The point is that people don't care about copyrights in an RIAA, Windows, or MPAA article, but they sure care about it when it's the GPL copyright being violated. He was just pointing out a double standard.
I don't suppose it matters that this JPEG bug was patched long ago, and SP2 users were never affected. But I don't think Slashdot will ever stop posting articles about it.
Don't worry, these sorts of editor abuses will get drowned out with the next "here's a new bash-Microsoft" article or "here's a new piracy-is-good" article.
Basically, the flaws of Slashdot--much like with Star Wars--are drowned out by the clamor of the fanbase for something new, no matter the lack of quality. I mean, look around. This website hasn't changed since 1998. Blast from the past! But working on that would take...work.
For the record, I have never, ever, in my history of visiting Slashdot since the 90s and having another account I used in college with Excellent karma, modded anything. Why? I dared post in "The Post"--the infamous classic case of editor abuse if there ever was one.
These complaints, like all the others, will go unnoticed by the editors who merely kick back and collect their checks from OSTG--the company that makes money from OSS products and conveniently also owns a news site that happens to criticize commercial competing vendors.
Yeah--AFTER it had sunk to the bottom of the front page (I assume you're talking about the Spider-man 2 review), and several dozen people had pointed it out in the comments. I think it's clear the editors barely read the site.
It's well-known that the editors don't listen to any feedback and aren't very open about things. This website is very "closed-source", if you will, which is amusing considering the readership that posts here.
As soon as I clicked "Read more," I knew it would be rife with justifications, denial, and spin!
Basically, any stories about Windows to Linux migrations are a-okay and 100% true. Any stories about Linux to Windows migrations are suddenly "vague," "don't give the whole story," and the reasons given "don't have to do with Linux at all."
And this is coming from someone running Gentoo on their laptop.
I read the letter. It still doesn't refute the point that Microsoft doesn't have to scan for every third-party DLL installed on the system. That's the same thing as blaming Microsoft when people don't patch their systems. Anything to bash Microsoft on this OSTG-owned website (interesting, isn't it?).
Incidentally, no, a company DOESN'T have to get permission to distribute a Microsoft DLL with their software. Get it? Hell, have you even used Visual Studio? It ships with almost all of them. But, why summon common sense and logic when we can post an emotive "open letter to Microsoft" on the front pages of an OSTG-owned geek site?
As for the "...but Mozilla is vulnerable too!" defence, Yes I imagine Mozilla on Windows certainly is.
No need to "imagine"--Mozilla on all platforms was vulnerable.
As for the "we're not the only ones" plea, this is not a very adult response to any form of critique.
Who is "we?" Oh, I see, an implication that I'm a Microsoftie. That's not a very adult response, either. Incidentally, such a response is used constantly on Slashdot to justify OSS flaws. "At least we're not like Microsoft!"
What does being a monopoly have anything to do with some vulnerability scanner? Tell me, what exact rules are "different?" You can't, because it was a vague, irrelevant statement that has nothing to do with this. You didn't refute any points.
Was it okay that Mozilla's bug was marked "confidential" for five years?
*whoosh* That's the sound of the point soaring over your head.
The monolithic nature of the Linux kernel means it requires recompilation in many situations. Last I checked, I didn't have to recompile Windows to add a driver.
I feel the need to lay out some ground rules before we go on:
1.) Microsoft is somehow responsible for all third-party DLLs on a system. Their scanner must contain a self-sufficient, learning AI that just "knows" which DLLs to scan on any system in existence.
2.) Mozilla was affected by this same vulnerability, but it's okay because it's Mozilla and not Microsoft.
3.) When Mozilla's XUL bug was marked "Confidential" since 1999 only to be revealed earlier this year when exploits came out for it, that's okay too. There won't be any "open letters" to Mozilla over it, because it's Mozilla and not Microsoft.
I hope we can all follow these simple ground rules in the discussion to follow. Thank you.
Well, before you're going to get users with no computer experience running Linux, you need to fix all the other things with Linux. Krita isn't going to convert anybody.
Congratulations, you had the time and initiative to do that.:)
Now, how many people out there do you think have the time and initiative? They'd just ask you, "Why do I have to 'recompile' this when Windows does things automatically?" Imagine if Windows users were expected to recompile their kernel.
I don't know, there are always the "studies" Slashdot links to, but when it comes right down to it, a lot of people try out Linux thinking it's this great alternative to Windows, and then they find out it's really an alternative to UNIX. Linux is a really great server operating system. I don't know why people are insistent on trying to fit a square peg through a round hole and hack on various desktop emulators to trick people into thinking otherwise via really snazzy screenshots. There is too much architecturally that holds Linux back from dominating the desktop market (you say "any market," but Linux pretty much does dominate a bit in the server arena...that's because it's a server UNIX clone).
...except making that kernel image took a kernel recompile. I think the grandparent was talking architecturally, not in regards to user experience. Why do I have to recompile the kernel so much when tweaking functionality?
Heck, if Linus wasn't opposed to a unified, standard driver API for the kernel, imagine the hardware support we'd have now. There are a lot of things holding Linux back in that department.
Before we continue this endless stream of "Why don't they use so-and-so image format that I read about on Slashdot once?" questions, please, everyone, take the time to RTFA and see that this is raw camera data--i.e., before conversion to an RGB (or any other) colorspace--allowing you to tweak settings such as aliasing and other attributes used by the camera before converting the raw data into a displayable format. This is the raw data that the camera actually "sees" before being visualized in a display format.
How do you feel about the spineless lawsuits that Democratic groups are launching against Ralph Nader, former Green party candidate of 2000, in order to stifle freedom and prevent his and other alternative names from being on the ballot? Do you agree that our election system was intended to force people to vote only between the big, rich Republicans or the big, rich Democrats?
Because eMule has a massive share right now, and has the most content. Most people shifted to eMule after eDonkey pretty much stagnated.
The E2DK already gives you higher download priority from people you're uploading to, effecting "exchanging parts you both need." Look in your uploads list, and you'll often see people you're downloading from.
Mostly, the reason for that is because of how the network is designed. For anyone to find anything, people simply have to keep content shared for long periods of time, until enough file chunks are flying around that it has a high availability value. On eMule, you're usually grabbing chunks sporadically from multiple users all over the place. On Kazaa and other places, you would usually download almost the entire file from one or two people.
You get higher priority to download from users that you're uploading to. The system is set up so that people trade file chunks with each other that each person is missing. Uploading more gives you overall higher priority to download.
The "5-10 times" is highly exaggerated. Usually, I'm uploading about 1/3 to 1/2 of what I'm downloading, which is right for this network.
eDonkey has always been the premiere place to download large binaries. You just don't find good 800+MB files on Kazaa or anything else. Often, you can determine the validity of a file on eMule just by doing a search and sorting by availability. The highest availability is always (in every case I've tried) exactly what I'm looking for. eMule even highlights high availability hashes with blue.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP Pro is $85-$100, varying with the store I look up online. FUD.
The point is that people don't care about copyrights in an RIAA, Windows, or MPAA article, but they sure care about it when it's the GPL copyright being violated. He was just pointing out a double standard.
Get him! He's threatening the hegemony!
I don't suppose it matters that this JPEG bug was patched long ago, and SP2 users were never affected. But I don't think Slashdot will ever stop posting articles about it.
Don't worry, these sorts of editor abuses will get drowned out with the next "here's a new bash-Microsoft" article or "here's a new piracy-is-good" article.
Basically, the flaws of Slashdot--much like with Star Wars--are drowned out by the clamor of the fanbase for something new, no matter the lack of quality. I mean, look around. This website hasn't changed since 1998. Blast from the past! But working on that would take...work.
For the record, I have never, ever, in my history of visiting Slashdot since the 90s and having another account I used in college with Excellent karma, modded anything. Why? I dared post in "The Post"--the infamous classic case of editor abuse if there ever was one.
These complaints, like all the others, will go unnoticed by the editors who merely kick back and collect their checks from OSTG--the company that makes money from OSS products and conveniently also owns a news site that happens to criticize commercial competing vendors.
Yeah--AFTER it had sunk to the bottom of the front page (I assume you're talking about the Spider-man 2 review), and several dozen people had pointed it out in the comments. I think it's clear the editors barely read the site.
It's well-known that the editors don't listen to any feedback and aren't very open about things. This website is very "closed-source", if you will, which is amusing considering the readership that posts here.
As soon as I clicked "Read more," I knew it would be rife with justifications, denial, and spin!
Basically, any stories about Windows to Linux migrations are a-okay and 100% true. Any stories about Linux to Windows migrations are suddenly "vague," "don't give the whole story," and the reasons given "don't have to do with Linux at all."
And this is coming from someone running Gentoo on their laptop.
I read the letter. It still doesn't refute the point that Microsoft doesn't have to scan for every third-party DLL installed on the system. That's the same thing as blaming Microsoft when people don't patch their systems. Anything to bash Microsoft on this OSTG-owned website (interesting, isn't it?).
Incidentally, no, a company DOESN'T have to get permission to distribute a Microsoft DLL with their software. Get it? Hell, have you even used Visual Studio? It ships with almost all of them. But, why summon common sense and logic when we can post an emotive "open letter to Microsoft" on the front pages of an OSTG-owned geek site?
As for the "...but Mozilla is vulnerable too!" defence, Yes I imagine Mozilla on Windows certainly is.
No need to "imagine"--Mozilla on all platforms was vulnerable.
As for the "we're not the only ones" plea, this is not a very adult response to any form of critique.
Who is "we?" Oh, I see, an implication that I'm a Microsoftie. That's not a very adult response, either. Incidentally, such a response is used constantly on Slashdot to justify OSS flaws. "At least we're not like Microsoft!"
What does being a monopoly have anything to do with some vulnerability scanner? Tell me, what exact rules are "different?" You can't, because it was a vague, irrelevant statement that has nothing to do with this. You didn't refute any points.
Was it okay that Mozilla's bug was marked "confidential" for five years?
Interesting that you completely disregarded point #3.
*whoosh* That's the sound of the point soaring over your head.
The monolithic nature of the Linux kernel means it requires recompilation in many situations. Last I checked, I didn't have to recompile Windows to add a driver.
I feel the need to lay out some ground rules before we go on:
1.) Microsoft is somehow responsible for all third-party DLLs on a system. Their scanner must contain a self-sufficient, learning AI that just "knows" which DLLs to scan on any system in existence.
2.) Mozilla was affected by this same vulnerability, but it's okay because it's Mozilla and not Microsoft.
3.) When Mozilla's XUL bug was marked "Confidential" since 1999 only to be revealed earlier this year when exploits came out for it, that's okay too. There won't be any "open letters" to Mozilla over it, because it's Mozilla and not Microsoft.
I hope we can all follow these simple ground rules in the discussion to follow. Thank you.
Well, before you're going to get users with no computer experience running Linux, you need to fix all the other things with Linux. Krita isn't going to convert anybody.
Congratulations, you had the time and initiative to do that. :)
Now, how many people out there do you think have the time and initiative? They'd just ask you, "Why do I have to 'recompile' this when Windows does things automatically?" Imagine if Windows users were expected to recompile their kernel.
I don't know, there are always the "studies" Slashdot links to, but when it comes right down to it, a lot of people try out Linux thinking it's this great alternative to Windows, and then they find out it's really an alternative to UNIX. Linux is a really great server operating system. I don't know why people are insistent on trying to fit a square peg through a round hole and hack on various desktop emulators to trick people into thinking otherwise via really snazzy screenshots. There is too much architecturally that holds Linux back from dominating the desktop market (you say "any market," but Linux pretty much does dominate a bit in the server arena...that's because it's a server UNIX clone).
...except making that kernel image took a kernel recompile. I think the grandparent was talking architecturally, not in regards to user experience. Why do I have to recompile the kernel so much when tweaking functionality?
Heck, if Linus wasn't opposed to a unified, standard driver API for the kernel, imagine the hardware support we'd have now. There are a lot of things holding Linux back in that department.
Before we continue this endless stream of "Why don't they use so-and-so image format that I read about on Slashdot once?" questions, please, everyone, take the time to RTFA and see that this is raw camera data--i.e., before conversion to an RGB (or any other) colorspace--allowing you to tweak settings such as aliasing and other attributes used by the camera before converting the raw data into a displayable format. This is the raw data that the camera actually "sees" before being visualized in a display format.
However, nowhere, and I mean *nowhere* did I read about LCDs having an input lag on them.
Perhaps there's a reason for that?
And how would it be possible for a monitor to have an "input lag" anyway? This is hilarious.
This is why Good Will Hunting is such a stupid movie. Damon would have never been allowed access to the rooms to clean.
Damon was pretending. He wanted to be there at the school.
They don't wear uniforms
Really? The rebels even have their own insignia!
they are not commanded by a government,
Then how was a princess involved? Leia's own mother was a queen of a government on Naboo.
The first or the second? The argument was regarding the Death Star in Return of the Jedi. I didn't see any giant insect creatures in that film.
How do you feel about the spineless lawsuits that Democratic groups are launching against Ralph Nader, former Green party candidate of 2000, in order to stifle freedom and prevent his and other alternative names from being on the ballot? Do you agree that our election system was intended to force people to vote only between the big, rich Republicans or the big, rich Democrats?
Because eMule has a massive share right now, and has the most content. Most people shifted to eMule after eDonkey pretty much stagnated.
The E2DK already gives you higher download priority from people you're uploading to, effecting "exchanging parts you both need." Look in your uploads list, and you'll often see people you're downloading from.
Mostly, the reason for that is because of how the network is designed. For anyone to find anything, people simply have to keep content shared for long periods of time, until enough file chunks are flying around that it has a high availability value. On eMule, you're usually grabbing chunks sporadically from multiple users all over the place. On Kazaa and other places, you would usually download almost the entire file from one or two people.
You get higher priority to download from users that you're uploading to. The system is set up so that people trade file chunks with each other that each person is missing. Uploading more gives you overall higher priority to download.
The "5-10 times" is highly exaggerated. Usually, I'm uploading about 1/3 to 1/2 of what I'm downloading, which is right for this network.
eDonkey has always been the premiere place to download large binaries. You just don't find good 800+MB files on Kazaa or anything else. Often, you can determine the validity of a file on eMule just by doing a search and sorting by availability. The highest availability is always (in every case I've tried) exactly what I'm looking for. eMule even highlights high availability hashes with blue.