No, Photoshop runs on Linux, under WINE. The same way the GIMP runs on Windows. You don't think Windows comes preinstalled with the Linux API, do you?
My point is that GIMP cannot be used as an "advantage" for linux given that it is a "free" program available on Windows as well as linux.
I wasn't saying it could be used as an advantage for Linux. Just as Photoshop can't be used as an "advantage" for Windows. In fact I think it runs fastest on OSX.:)
For the commercial applications that aren't available there's always WINE.;)
Stop what? What features are lacking from the GIMP that the average person like me would need? Maybe I'm missing something here. And its been running on my laptop for almost a week now, since I installed it. Not terribly unstable if you ask me. Although I admit I am running Linux and the GIMP 2.0. That might have something to do with it.
And who isn't cash-strapped these days?
I'm just saying that Photoshop is great for when you need that much power in your photo editing application. But unless you're doing graphic design you could probably make due with the GIMP and save yourself several hundred dollars.
But the GIMP works for me just fine. I see no reason to spend $200+ + the cost of Windows so I can run photoshop to edit my photos. I have never found a need for features that weren't available in the GIMP. But I'm not a graphic designer or professional artist. I'm just an average user in that reguard.
What if the article offers the GIMP as a reasonable alterative or replacement to Photoshop for average people like me? Would you take it seriously then?:)
How could we have known patents would be so bad? If only somebody had warned us. If only one of those open source websites could have put up some information on their homepage directing us to the possible problems these patents could cause governments in the EU. Hrmmm. I really wish someone had done this. Don't you?
First men around the moon, first men *on* the moon: America (Apollos 8 and 11) - if anyone thinks that wasn't a win, you don't know what you are talking about - the Soviets simply couldn't match our determination and engineering)
Yep. Cowboys in space.
First school teacher blew up on the way to space.
First shuttle incinerated on reentry with a full crew aboard.
I'd guess we forgot to consider the value of a human in all these races. Money should not be an object so long as we want humans in space! Unless, of course, being first is the only thing that matters.
I wrote over 3000 lines of reusable object oriented Perl, most of which is easy for me to maintain and well documented. Some methods I have run well over 100,000 times in the last few months, some execute several hundred times per pass of the application and have never needed to be examined because they were written properly the first time and documented.
Sometimes its a lot easier to maintain 30 well-written 10-line methods than to build a complex 300-line structured program.
And I'm a pothead. I can't remember what I did yesterday.;)
Yeah, but along with Lao Tzu we'd be saving the memory of George W Bush. Why not just let nature take its course and allow some other form of intelligent life take our place in the stars.
We can't even come to an agreement over simple issues like gay marriage, abortion, evolution, basic medical care and the costs associated with it. Why complicate alien thought, if it exists, with our pointless dilemas? I suggest we live free and then die, peacefully, naturally.
oops, I meant to put this link on Security, showing how John Bush in Florida was preparing to declare martial law on Sep 7th, 2001, 4 days before September 11th. Now I would like to know what event happened around that time that was worthy of declaring martial law. Perhaps I still don't have all the facts.
I don't trust my government to protect me from terrorism if that terrorism could be used to their advantage, like increasing public popularity for war with a country like Iraq to bring them our version of freedom and democracy.
Looking back its obvious to understand why these wars aren't popular, but today it seems like its very difficult to convince our leaders that diplomacy is the prefered method, or in the case of terrorism to strike directly at those groups responsible for the terror.
So you're arguement is it is more likely that lifeforms instantly appeared as a creation of God instead of evolving over the hundreds of millions or possibly billions of years they have existed? Can you fathom how long a million years is? How about a billion? Its a really long time, y'know.
Why haven't christian scientists provided us a "theory" to explain this? It is scientificly provable is it not?
theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
We ask for data and experimentation to prove your hypothesis that your God, the one that has a son named Jesus, is The Creator. That's all we ask. Then Intelligent Design might be taken a little more seriously, but it is hardly being ignored. But what about Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism. They can't all be right can they?
That's why we have science. It at least tries to derive truth by observing reality and recording the facts in the most objective manner possible given our extremely subjective human perspectives. And then it gives up trying to insist its authority when it has been proven wrong. So its really quite simple. Prove it wrong. Use science against itself.
I won't pretend to know anything about stem cell research.
We have observed and recorded the observations of both mutation and natural selection in our history. Yet we have no recorded evidence of the existence of this Intelligent Designer. Can you please explain this for lazy potheads like myself who probably don't have a freakin clue?
I might have a hypothesis to explain this intelligence in all these complex lifeforms. Actually I doubt its a real hypothesis, but anyway here it goes. The laws of physics describe the 4 known forces of nature and might appear intelligent to someone new to science. But as we learn more we find more mathematical complexity in the very fabric of our universe than is taught in our most prestigious universities. These "laws" of physics are highly dependant on our perspective within this universe. And our perspective is rather limitted compared to the whole of our macro/micro universe. So its highly unlikely that we will know-it-all anytime in the near future. And it will take even longer when we have religious and/or political groups insisting their new "science" is more accurate than those theories that have withstood hundreds of years of criticism. Propoganda and belief don't count as scientific evidence, sorry.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science says:
Whereas, ID proponents claim that contemporary evolutionary theory is incapable of explaining the origin of the diversity of living organisms;
Whereas, to date, the ID movement has failed to offer credible scientific evidence to support their claim that ID undermines the current scientifically accepted theory of evolution;
Whereas, the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims;
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the lack of scientific warrant for so-called "intelligent design theory" makes it improper to include as a part of science education;
Therefore Be Further It Resolved, that AAAS urges citizens across the nation to oppose the establishment of policies that would permit the teaching of "intelligent design theory" as a part of the science curricula of the public schools;
Therefore Be It Further Resolved, that AAAS calls upon its members to assist those engaged in overseeing science edu
...at some point, at some time desktop Linux will be hit by viruses/spyware/other undesireables.
What makes you think its impossible to design a secure system? What if the goal of the people designing the system is to design a secure and stable system instead of making a profitable business out of selling software and competing for market dominance? Sure, everything can be insecure, but what matters is what you do after you discover that it was implemented improperly, no? Do you scrap the old code and redesign it to protect against those new vulnerabilities or pretend they're not a threat to your business?
"Laws increasing governments' power will ultimately be abused."
That would be why I'm a libertarian.
"You know, the only trouble with capitalism is capitalists; they're too damn greedy." - US President Herbert Hoover, right after our decline into the great depression.
And that would be why I'm a communist, or at least believe that currency is a waste of our resources and time.
Capitalism doesn't seem to be working for everyone, so my suggestion is to compromise and apply some socialist or communist concepts on top of our capitalist system to improve things. Its not like we haven't done this already, but it still needs more work, IMO.
But that might require everyone have a heart. That's probably too much to ask.
On a similar tangent I ran across some interesting information in social psychology last night. I was very interested in what it had to say about situation vs. the Fundamental attribution error. And how that related to people who are currently in a situation of poverty and how they might or might not be helped out of that situation in light of recent public discussion about the loss of jobs and conservativism. What do you think it would take to get the President to write an essay in his own words explaining his position on this topic?
And here I am a freakin pothead reading a psychology book. How the hell did that happen?
Destroy the economy once, shame on you. Destroy it two or more times, sha.. er, whatever. Just legalise Cannabis!:)
Yeah, CPUs have different "rules" than nature and its natural selection. But at least we have taken these rules of nature, such as electricity and magnetism and created something with an artificial set of rules to make it more logical and easier to predict.
I don't see how we could accomplish that with life, but if we could program life to the rules of nature does it really matter? Is there really any difference? Or is it just programming to a different instruction set?
So we want to terraform Mars now? How is that going to be profitable? How is that not going to be a complete waste of our talents, time and resources? Are we going to find God on Mars or something?
There seems to be a huge gap between the perceptions of reality among the conservative elderly and us science fiction fans. Aren't we concerned about the various social problems we should be dealing with here on this planet? Or do we somehow believe that terraforming Mars will solve all our problems overnight or provide that amazing replicator technology we keep dreaming about so communism will finally be a possibility instead of a dirty word.
I have 151MB of 256MB of RAM available on my 1Ghz laptop. I'm running Slackware with both KDE and GNOME, 10 Konqueror browsers with a couple tabs each, one konsole with several tabs and/or screen, konqueror filemanager, gkrellm, and gedit. It appears that I'm using a lot of swap, around 150MB, but since the system has been up in this state for about 7 days and has a lot of webpages stored in RAM that almost seems reasonable. Anyway, I don't see a problem here. It has plenty of available RAM and CPU to handle everything I want to run on it.
Who buys a system with less than 256MB of RAM today? And how much do you pay for these systems? And why do you buy them if you know you'll be running a UNIX-like OS where extra RAM can be very useful for things like running many long-running apps or launching a new browser/tab whenever you want to visit a new website.
I'm only using one of my 4 virtual desktops. So the system is under rather light load at the moment. But if I had to suffer with 128MB of RAM I'm sure I could do it without using much swap. But then I might only be able to run KDE or GNOME and a few applications.
Are you a McCarthyist? Just curious, the way you mention red books and all. Nothing wrong with that, er, well, actually there is, but we can talk about that some other time.
I never read any of Marx's writings. I'm talking about communism as an economic model, not a government.
Show me an example of where communism failed in a country based on freedom, then maybe your point will make more sense. And show me a communist system that used technology, which has only been available for the last 20 years, to automate its production. I haven't read about one, but I'm not widely read.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, call me clueless, too, but sometimes I think there are things in life more important than money.
How could anyone get a crazy idea like that living in this society?
Can i say there is a native version of a particular dos game on the mac if I run it in Dosbox?
:)
Yes.
We have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Er, something like that.
I suggest you read their faq.
:)
;)
Sorry, but Photoshop does not run on linux.
No, Photoshop runs on Linux, under WINE. The same way the GIMP runs on Windows. You don't think Windows comes preinstalled with the Linux API, do you?
My point is that GIMP cannot be used as an "advantage" for linux given that it is a "free" program available on Windows as well as linux.
I wasn't saying it could be used as an advantage for Linux. Just as Photoshop can't be used as an "advantage" for Windows. In fact I think it runs fastest on OSX.
For the commercial applications that aren't available there's always WINE.
Stop what? What features are lacking from the GIMP that the average person like me would need? Maybe I'm missing something here. And its been running on my laptop for almost a week now, since I installed it. Not terribly unstable if you ask me. Although I admit I am running Linux and the GIMP 2.0. That might have something to do with it.
And who isn't cash-strapped these days?
I'm just saying that Photoshop is great for when you need that much power in your photo editing application. But unless you're doing graphic design you could probably make due with the GIMP and save yourself several hundred dollars.
Yeah.. both the GIMP and Photoshop run on Windows, Linux and OSX. What's your point?
Well, I refuse to take any article seriously.
:)
But the GIMP works for me just fine. I see no reason to spend $200+ + the cost of Windows so I can run photoshop to edit my photos. I have never found a need for features that weren't available in the GIMP. But I'm not a graphic designer or professional artist. I'm just an average user in that reguard.
What if the article offers the GIMP as a reasonable alterative or replacement to Photoshop for average people like me? Would you take it seriously then?
How could we have known patents would be so bad? If only somebody had warned us. If only one of those open source websites could have put up some information on their homepage directing us to the possible problems these patents could cause governments in the EU. Hrmmm. I really wish someone had done this. Don't you?
First men around the moon, first men *on* the moon: America (Apollos 8 and 11) - if anyone thinks that wasn't a win, you don't know what you are talking about - the Soviets simply couldn't match our determination and engineering)
Yep. Cowboys in space.
First school teacher blew up on the way to space.
First shuttle incinerated on reentry with a full crew aboard.
I'd guess we forgot to consider the value of a human in all these races. Money should not be an object so long as we want humans in space! Unless, of course, being first is the only thing that matters.
I wrote over 3000 lines of reusable object oriented Perl, most of which is easy for me to maintain and well documented. Some methods I have run well over 100,000 times in the last few months, some execute several hundred times per pass of the application and have never needed to be examined because they were written properly the first time and documented.
;)
Sometimes its a lot easier to maintain 30 well-written 10-line methods than to build a complex 300-line structured program.
And I'm a pothead. I can't remember what I did yesterday.
I agree. But the same can be said for Perl.
Yep and recent polls show that most people still believe that Jesus is their personal savior.
I wish Jesus could save me from all of them.
Yeah, but along with Lao Tzu we'd be saving the memory of George W Bush. Why not just let nature take its course and allow some other form of intelligent life take our place in the stars.
We can't even come to an agreement over simple issues like gay marriage, abortion, evolution, basic medical care and the costs associated with it. Why complicate alien thought, if it exists, with our pointless dilemas? I suggest we live free and then die, peacefully, naturally.
oops, I meant to put this link on Security, showing how John Bush in Florida was preparing to declare martial law on Sep 7th, 2001, 4 days before September 11th. Now I would like to know what event happened around that time that was worthy of declaring martial law. Perhaps I still don't have all the facts.
link
a threat
to
National
Security?
I don't trust my government to protect me from terrorism if that terrorism could be used to their advantage, like increasing public popularity for war with a country like Iraq to bring them our version of freedom and democracy.
Looking back its obvious to understand why these wars aren't popular, but today it seems like its very difficult to convince our leaders that diplomacy is the prefered method, or in the case of terrorism to strike directly at those groups responsible for the terror.
So you're arguement is it is more likely that lifeforms instantly appeared as a creation of God instead of evolving over the hundreds of millions or possibly billions of years they have existed? Can you fathom how long a million years is? How about a billion? Its a really long time, y'know.
Why haven't christian scientists provided us a "theory" to explain this? It is scientificly provable is it not?
theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
We ask for data and experimentation to prove your hypothesis that your God, the one that has a son named Jesus, is The Creator. That's all we ask. Then Intelligent Design might be taken a little more seriously, but it is hardly being ignored. But what about Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism. They can't all be right can they?
That's why we have science. It at least tries to derive truth by observing reality and recording the facts in the most objective manner possible given our extremely subjective human perspectives. And then it gives up trying to insist its authority when it has been proven wrong. So its really quite simple. Prove it wrong. Use science against itself.
I won't pretend to know anything about stem cell research.
Intelligent Design
Evilution
We have observed and recorded the observations of both mutation and natural selection in our history. Yet we have no recorded evidence of the existence of this Intelligent Designer. Can you please explain this for lazy potheads like myself who probably don't have a freakin clue?
I might have a hypothesis to explain this intelligence in all these complex lifeforms. Actually I doubt its a real hypothesis, but anyway here it goes. The laws of physics describe the 4 known forces of nature and might appear intelligent to someone new to science. But as we learn more we find more mathematical complexity in the very fabric of our universe than is taught in our most prestigious universities. These "laws" of physics are highly dependant on our perspective within this universe. And our perspective is rather limitted compared to the whole of our macro/micro universe. So its highly unlikely that we will know-it-all anytime in the near future. And it will take even longer when we have religious and/or political groups insisting their new "science" is more accurate than those theories that have withstood hundreds of years of criticism. Propoganda and belief don't count as scientific evidence, sorry.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science says:
Whereas, ID proponents claim that contemporary evolutionary theory is incapable of explaining the origin of the diversity of living organisms;
Whereas, to date, the ID movement has failed to offer credible scientific evidence to support their claim that ID undermines the current scientifically accepted theory of evolution;
Whereas, the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims;
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the lack of scientific warrant for so-called "intelligent design theory" makes it improper to include as a part of science education;
Therefore Be Further It Resolved, that AAAS urges citizens across the nation to oppose the establishment of policies that would permit the teaching of "intelligent design theory" as a part of the science curricula of the public schools;
Therefore Be It Further Resolved, that AAAS calls upon its members to assist those engaged in overseeing science edu
...at some point, at some time desktop Linux will be hit by viruses/spyware/other undesireables.
What makes you think its impossible to design a secure system? What if the goal of the people designing the system is to design a secure and stable system instead of making a profitable business out of selling software and competing for market dominance? Sure, everything can be insecure, but what matters is what you do after you discover that it was implemented improperly, no? Do you scrap the old code and redesign it to protect against those new vulnerabilities or pretend they're not a threat to your business?
er actually I have no idea what that had to do with history and civil rights and stuff. Oh well. :P
"Laws increasing governments' power will ultimately be abused."
:)
That would be why I'm a libertarian.
"You know, the only trouble with capitalism is capitalists; they're too damn greedy." - US President Herbert Hoover, right after our decline into the great depression.
And that would be why I'm a communist, or at least believe that currency is a waste of our resources and time.
Capitalism doesn't seem to be working for everyone, so my suggestion is to compromise and apply some socialist or communist concepts on top of our capitalist system to improve things. Its not like we haven't done this already, but it still needs more work, IMO.
But that might require everyone have a heart. That's probably too much to ask.
On a similar tangent I ran across some interesting information in social psychology last night. I was very interested in what it had to say about situation vs. the Fundamental attribution error. And how that related to people who are currently in a situation of poverty and how they might or might not be helped out of that situation in light of recent public discussion about the loss of jobs and conservativism. What do you think it would take to get the President to write an essay in his own words explaining his position on this topic?
And here I am a freakin pothead reading a psychology book. How the hell did that happen?
Destroy the economy once, shame on you. Destroy it two or more times, sha.. er, whatever. Just legalise Cannabis!
Yeah, CPUs have different "rules" than nature and its natural selection. But at least we have taken these rules of nature, such as electricity and magnetism and created something with an artificial set of rules to make it more logical and easier to predict.
I don't see how we could accomplish that with life, but if we could program life to the rules of nature does it really matter? Is there really any difference? Or is it just programming to a different instruction set?
So we want to terraform Mars now? How is that going to be profitable? How is that not going to be a complete waste of our talents, time and resources? Are we going to find God on Mars or something?
:P
There seems to be a huge gap between the perceptions of reality among the conservative elderly and us science fiction fans. Aren't we concerned about the various social problems we should be dealing with here on this planet? Or do we somehow believe that terraforming Mars will solve all our problems overnight or provide that amazing replicator technology we keep dreaming about so communism will finally be a possibility instead of a dirty word.
You people crack me up.
We don't need rules, we have faith!
I have 151MB of 256MB of RAM available on my 1Ghz laptop. I'm running Slackware with both KDE and GNOME, 10 Konqueror browsers with a couple tabs each, one konsole with several tabs and/or screen, konqueror filemanager, gkrellm, and gedit. It appears that I'm using a lot of swap, around 150MB, but since the system has been up in this state for about 7 days and has a lot of webpages stored in RAM that almost seems reasonable. Anyway, I don't see a problem here. It has plenty of available RAM and CPU to handle everything I want to run on it.
Who buys a system with less than 256MB of RAM today? And how much do you pay for these systems? And why do you buy them if you know you'll be running a UNIX-like OS where extra RAM can be very useful for things like running many long-running apps or launching a new browser/tab whenever you want to visit a new website.
I'm only using one of my 4 virtual desktops. So the system is under rather light load at the moment. But if I had to suffer with 128MB of RAM I'm sure I could do it without using much swap. But then I might only be able to run KDE or GNOME and a few applications.
P.S.
Are you a McCarthyist? Just curious, the way you mention red books and all. Nothing wrong with that, er, well, actually there is, but we can talk about that some other time.
I never read any of Marx's writings. I'm talking about communism as an economic model, not a government.
Show me an example of where communism failed in a country based on freedom, then maybe your point will make more sense. And show me a communist system that used technology, which has only been available for the last 20 years, to automate its production. I haven't read about one, but I'm not widely read.