
If you are installing onto a different box, then install and then access your files over a network.
What if his office machine is a Windows box with neither emacs nor vi? What if he needs a small editor like nano? Also, some his of pages may benefit more from the capacities of vi over those of emacs (and vice versa).
Amen.Not talking to the police is the first -- and almost only -- rule in dealing with the police unless you are reporting a crime of which you are the victim. Just don't do it.
But one must be careful even there. Alan Turing reported a robbery to the police, and he ended up confessing that the thief was his homosexual lover. Why didn't Hans learn from this?
If a tree falls in the woods and there is nobody there to hear it does it make a noise? The question of course to scientist is "of course it makes a nose, noise is the consequence of matter vibrating the air."
I largely agree with your argument, but you should have used the word "sound" instead of "noise", as the latter requires that someone/something hear it.
A problem with the part that you cited is how can mathematical ideas exist with minds? Mathematical objects, on the other hand, may well be independent of minds.
Did it ever occur to Kant that human "intuition" is itself the result of "things in themselves" imposing themselves on us? That is, that our visual intuition is Euclidean because spacetime is, over the scale of human perception, Euclidean.
Also, do we impose spacetime on "things in themselves", or is spacetime itself a "thing in itself"?
But the axioms as axioms are invented in the sense that we select some truths (at least we hope they are truths) to be axioms, and we derive the other truths. Even given that some spacetime is Euclidean, the choice of which truths thereof are axioms is a human "invention".
I have a problem with Dijkstra's example. Submarines do move through water, so we can ask if that motion is swimming. What do computers do that is even analogous to thinking?
Slashdot Mirror
If the problem is in the kernel, you can at least go back to the previous image (you do save the previous image, don't you?). Also, if the new kernel fails, and you were installing/compiling from source, you might have some idea of the problem. Howdoes one do this in Windows?
Why should regular users need to understand their radial arm saw?
/. has accepted in recent history. Sheesh...
One of the dumber statements
I think you missed the poster's intent. He was not suggesting that one use power tools in such a manner, he was criticizing the previous poster. I believe this technique is called "sarcasm".
Because in Linux (and I would guess *BSD) the OS tools don't break. Even if your mess up your system with bad /etc files, it's not too hard to toss in a Live CD, fire up a text editor, and fix the problem. The fact that the base configuration is stored in plain text files is a feature, not a bug.
If I had a hardware fault, I might consider replacing the machine (though I would prefer to replace the part). For a software fault, I'd rather try to repair the system.
But repairs in Linux cost far less than the cost of a new system. Also, even with a new machine, wouldn't you want your files from the previous one?
And, it is easy, if possibly expensive, to move from one car to another. The same can not be said of computer operating systems. This is because even if one bought a new computer, one would need copy over all one's data, get the same programs for that computer/OS or get a replacement program and convert the data to a format suitable for said replacement. And even then, one will have to learn to use the O/S and program, essentially having to learn to drive all over again.
/home/$user, all stuff not likely to be on a distribution in /usr/local (remember to have /home and /usr/local as separate partitions), then install the new distribution, without reformatting /home and /usr/local.
That would be true if one were moving between Linux and Microsoft Windows, but not between different Linux distributions. Keep all your your personal data in
If you are installing onto a different box, then install and then access your files over a network.
In that case, you should not have quoted from the previous post as you did. Also, Adobe Acrobat Reader is available for Linux.
Microsoft released Photoshop and Adobe Acrobat Reader?
Emacs has a php mode? Where?
What if his office machine is a Windows box with neither emacs nor vi? What if he needs a small editor like nano? Also, some his of pages may benefit more from the capacities of vi over those of emacs (and vice versa).
True enough, but they may make such arguments against certain kinds of software as well.Remember the clipper chip?
What if one disables mounting of usb devices? And has it disabled in the kernel (no module). Wouldn't one have to reboot to enable it?
And those same agencies use weapons that they might not want civilians to own.
UNIX: Everything is a file.
Microsoft Windows: Everything is a revenue stream.
Your honor, the defendant was using reiserfs, clearly he was intending to murder his wife.
It's made of Demons!
*BSD? No need to reformat the drives, they could tell it was made of demons just by seeing the logo.
Amen.Not talking to the police is the first -- and almost only -- rule in dealing with the police unless you are reporting a crime of which you are the victim. Just don't do it.
But one must be careful even there. Alan Turing reported a robbery to the police, and he ended up confessing that the thief was his homosexual lover. Why didn't Hans learn from this?
If a tree falls in the woods and there is nobody there to hear it does it make a noise? The question of course to scientist is "of course it makes a nose, noise is the consequence of matter vibrating the air."
I largely agree with your argument, but you should have used the word "sound" instead of "noise", as the latter requires that someone/something hear it.
If mathematics has objects, wouldn't they be different from our awareness of them?
Where, exactly, do these mathematical truths exist?
Where do the truths (not facts) of physics exist?
Can a mathematical truth really exist before anyone has ever imagined it?
Again, can a truth (not fact) of physics exist before anyone has ever imagined it?
Are there truths without language?
A problem with the part that you cited is how can mathematical ideas exist with minds? Mathematical objects, on the other hand, may well be independent of minds.
But is mathematics the study of generalized rule sets using logic?
Did it ever occur to Kant that human "intuition" is itself the result of "things in themselves" imposing themselves on us? That is, that our visual intuition is Euclidean because spacetime is, over the scale of human perception, Euclidean.
Also, do we impose spacetime on "things in themselves", or is spacetime itself a "thing in itself"?
But the axioms as axioms are invented in the sense that we select some truths (at least we hope they are truths) to be axioms, and we derive the other truths. Even given that some spacetime is Euclidean, the choice of which truths thereof are axioms is a human "invention".
I have a problem with Dijkstra's example. Submarines do move through water, so we can ask if that motion is swimming. What do computers do that is even analogous to thinking?