Please don't use "home schooled" as an insult again. It just comes across as completely ignorant.
Actually, it comes off as hilarious, because it's guarnateed to make a homeschooler pipe up to angrily defend themselves, everty single time. It's as good a trigger as calling a German a nazi.
That's all well and nice, but why then do I have to press Ctrl-X Ctrl-S to save (the number one most common operation), instead of the agreed-upon plain Ctrl-S? That is hardly efficient in any way.
You seem to think key revocation is used to punish people. I really don't know where you are getting this idea.
The point of key revocation is to make leaked keys unusable. A side effect is that it makes the player they were taken from unusable too, but as the only likely way to get the keys out of a hardware player is by taking it apart and scanning the stripped circuits with an electron microscope, this is not likely to bother anyone in practice.
There are, actually, enough keys in the world for every player to have its own, thanks to cryptographic trickery. That is one of the extremely clever parts of AACS. Keys can be revokes for individual players.
companies have been doing that since DeCSS came out.
DeCSS came out in 1999. Those seem to be from 2005/2006, so that's something like six years later. While they may technically be a result of the original release of DeCSS, it's hardly "doing that since DeCSS came out".
They consider that a feature, right? The movies you buy today may not play tomorrow. Screw that!
No, the movies you buy today will keep playing forever. However, the movies you buy tomorrow may not play on the player you bought today. However, the only reason this would happen is if you extracted the keys from your player and posted them on the internet.
They are going to take a stab at improving the protection, but companies have been doing that since DeCSS came out.
Actually, they have not, as there was no way to fix CSS once it was broken. They just had to deal with it.
A lot of lessons learned from that went into designing AACS, and it has many methods to deal with various kinds of breaks, including all that have been done so far. The battle over AACS is just beginning, and currently the ball is in the content producers' court. Future discs will not be cracked as easily as the current ones. The question is basically who will give up first as the game gets progressively harder.
a) have the stood the test of time, b) are constantly improving, c) exceedingly flexible, and d) used my millions.
You could use those same arguments to argue the superiority of Windows over Linux. It might be more true, because there are actually millions of people who use Windows, while this is obviously untrue for Emacs or vi.
This has nothing to do with having to use menus. Menus are there for when you need to look for a rarely-used option. Keyboard shortcuts for menu items are there for the often-used options. Furhtermore, menus show the keyboard shortcuts so you can easily learn them, and the basic keyboard shortcuts are consistent across all apps on the system.
Unless you are using Emacs, that is. Then you have inconsistent keyboard controls, and no quick and intuitive way to find out what they are.
It's certainly not universal, but it doesn't need to be to prove that you are full of shit.
Incorrect. "Consistent" means "universal".
Also, they tend to focus on new users, not those who use editors all day long.
Incorrect. Learn some HCI.
Wonder why?
Because there are no decent alternatives on Linux? Windows and Mac users don't choose Emacs and vi "over and over again", because they have text editors that are actually usable, like Textpad, Ultraedit, BBEdit, and so on.
Maybe you should ask a HCI expert about that? You know, those people who didn't exist back when Emacs and vi were designed, but do now, and they actually know lots of stuff.
One thing they know is consistency. You don't need to learn every modern text editor separately, because they use keyboard shortcuts and controls that are consistent across them all, and elsewhere in the system, as others pointed out. Emacs and vi are not only inconsistent with each other, but with everything else, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Here, have a phrase for future use:
"I know English is only your first language, and I'm sure you'll do better on your next, but..."
You expect me to actually put in any more effort than copypaste when telling people this?
Slashdot "editors" do not "edit" submissions. This makes Slashdot "more real", according to CmdrTaco.
o ld=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=14502339#145024 84
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=174297&thresh
What it doesn't explain is why Slashdot has been running so many stories direct from the Sony marketing department lately...
I dunno, could it have anything to do with constantly running big flash ads for Casino Royale this last week?
That would fine, except for not making any sense either.
Just what is "imspeech" supposed to mean? I honestly can't figure it out.
Saving is a very, very common operation when writing code, which is what most people who use Emacs use it for.
Please don't use "home schooled" as an insult again. It just comes across as completely ignorant.
Actually, it comes off as hilarious, because it's guarnateed to make a homeschooler pipe up to angrily defend themselves, everty single time. It's as good a trigger as calling a German a nazi.
Slashdot "editors" do not "edit" submissions. This makes Slashdot "more real", according to CmdrTaco.
o ld=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=14502339#145024 84
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=174297&thresh
That's all well and nice, but why then do I have to press Ctrl-X Ctrl-S to save (the number one most common operation), instead of the agreed-upon plain Ctrl-S? That is hardly efficient in any way.
You seem to think key revocation is used to punish people. I really don't know where you are getting this idea.
The point of key revocation is to make leaked keys unusable. A side effect is that it makes the player they were taken from unusable too, but as the only likely way to get the keys out of a hardware player is by taking it apart and scanning the stripped circuits with an electron microscope, this is not likely to bother anyone in practice.
There are, actually, enough keys in the world for every player to have its own, thanks to cryptographic trickery. That is one of the extremely clever parts of AACS. Keys can be revokes for individual players.
g -subsetdifference-00.txt
See for instance:
http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-irtf-smu
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=122363
The original claim was,
companies have been doing that since DeCSS came out.
DeCSS came out in 1999. Those seem to be from 2005/2006, so that's something like six years later. While they may technically be a result of the original release of DeCSS, it's hardly "doing that since DeCSS came out".
No, I think that Emacs and vi today do not adhere to modern interface standards, and are thus inconsistent and hard to use, for no real benefit.
They consider that a feature, right? The movies you buy today may not play tomorrow. Screw that!
No, the movies you buy today will keep playing forever. However, the movies you buy tomorrow may not play on the player you bought today. However, the only reason this would happen is if you extracted the keys from your player and posted them on the internet.
They are going to take a stab at improving the protection, but companies have been doing that since DeCSS came out.
Actually, they have not, as there was no way to fix CSS once it was broken. They just had to deal with it.
A lot of lessons learned from that went into designing AACS, and it has many methods to deal with various kinds of breaks, including all that have been done so far. The battle over AACS is just beginning, and currently the ball is in the content producers' court. Future discs will not be cracked as easily as the current ones. The question is basically who will give up first as the game gets progressively harder.
a) have the stood the test of time, b) are constantly improving, c) exceedingly flexible, and d) used my millions.
You could use those same arguments to argue the superiority of Windows over Linux. It might be more true, because there are actually millions of people who use Windows, while this is obviously untrue for Emacs or vi.
Why is the parent modded +5 Funny?
Because the copy a couple of posts up in the thread got all the "Insightful" mods.
Of course it's Insightful! It's about Microsoft being bad!
This has nothing to do with having to use menus. Menus are there for when you need to look for a rarely-used option. Keyboard shortcuts for menu items are there for the often-used options. Furhtermore, menus show the keyboard shortcuts so you can easily learn them, and the basic keyboard shortcuts are consistent across all apps on the system.
Unless you are using Emacs, that is. Then you have inconsistent keyboard controls, and no quick and intuitive way to find out what they are.
I'm not really interested in playing literal-minded nerd sematic games.
It's certainly not universal, but it doesn't need to be to prove that you are full of shit.
Incorrect. "Consistent" means "universal".
Also, they tend to focus on new users, not those who use editors all day long.
Incorrect. Learn some HCI.
Wonder why?
Because there are no decent alternatives on Linux? Windows and Mac users don't choose Emacs and vi "over and over again", because they have text editors that are actually usable, like Textpad, Ultraedit, BBEdit, and so on.
If you're a "text-editing geek", you need to get yourself a real hobby, stat.
If you think HCI means "pretty graphics", your book of clue coupons seems to be running empty.
It really depends what an improved UI is.
Maybe you should ask a HCI expert about that? You know, those people who didn't exist back when Emacs and vi were designed, but do now, and they actually know lots of stuff.
One thing they know is consistency. You don't need to learn every modern text editor separately, because they use keyboard shortcuts and controls that are consistent across them all, and elsewhere in the system, as others pointed out. Emacs and vi are not only inconsistent with each other, but with everything else, too.