People who complain about Javascript usually don't really understand anything about it - Activation & Variable, [[scope]], closures etc etc. They try to write a program in traditional OOP fashion and maybe they accidentally form lexical closures and see unexpected behaviour that they interpret as variable visibility issues. Or, they touch one of the many places where JS is incompatible across browsers and become confused. Then they go on some forum to explain in how many ways JS sucks. I wish they just studied the language and took the time to understand it.
Gentoo isn't the easiest distro to install, it's just easy enough. Any advanced user can install it without any kind of problem. There qre requisites, though: experience, a fast machine and the ability to schedule the upgrades so that it compiles while he;s out with his friends. That's why you don't tell a newbie to start with it and you give him an Ubuntu disc. It might not even be the best distro for a geek, indeed I think Debian is a wonderful geek distro and couldn't decide between the two.
"I was pissed to learn that you can't do a stage 1 install easily anymore."
So what? It doesn't make a difference, if you're worried about performance. The only difference is that a stage 1 can lead to big problems, which is the reason why it was deprecated, and I don't mean because it's more difficult - there were (and still are) technical problems.
For the stupid mods who didn't get it and modded parent -1 Troll, what parent did was showing that if you give someone the power to block out a certain kind of content you're aslo giving him the power to block anything else, like communist literature (of nazi literature or whatever). If you build a network that guarantees perfect freedom of speech you can't build into it any censorship mechanism.
That was my point. We don't give value to those things because we don't feel they deserve our attention, hence Hollywood failed since its job is to appeal to potential customers and make them believe its products are worth something.
Yes, I buy what I like. Yes, I tell my friends. Now tell me: how am I supposed to know if they're good without watching them? As I said, after sampling them I deleted them. If Hollywood had built a history of quality and reliability I wouldn't need to do that. Now I (and many others, I believe) can't trust it at all so I have to download before getting the high-quality version buying the DVD. However this isn't true anymore; I just stopped bothering. As a general rule when someone starts to download shitloads of movies he probably don't like them anymore. Same for games. I see the increase of piracy as a failure of Hollywood, not as an increase in criminality.
That argument would have a basis if those movies deserved my money. Before I gave up Hollywood completely I was deleting 99% of the movies I downloaded halfway through seeing them. Just imagine how wasteful it would have been to pay for all of them. The problem is that Hollywood has lost the ability to appeal to its potential customers long ago and now nobody who has a clue would ever pay for a movie before he's seen it once and most won't care about owning a DVD with a barely average movie on it. Dowloading is easier, cheaper and you can dispose of a file with a simple command.
I said "no" to Hollywood years ago. It can't produce more than a single great movie every 2-3 years. Most of its money are blown on movies that are so stupid that when I'm unfortunate enough to watch them I actually feel things grating against each other somewhere inside me. Let it die.
I'm not trying to spread FUD at all. I did ask to please correct me if I was wrong. It's ok, I stand corrected. I don't see what good is to fight over things like this since we're obviously on the same side and I've been polite. Are you flaming just for fun? Well it doesn't matter, it's slashdot and I normally don't give a damn anyway.
I believe this is no completely true. Correct me if I'm wrong, I think each nation belonging to the EU still accepts or deny software patents as they see fit, accordingly to their constitutions. The EU effort went towards unification of the method of accepting patents and the refusal didn't outlaw software patents in the EU. Now we need to stand up and say that software patents are bad and must not be issued at all. That makes sense for the EU, because all the software giants like Microsoft are american and in the EU we only have medium sized enterprises that couldn't pay the patent-related legal fees. And yes, I know my english sucks ^^
Isn't that the US patent system's fault in the first place? A software company shouldn't have to pay 10 billion $ to lawyers just to make sure it's not infringing and another 20 to settle over the actual infringments. Copyright is enough, patents are one of the reasons why Microsoft has a monopoly and THE reason why no USA medium sized company will ever be able to compete with them, even if it creates the best software ever. Thankfully we're not as unlucky in the EU.
You're about 99.99% right. However many people who use Microsoft products go around saying Microsoft sucks and Windows is bad and it's stupid that you can still be infected by viruses etc etc, maybe because there are many people who ask nerds before buying a PC or when they run into trouble. That won't matter when they'll start seeing ads like "Latest Britney Spears single free with 2 Big macs!" and they'll find out it doesn't play on systems without DRM, so your conclusions are still absolutely correct. I believe a big part of the general public doesn't trust Microsoft anymore but their feelings against that company aren't strong enough. They're mindless consumers and can be easily led like the sheep they are.
You know what I meant. Gulag etc. etc. Probably you also know that calling OSS advocates communists is ridiculuos, wich is the only reason why I answered that way.
Exactly, the don't give their product away. They have their programmers, write lots of code for GNU/Linux, license under the GPL "giving it away" and still make money. So why am I wrong and why am I a dumbshit?
An unmistakable sign of communism at work is monopoly. Also, communism is a regime where you're kindly invited to share. If you don't you get a bullet in the head. That's a little different from Open Source. Novell and Red Hat are enterprises. They believe in capitalism and the Open Source model fuels competition, which is an unmistakable mark of capitalism.
"He's not completely wrong. Open source people will only work on what interests them so you have a ton of very crappy, partially-finished open source software out there that usually just barely scratches the itch of the original programmer. Sure there are successes like Mozilla Firefox, Apache, KDE, Gnome, the Linux kernel, etc., but for every success there are hundreds of completely useless failures out there."
And why do you want to use the failures rather then the successes? I use kernel + Xorg + KDE + several applications like mplayer, amaroK, thunderbird and so on. They are all very polished, perform admirably and only the testing versions ever crash (and I use unstable things only in rare cases). If someone wants to code a pile of crap it's none of my concern, the great, well coded apps I can install are more than I'll ever use.
"Most businesses would be insane to rely on open source programmers to develop their software for them... that's why many of you reading this still have a job developing commercial software or in-house homegrown software. They give you money, you develop software that they want. It's a win-win situation. The alternative is they give you nothing, you starve, someone spends all their free time writing another damn e-mail client or content management system in PHP"
I don't see the problem here. Open Source programmers are still programmers and they're paid by whoever employs them. Novell and Red Hat aren't exactly what you would call community-driven, heh. The programmers giving code for free are usually guys sending in patches for some kind of problem they found and were able to fix. Anyway if someone wants to donate it's his decision, nobody points a gun at him. If someone starts a project, leaves it and it remains unfinished it will go in the pit together with all the crappy programs I'll never use.
You're a hopeless fanboy and because of fucked up idiots like you the world hates gentoo users. I'm positively scared by the possibility of getting the portage tree from the same mirror you touched with your filthy connection. I hope an axe falls on your modem cable and frees the net from just another fucking Gentoo preacher. To the guys who read parent and think "gentoo users are idiots": we're not like him. He represents a very noisy minority.
Slashdot Mirror
People who complain about Javascript usually don't really understand anything about it - Activation & Variable, [[scope]], closures etc etc. They try to write a program in traditional OOP fashion and maybe they accidentally form lexical closures and see unexpected behaviour that they interpret as variable visibility issues. Or, they touch one of the many places where JS is incompatible across browsers and become confused. Then they go on some forum to explain in how many ways JS sucks. I wish they just studied the language and took the time to understand it.
Gentoo isn't the easiest distro to install, it's just easy enough. Any advanced user can install it without any kind of problem. There qre requisites, though: experience, a fast machine and the ability to schedule the upgrades so that it compiles while he;s out with his friends. That's why you don't tell a newbie to start with it and you give him an Ubuntu disc. It might not even be the best distro for a geek, indeed I think Debian is a wonderful geek distro and couldn't decide between the two.
"I was pissed to learn that you can't do a stage 1 install easily anymore."
So what? It doesn't make a difference, if you're worried about performance. The only difference is that a stage 1 can lead to big problems, which is the reason why it was deprecated, and I don't mean because it's more difficult - there were (and still are) technical problems.
For the stupid mods who didn't get it and modded parent -1 Troll, what parent did was showing that if you give someone the power to block out a certain kind of content you're aslo giving him the power to block anything else, like communist literature (of nazi literature or whatever). If you build a network that guarantees perfect freedom of speech you can't build into it any censorship mechanism.
Wrog. Gentoo distributes scripts to install the application (ebuilds). The sources are not on gentoo's mirrors.
That was my point. We don't give value to those things because we don't feel they deserve our attention, hence Hollywood failed since its job is to appeal to potential customers and make them believe its products are worth something.
Then why most movies make a loss? Hollywood's declining.
Yes, I buy what I like. Yes, I tell my friends. Now tell me: how am I supposed to know if they're good without watching them? As I said, after sampling them I deleted them. If Hollywood had built a history of quality and reliability I wouldn't need to do that. Now I (and many others, I believe) can't trust it at all so I have to download before getting the high-quality version buying the DVD.
However this isn't true anymore; I just stopped bothering. As a general rule when someone starts to download shitloads of movies he probably don't like them anymore. Same for games. I see the increase of piracy as a failure of Hollywood, not as an increase in criminality.
That argument would have a basis if those movies deserved my money. Before I gave up Hollywood completely I was deleting 99% of the movies I downloaded halfway through seeing them. Just imagine how wasteful it would have been to pay for all of them. The problem is that Hollywood has lost the ability to appeal to its potential customers long ago and now nobody who has a clue would ever pay for a movie before he's seen it once and most won't care about owning a DVD with a barely average movie on it. Dowloading is easier, cheaper and you can dispose of a file with a simple command. I said "no" to Hollywood years ago. It can't produce more than a single great movie every 2-3 years. Most of its money are blown on movies that are so stupid that when I'm unfortunate enough to watch them I actually feel things grating against each other somewhere inside me. Let it die.
If iTunes and CDs are any indication, it isn't the artist who determines how his work will be distributed. Nobody's against artists.
I'm not trying to spread FUD at all. I did ask to please correct me if I was wrong. It's ok, I stand corrected. I don't see what good is to fight over things like this since we're obviously on the same side and I've been polite. Are you flaming just for fun? Well it doesn't matter, it's slashdot and I normally don't give a damn anyway.
I believe this is no completely true. Correct me if I'm wrong, I think each nation belonging to the EU still accepts or deny software patents as they see fit, accordingly to their constitutions. The EU effort went towards unification of the method of accepting patents and the refusal didn't outlaw software patents in the EU. Now we need to stand up and say that software patents are bad and must not be issued at all. That makes sense for the EU, because all the software giants like Microsoft are american and in the EU we only have medium sized enterprises that couldn't pay the patent-related legal fees. And yes, I know my english sucks ^^
I stand corrected ^^ Thanks
Isn't that the US patent system's fault in the first place? A software company shouldn't have to pay 10 billion $ to lawyers just to make sure it's not infringing and another 20 to settle over the actual infringments. Copyright is enough, patents are one of the reasons why Microsoft has a monopoly and THE reason why no USA medium sized company will ever be able to compete with them, even if it creates the best software ever. Thankfully we're not as unlucky in the EU.
I don't see any difference between mindless consumers who read slashdot and mindless consumers who don't...
You're about 99.99% right. However many people who use Microsoft products go around saying Microsoft sucks and Windows is bad and it's stupid that you can still be infected by viruses etc etc, maybe because there are many people who ask nerds before buying a PC or when they run into trouble.
That won't matter when they'll start seeing ads like "Latest Britney Spears single free with 2 Big macs!" and they'll find out it doesn't play on systems without DRM, so your conclusions are still absolutely correct. I believe a big part of the general public doesn't trust Microsoft anymore but their feelings against that company aren't strong enough. They're mindless consumers and can be easily led like the sheep they are.
You know what I meant. Gulag etc. etc. Probably you also know that calling OSS advocates communists is ridiculuos, wich is the only reason why I answered that way.
I was trying to tell him that the basis for his reasoning is flawed. No, I don't know english very well, I'm Italian.
Exactly, the don't give their product away. They have their programmers, write lots of code for GNU/Linux, license under the GPL "giving it away" and still make money. So why am I wrong and why am I a dumbshit?
Do you see Red Hat declaring bankruptcy? Nor do I. Get your facts straight, please.
An unmistakable sign of communism at work is monopoly. Also, communism is a regime where you're kindly invited to share. If you don't you get a bullet in the head. That's a little different from Open Source. Novell and Red Hat are enterprises. They believe in capitalism and the Open Source model fuels competition, which is an unmistakable mark of capitalism.
"He's not completely wrong. Open source people will only work on what interests them so you have a ton of very crappy, partially-finished open source software out there that usually just barely scratches the itch of the original programmer. Sure there are successes like Mozilla Firefox, Apache, KDE, Gnome, the Linux kernel, etc., but for every success there are hundreds of completely useless failures out there."
And why do you want to use the failures rather then the successes? I use kernel + Xorg + KDE + several applications like mplayer, amaroK, thunderbird and so on. They are all very polished, perform admirably and only the testing versions ever crash (and I use unstable things only in rare cases). If someone wants to code a pile of crap it's none of my concern, the great, well coded apps I can install are more than I'll ever use.
"Most businesses would be insane to rely on open source programmers to develop their software for them... that's why many of you reading this still have a job developing commercial software or in-house homegrown software. They give you money, you develop software that they want. It's a win-win situation. The alternative is they give you nothing, you starve, someone spends all their free time writing another damn e-mail client or content management system in PHP"
I don't see the problem here. Open Source programmers are still programmers and they're paid by whoever employs them. Novell and Red Hat aren't exactly what you would call community-driven, heh. The programmers giving code for free are usually guys sending in patches for some kind of problem they found and were able to fix. Anyway if someone wants to donate it's his decision, nobody points a gun at him. If someone starts a project, leaves it and it remains unfinished it will go in the pit together with all the crappy programs I'll never use.
Sure I just applied that patch that hooks Konqueror into the kernel and wtf it's FLYING now. Seriously, what you said is simply not true.
I want "Halo: The Movie: The Game: The Official Guide"
You're a hopeless fanboy and because of fucked up idiots like you the world hates gentoo users. I'm positively scared by the possibility of getting the portage tree from the same mirror you touched with your filthy connection. I hope an axe falls on your modem cable and frees the net from just another fucking Gentoo preacher. To the guys who read parent and think "gentoo users are idiots": we're not like him. He represents a very noisy minority.