Gnome is trying to make things simpler, and in their view more user-friendly, by removing some of the array of options and features available, with the downside of reducing customisability and (to some) functionality. KDE has rejected this view and offers as many features as it thinks could possibly be useful, which may make things confusing for new users and adds to bloat. Gnome is still bloated, but there is a concerted effort to get rid of the bloat, whereas in KDE that would not happen at the expense of features. If they like KDE that's fine, but if you don't hold with the "features above all else" ideology, I can't see why you would prefer KDE. I'm a KDE supporter and user, but in all honesty once you've replaced the horrible default theme gnome can do most of the stuff KDE can, and the things KDE does that gnome doesn't are presumably the same things they'll be stripping out to make a "lite" version.
If you have a clue you don't need those programs. Even if you don't, you can get perfectly good free ones to do all of the things you list. And Mac software tends to cost more than PC (all the little utilities that would be free on a PC seem to be shareware for mac)
The point is that Win2K, unlike perhaps 98 or definitely 3.1, is compatible with almost all applications and things, so the bloat in XP is not merely unnecessary but serves no purpose whatsoever. It seems to have just been added on to sell new computers. Kinda like the whole Java language.
It's not a flamewar, just a disagreement. The two projects have different directions, and people who prefer one or the other will generally support that one. It's all reasonably amicable, but at the same time there are deap-seated differences.
IA-intensely-NAL, but isn't there a meatspace legal principle that people in a brightly lit public place have no reasonable expectation of privacy? Can't any random passerby take my picture on a public street without fear of being sued? How is this different?
It's different when you start redistributing. You can take your own cached copy, fine, but when you give copies to others, that's something entirely different.
When information is kept in your safe, or desk drawer, or other private location, it's yours and you can control what happens to it. As soon as you put that information on posters and plaster the city with it (or put it on TV, or stick it on a web page), in a public place, it's out now. It's escaped, it's Out There, the cat is out of the bag, the horse has bolted, and other metaphors. If this is a problem for someone, they ought not make that information publically available. Seems fair enough to me.
If you believe that, do you believe no one can copyright anything they publish? As soon as you release that book or song or whatever, you can't do anything if people decide to make and sell copies, put it on posters, perhaps falsely claim authorship, and so on? Because that seems to be what you're suggesting. According to law, not only do you keep the copyright, but you don't even count as having published it, when you broadcast something on TV or say it loudly in public. It should be the same on the Web.
Normal practice is to just store the MD5 of the password (Well, hopefully salted, but that's a technicality). If MD5 were truly irreversible then that would be enough, there's no way to work out the password from the hash. The way to deal with the flaws in MD5 isn't to MD5 twice, it's to switch to a stronger hash.
Some people are worried. I always wait for the DVD rip rather than getting a screener. Obviously there's profit to be made from this method of ripping, but it's not a total solution.
The study *obviously* means it takes more energy for us to produce the ethanol, even with the sun's input, than we get out of it. Parent is a psuedo-intellectual idiot.
They're forking because they want something contrary to KDE principles, namely less choice. (Why they don't just join gnome I don't know, but presumably they have their reasons). I hope they will continue, limping along, so someone doesn't try and do the "simplification" thing to mainline KDE and end up with abominations like the gnome file dialog. More buttons is never a bad thing.
Google groups is not a set of groups, it's just a gateway to usenet, which has nothing to do with google, was around long before google, and will hopefully be around long after google is dead and buried.
AIUI they can manufacture the lasers using the same methods as DVD for HD-DVD, but need to rework the factories to produce ones for Blu-ray, meaning the players for HD-DVD can be cheaper.
I do a similar thing, and I've found the address I used for newsforge gets a ton of spam. Also those I use for sourceforge mailing lists, but that's understandable from screen-scraping or similar.
Maybe you could actually edit. I can't expect every submitter to know how to use an apostrophe, but you'd have though the actual editor of a news website would have a bit of a clue.
But does putting something on a website count as publishing? Considering that saying it in a speech before any number of people, or broadcasting it on television or radio, is not (at least under US law) counted as publishing, I don't think making it available on your webserver should be either.
The court wouldn't agree with you. To publish something, with the legal implications that has, you have to actually publish it. Having it clearly visible, having people obtain preprints, speaking it infront of a large crowd, even broadcasting it on television does not count as publishing it. If broadcasting it doesn't count, I don't think putting it on a website should either.
Slashdot Mirror
Gnome is trying to make things simpler, and in their view more user-friendly, by removing some of the array of options and features available, with the downside of reducing customisability and (to some) functionality. KDE has rejected this view and offers as many features as it thinks could possibly be useful, which may make things confusing for new users and adds to bloat. Gnome is still bloated, but there is a concerted effort to get rid of the bloat, whereas in KDE that would not happen at the expense of features. If they like KDE that's fine, but if you don't hold with the "features above all else" ideology, I can't see why you would prefer KDE. I'm a KDE supporter and user, but in all honesty once you've replaced the horrible default theme gnome can do most of the stuff KDE can, and the things KDE does that gnome doesn't are presumably the same things they'll be stripping out to make a "lite" version.
Of course it's not at all unreasonable that one should have to spend $20 to be able to use the computer and software you bought. Oh no.
If you have a clue you don't need those programs. Even if you don't, you can get perfectly good free ones to do all of the things you list. And Mac software tends to cost more than PC (all the little utilities that would be free on a PC seem to be shareware for mac)
The point is that Win2K, unlike perhaps 98 or definitely 3.1, is compatible with almost all applications and things, so the bloat in XP is not merely unnecessary but serves no purpose whatsoever. It seems to have just been added on to sell new computers. Kinda like the whole Java language.
It's not a flamewar, just a disagreement. The two projects have different directions, and people who prefer one or the other will generally support that one. It's all reasonably amicable, but at the same time there are deap-seated differences.
Are you sure that's just due to screen scraping?
It's different when you start redistributing. You can take your own cached copy, fine, but when you give copies to others, that's something entirely different.
When information is kept in your safe, or desk drawer, or other private location, it's yours and you can control what happens to it. As soon as you put that information on posters and plaster the city with it (or put it on TV, or stick it on a web page), in a public place, it's out now. It's escaped, it's Out There, the cat is out of the bag, the horse has bolted, and other metaphors. If this is a problem for someone, they ought not make that information publically available. Seems fair enough to me.
If you believe that, do you believe no one can copyright anything they publish? As soon as you release that book or song or whatever, you can't do anything if people decide to make and sell copies, put it on posters, perhaps falsely claim authorship, and so on? Because that seems to be what you're suggesting. According to law, not only do you keep the copyright, but you don't even count as having published it, when you broadcast something on TV or say it loudly in public. It should be the same on the Web.
Normal practice is to just store the MD5 of the password (Well, hopefully salted, but that's a technicality). If MD5 were truly irreversible then that would be enough, there's no way to work out the password from the hash. The way to deal with the flaws in MD5 isn't to MD5 twice, it's to switch to a stronger hash.
Some people are worried. I always wait for the DVD rip rather than getting a screener. Obviously there's profit to be made from this method of ripping, but it's not a total solution.
The study *obviously* means it takes more energy for us to produce the ethanol, even with the sun's input, than we get out of it. Parent is a psuedo-intellectual idiot.
They're forking because they want something contrary to KDE principles, namely less choice. (Why they don't just join gnome I don't know, but presumably they have their reasons). I hope they will continue, limping along, so someone doesn't try and do the "simplification" thing to mainline KDE and end up with abominations like the gnome file dialog. More buttons is never a bad thing.
O3 is better known as Ozone, which to my amateur eye seems to be something we need more of.
Ahem
Then you haven't been reading this site very long, there have been stories about its flaws every month or so. It's not a secure hash.
It's not unusual. Anyone with sense doesn't bother to upgrade to new versions of windows, it's not like they're any better.
AIUI they can manufacture the lasers using the same methods as DVD for HD-DVD, but need to rework the factories to produce ones for Blu-ray, meaning the players for HD-DVD can be cheaper.
But then you're no better off than getting the fuzzy image by connecting directly to a recorder. The "analogue hole" is not a solution.
No colours though. That's why I prefer libcaca. The videos are actually usable.
Bah. Typo, and of course my spellchecker didn't flag it. Not that that's any excuse.
Anyone else have this?
I know, I know.
If you run the thumper won't do you any good, you've got to do the arhythmic sliding movement thing
But does putting something on a website count as publishing? Considering that saying it in a speech before any number of people, or broadcasting it on television or radio, is not (at least under US law) counted as publishing, I don't think making it available on your webserver should be either.
The court wouldn't agree with you. To publish something, with the legal implications that has, you have to actually publish it. Having it clearly visible, having people obtain preprints, speaking it infront of a large crowd, even broadcasting it on television does not count as publishing it. If broadcasting it doesn't count, I don't think putting it on a website should either.
No, just that the average government on Earth is no worse than the US government. I have more faith in humanity as a whole than in america.