The PC is more flexible than a Mac? Hmmmm... Macs can run Windows, Linux, and everything else that PCs run, plus MacOS. Meanwhile, there's a whole world of great Mac-only software out there, that standard PCs can't run. So, which platform is really more flexible?
Personally I set myself unwilling to moderate because I found that I always ended up moderating in conversations in which I knew the least,
You don't need to know about a topic to be a good moderator. For example, it's pretty easy to spot abusive posts like trolls, even if you know nothing of the discussion's subject. Likewise, it's also fairly easy to mod people up to counter unfair moderation - like if they are modded troll just for expressing an unpopular or controversial opinion, and didn't submit an abusive post.
Jon Stewart should have interviewed Gates witha stormtrooper helmet on. When Gates asks "Why are you wearing a stormtrooper helmet, John?" Stewart replies "I'm not wearing a helmet... dark master."
The media calls Bill Gates a genius or a whiz-kid all the time. Among middle-America, Bill Gates' name is often used as being synonymous with being a technical genius or brilliant hacker.
But if it would have been Jobs talking about Mac, or Linus talking about Linux it would have been "Steve Jobs/Linus Torvalds Extols Virtues of Mac/Linux, Totally Demolishes Microsoft's Pathetic Ads."
Not necessarily. It would depend on if they were bragging, or just extolling virtues. Gates is clearly over the line into bragging. I'd be fine about a similar interview with Jobs or Torvalds being described as "bragging."
And the "Totally Demolishes Pathetic Ads" headline you made up seems really out of place. I don't think I've ever seen a slashdot headline like that.
Tell that to anyone who's been running an OS9-based G4, who then upgrades to the latest version of OSX.
Like me, for example? 10.0 and 10.1 were a little sluggish, but not too bad. But the reason I was still running OS9 was application support. By the time 10.2 and 10.3 came around, my G4 was so much nicer to use on OS X rather than OS 9. With 10.4 it flies. No hardware upgrades.
John Hodgeman is great and people like him better than the Mac guy." At least he would have come off more sympathetically.
Speaking of Hodgeman and sympathy, did you see Gates on The Daily Show? The instant the interview was over, Gates did an about-face and high-tailed it out of there. Didn't even sit down and do the faux-chat thing during the transition to the commercial break. The guy couldn't generate sympathy if he tried, he has no social graces at all. He didn't even use any humor during the interview - he spoke like it was a advertisement for laundry detergent, not an interview with Jon Stewart.
Anything that is used as often as a computer soon loses its "ooh, shiny!" effect and simply becomes a tool.
And? Good craftspeople are often fanatical about their tools, and very devoted. Mac fans aren't Mac fans because it's shiny - they are fans because Macs are great tools. great tools truly make life a breeze. What's not to love? Quality tools are highly satisfying.
The problem with Windows is that it is a very poor tool, and frequently gets in the way of doing the job.
Why do you have to "redesign processes" or replace hardware to use your car less, and walk more? Why do you need to purchase anything to switch off lights in your house, or use the air-conditioning or heating less?
Because we have limited resources. If we are going to spend a billion dollars, either directly or indirectly, on "improving the environment", we should make sure that the expenditure is effective and efficient at reaching our goals.
Why would it cost more? It actually costs LESS to use less energy. It's the economically rational thing to do. Why would we continue to waste energy, when it's so expensive and wasteful to do so?
I disagree. Recall that, just after 9/11, virtually *every* member of Congress, both Democrat AND republican (and the odd Independent or two) were screaming for blood and were looking at Iraq's leaders as the cause
That would be incorrect. After 9/11, everybody wanted to go after Osama bin Laden. Remember Afghanistan? Most people don't seem to. It was definitely the neoconservatives who pulled the bait-and-switch of suggesting Iraq as a target. They used political manipulation to equate Iraq with Osama, and make anyone who disagreed with war on Iraq an unpatriotic traitor. There were plenty of Democrats who were too weak, and yielded to this manipulation, in the name of popularity. But none of them wer actively suggesting we go into Iraq. They just passively went along with Republican plans. Do you have any evidence of these Democrats suggesting Iraq (rather than Afghanistan) as a target before the Republicans began their campaign to convince people of WMDs with doctored intelligence?
Those flyers you get in the mail about crap you never asked for? Spam. Those phone calls from telemarketers? Spam. Those ads on TV & Radio for products you're not interested in? Spam. Those mails & whispers from gold sellers in Warcraft? Spam.
Granted professional users will go with what will best fit their needs, but the average consumer is going to go with the OS and software that has the most exposure.
But why should it always be about the "average consumer"? When talking about video and graphics applications, we are almost by definition not talking about average consumers. Linux would gain marketshare faster by appealing to specialists who spend a lot on commercial software, and know how to use a computer. The "average consumer" wouldn't see that much value to a free OS, because they get Windows "for free" and don't spend thousands on software like professionals do.
Anyway, even for the average consumer, Linux apps usually are missing a lot - maybe not in "features" - but one of the biggest issues is a lack of consistent and well-thought-out user interfaces.
And if you continually disparage F/OSS offerrings, you are basically advertising for the (mainstream) commercial versions. Additionally, this helps to keep commercial userbases high and stifles exposure of F/OSS applications, which in turn slows development and improvement on said F/OSS applications.
Huh? I'm not disparaging anything. I'm just being honest. A computer for me is a tool, not a philosophy. Do you think we should lie about software in order to "advertise" FOSS software? There is lots of good commercial software - why should I discourage their use? They deserve to have "high userbases" when they do the job well, and programmers put lots of effort into them.
When FOSS software in other areas gets as good as Firefox or Apache, then I'll happily advocate it. But why should I encourage the use of inferior tools, just because they are FOSS? That could severely damage my reputation.
In essence, by complaining about the lack of specific functionality in F/OSS, you are helping to keep that functionality out of F/OSS.
What a load of crap! That just defies logic. So, we should just ignore the elephant in the room and hope nobody else notices?
It really doesn't make any sense. How am I preventing a developer from adding these features to FOSS. I really doubt that some programmer is going to read my post and say; "Well, I was going to develop a great FOSS video editing application, but because dangitman on slashdot complained about the lack of FOSS video editing applications, now I'm not going to do that, and go to Las Vegas instead." Doesn't make any sense.
Re:Something doesn't add up...
on
Water From Wind
·
· Score: 1
A few trees on a large lawn during a draught will cause the grass under the trees to brown first because the trees are using up the water.
This is known as a "good thing." Grass is pretty pointless. Why would you want it to live, when that water could be going to a tree, with much longer-term benefits?
Paste the phone number on the screen of a telethon, have the operators key in the high bid onto the big board behind the MC, and you have a system that can take bids just like ebay.
But what if an operator is slow, or doesn't understand what the person is saying, and has to get them to repeat it? It introduces a massive factor of human error that barely exists with eBay.
But just one is enough to prove that you do not have the introspection necessary to have a debate with. When you enter into a debate with the assumption that you are right 100% of the time and everyone else is stupider than you
Wow, this is totally off the wall. Where did I imply that everyone is stupider than I am? Where did I show that I lack introspection?
I'm sure that, even though the example I gave would work fine
Except that it wouldn't work fine. How could it possibly work when someone calls with 1 or 2 second left on the clock, and still have the bid placed?
Not only does linux have thousands of applications, I would venture to say that you have never used Amarok, Gimp or a dozen other programs that outstip any comercial equivelent.
Well, you must be clinically insane. GIMP outstrips any commercial equivalent?? It doesn't even come close to Photoshop. It's not even in the same category. I think you might be the troll here. The fact is that while there are plenty of applications for Linux, most of them are far less functional than the best commercial software. It would be nice if this wasn't true, but it is. For example, show me where you can get a Linux video editing application that even comes close to commercial counterparts like Final Cut Pro or Avid.
Do you have any evidence for that? You claim that you would have bid more if you had been able to "answer" a bid by another user. That would make the buying price higher. Therefore, sniping keeps selling prices lower. Lower prices attract buyers. If all the prices went up, then why would customers stay, if there were no bargains to be had?
If someone bid higher than you, then why didn't you bid your maximum? When two maximum bids are the same, the buyer with the earlier bid would win. So, if the sniper was not willing to pay more than you, you would win by putting your maximum bid in first.
There's a reason live auctioneers give you a three count before they swing the gavel.
That's because there's no fixed time for the finish of the auction.
Slashdot Mirror
The PC is more flexible than a Mac? Hmmmm... Macs can run Windows, Linux, and everything else that PCs run, plus MacOS. Meanwhile, there's a whole world of great Mac-only software out there, that standard PCs can't run. So, which platform is really more flexible?
No, it starts with A and ends with pple. The Xerox systems did not have pull-down menus.
You don't need to know about a topic to be a good moderator. For example, it's pretty easy to spot abusive posts like trolls, even if you know nothing of the discussion's subject. Likewise, it's also fairly easy to mod people up to counter unfair moderation - like if they are modded troll just for expressing an unpopular or controversial opinion, and didn't submit an abusive post.
Jon Stewart should have interviewed Gates witha stormtrooper helmet on. When Gates asks "Why are you wearing a stormtrooper helmet, John?" Stewart replies "I'm not wearing a helmet... dark master."
The media calls Bill Gates a genius or a whiz-kid all the time. Among middle-America, Bill Gates' name is often used as being synonymous with being a technical genius or brilliant hacker.
Not necessarily. It would depend on if they were bragging, or just extolling virtues. Gates is clearly over the line into bragging. I'd be fine about a similar interview with Jobs or Torvalds being described as "bragging."
And the "Totally Demolishes Pathetic Ads" headline you made up seems really out of place. I don't think I've ever seen a slashdot headline like that.
.0001 percent of the infected machines actually running Vista. Not that I work for BG's PR team, just a valid point.How is it a valid point? Gates said "The Windows machine," not "The Vista machine."
Like me, for example? 10.0 and 10.1 were a little sluggish, but not too bad. But the reason I was still running OS9 was application support. By the time 10.2 and 10.3 came around, my G4 was so much nicer to use on OS X rather than OS 9. With 10.4 it flies. No hardware upgrades.
Did you even bother to read anything about this exploit, or was it too dark to read with your nose up Billy's ass?
Vista includes built-in perspiration capabilities, so I'm sure he can overcome that hurdle.
?aaaaaaaaaaammaaaaarruuutuuuF lecnac yeht did yhW
Speaking of Hodgeman and sympathy, did you see Gates on The Daily Show? The instant the interview was over, Gates did an about-face and high-tailed it out of there. Didn't even sit down and do the faux-chat thing during the transition to the commercial break. The guy couldn't generate sympathy if he tried, he has no social graces at all. He didn't even use any humor during the interview - he spoke like it was a advertisement for laundry detergent, not an interview with Jon Stewart.
And? Good craftspeople are often fanatical about their tools, and very devoted. Mac fans aren't Mac fans because it's shiny - they are fans because Macs are great tools. great tools truly make life a breeze. What's not to love? Quality tools are highly satisfying.
The problem with Windows is that it is a very poor tool, and frequently gets in the way of doing the job.
You shouldn't call people retards when you can barely string an English sentence together. "Let he who casts the first stone be without sin"
I doubt it. I'd say it's due to the iPod, which means that you are actually allowed to (shock! horror!) use Apple products today.
Why do you have to "redesign processes" or replace hardware to use your car less, and walk more? Why do you need to purchase anything to switch off lights in your house, or use the air-conditioning or heating less?
Why would it cost more? It actually costs LESS to use less energy. It's the economically rational thing to do. Why would we continue to waste energy, when it's so expensive and wasteful to do so?
That would be incorrect. After 9/11, everybody wanted to go after Osama bin Laden. Remember Afghanistan? Most people don't seem to. It was definitely the neoconservatives who pulled the bait-and-switch of suggesting Iraq as a target. They used political manipulation to equate Iraq with Osama, and make anyone who disagreed with war on Iraq an unpatriotic traitor. There were plenty of Democrats who were too weak, and yielded to this manipulation, in the name of popularity. But none of them wer actively suggesting we go into Iraq. They just passively went along with Republican plans. Do you have any evidence of these Democrats suggesting Iraq (rather than Afghanistan) as a target before the Republicans began their campaign to convince people of WMDs with doctored intelligence?
That delicious ham in a can? Spam.
But why should it always be about the "average consumer"? When talking about video and graphics applications, we are almost by definition not talking about average consumers. Linux would gain marketshare faster by appealing to specialists who spend a lot on commercial software, and know how to use a computer. The "average consumer" wouldn't see that much value to a free OS, because they get Windows "for free" and don't spend thousands on software like professionals do.
Anyway, even for the average consumer, Linux apps usually are missing a lot - maybe not in "features" - but one of the biggest issues is a lack of consistent and well-thought-out user interfaces.
And if you continually disparage F/OSS offerrings, you are basically advertising for the (mainstream) commercial versions. Additionally, this helps to keep commercial userbases high and stifles exposure of F/OSS applications, which in turn slows development and improvement on said F/OSS applications.Huh? I'm not disparaging anything. I'm just being honest. A computer for me is a tool, not a philosophy. Do you think we should lie about software in order to "advertise" FOSS software? There is lots of good commercial software - why should I discourage their use? They deserve to have "high userbases" when they do the job well, and programmers put lots of effort into them.
When FOSS software in other areas gets as good as Firefox or Apache, then I'll happily advocate it. But why should I encourage the use of inferior tools, just because they are FOSS? That could severely damage my reputation.
In essence, by complaining about the lack of specific functionality in F/OSS, you are helping to keep that functionality out of F/OSS.What a load of crap! That just defies logic. So, we should just ignore the elephant in the room and hope nobody else notices?
It really doesn't make any sense. How am I preventing a developer from adding these features to FOSS. I really doubt that some programmer is going to read my post and say; "Well, I was going to develop a great FOSS video editing application, but because dangitman on slashdot complained about the lack of FOSS video editing applications, now I'm not going to do that, and go to Las Vegas instead." Doesn't make any sense.
This is known as a "good thing." Grass is pretty pointless. Why would you want it to live, when that water could be going to a tree, with much longer-term benefits?
... Hello.
But what if an operator is slow, or doesn't understand what the person is saying, and has to get them to repeat it? It introduces a massive factor of human error that barely exists with eBay.
But just one is enough to prove that you do not have the introspection necessary to have a debate with. When you enter into a debate with the assumption that you are right 100% of the time and everyone else is stupider than youWow, this is totally off the wall. Where did I imply that everyone is stupider than I am? Where did I show that I lack introspection?
I'm sure that, even though the example I gave would work fineExcept that it wouldn't work fine. How could it possibly work when someone calls with 1 or 2 second left on the clock, and still have the bid placed?
Well, you must be clinically insane. GIMP outstrips any commercial equivalent?? It doesn't even come close to Photoshop. It's not even in the same category. I think you might be the troll here. The fact is that while there are plenty of applications for Linux, most of them are far less functional than the best commercial software. It would be nice if this wasn't true, but it is. For example, show me where you can get a Linux video editing application that even comes close to commercial counterparts like Final Cut Pro or Avid.
Do you have any evidence for that? You claim that you would have bid more if you had been able to "answer" a bid by another user. That would make the buying price higher. Therefore, sniping keeps selling prices lower. Lower prices attract buyers. If all the prices went up, then why would customers stay, if there were no bargains to be had?
If someone bid higher than you, then why didn't you bid your maximum? When two maximum bids are the same, the buyer with the earlier bid would win. So, if the sniper was not willing to pay more than you, you would win by putting your maximum bid in first.
There's a reason live auctioneers give you a three count before they swing the gavel.That's because there's no fixed time for the finish of the auction.