Painful? What, you had to run apt to clear up some packages?:p Most people's problems could be avoided if they removed all the ad-hoc incompatible backports they've downloaded (of Firefox or openoffice.org, as so many posts on ubuntuforums irresponsibly encourage users to do) and binary drivers which no-one should be using.
I upgraded between Fedora Core releases using CD images I burnt, but I stupidly hadn't bothered to check them, and the later ones turned out to be corrupt, and the install went SMEF. Don't panic, I thought I was for it. Heehee, no. The computer booted (admittedly X wouldn't start), and yum was able to finish the install over the net. The only painful bit was making toast while yum performed Floyd's algorithm on the dependancies.
Painful installs only occur at night, anyway.
Don't encourage fresh installs over upgrades, otherwise they might as well install a fresh copy of Windows.
A different strategy I read about in NewScientist a few years back to reduce malarial infection was to introduce a certain gene into the mosquito population. Two mosquitoes carrying this gene would be unable to mate together (specifically, their larvae would not develop), but they would able to reproduce with other non carrier mosquitoes. It was calculated that, the gene, while rare, would propogate through the population with minimal effect. Then once popular, it prevent many pairs of mosquitos from reproducing, severely diminishing the population, perhaps permenantly. While it is certain reducing mosquito numbers would reduce malarial infection, I think there was justified concern about the effect it would have on many ecosystems where mosquito are bottom of the food chain.
I also once read about how one guy almost eradicated mosquito populations in New Mexico by introducing bats in houses near still water.
I haven't read in detail about the plan in this weeks news (I read my paper, The Times, but that sports the most dubious lacklustre reporting on science), but it sounds like a good solution which wouldn't affect other creatures. They've only tested the two genotypes competing in a lab however, with a virus other than the malarial virus, they can't be certain how the modified mosquitoes would fare in the wild. Wisdom suggests that the ability to carry the malarial parasite must be in some way an advantage, or mosquitos would develop a resistance by themselves.
The Earth is getting warmer, and at a greater rate than ever previously occurred. Rising levels of carbon dioxide (and some other greenhouse gases), as a result of our species industrial activities (ie. the mass combustion of fossil fuels) are at least partly responsible. Even if *another* effect was responsible for a significant part of the warming (say variations in the sun's output) and this effect was beyond our control, we'd still need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and by an even greater amount to counter effects over which we have no control.
The debate on "if" the Earth is getting warmer finished decades ago. The debate is over on why (rising levels of greenhouse gases). The debate should be over (it is in most places) on what we have to do about it (reduce greenhouse gas emissions). The debate is now rightly on *HOW* we should take action.
Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.
Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?
What matters is that the user is free to choose informedly, rather than only able to buy that right from an extortionate Microsoft who has beaten the price of Vista out of them. Think how people play their first poker games badly: after they've committed a certain amount (say £10) that they consider large, they feel 'must' keep betting as the stakes raise to protect their initial investment. Even when they know they stand little chance of winning, they keep giving to the pot, and the effect worsens each round as they have more investment to protect. Ultimately they lose a sum (say £100) that makes the initial investment insignificant. Why didn't they stop playing? Because people think in terms of what they might win, rather than what they will lose. The initial investment is the OEM price of an operating system, and the raising stakes are the cost of additional software it demands. Now you can see why Microsoft's strategy is so profitable. It's the same one that gives away 'free printers' that take only £30 ink cartridges.
My hydrogen storage device: a giant balloon around an aliminium frame inflated with the gas, such that it is lighter than air. Attach a few engines and this green machine could be manouevred through the skies, carrying massive cargo and passengers. I just need some help to think of an imposing name for the future of transportation.
This said, most of universe's energy comes from the fusion of Hydrogen nuclei.
Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.
Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?
What matters is that the user is free to choose, rather than free to choose after they've already been made to pay £100 for OEM Vista.
The article linked in the New York Times correctly uses fewer and not less. Corruption must have occured.
I completely forgot what I was going to post. So I'll say something else. About how Perl programmers would disagree with you.
Larry Wall's Perl is a fantastic language, because as a linguist he tried to emulate the versility of natural languages. Perl includes pronouns (it, them) and the same characters can be used for different functions, depending on context. He wanted to travel to a remote people without writing and help them create a system, but couldn't afford to, so blessed us by creating Perl. Thank you. See http://www.wall.org/~larry/natural.html
I've forgotten again. Shit. Sorry. Matt
Oh yeah. Making a program language more natural isn't about using more English words and fewer punctuation characters - *cough* to the languages that want you to write number.arithmetic.multiply - a ridiculous construction, but by helping the user achieve a similar command (if not comfort) we have with out natural languages. Greater writers are never confined by their language, they play with it, tease it, and often ignore all convention to create their masterpieces. What programming languages can boast poetry? http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node=Perl%20Poet ry
This was a great issue of debate, but it was silenced after the World Trade Center was attacked on the 9th November 2001. Bizarrely, we were united after the attacks in London on the 7th July 2005.
No-one who has ever used unix would tell you that/etc was extendable tool chest. So please, whoever started thinks that, shut up until you've used unix. In return, maybe we won't tell people that "Control Panel" is on the side of your computer, "My Documents" are printed on paper inside, and that "start" stands for "Start thinking alright?".
I know Google donated some servers last year, but a serious partnership would be more productive. Google seem to have little problem handling a huge volume of traffic.
I think changes to the wikipedia software and architecture (are PHP and mySQL really the best solution?) would help.
Most of the bandwidth requirement comes from people visiting articles to read, rather than edit. if wikipedia were to encourage/redirect users to any of the hundreds of sites that mirror the wikipedia content (eg reference.com encylopedia.info they all sound like that), but which included edit links to wikipedia.org , and bandwidth requirements would *drop*.
Bittorrent is the primary means of distribution for that filthy, UnAmerican, Communist, no sorry, Terrorist (that's what they tell you now isn't it?) software that is GNU/Linux.
> has not gained much adoption in music sales and portable players
The first may be true, but selling music in a matrix of codecs and bitrates is going to be messy. The ultimate solution is to provide lossless copies (in a suitable patent-free codec), which can then be encoded into whatever codec and bitrate that will suit the user and devices.
Many portable players do play vorbis. Of course the highest profile ones don't, viz. the iPod because Apple want to push AAC, and the Zen because Creative wish to protect their alliance to Microsoft. Years ago, some smaller players lacked the necessary processing power and memory to handle vorbis in addition to mp3, but these players are long obsolete (dude, the ipod nano can run linux). My iRiver certainly plays vorbis, and wikipedia also lists Samsung, Rio, Neuros Technology and Cowon in addition.
If the iPod supported vorbis wouldn't the situation look *very* different?: So where can we lobby Apple? It's a shame so many users chose their devices on looks without considering whether they're restricted to iTunes, both as a music store and an interface.
A journal with that name just has to be a joke. Yes I did try to read the fucking article, but it was obscured by a large photograph of a bridge. I guess this was an advert.
Well I'm glad to see this web 2.0 is so user friendly.
Slashdot Mirror
Painful? What, you had to run apt to clear up some packages? :p Most people's problems could be avoided if they removed all the ad-hoc incompatible backports they've downloaded (of Firefox or openoffice.org, as so many posts on ubuntuforums irresponsibly encourage users to do) and binary drivers which no-one should be using.
I upgraded between Fedora Core releases using CD images I burnt, but I stupidly hadn't bothered to check them, and the later ones turned out to be corrupt, and the install went SMEF. Don't panic, I thought I was for it. Heehee, no. The computer booted (admittedly X wouldn't start), and yum was able to finish the install over the net. The only painful bit was making toast while yum performed Floyd's algorithm on the dependancies.
Painful installs only occur at night, anyway.
Don't encourage fresh installs over upgrades, otherwise they might as well install a fresh copy of Windows.
A different strategy I read about in NewScientist a few years back to reduce malarial infection was to introduce a certain gene into the mosquito population. Two mosquitoes carrying this gene would be unable to mate together (specifically, their larvae would not develop), but they would able to reproduce with other non carrier mosquitoes. It was calculated that, the gene, while rare, would propogate through the population with minimal effect. Then once popular, it prevent many pairs of mosquitos from reproducing, severely diminishing the population, perhaps permenantly. While it is certain reducing mosquito numbers would reduce malarial infection, I think there was justified concern about the effect it would have on many ecosystems where mosquito are bottom of the food chain.
I also once read about how one guy almost eradicated mosquito populations in New Mexico by introducing bats in houses near still water.
I haven't read in detail about the plan in this weeks news (I read my paper, The Times, but that sports the most dubious lacklustre reporting on science), but it sounds like a good solution which wouldn't affect other creatures. They've only tested the two genotypes competing in a lab however, with a virus other than the malarial virus, they can't be certain how the modified mosquitoes would fare in the wild. Wisdom suggests that the ability to carry the malarial parasite must be in some way an advantage, or mosquitos would develop a resistance by themselves.
Maybe there's some perl in there ;)
For one scary moment, that could be "Rupert Murdock joining Sun"!
Continued CPR requires at least two people, maybe someone could be performing chest compressions throughout?
The Earth is getting warmer, and at a greater rate than ever previously occurred. Rising levels of carbon dioxide (and some other greenhouse gases), as a result of our species industrial activities (ie. the mass combustion of fossil fuels) are at least partly responsible. Even if *another* effect was responsible for a significant part of the warming (say variations in the sun's output) and this effect was beyond our control, we'd still need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and by an even greater amount to counter effects over which we have no control.
The debate on "if" the Earth is getting warmer finished decades ago. The debate is over on why (rising levels of greenhouse gases). The debate should be over (it is in most places) on what we have to do about it (reduce greenhouse gas emissions). The debate is now rightly on *HOW* we should take action.
Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.
Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?
What matters is that the user is free to choose informedly, rather than only able to buy that right from an extortionate Microsoft who has beaten the price of Vista out of them. Think how people play their first poker games badly: after they've committed a certain amount (say £10) that they consider large, they feel 'must' keep betting as the stakes raise to protect their initial investment. Even when they know they stand little chance of winning, they keep giving to the pot, and the effect worsens each round as they have more investment to protect. Ultimately they lose a sum (say £100) that makes the initial investment insignificant. Why didn't they stop playing? Because people think in terms of what they might win, rather than what they will lose. The initial investment is the OEM price of an operating system, and the raising stakes are the cost of additional software it demands. Now you can see why Microsoft's strategy is so profitable. It's the same one that gives away 'free printers' that take only £30 ink cartridges.
My hydrogen storage device: a giant balloon around an aliminium frame inflated with the gas, such that it is lighter than air. Attach a few engines and this green machine could be manouevred through the skies, carrying massive cargo and passengers. I just need some help to think of an imposing name for the future of transportation.
This said, most of universe's energy comes from the fusion of Hydrogen nuclei.
Selling blank PC's is stupid, because they'd be useless to anyone without a second computer and broadband handy (that's most people not on Slashdot), and a operating system is necessary to test the hardware functions correctly immediately after purchase. You wouldn't want to test three different OS just to find out the graphics card is bust and none of them were to blame. Imagine customer service telling you to keep trying different ones. There has to be a standard system on which to test hardware.
Ship ANY free OS, it *REALLY* doesn't matter which, because almost every user is going to end up replacing it, but they must ship *something* that allows people to download their OS of choice (hell, this could even be windows). Computer boots up for the first time with a good list of links to various operating systems and a functioning network card. Experienced users can go download whatever kinky OS is their fetish. New users can make an informed choice. A few recent images of free OS could be thrown on for users without broadband. Maybe even links to offers to buy Windows and Mac OS at OEM prices. Wouldn't that be fair?
What matters is that the user is free to choose, rather than free to choose after they've already been made to pay £100 for OEM Vista.
The article linked in the New York Times correctly uses fewer and not less. Corruption must have occured.
t ry
I completely forgot what I was going to post. So I'll say something else. About how Perl programmers would disagree with you.
Larry Wall's Perl is a fantastic language, because as a linguist he tried to emulate the versility of natural languages. Perl includes pronouns (it, them) and the same characters can be used for different functions, depending on context. He wanted to travel to a remote people without writing and help them create a system, but couldn't afford to, so blessed us by creating Perl. Thank you. See http://www.wall.org/~larry/natural.html
I've forgotten again. Shit. Sorry. Matt
Oh yeah. Making a program language more natural isn't about using more English words and fewer punctuation characters - *cough* to the languages that want you to write number.arithmetic.multiply - a ridiculous construction, but by helping the user achieve a similar command (if not comfort) we have with out natural languages. Greater writers are never confined by their language, they play with it, tease it, and often ignore all convention to create their masterpieces. What programming languages can boast poetry?
http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node=Perl%20Poe
This was a great issue of debate, but it was silenced after the World Trade Center was attacked on the 9th November 2001. Bizarrely, we were united after the attacks in London on the 7th July 2005.
>Fucking inaccurate
This is Slashdot, you insensitive clod!
My company pays for my second life account so long as my avatar walks around with a large sign reading GOLF SALE.
Update. I know, second life isn't subscription, and that all objects have the resolution of a 1992 internet jpeg.
If you want to code well, you're best reading the Camel Book [sic].
No-one who has ever used unix would tell you that /etc was extendable tool chest. So please, whoever started thinks that, shut up until you've used unix. In return, maybe we won't tell people that "Control Panel" is on the side of your computer, "My Documents" are printed on paper inside, and that "start" stands for "Start thinking alright?".
Brothers, stand back.
http://xkcd.com/c208.html
The bright trouble kids are the best. They keep a list of who'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes.
I know Google donated some servers last year, but a serious partnership would be more productive. Google seem to have little problem handling a huge volume of traffic.
I think changes to the wikipedia software and architecture (are PHP and mySQL really the best solution?) would help.
Most of the bandwidth requirement comes from people visiting articles to read, rather than edit. if wikipedia were to encourage/redirect users to any of the hundreds of sites that mirror the wikipedia content (eg reference.com encylopedia.info they all sound like that), but which included edit links to wikipedia.org , and bandwidth requirements would *drop*.
All google could buy wikpiedia./
Bittorrent is the primary means of distribution for that filthy, UnAmerican, Communist, no sorry, Terrorist (that's what they tell you now isn't it?) software that is GNU/Linux.
> has not gained much adoption in music sales and portable players
The first may be true, but selling music in a matrix of codecs and bitrates is going to be messy. The ultimate solution is to provide lossless copies (in a suitable patent-free codec), which can then be encoded into whatever codec and bitrate that will suit the user and devices.
Many portable players do play vorbis. Of course the highest profile ones don't, viz. the iPod because Apple want to push AAC, and the Zen because Creative wish to protect their alliance to Microsoft. Years ago, some smaller players lacked the necessary processing power and memory to handle vorbis in addition to mp3, but these players are long obsolete (dude, the ipod nano can run linux). My iRiver certainly plays vorbis, and wikipedia also lists Samsung, Rio, Neuros Technology and Cowon in addition.
If the iPod supported vorbis wouldn't the situation look *very* different?: So where can we lobby Apple? It's a shame so many users chose their devices on looks without considering whether they're restricted to iTunes, both as a music store and an interface.
Which internet?
I don't think playing round after round of counter-strike has any place in school.
A journal with that name just has to be a joke. Yes I did try to read the fucking article, but it was obscured by a large photograph of a bridge. I guess this was an advert.
Well I'm glad to see this web 2.0 is so user friendly.