Sorry for being obtuse here, but that just looks like a subset of Stoicism to me. I mean what you just described will be found in a few paragraphs of Marcus Aurelius. What's with *all the rest of it*, the shaved heads and the yoga and all that? Marcus Aurelius didn't proscribe anything; his is a useful, simple, understandable, practical philosophy. Buddhism is not that, yet your four main beliefs would produce something like that.
This to the people who invented public key cryptography and an implementation of RSA (and kept it secret, of course) decades before the public did? And you're comparing them to the incompetent City bankers who (despite their skilled ancestors of the nineteenth century) bought up all those bad loans? For shame.
For just commenting out blocks of code, you can highlight with V and replace with:s, or even simpler, just hit Ctrl-V, select, then I. It will insert at each line in the "left side" of the rectangle.
:set hls! turns it off entirely. I'm afraid I don't know how to turn it off after a particular search result -- but someone probably will post here later.:)
He practically squeaked by at 51 odd percent. Not to detract from his achievement; I think it was a brilliantly planned and executed campaign. It is still disheartening to me, as a non-American, that such a candidate could command so small a majority of his countrymen's support.
You've still not given any actual reason for why yum would be better than apt, merely made some personal insults. I don't think there's much point continuing this discussion if you refuse to talk facts (as you'll note I have done).
Thanks. I've admined clusters and individual machines at plenty of places I've worked. I know what RHEL is like, because I still admin a RHEL cluster of 12 machines to serve a high-traffic website. Let me tell you it sucks. Just because there's a GUI to do some intricate change doesn't make it in any way good. Come on, instead of resorting to insults, give me a good reason why RHEL is better to administer than Debian.
Wish I could mod you up, but I'd already posted. As usual, don't forget that you shouldn't lump the UK with them; after all, it's the daddy of individual liberties.
Where does this magic number 3 come from? Is it just because you're American/French? Most democracies get by fine with anything between 2-5 groups. (Calling the groups "equal" is, of course, ridiculous and meaningless in any government.)
Re:Mebbe I should try it some time
on
OpenBSD 4.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
As a Debian admin and user, I have to point out that Debian also makes this process trivial. Gentoo is overrated; Debian is the best OS to admin I've come across, whether Linux or BSD.
I administer both a Debian cluster (which I set up) and a mixed Fedora/RedHat cluster (which I inherited) for a large university, and I've administered a SUSE machine before. So I had to chip in. Yum is in no way a superset of apt-get. apt-get has always blown other package management solutions out of the water -- well, at least since I started using them 6 years ago. Heck, it was the first real package manager. And it has not been surpassed by anything.
On an equivalent system, yum runs much slower than apt-get, both in dependency resolution and in installation (which is rpm's fault relative to dpkg). apt-cache search (or apt-file) is also faster than yum search. Funnily enough, up2date doesn't suck as much as yum. Yum also breaks far more easily. The one thing I grant you is that yum has pretty tables and apt-get doesn't. I don't give a flying fuck, and I suspect neither does any sysadmin. And of course, Debian has always had far more packages available in its official repos (and hence well tested and integrated) than RedHat or Suse. Suse, incidentally, had only a hideously slow and unreliable beast of a package manager until recently (Yast), then they shipped a version with zmd which was broke, and I've lost track since then. A lot of Suse users used apt-rpm. Oh, and have you ever compared the documentation of Debian packages compared to Fedora packages? It's light and day.
I think RedHat is a decent distro. They have a different niche than Debian. But Debian is certainly the best distro to administer, bar none; it's UNIX as it ought to be; and this makes it, thought not perfect, a UNIX admin's paradise. And before the BSDers chip in, yes, I've administered Net and Free before, and I stand by what I said.
That's just a high-level view of the situation. In network terms, a push technology simply means that the server becomes the client temporarily. At low-level, of course, you will find that either the client does mini-downloads, or that the connection is an open two-way socket, and occasionally both parties act as client or server, as the case may be. Client and server are terms typically used for protocols which do *not* keep a two-way socket open.
And as you point out, that polysemy just helps cloud the issue when thinking about it.
Thanks, but I won't accent an import phrase. But if you like, I'll substitute the Anglo-Saxon "very purpose". This is less familiar to non-native English speakers, which is why sometimes a well-known French or Latin phrase fits the bill. But it's perfectly intelligible without accents.
I wasn't discussing specific models. Why were guns invented, why were bows invented, and why was bittorrent invented? Saying that the purpose of guns is to target shoot is like saying that the purpose of bittorrent is to download movies and music. I don't doubt that we are moving toward a world in which the primary purpose of guns will be target practice, because it's a fun thing to do, to measure your skill at anything, including shooting handguns or rifles.
Look, all I am trying to point out is that the GP's analogy sucked. I think that we are basically in agreement, except I think the situation you describe is in the future. When it will be unusual to have a metal round in a gun, or in any way when using a gun to kill someone is awkward and inconvenient and difficult (perhaps because some laser gadget will have superseded firearms, like firearms superseded bows), then I will agree with you unreservedly. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, the very purpose [this is still not quite the same as raison d'etre] of guns is to kill or maim living things, and the mere fact that most round are expended in target practice does not contradict my view.
Did you know that a bow and arrow were used in combat as recently as Dunkirk? I believe it was Mad Jack Churchill, but I do not know for sure. He got his German, in any case.
Your country has been "most prosperous" for a third of its existence at most. Other countries have been at the top much longer or much higher. Your "way of doing things" is not as different as you think it is, and was almost the same as the usual fare in the most prosperous periods of your history. Obviously in the last 40 years, you've ditched conventional economic wisdom and gone back towards 19th century times. It doesn't seem to be working.
"Once the idea is instilled that it is right and proper for the federal government to take money from people who have earned it on an open and free market and give it to the idle and stupid, then it is just a matter of moving the mark of where "middle-class" falls. It started at $250K, but he isn't even elected yet and we've seen it go to $200K and now down to $150K."
Personally, I think the idle and stupid lie on the rich end of the spectrum. But here's a quick question for you: do you support death or estate taxes? If you do, you believe in social justice (the right wing by now would be calling you Marxist). If you don't, you're a hypocrite. Hint: most money isn't made on an "open and free market". Now put up or shut up.
I forgot to mention that only in a completely insular world do people have children when they fuck. People always want to have children, but if they can't afford it, they won't. They love their children. If they could afford it, they would get another child. This kind of encouragement policy is perfectly well proven and tested to work.
You've obviously never managed a team of more than 5 people. I don't mean this as flamebait. People have to be incentivised for even basic things like their own (or perhaps their planet's) good.
Archery is an Olympic sport too. Arrows can be used for some other purposes than killing living things, such as sending messages, but it's still nearly true that the raison d'etre of bows and arrows is to kill or maim living things; just as with guns. We just let archery be because a bow is a thousand times less efficient at its task than a gun, and a hundred times cheaper and easier to fashion at home.
The fact that guns are used recreationally is not a good defence of bittorrent via analogy -- bittorrent's raison d'etre is not to do harm, not even in copyright infringement. Cohen explicitly said so, and that's why he made it centralised too -- he didn't imagine that a centralised architecture could be so good for copyright infringement after Napster.
I'm afraid you misunderstood the GP. The point is, one transaction does not have both an uploader and a downloader -- just one of them. To fill out your chart with his terms:
1. upload
2. download
3. nonsensical (the server is never the one who initiates the transaction)
4. nonsensical (ditto)
5. upload (Peer A the client, Peer B the server)
6. download (ditto)
The key is just that the client initiates all communications, every transaction can be an upload or a download (but not both), and that the terms client and server are fluid and simply depend on who initiated the connection. If a CGI on my web server contacts a database server, then it is acting as the client, because it is initiating a transaction. The terms are quite natural from English: the server stands ready to accept a request and services it; the client is the one who makes the request in the first place.
I realise it's confusing at first, but think it through, it's logical.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for your fair and informative reply.
Sorry for being obtuse here, but that just looks like a subset of Stoicism to me. I mean what you just described will be found in a few paragraphs of Marcus Aurelius. What's with *all the rest of it*, the shaved heads and the yoga and all that? Marcus Aurelius didn't proscribe anything; his is a useful, simple, understandable, practical philosophy. Buddhism is not that, yet your four main beliefs would produce something like that.
This to the people who invented public key cryptography and an implementation of RSA (and kept it secret, of course) decades before the public did? And you're comparing them to the incompetent City bankers who (despite their skilled ancestors of the nineteenth century) bought up all those bad loans? For shame.
IBM already has.
For just commenting out blocks of code, you can highlight with V and replace with :s, or even simpler, just hit Ctrl-V, select, then I. It will insert at each line in the "left side" of the rectangle.
:set hls! turns it off entirely. I'm afraid I don't know how to turn it off after a particular search result -- but someone probably will post here later. :)
Fair do, but today's systems are a thousand times more complex. /usr/share/doc on a Debian system is pretty good.
He was referring to Obama being removed somehow, forcefully, either by some sham impeachment or an assasination, whatever.
He practically squeaked by at 51 odd percent. Not to detract from his achievement; I think it was a brilliantly planned and executed campaign. It is still disheartening to me, as a non-American, that such a candidate could command so small a majority of his countrymen's support.
You've still not given any actual reason for why yum would be better than apt, merely made some personal insults. I don't think there's much point continuing this discussion if you refuse to talk facts (as you'll note I have done).
Thanks. I've admined clusters and individual machines at plenty of places I've worked. I know what RHEL is like, because I still admin a RHEL cluster of 12 machines to serve a high-traffic website. Let me tell you it sucks. Just because there's a GUI to do some intricate change doesn't make it in any way good. Come on, instead of resorting to insults, give me a good reason why RHEL is better to administer than Debian.
Wish I could mod you up, but I'd already posted. As usual, don't forget that you shouldn't lump the UK with them; after all, it's the daddy of individual liberties.
Where does this magic number 3 come from? Is it just because you're American/French? Most democracies get by fine with anything between 2-5 groups. (Calling the groups "equal" is, of course, ridiculous and meaningless in any government.)
As a Debian admin and user, I have to point out that Debian also makes this process trivial. Gentoo is overrated; Debian is the best OS to admin I've come across, whether Linux or BSD.
The show was broadcast in the US under the name Junkyard Wars. I guess it's true that America is militaristic? ;)
Why is this modded troll? All but the last flamebait sentence is perfectly true and cuts to the heart of the matter. And I say this as a socialist.
I administer both a Debian cluster (which I set up) and a mixed Fedora/RedHat cluster (which I inherited) for a large university, and I've administered a SUSE machine before. So I had to chip in. Yum is in no way a superset of apt-get. apt-get has always blown other package management solutions out of the water -- well, at least since I started using them 6 years ago. Heck, it was the first real package manager. And it has not been surpassed by anything.
On an equivalent system, yum runs much slower than apt-get, both in dependency resolution and in installation (which is rpm's fault relative to dpkg). apt-cache search (or apt-file) is also faster than yum search. Funnily enough, up2date doesn't suck as much as yum. Yum also breaks far more easily. The one thing I grant you is that yum has pretty tables and apt-get doesn't. I don't give a flying fuck, and I suspect neither does any sysadmin. And of course, Debian has always had far more packages available in its official repos (and hence well tested and integrated) than RedHat or Suse. Suse, incidentally, had only a hideously slow and unreliable beast of a package manager until recently (Yast), then they shipped a version with zmd which was broke, and I've lost track since then. A lot of Suse users used apt-rpm. Oh, and have you ever compared the documentation of Debian packages compared to Fedora packages? It's light and day.
I think RedHat is a decent distro. They have a different niche than Debian. But Debian is certainly the best distro to administer, bar none; it's UNIX as it ought to be; and this makes it, thought not perfect, a UNIX admin's paradise. And before the BSDers chip in, yes, I've administered Net and Free before, and I stand by what I said.
That's just a high-level view of the situation. In network terms, a push technology simply means that the server becomes the client temporarily. At low-level, of course, you will find that either the client does mini-downloads, or that the connection is an open two-way socket, and occasionally both parties act as client or server, as the case may be. Client and server are terms typically used for protocols which do *not* keep a two-way socket open.
And as you point out, that polysemy just helps cloud the issue when thinking about it.
Thanks, but I won't accent an import phrase. But if you like, I'll substitute the Anglo-Saxon "very purpose". This is less familiar to non-native English speakers, which is why sometimes a well-known French or Latin phrase fits the bill. But it's perfectly intelligible without accents.
I wasn't discussing specific models. Why were guns invented, why were bows invented, and why was bittorrent invented? Saying that the purpose of guns is to target shoot is like saying that the purpose of bittorrent is to download movies and music. I don't doubt that we are moving toward a world in which the primary purpose of guns will be target practice, because it's a fun thing to do, to measure your skill at anything, including shooting handguns or rifles.
Look, all I am trying to point out is that the GP's analogy sucked. I think that we are basically in agreement, except I think the situation you describe is in the future. When it will be unusual to have a metal round in a gun, or in any way when using a gun to kill someone is awkward and inconvenient and difficult (perhaps because some laser gadget will have superseded firearms, like firearms superseded bows), then I will agree with you unreservedly. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, the very purpose [this is still not quite the same as raison d'etre] of guns is to kill or maim living things, and the mere fact that most round are expended in target practice does not contradict my view.
Did you know that a bow and arrow were used in combat as recently as Dunkirk? I believe it was Mad Jack Churchill, but I do not know for sure. He got his German, in any case.
Your country has been "most prosperous" for a third of its existence at most. Other countries have been at the top much longer or much higher. Your "way of doing things" is not as different as you think it is, and was almost the same as the usual fare in the most prosperous periods of your history. Obviously in the last 40 years, you've ditched conventional economic wisdom and gone back towards 19th century times. It doesn't seem to be working.
"Once the idea is instilled that it is right and proper for the federal government to take money from people who have earned it on an open and free market and give it to the idle and stupid, then it is just a matter of moving the mark of where "middle-class" falls. It started at $250K, but he isn't even elected yet and we've seen it go to $200K and now down to $150K."
Personally, I think the idle and stupid lie on the rich end of the spectrum. But here's a quick question for you: do you support death or estate taxes? If you do, you believe in social justice (the right wing by now would be calling you Marxist). If you don't, you're a hypocrite. Hint: most money isn't made on an "open and free market". Now put up or shut up.
I forgot to mention that only in a completely insular world do people have children when they fuck. People always want to have children, but if they can't afford it, they won't. They love their children. If they could afford it, they would get another child. This kind of encouragement policy is perfectly well proven and tested to work.
You've obviously never managed a team of more than 5 people. I don't mean this as flamebait. People have to be incentivised for even basic things like their own (or perhaps their planet's) good.
Top Gear have done it a few times now too (and probably also from scratch, but they never dwell on it for more than a sentence).
Archery is an Olympic sport too. Arrows can be used for some other purposes than killing living things, such as sending messages, but it's still nearly true that the raison d'etre of bows and arrows is to kill or maim living things; just as with guns. We just let archery be because a bow is a thousand times less efficient at its task than a gun, and a hundred times cheaper and easier to fashion at home.
The fact that guns are used recreationally is not a good defence of bittorrent via analogy -- bittorrent's raison d'etre is not to do harm, not even in copyright infringement. Cohen explicitly said so, and that's why he made it centralised too -- he didn't imagine that a centralised architecture could be so good for copyright infringement after Napster.
I'm afraid you misunderstood the GP. The point is, one transaction does not have both an uploader and a downloader -- just one of them. To fill out your chart with his terms:
1. upload
2. download
3. nonsensical (the server is never the one who initiates the transaction)
4. nonsensical (ditto)
5. upload (Peer A the client, Peer B the server)
6. download (ditto)
The key is just that the client initiates all communications, every transaction can be an upload or a download (but not both), and that the terms client and server are fluid and simply depend on who initiated the connection. If a CGI on my web server contacts a database server, then it is acting as the client, because it is initiating a transaction. The terms are quite natural from English: the server stands ready to accept a request and services it; the client is the one who makes the request in the first place.
I realise it's confusing at first, but think it through, it's logical.