Probably easily treatable with a $300 bottle of pills from the big pharma's right?.
Actually, the answer is no. Addiction disorders are treated primarily with therapy and 12-step programs. There are often other, related and usually contributing disorders, such as depression and anxiety, that are treated with pills from big pharma. But they're not necessarily $300 a bottle.
(Full disclosure: my wife is a psychologist and addictions counselor)
Ever heard of computer loaded with *nix and configured as a gateway/router/proxy with snort or something similar loaded? Back before you young whippersnappers came in with your fancy firewall appliances, that's what we had. And we liked it that way!
And for people who rely on donated hardware (e.g. non-profit organizations, or recipients of birthday or Christmas presents), how do they get donors to respect the HCL?
You ask for specific hardware. People do it all the time.
In other words, you have to choose Linux before you choose to buy hardware, not afterward. That makes it much more expensive for a current user of Windows to switch to Linux than it would otherwise be. I owned the scanner in question before I tried installing Linux on the PC.
You have to choose Mac OS X before you choose to buy hardware. You actually have to choose Windows before you choose to buy hardware, but it's not so clear cut since there is a huge array of hardware that works with Windows.
There's a logo on the front of the box of hardware that comes with a Mac OS X driver. There's no logo and no driver for Linux.
Again, irrelevant. If the hardware in question works with Linux, there is already a driver. A logo would be convenient, but then, you need to research what works and what doesn't.
But does that matter much? If you aren't close to the PC to which the scanner is connected, you can't put the document on the scanner to scan in the first place. It isn't like a printer, where you can print, walk to the printer, and remove the document from the output tray. If you have a document on the scanner, you monopolize the scanner until you remove the document.
Yes, it does matter. With network transparency, it doesn't matter which PC I am logged into. I may have applications installed on one that I don't have on the other, for instance. It's a matter of convenience. There are sufficiently long USB cables to locate the scanner away from the PC.
I doubt even the militarised versions of Windows have *everything* they know about fixed
Hahahahah! Now that's funny!
There are no militarized versions of Windows. The military uses the same version of Windows everyone else uses, though they tend to use "locked-down" configurations, which is not surprising.
Now the obvious question: How is [manufacturers' failure to cooperate] linux's fault?
It is not Linux's fault, but it is still Linux's problem.
It's not really a problem, either. That an old scanner doesn't have driver support in SANE matters not. Or that a particular printer manufacturer's printers don't work well on Linux isn't a problem either.
I'll say it again: You have to buy hardware that works right in Linux, just as you have to buy hardware that works right in Mac OS X, just like you have to buy hardware that works in Windows Vista or even XP. I can tell you from personal experience that there is a TON of old hardware that absolutely, positively does NOT work with Windows XP, nor will it ever. And there is a TON MORE of old hardware that does NOT work with Vista.
So the ScanMaker 4850 doesn't work. It's a crappy Microtek piece of junk anyway. Just go out and get one of the other scanners that do work. Most (all?) of the Canon LIDE scanners are fully supported under SANE. I have a LiDE 60. It works great. I didn't even need to install anything. I just plugged it into the USB port and it was automatically recognized in Xsane. And, oh yeah, since SANE supports network transparency, the scanner is shared out on my network so I can scan using any of my laptops or mine or my wife's desktop, etc. scross the network, in a completely transparent fashion. Try that in Windows.
It's the vendors' fault for not putting a penguin logo on any products that I can buy at Best Buy. But because it's equally the fault of every vendor, end users place the blame elsewhere.
A penguin logo, while it would be nice, is not needed. Since you already need to research hardware before you buy it, you'll know what models works and don't work before you even get to the store. BTW--I would recommend that Windows users do the same, because just because it is supported on Windows doesn't mean it is supported for your version of Windows or your particular hardware configuration.
So how do you use the Internet to download the driver for your modem or network card?
You don't need to. Most plug-and-play wired network cards are already supported by most Linux kernels out of the box. Between support for Broadcom, Intel, 3COM, and Realtek chipsets, that covers virtually 100% of all NICs you could buy in the store.
As for wireless, current Ubuntu versions actually ship (closed binary blob) support for the Broadcom wireless NICs found in most laptops these days on the LiveCD. Many other chipsets are also supported.
But "almost" is still better than no driver being enclosed at all, which is the case for the vast majority of hardware that one would want to use on Linux.
For many, many pieces of hardware, no driver CD is necessary. Simply plug the device in and hal/dbus will automatically load the correct driver. Done.
+1 Informative. I can't remember the exact amount of time between the first releases of Mobile and Mini, but it was at least 2 years. Mobile is a completely different browser than Mini. The easy way to think about it is that Opera Mobile is designed for phones with an OS and Mini is designed for phones that only run J2ME apps. Both gain their speed by using special web proxies run by Opera built for serving Web content to mobile phones and optimized specifically for their browsers.
Well, not all reference implementations are completely compliant. They should be, I know, but they aren't necessarily. I don't think sendmail, for instance, was originally 100% compliant with the RFCs that sendmail was offered up as a reference implementation of.
And, no, not the same as Office not being a complete implementation of OOXML. OOXML, as spec'd, cannot be implemented by anyone other than Microsoft. At all. The missing ODF compliance in OO.o is very minor compared to that nonsense.
I look at that horrific list, and when he says that output will be reduced all I can think is, "Good!" Maybe people will go outside instead of watching this dreck.
Better yet, maybe they'll be inspired and actually create something worthwhile.
That's it exactly. Did Michelangelo lock the doors to the Sistine Chapel and stand outside charging $20 a head (sorry, no cameras or sketchpads allowed) to come in and see his masterpiece? No.
Did Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart charge each symphony that wanted to play his pieces a separate fee for each concert they performed? No.
Did Leonardo Da Vinci hide digital watermarks in Mona Lisa so he could make sure no one was stealing his work? No.
Does Sony think The Fugees are in the same caliber as any one of the above artists in terms of culture?
1) MS is a powerful marketing organisation with a single control center. It has millions to spend on lobbying. Instead of one central purchasing order they will go after each state/county and government organisation parallely and independently
I agree to a point: I personally don't think that Microsoft has the domain knowledge to after individual provinces or localities in New Zealand, but then I may be underestimating Microsoft's presence in NZ.
2) To take advantage of this situation the FOSS/Open Source has NO marketing budget or marketing plan except for some backdoor geeks.
Red Hat, Novell, Canonical, Mandriva, Sun, IBM, etc. all have marketing budgets. With the sole exception of IBM, none have as large a marketing budget as Microsoft, at least not by themselves.
3) Lobbyists that MS hires far outmatch the abilities of what FOSS can bring up....
There is no "open source lobbying" organization. ("FOSS" and "FLOSS" are ugly terms, IMHO). But certainly there are individual groups that, together, are extremely power, each from different angles. From the "online freedom" aspect, you have the EFF. From the "Linux is good" dept., we have The Linux Foundation. There are several organizations pushing open standards. IBM pushes open standards and open source. And there are tons of other examples. Together, these organizations outweigh Microsoft's lobbying efforts.
And there is no "we": Open source represents a bunch of diverse elements with diverse agendas. That's why open source is winning (yes, I said it: we are winning!). Many individuals and organizations with many agendas easily outweigh the one agenda and one organization, no matter how big or how much money said agenda and organization are.
Yep. In terms of computer usage, I've always said that it is the people who "think" they know what they are doing who get into the most trouble.rec
Think of learning Unix. You start out, you double check the manpages, you double check what directory you're in, what machine you're on, your current user ID etc. Then a little bit later, when you feel like you're finally getting the hang of it, you end up as root sitting in '/' and in one window, and in another your sitting in a directory that you need to delete files in. You type 'rm -rf *' and realize, only afterwards, that you were in the wrong terminal window!
Then you learn: double check everything before typing something stupid like 'rm -rf *'!
When will corporations realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of when will corporation realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of when will corporations realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of....
Isn't it funny that whenever there is talk about security it generally means the opposite?
Well, it makes sense. In order to defend a secure system/network, you must first know multiple ways to break into that secure system/network. Posers doing "IT security" jobs that don't know what they're doing are for sure going to drop the ball and get pwned.
Literally any governmental or military job that involves dealing with classified information, requires you to be a US citizen. I imagine this would be no different.
Sorry, dude, I hate to be the one break the news to you, but Angelina Jolie? She doesn't know anything about hacking. Neither did her character in that movie.
OTOH, she did do her own stunts for the Tomb Raider movies. Athletic and sexy....yum.
Slashdot Mirror
I play a few too many video games than I probably should, when will that be a diagnosable mental illness?
It already is.
How about my girlfriend who likes TV and Facebook a bit more than the average person?
Yep. And yep.
Probably easily treatable with a $300 bottle of pills from the big pharma's right?.
Actually, the answer is no. Addiction disorders are treated primarily with therapy and 12-step programs. There are often other, related and usually contributing disorders, such as depression and anxiety, that are treated with pills from big pharma. But they're not necessarily $300 a bottle.
(Full disclosure: my wife is a psychologist and addictions counselor)
Ever heard of computer loaded with *nix and configured as a gateway/router/proxy with snort or something similar loaded? Back before you young whippersnappers came in with your fancy firewall appliances, that's what we had. And we liked it that way!
If a unified tool can be more easily configured securely than many best of bread applications,
Wait! Whole wheat, white, pumpernickel or 7-grain?
Without already owning a working printer, how do I print out the hardware compatibility list to carry it into the store?
Ever heard of one of these and this?
And for people who rely on donated hardware (e.g. non-profit organizations, or recipients of birthday or Christmas presents), how do they get donors to respect the HCL?
You ask for specific hardware. People do it all the time.
In other words, you have to choose Linux before you choose to buy hardware, not afterward. That makes it much more expensive for a current user of Windows to switch to Linux than it would otherwise be. I owned the scanner in question before I tried installing Linux on the PC.
You have to choose Mac OS X before you choose to buy hardware. You actually have to choose Windows before you choose to buy hardware, but it's not so clear cut since there is a huge array of hardware that works with Windows.
There's a logo on the front of the box of hardware that comes with a Mac OS X driver. There's no logo and no driver for Linux.
Again, irrelevant. If the hardware in question works with Linux, there is already a driver. A logo would be convenient, but then, you need to research what works and what doesn't.
But does that matter much? If you aren't close to the PC to which the scanner is connected, you can't put the document on the scanner to scan in the first place. It isn't like a printer, where you can print, walk to the printer, and remove the document from the output tray. If you have a document on the scanner, you monopolize the scanner until you remove the document.
Yes, it does matter. With network transparency, it doesn't matter which PC I am logged into. I may have applications installed on one that I don't have on the other, for instance. It's a matter of convenience. There are sufficiently long USB cables to locate the scanner away from the PC.
I doubt even the militarised versions of Windows have *everything* they know about fixed
Hahahahah! Now that's funny!
There are no militarized versions of Windows. The military uses the same version of Windows everyone else uses, though they tend to use "locked-down" configurations, which is not surprising.
It is not Linux's fault, but it is still Linux's problem.
It's not really a problem, either. That an old scanner doesn't have driver support in SANE matters not. Or that a particular printer manufacturer's printers don't work well on Linux isn't a problem either.
I'll say it again: You have to buy hardware that works right in Linux, just as you have to buy hardware that works right in Mac OS X, just like you have to buy hardware that works in Windows Vista or even XP. I can tell you from personal experience that there is a TON of old hardware that absolutely, positively does NOT work with Windows XP, nor will it ever. And there is a TON MORE of old hardware that does NOT work with Vista.
So the ScanMaker 4850 doesn't work. It's a crappy Microtek piece of junk anyway. Just go out and get one of the other scanners that do work. Most (all?) of the Canon LIDE scanners are fully supported under SANE. I have a LiDE 60. It works great. I didn't even need to install anything. I just plugged it into the USB port and it was automatically recognized in Xsane. And, oh yeah, since SANE supports network transparency, the scanner is shared out on my network so I can scan using any of my laptops or mine or my wife's desktop, etc. scross the network, in a completely transparent fashion. Try that in Windows.
It's the vendors' fault for not putting a penguin logo on any products that I can buy at Best Buy. But because it's equally the fault of every vendor, end users place the blame elsewhere.
A penguin logo, while it would be nice, is not needed. Since you already need to research hardware before you buy it, you'll know what models works and don't work before you even get to the store. BTW--I would recommend that Windows users do the same, because just because it is supported on Windows doesn't mean it is supported for your version of Windows or your particular hardware configuration.
So how do you use the Internet to download the driver for your modem or network card?
You don't need to. Most plug-and-play wired network cards are already supported by most Linux kernels out of the box. Between support for Broadcom, Intel, 3COM, and Realtek chipsets, that covers virtually 100% of all NICs you could buy in the store.
As for wireless, current Ubuntu versions actually ship (closed binary blob) support for the Broadcom wireless NICs found in most laptops these days on the LiveCD. Many other chipsets are also supported.
But "almost" is still better than no driver being enclosed at all, which is the case for the vast majority of hardware that one would want to use on Linux.
For many, many pieces of hardware, no driver CD is necessary. Simply plug the device in and hal/dbus will automatically load the correct driver. Done.
+1 Informative. I can't remember the exact amount of time between the first releases of Mobile and Mini, but it was at least 2 years. Mobile is a completely different browser than Mini. The easy way to think about it is that Opera Mobile is designed for phones with an OS and Mini is designed for phones that only run J2ME apps. Both gain their speed by using special web proxies run by Opera built for serving Web content to mobile phones and optimized specifically for their browsers.
Even Microsoft employees would rather have an iPhone than Windows Mobile.
I live in Florida. If you believe any of Dan Brown's books, I've got some swamp land down here you might be interested in...
And the nanotech memory is superior in this regard exactly how?
Wow, what a claim. And by the time someone figures out it's bullshit, the guy who made it will be dust long ago.
Bah! I already have a medium that can store data for a billion years. Now you kids can take your newfangled nanotech memory and get off of my lawn!
Well, not all reference implementations are completely compliant. They should be, I know, but they aren't necessarily. I don't think sendmail, for instance, was originally 100% compliant with the RFCs that sendmail was offered up as a reference implementation of.
And, no, not the same as Office not being a complete implementation of OOXML. OOXML, as spec'd, cannot be implemented by anyone other than Microsoft. At all. The missing ODF compliance in OO.o is very minor compared to that nonsense.
I look at that horrific list, and when he says that output will be reduced all I can think is, "Good!" Maybe people will go outside instead of watching this dreck.
Better yet, maybe they'll be inspired and actually create something worthwhile.
Culture is much more than what you can sell.
That's it exactly. Did Michelangelo lock the doors to the Sistine Chapel and stand outside charging $20 a head (sorry, no cameras or sketchpads allowed) to come in and see his masterpiece? No.
Did Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart charge each symphony that wanted to play his pieces a separate fee for each concert they performed? No.
Did Leonardo Da Vinci hide digital watermarks in Mona Lisa so he could make sure no one was stealing his work? No.
Does Sony think The Fugees are in the same caliber as any one of the above artists in terms of culture?
Considering weapons is just about the only thing not Made In China,
I wouldn't count on that.
1) MS is a powerful marketing organisation with a single control center. It has millions to spend on lobbying. Instead of one central purchasing order they will go after each state/county and government organisation parallely and independently
I agree to a point: I personally don't think that Microsoft has the domain knowledge to after individual provinces or localities in New Zealand, but then I may be underestimating Microsoft's presence in NZ.
2) To take advantage of this situation the FOSS/Open Source has NO marketing budget or marketing plan except for some backdoor geeks.
Red Hat, Novell, Canonical, Mandriva, Sun, IBM, etc. all have marketing budgets. With the sole exception of IBM, none have as large a marketing budget as Microsoft, at least not by themselves.
3) Lobbyists that MS hires far outmatch the abilities of what FOSS can bring up....
There is no "open source lobbying" organization. ("FOSS" and "FLOSS" are ugly terms, IMHO). But certainly there are individual groups that, together, are extremely power, each from different angles. From the "online freedom" aspect, you have the EFF. From the "Linux is good" dept., we have The Linux Foundation. There are several organizations pushing open standards. IBM pushes open standards and open source. And there are tons of other examples. Together, these organizations outweigh Microsoft's lobbying efforts.
And there is no "we": Open source represents a bunch of diverse elements with diverse agendas. That's why open source is winning (yes, I said it: we are winning!). Many individuals and organizations with many agendas easily outweigh the one agenda and one organization, no matter how big or how much money said agenda and organization are.
If there had been a reference implementation (ahem ... OO.o), we wouldn't have the weasel ODF support in MS Office SP2.
What "if"? OO.o pretty much is the reference implementation of ODF, or am I missing something?
Yep. In terms of computer usage, I've always said that it is the people who "think" they know what they are doing who get into the most trouble.rec
Think of learning Unix. You start out, you double check the manpages, you double check what directory you're in, what machine you're on, your current user ID etc. Then a little bit later, when you feel like you're finally getting the hang of it, you end up as root sitting in '/' and in one window, and in another your sitting in a directory that you need to delete files in. You type 'rm -rf *' and realize, only afterwards, that you were in the wrong terminal window!
Then you learn: double check everything before typing something stupid like 'rm -rf *'!
Please give me more, mistress!
When will corporations realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of when will corporation realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of when will corporations realize that we will never stop repeating the mantra of ....
Arrrgggggghhhhh!
Ever consider how many people would have not bought an iPhone if it was 100% impossible to "jailbreak"?
Ever consider how many people have not bought an iPhone simply because for it be useful, they would have to "jailbreak" it?
Isn't it funny that whenever there is talk about security it generally means the opposite?
Well, it makes sense. In order to defend a secure system/network, you must first know multiple ways to break into that secure system/network. Posers doing "IT security" jobs that don't know what they're doing are for sure going to drop the ball and get pwned.
Literally any governmental or military job that involves dealing with classified information, requires you to be a US citizen. I imagine this would be no different.
Or even merely ITAR-restricted data.
Sorry, dude, I hate to be the one break the news to you, but Angelina Jolie? She doesn't know anything about hacking. Neither did her character in that movie.
OTOH, she did do her own stunts for the Tomb Raider movies. Athletic and sexy....yum.