Try dvddecrypter running on wine if the above options don't work for you. It can rip to an iso file that most players can play directly.
Your other option is to try looking around at doom9.org and asking on their forums if you can't find what you're looking for.
But he wants a single file as output though so dvdshrink won't work.
That's not true. By default dvdshrink creates the video_ts and audio_ts folders, but if you select the option, you can choose an iso image as the backup target. Pretty much every media player on Linux can now play a DVD iso image directly. Dvdshrink running on Wine works pretty well, though it crashes after it's done and the previews don't always work very well. The output is much higher quality than what K9copy will do last I checked though, so so far that's what I use for the unencrypted DVDs that I watch. It doesn't do decryption, so I suppose you'd have to get something like dvddecrypter first if you had an encrypted DVD. But I don't bother to watch those.:)
Unfortunately while handbrake looks like a great program to rip and encode to various containers, it doesn't give an iso image as an output option, so if I want to back up a DVD to another physical disk that I can play in my DVD player, that doesn't seem to be an (easy at least) option.
Yes, and that's rather unfortunate that you can't walk into a store anymore and see a fair comparison of Linux with a fair price and options. And of course you're probably right about the reasons for it.
But you certainly can still get them online, and at Dell at least, the Ubuntu option is fairly prominent. Just click the Home tab and Ubuntu Linux is an option on the left. Netbooks are the only computers that return in the home user search result, but that is fairly prominent. Of course, they still "recommend" Vista. Unfortunately they don't have any option for a netbook that can upgrade the memory and the battery or I'd buy one from them. Of the three or so netbooks that claim really high battery capacity, say 9+ hrs, none so far have a linux option. Just proves your point even more.
There is no reason the licence needs to be in 'legalese' instead of plain english. Just be careful that there are no loopholes in interpretation.
That's what legalese is: removing the loopholes in interpretation from plain English when it is interpreted by the law. Well that and an agreed upon lexicon that the courts and other lawyers have agreed on.
ahh yes, editing out the parts where he has very strong points and you have no answers. Yes, he could be less caustic about it, but he has very good evidence to back up his assertions.
HTML5 can't do anything we talked about above, so it's not a good solution to these problems.
But it would be able to if your company didn't actively try to subvert it the way it subverts other standards it can't control and instead contributed to HTML5. You asked for a better solution and were given one. Contributing to HTML5 development would be better for everyone and less wasted time and effort for your employer. The only thing your employer wouldn't gain is lock in, so just admit that is your primary goal.
After all your and your company's claims of cross platform compatibility the 1.0 announcement here doesn't matter much since it doesn't actually do anything. It doesn't work. Netflix can't be viewed and neither can other demos.
Not that I think I'd install it because I don't want to support the type of bad corporate citizenship that AKAImBatman has pointed out above as evidence that your company will continue the same trend with this effort, but just saying. It does refute your claims that your company actually cares about making it cross platform and makes it more likely that you/they just want to make it look like it is.
If I had em right now you'd get em, but someone should mod you up.
I think you're right about it taking an ARM product to really bring the prices down. A number of articles have been claiming people are working on them but we'll see. I'm sure you're right about the Wintel cohort putting all their collective muscle into stopping anything like that from happening though. It would carve into both of their margins if someone could make a decently functional product that used less battery, lasted longer, was lighter, and was cheaper.
Just buy a cheap laptop when they are offered as loss leaders from the big consumer electronic stores. If you stalk the sale flyers at best buy, office max, office depot, etc, you can often find regular laptops for $350 or $400. I've seen $300 I think. But you may find you get what you pay for, low specs, cheap disks, poor build quality, etc. That sounds like it may fit your needs though.
I mean everybody has their fanboys, but what is up with all the Windows astroturfing lately? Not just random blogs here and there, but on slashdot, the last bastion of journalistic integrity and safety from MS shills. (for the sarcasm impaired, yeah, it's in there.)
Yes, instead of giving people positive reinforcement for making environmentally sound choices that will have positive benefits even after the global warming pseudo-science is long forgotten, lets just raise taxes.
Well a pollution tax is a good potential option as well. As a staunch fiscal conservative, I don't agree with many taxes, but pollution taxes can be used like a cap and trade system to bring externalities back into a market.
What can be done in theory is replace other taxes with a pollution tax. That way the non polluting behavior is taxed less and the polluting behavior is taxed more. Of course the cynical will note that a new tax will not really ever replace anything for long, it will just become additional as the other tax is raised again. I suppose that still levels the playing field a little.
Also the GP post's characterization of cap and trade as "spectacularly susceptable" to rent seeking is not only a mischaracterization of what the linked source said, but it's not really a reliable source to start with.
What cap and trade systems are is a way to allow markets to most effectively allocate the costs of and pollution caps or reductions. If the government is going to mandate a pollution reduction, it would cost some firms so much they would go out of business. While that is ok to some people, it is not ok to most, and especially not to those whose jobs are at that company. But they may be able to buy pollution or carbon credits from another company that can more easily reduce their pollution. That way the overall desired reduction or cap (lack of increase) in pollution is achieved with the least cost. In other words, if no cap and trade system is implemented and no pollution reductions are required it's status quo, but if caps or reductions are desired a cap and trade system is the most efficient way to go.
The lack of understanding of cap and trade systems by people that claim to be environmentalists is really astounding to me. I'm not disparaging you because you are not one of those claiming to be in the know. They really are however one of the most brilliant solutions to pollution. It's not a cap and trade system that allows pollution, it's whatever targets are set for the caps or reductions that either allows people to continue polluting or forces them to reduce.
A previous article about this on p2pnet said that the Berkman center at the Harvard Law School intends to pay for rebroadcasting the footage and intends to do so under a creative commons non commercial license. They say details are still being worked out. It's possible CC non commercial might not allow posting to youtube, but I'm no lawyer.
It used to be really bad I agree, and so would everyone else. But it has recently gotten much better. It was just never seen as a high enough priority given the shoestring budgets and other fires that needed to be put out.
Now however it gives reasonable suggestions for misspellings and has better accuracy.
That's basically the gist of the article if you read it. The feeling is the only people that are going to get a lot out of a large lecture style class are the ones that would have learned the material anyway. It's hard to tell how well researched the article is and how much of what they are talking about is actually coming from what MIT is doing, but the phrasing it uses such as active, student centered learning (the opposite on the spectrum from sit in a lecture hall and shut up) is the basics behind the educational theory of constructivism
The article makes it sound all rosy, but there is a huge amount of debate right now in how far to take it and where the sweet spot is. The debate is particularly raging for mathematics in the US. The reform mathematics curricula are essentially based on constructivist theories.
I know no one reads TFA but it doesn't actually mention anything about requiring Linux. That was your wonderful submitter that seems to have gotten that part wrong. TFA isn't even very clear if the requirement is even to change the server OS or just what apps are installed on it.
All that aside, I'm trying to be optimistic that 7 will be what Vista promised to be.
Except it won't be. None of the features that were promised to be in Vista but were dropped to keep from sliding the release even further will be in Windows 7. As far as I can tell, there aren't really any new important features in Windows 7. It's a new OS in name only (and bit of spit polish and debugging) and unfortunately that might just be enough.
And that's on top of Vista having few new important features. They did of course manage to cram in all the protected path DRM crap. Guess we know their priorities.
The beginning of your comment was on track for an insightful mod, then you ended your comments about how to judge propaganda with a link about SICK BABIES. Dear god, think about the children man, did you not see the irony in that?
Pandora did not have a problem filling orders
on
Ubuntu Ports To ARM
·
· Score: 1
If you watched the ordering a day after the initial sellout (see the October 2nd news on the Pandora site), they extended the purchasing period for a couple more days telling buyers that whatever higher number was ordered over the next few days would be the number they would order from their supplier. So as long as people didn't give up in the first hours, which unfortunately since everybody seems to remark that they sold out and people got stiffed it seems people did, then people that knew and wanted them were able to order.
Presumably it will be the same way for the next batch. If you want them, order it and I imaging they'll figure out how to fill your order.
Even if Lexmarks suck they are ubiquitous and you may say they barely have win drivers but the fact is they do work while I had to go out and by a new printer to use with Linux. I justified it by getting more out of the deal and the other printer was wearing out anyway. Basically all printers in the cheap category are a problem except a few HP printers. And guess what lots of people want to buy and what they have lots of at the local stores. I realize a laser printer with PS built in is a better printer in some ways, but in many cases I don't see the higher quality so why should I spend so many times more. And the fact is the inkjet is better for color images. Even HP printers aren't all fully supported and HP contributed a great printer driver and continues to update it for many new models. As far as multifunctions went there were only a few that were fully supported out of the many on the shelves. I don't think any of the lower end Brother printers are supported. In other words not many are on the lower end.
You've hit the point where I'm not sure Greg Kroah-Hartman is in touch with reality. Now I very much value his efforts and this doesn't change that, but if you RTFA (I know, I know) he says that every type of device is supported and there are only two classes of devices that are problems. He mentions webcams and wireless. He says webcam suport has recently been greatly improved and about wireless: About a year ago wireless wasn't doing so well. We got a bunch of people working on that now and everything is supported now. The one hold-out is Broadcom but even they have Linux drivers, they're just closed source.
That would be major news to me. Where are these Broadcom drivers? And of course that doesn't fit with the "everything works now" that he is saying. Specifically the BCM4328 isn't usable without ndiswrapper.
So back to the main point, he misses the major class of devices that aren't well supported on Linux: printers. I just spent a lot of time researching and finally settled on an HP Officejet J4580 that I could go buy at any of the major stores and it is perfectly supported in the just released Linux distributions such as Ubuntu Intrepid. And that's all the functions as it is a multifunction. But you certainly cannot just buy any printer out there and have it be supported. I did hours of research to find the ones that are and that met my needs and are available in stores.
So again I greatly appreciate the work he and other driver developers do, but it does no one any good and probably damages Linux to act as if it is something it's not. It's better to be realistic and work from there.
Indeed it's been a long time since that wasn't the case. Since the 2.6 Kernel came out basically. Here's the lkml thread on it. http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/6/29/11 and http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/7/7/326 are the two posts. The latter is more informative, the former is definitive and clearly shows Andrew Morton is the one saying that part too. This is from 2005 folks. Someone notify the submitter. That is of course unless you don't trust Andrew Morton to know what he is talking about. And just because this comes up every once in a while, googling for linux swap file performance finds that post easily.
Well I actually like the new wallpaper and I'm not one of the people that is bothered by the brown theme. After all I'm never really looking at my desktop background since I have some application or another open if I'm using the computer.
But someone made the comment that the new wallpaper looks like poo smeared on a cave wall, and I can't help but find that funnily appropriate especially considering all the poop jokes about the Ubuntu color scheme.
Just add the deb and deb-src lines from the top of that page to/etc/apt/source.list
Then do a sudo aptitude update or whatever your preferred package manager is and then 3.0 will be available for install through your package manager. I realize it's not just there and easy for the taking, but the above isn't too hard if you want 3.0 now. In fact it works for Hardy too if you change the source.list entries appropriately.
Not sure why I'm replying because it's really obvious from your writing why you have so much difficulty on Wikipedia. It's your methods, not everybody else. It's really not very hard to be productive on Wikipedia and not get blocked even on the most controversial topics, you just have to be able to behave.
This is impossible when you have an organized "consensus" of people who coordinate their efforts to keep certain reliable sources that don't fit their particular bias out.
If this happens most likely your sources simply aren't reliable like you think they are. Or you need to involve some other expert editors in the subject that are known not to have an axe to grind so that the reliability of the sources can be made known. I am not alone among editors in being very firm that reliable sources quoted accurately trump everything. There's lots of us out there like that. So if you bring the source up for review and still can't demonstrate it's reliability, it's not.
Excuse me? Admins can quite easily, in sequence, (a) reverse an edit and (b) block or even ban whoever made the edit.
Well since this is considered a very serious offense, simply report this if it happens in calm language and the admin's action will be reviewed. If it was actually just to try to keep an article they way they want it the block will be reversed and the admin can lose their admin bit. That happened here. And even in that case it wasn't as draconian as you make it out and it's certainly not widespread. If it were, there would be a lot more desysopped admins.
Thanks to Wikipedia policy on "wheel warring", no sane admin who wants to stay an admin will ever actually reverse the action of another
The policy says they shouldn't be reversed without discussion, not that they shouldn't be reversed. They are in fact reversed regularly after review as can be seen in all of the admin logs.
But clearly you're already decided in your opinion and you don't want facts to get in the way of that. I've been around long enough to realize that if someone is repeatedly having trouble navigating the Wikipedia system without getting blocked it's their behavior that is the problem, not the system. Again it's simply not that hard to behave.
when many schools wont allow research to be done on wikipedia itself which has the authority of the sources itself to back it
Actually, Wikipedia has:
- Cherry-picked sources
- Quotations taken out of context
- Redundantly sourced crap (sources that turn out later to have themselves been sourced from... wikipedia).
Ok, so fix that with better sources, that's how it's supposed to work. Nobody said it was perfect.
- NO way to fix any of these if an administrator or "consensus" of kooks sets up shop on a particular page and decides to edit-war en masse and proclaim that real, authoritative sources counter to their POV are "not reliable."
Well it's really easy to refute this since these types of things get fixed all the time. Certainly one admin cannot proclaim a source isn't good enough and keep it out and you know that, but you're choosing to distort the situation. If one admin acts against the consensus then others can easily come in and reverse that admin. Not that that needs to happen much since there isn't much that admins can do to enforce certain content, but admins do reverse others regularly, so your point has no teeth to it. Now a consensus of editors can decide that a source is not reliable and that's how it should work. If you're really finding so many situations where everyone else thinks your sources aren't reliable, then the problem becomes increasingly unlikely to be with everyone else.
The rest of your post is pretty amusing especially the claim of the user being an administrator. For one he wasn't, for another, what sudden authority would that give him that every other administrator you claim is destroying the shop isn't worthy of? What's most amusing is that poorly thought out posts like this get modded up on Slashdot.
What's funny about this is that the Microsoft employee is touting getting one new container in testing down to what Google's current running average is. If you think about what an average means (that there are some higher and some lower than the average) then MS's accomplishemnt doesn't mean much. The article sort of mentions this noting that Google has one at 1.13 and that its numbers are for working installations, not just testing numbers like MS.
On the other hand I fully agree with the other comments that PUE is only a small part of the equation. It's the amount of useful work per electrical watt expended that is much more important. But at least when the focus is on lower power data centers, the rest of the problem is being worked on too.
Slashdot Mirror
Try dvddecrypter running on wine if the above options don't work for you. It can rip to an iso file that most players can play directly. Your other option is to try looking around at doom9.org and asking on their forums if you can't find what you're looking for.
But he wants a single file as output though so dvdshrink won't work.
That's not true. By default dvdshrink creates the video_ts and audio_ts folders, but if you select the option, you can choose an iso image as the backup target. Pretty much every media player on Linux can now play a DVD iso image directly. Dvdshrink running on Wine works pretty well, though it crashes after it's done and the previews don't always work very well. The output is much higher quality than what K9copy will do last I checked though, so so far that's what I use for the unencrypted DVDs that I watch. It doesn't do decryption, so I suppose you'd have to get something like dvddecrypter first if you had an encrypted DVD. But I don't bother to watch those. :)
Unfortunately while handbrake looks like a great program to rip and encode to various containers, it doesn't give an iso image as an output option, so if I want to back up a DVD to another physical disk that I can play in my DVD player, that doesn't seem to be an (easy at least) option.
But you certainly can still get them online, and at Dell at least, the Ubuntu option is fairly prominent. Just click the Home tab and Ubuntu Linux is an option on the left. Netbooks are the only computers that return in the home user search result, but that is fairly prominent. Of course, they still "recommend" Vista. Unfortunately they don't have any option for a netbook that can upgrade the memory and the battery or I'd buy one from them. Of the three or so netbooks that claim really high battery capacity, say 9+ hrs, none so far have a linux option. Just proves your point even more.
There is no reason the licence needs to be in 'legalese' instead of plain english. Just be careful that there are no loopholes in interpretation.
That's what legalese is: removing the loopholes in interpretation from plain English when it is interpreted by the law. Well that and an agreed upon lexicon that the courts and other lawyers have agreed on.
ahh yes, editing out the parts where he has very strong points and you have no answers. Yes, he could be less caustic about it, but he has very good evidence to back up his assertions.
HTML5 can't do anything we talked about above, so it's not a good solution to these problems.
But it would be able to if your company didn't actively try to subvert it the way it subverts other standards it can't control and instead contributed to HTML5. You asked for a better solution and were given one. Contributing to HTML5 development would be better for everyone and less wasted time and effort for your employer. The only thing your employer wouldn't gain is lock in, so just admit that is your primary goal.
After all your and your company's claims of cross platform compatibility the 1.0 announcement here doesn't matter much since it doesn't actually do anything. It doesn't work. Netflix can't be viewed and neither can other demos.
Not that I think I'd install it because I don't want to support the type of bad corporate citizenship that AKAImBatman has pointed out above as evidence that your company will continue the same trend with this effort, but just saying. It does refute your claims that your company actually cares about making it cross platform and makes it more likely that you/they just want to make it look like it is.
I think you're right about it taking an ARM product to really bring the prices down. A number of articles have been claiming people are working on them but we'll see. I'm sure you're right about the Wintel cohort putting all their collective muscle into stopping anything like that from happening though. It would carve into both of their margins if someone could make a decently functional product that used less battery, lasted longer, was lighter, and was cheaper.
Just buy a cheap laptop when they are offered as loss leaders from the big consumer electronic stores. If you stalk the sale flyers at best buy, office max, office depot, etc, you can often find regular laptops for $350 or $400. I've seen $300 I think. But you may find you get what you pay for, low specs, cheap disks, poor build quality, etc. That sounds like it may fit your needs though.
I mean everybody has their fanboys, but what is up with all the Windows astroturfing lately? Not just random blogs here and there, but on slashdot, the last bastion of journalistic integrity and safety from MS shills. (for the sarcasm impaired, yeah, it's in there.)
Yes, instead of giving people positive reinforcement for making environmentally sound choices that will have positive benefits even after the global warming pseudo-science is long forgotten, lets just raise taxes.
Well a pollution tax is a good potential option as well. As a staunch fiscal conservative, I don't agree with many taxes, but pollution taxes can be used like a cap and trade system to bring externalities back into a market.
What can be done in theory is replace other taxes with a pollution tax. That way the non polluting behavior is taxed less and the polluting behavior is taxed more. Of course the cynical will note that a new tax will not really ever replace anything for long, it will just become additional as the other tax is raised again. I suppose that still levels the playing field a little.
Also the GP post's characterization of cap and trade as "spectacularly susceptable" to rent seeking is not only a mischaracterization of what the linked source said, but it's not really a reliable source to start with.
What cap and trade systems are is a way to allow markets to most effectively allocate the costs of and pollution caps or reductions. If the government is going to mandate a pollution reduction, it would cost some firms so much they would go out of business. While that is ok to some people, it is not ok to most, and especially not to those whose jobs are at that company. But they may be able to buy pollution or carbon credits from another company that can more easily reduce their pollution. That way the overall desired reduction or cap (lack of increase) in pollution is achieved with the least cost. In other words, if no cap and trade system is implemented and no pollution reductions are required it's status quo, but if caps or reductions are desired a cap and trade system is the most efficient way to go.
The lack of understanding of cap and trade systems by people that claim to be environmentalists is really astounding to me. I'm not disparaging you because you are not one of those claiming to be in the know. They really are however one of the most brilliant solutions to pollution. It's not a cap and trade system that allows pollution, it's whatever targets are set for the caps or reductions that either allows people to continue polluting or forces them to reduce.
A previous article about this on p2pnet said that the Berkman center at the Harvard Law School intends to pay for rebroadcasting the footage and intends to do so under a creative commons non commercial license. They say details are still being worked out. It's possible CC non commercial might not allow posting to youtube, but I'm no lawyer.
It used to be really bad I agree, and so would everyone else. But it has recently gotten much better. It was just never seen as a high enough priority given the shoestring budgets and other fires that needed to be put out.
Now however it gives reasonable suggestions for misspellings and has better accuracy.
That's basically the gist of the article if you read it. The feeling is the only people that are going to get a lot out of a large lecture style class are the ones that would have learned the material anyway. It's hard to tell how well researched the article is and how much of what they are talking about is actually coming from what MIT is doing, but the phrasing it uses such as active, student centered learning (the opposite on the spectrum from sit in a lecture hall and shut up) is the basics behind the educational theory of constructivism
The article makes it sound all rosy, but there is a huge amount of debate right now in how far to take it and where the sweet spot is. The debate is particularly raging for mathematics in the US. The reform mathematics curricula are essentially based on constructivist theories.
I know no one reads TFA but it doesn't actually mention anything about requiring Linux. That was your wonderful submitter that seems to have gotten that part wrong. TFA isn't even very clear if the requirement is even to change the server OS or just what apps are installed on it.
All that aside, I'm trying to be optimistic that 7 will be what Vista promised to be.
Except it won't be. None of the features that were promised to be in Vista but were dropped to keep from sliding the release even further will be in Windows 7. As far as I can tell, there aren't really any new important features in Windows 7. It's a new OS in name only (and bit of spit polish and debugging) and unfortunately that might just be enough.
And that's on top of Vista having few new important features. They did of course manage to cram in all the protected path DRM crap. Guess we know their priorities.
The beginning of your comment was on track for an insightful mod, then you ended your comments about how to judge propaganda with a link about SICK BABIES. Dear god, think about the children man, did you not see the irony in that?
If you watched the ordering a day after the initial sellout (see the October 2nd news on the Pandora site), they extended the purchasing period for a couple more days telling buyers that whatever higher number was ordered over the next few days would be the number they would order from their supplier. So as long as people didn't give up in the first hours, which unfortunately since everybody seems to remark that they sold out and people got stiffed it seems people did, then people that knew and wanted them were able to order.
Presumably it will be the same way for the next batch. If you want them, order it and I imaging they'll figure out how to fill your order.
Even if Lexmarks suck they are ubiquitous and you may say they barely have win drivers but the fact is they do work while I had to go out and by a new printer to use with Linux. I justified it by getting more out of the deal and the other printer was wearing out anyway. Basically all printers in the cheap category are a problem except a few HP printers. And guess what lots of people want to buy and what they have lots of at the local stores. I realize a laser printer with PS built in is a better printer in some ways, but in many cases I don't see the higher quality so why should I spend so many times more. And the fact is the inkjet is better for color images. Even HP printers aren't all fully supported and HP contributed a great printer driver and continues to update it for many new models. As far as multifunctions went there were only a few that were fully supported out of the many on the shelves. I don't think any of the lower end Brother printers are supported. In other words not many are on the lower end.
You've hit the point where I'm not sure Greg Kroah-Hartman is in touch with reality. Now I very much value his efforts and this doesn't change that, but if you RTFA (I know, I know) he says that every type of device is supported and there are only two classes of devices that are problems. He mentions webcams and wireless. He says webcam suport has recently been greatly improved and about wireless: About a year ago wireless wasn't doing so well. We got a bunch of people working on that now and everything is supported now. The one hold-out is Broadcom but even they have Linux drivers, they're just closed source.
That would be major news to me. Where are these Broadcom drivers? And of course that doesn't fit with the "everything works now" that he is saying. Specifically the BCM4328 isn't usable without ndiswrapper.
So back to the main point, he misses the major class of devices that aren't well supported on Linux: printers. I just spent a lot of time researching and finally settled on an HP Officejet J4580 that I could go buy at any of the major stores and it is perfectly supported in the just released Linux distributions such as Ubuntu Intrepid. And that's all the functions as it is a multifunction. But you certainly cannot just buy any printer out there and have it be supported. I did hours of research to find the ones that are and that met my needs and are available in stores.
So again I greatly appreciate the work he and other driver developers do, but it does no one any good and probably damages Linux to act as if it is something it's not. It's better to be realistic and work from there.
Indeed it's been a long time since that wasn't the case. Since the 2.6 Kernel came out basically. Here's the lkml thread on it. http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/6/29/11 and http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/7/7/326 are the two posts. The latter is more informative, the former is definitive and clearly shows Andrew Morton is the one saying that part too. This is from 2005 folks. Someone notify the submitter. That is of course unless you don't trust Andrew Morton to know what he is talking about. And just because this comes up every once in a while, googling for linux swap file performance finds that post easily.
Well I actually like the new wallpaper and I'm not one of the people that is bothered by the brown theme. After all I'm never really looking at my desktop background since I have some application or another open if I'm using the computer.
But someone made the comment that the new wallpaper looks like poo smeared on a cave wall, and I can't help but find that funnily appropriate especially considering all the poop jokes about the Ubuntu color scheme.
As others mentioned it will be in backports though and if you're impatient, you can get it right away by adding the PPA: https://launchpad.net/~openoffice-pkgs/+archive
Just add the deb and deb-src lines from the top of that page to /etc/apt/source.list
Then do a sudo aptitude update or whatever your preferred package manager is and then 3.0 will be available for install through your package manager. I realize it's not just there and easy for the taking, but the above isn't too hard if you want 3.0 now. In fact it works for Hardy too if you change the source.list entries appropriately.
Not sure why I'm replying because it's really obvious from your writing why you have so much difficulty on Wikipedia. It's your methods, not everybody else. It's really not very hard to be productive on Wikipedia and not get blocked even on the most controversial topics, you just have to be able to behave.
This is impossible when you have an organized "consensus" of people who coordinate their efforts to keep certain reliable sources that don't fit their particular bias out.
If this happens most likely your sources simply aren't reliable like you think they are. Or you need to involve some other expert editors in the subject that are known not to have an axe to grind so that the reliability of the sources can be made known. I am not alone among editors in being very firm that reliable sources quoted accurately trump everything. There's lots of us out there like that. So if you bring the source up for review and still can't demonstrate it's reliability, it's not.
Excuse me? Admins can quite easily, in sequence, (a) reverse an edit and (b) block or even ban whoever made the edit.
Well since this is considered a very serious offense, simply report this if it happens in calm language and the admin's action will be reviewed. If it was actually just to try to keep an article they way they want it the block will be reversed and the admin can lose their admin bit. That happened here. And even in that case it wasn't as draconian as you make it out and it's certainly not widespread. If it were, there would be a lot more desysopped admins.
Thanks to Wikipedia policy on "wheel warring", no sane admin who wants to stay an admin will ever actually reverse the action of another
The policy says they shouldn't be reversed without discussion, not that they shouldn't be reversed. They are in fact reversed regularly after review as can be seen in all of the admin logs.
But clearly you're already decided in your opinion and you don't want facts to get in the way of that. I've been around long enough to realize that if someone is repeatedly having trouble navigating the Wikipedia system without getting blocked it's their behavior that is the problem, not the system. Again it's simply not that hard to behave.
when many schools wont allow research to be done on wikipedia itself which has the authority of the sources itself to back it
Actually, Wikipedia has: - Cherry-picked sources - Quotations taken out of context - Redundantly sourced crap (sources that turn out later to have themselves been sourced from... wikipedia).
Ok, so fix that with better sources, that's how it's supposed to work. Nobody said it was perfect.
- NO way to fix any of these if an administrator or "consensus" of kooks sets up shop on a particular page and decides to edit-war en masse and proclaim that real, authoritative sources counter to their POV are "not reliable."
Well it's really easy to refute this since these types of things get fixed all the time. Certainly one admin cannot proclaim a source isn't good enough and keep it out and you know that, but you're choosing to distort the situation. If one admin acts against the consensus then others can easily come in and reverse that admin. Not that that needs to happen much since there isn't much that admins can do to enforce certain content, but admins do reverse others regularly, so your point has no teeth to it. Now a consensus of editors can decide that a source is not reliable and that's how it should work. If you're really finding so many situations where everyone else thinks your sources aren't reliable, then the problem becomes increasingly unlikely to be with everyone else.
The rest of your post is pretty amusing especially the claim of the user being an administrator. For one he wasn't, for another, what sudden authority would that give him that every other administrator you claim is destroying the shop isn't worthy of? What's most amusing is that poorly thought out posts like this get modded up on Slashdot.
What's funny about this is that the Microsoft employee is touting getting one new container in testing down to what Google's current running average is. If you think about what an average means (that there are some higher and some lower than the average) then MS's accomplishemnt doesn't mean much. The article sort of mentions this noting that Google has one at 1.13 and that its numbers are for working installations, not just testing numbers like MS.
On the other hand I fully agree with the other comments that PUE is only a small part of the equation. It's the amount of useful work per electrical watt expended that is much more important. But at least when the focus is on lower power data centers, the rest of the problem is being worked on too.