Well, it isn't a really good shell... no tab completion, for one...
So in a way, it is a bit hell-ish. Imagine being presented with good old DOS and having to do something in it...
I only just started looking into Lisp and Prolog; they seem to have lots of potential for language analysis, which is what I need them for.
The only way to prove it is to find Buridan and his ass (donkey, if you will... not the thing you perverts thought of first) and see how would the ass choose one haystack over another one just like it.
I've heard many complaints so far about both eBay and PayPal - could it be that they feel Google's service will be beta^Hter?
So see if I care... they can get all the partners they want, but if Google rolls out a superior service, they can either adapt or go sulk in the corner.
I avoid television as it is... If they start implementing such things I'll stop watching altogether.
DivX DVD collections of good shows will become the one and only way I'll watch anything... and guess what, the authors, producers and the rest of them won't get a dime then.
At least the polar caps won't melt... there'll be so many more pirates in the times to come. Arrr!
Creationism is based upon belief. Science is based upon proof.
The problem arises when certain people - Creationists, to be more precise - start bashing science. The only reason they do that is because (scientifically proven) facts do not agree with their literal interpretation of their holy texts.
Most religious people and organisations do not have issues with science and they accept that their holy texts need not always be interpreted literally. Creationists are just the opposite.
The mistake you made is confusing the belief in a god or some other kind of supreme being, which most people bashing Creationism have no issue with, and literal interpretation of some holy text or another. The two can, but need not coincide.
All the Creationists I've had contact with did at least bash evolution... some even tried to prove Earth was some 6000 years old etc.
Those people are either willingly and willfuly ignorant or simply... ah... set in their peculiar ways.
I do not have a problem with anyone's beliefs; I only protest when they try to present them as facts. These two, I feel, need to be carefully separated in the minds of men.
Especially in the light of Microsoft's intentional changing (i.e. breaking) the SMB, so that it wouldn't work with Samba.
Do you have something to support this? I'm not being sarcastic... Is it generally accepted that MS broke SMB for this purpose?
As it is not anywhere near my immediate area of interest, no, I do not have anything to prove it with.
Actually, were it not for Slashdot, I wouldn't have known of it.
However, although it is a theory I encountered here, I've never actually found anyone willing to dispute it... and not all Slashdotters are MS-bashers. Therefore, I have judged it 'reliable enough'.
First spend a few days reading Gentoo Forums for advice on tweaking your/etc/make.conf. Set up your compiler options and USE flags.
Don't forget that; USE flags are important.
Then just type "emerge virus" and it will most beautifully compile and run efficientliestly.
Someone actually had enough free time to check WINE's compatibility with several DOS and Windows viruses.
Unfortunately, none of them worked.
It's kind of sad, I guess... knowing you have an almost-compatible system, but not quite.
Then again, maybe this explains the results published recently of WINE being faster than Windows... they probably forgot to include the antivirus overhead...
Oh, I don't mind it scanning the drive once. I do mind it scanning the drive thrice for a single operation... it suggests sloppy programming - in the sense "we're not sure we can make a program that'll create a partition properly, so we'll have it scan everything every single time the user presses a key."
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it isn't a really good shell... no tab completion, for one...
So in a way, it is a bit hell-ish. Imagine being presented with good old DOS and having to do something in it...
I only just started looking into Lisp and Prolog; they seem to have lots of potential for language analysis, which is what I need them for.
Currently reading: CLASH - Common Lisp As SHell.
Objects? We don't need no stinkin' objects!
I recently had to check out an essay-grading robot for my Introduction to Natural Language Processing class.
I'd fed it the introduction of a randomly generated essay. It got a 4/5 on all counts.
I figure, if teachers are going to use robots to grade essays, we should use robots to create them in the first place.
No.
The only way to prove it is to find Buridan and his ass (donkey, if you will... not the thing you perverts thought of first) and see how would the ass choose one haystack over another one just like it.
One thing is certain: I have come to approve of dictatorship recently.
Democracy is the goverment of the people, for the people... and we all know Sturgeon's Law.
What's that? 1337 for "teet"?
Is that how you pronounce "tit"? Or is it just a Freudian slip?
So, eBay is afraid of Google.
I've heard many complaints so far about both eBay and PayPal - could it be that they feel Google's service will be beta^Hter?
So see if I care... they can get all the partners they want, but if Google rolls out a superior service, they can either adapt or go sulk in the corner.
Oh, deary deary me.
I avoid television as it is... If they start implementing such things I'll stop watching altogether.
DivX DVD collections of good shows will become the one and only way I'll watch anything... and guess what, the authors, producers and the rest of them won't get a dime then.
At least the polar caps won't melt... there'll be so many more pirates in the times to come. Arrr!
No worries... neither am I ;)
Yes, I know. Check the tongueincheek tag.
Creationism is based upon belief. Science is based upon proof.
The problem arises when certain people - Creationists, to be more precise - start bashing science. The only reason they do that is because (scientifically proven) facts do not agree with their literal interpretation of their holy texts.
Most religious people and organisations do not have issues with science and they accept that their holy texts need not always be interpreted literally. Creationists are just the opposite.
The mistake you made is confusing the belief in a god or some other kind of supreme being, which most people bashing Creationism have no issue with, and literal interpretation of some holy text or another. The two can, but need not coincide.
All the Creationists I've had contact with did at least bash evolution... some even tried to prove Earth was some 6000 years old etc.
Those people are either willingly and willfuly ignorant or simply... ah... set in their peculiar ways.
I do not have a problem with anyone's beliefs; I only protest when they try to present them as facts. These two, I feel, need to be carefully separated in the minds of men.
Is AdBlock "software"? As in "separate software"?
I mean, it's an integral part of Firefox... are they trying to ban Firefox users?
[/tongueincheek]
Especially in the light of Microsoft's intentional changing (i.e. breaking) the SMB, so that it wouldn't work with Samba.
Do you have something to support this? I'm not being sarcastic... Is it generally accepted that MS broke SMB for this purpose?
As it is not anywhere near my immediate area of interest, no, I do not have anything to prove it with.
Actually, were it not for Slashdot, I wouldn't have known of it.
However, although it is a theory I encountered here, I've never actually found anyone willing to dispute it... and not all Slashdotters are MS-bashers. Therefore, I have judged it 'reliable enough'.
Oh, I haven't seen *that* one for quite a while... thought it was dead already.
I have a proposition for moderators, though: start modding this funny. Maybe the idiot gives up.
Not that I'm defending said attitude, but...
How come you don't look for help on the other side?
What would be, say, Microsoft's reaction if you asked them for help on plugging your Windows box in a mixed network using Samba?
Especially in the light of Microsoft's intentional changing (i.e. breaking) the SMB, so that it wouldn't work with Samba.
Let's face it... more often than not, it's the clash of religions.
As a matter of fact, several religions throughout history are/were based on the assumption that death is not idiot-proof.
But I digress...
Well, in that case mail your distro maintainers to ensure proper patches and a pre-compiled virus. Duh!
The Microsoft Way?
What? Even a virus now has its own installer and license agreement?
No, no, nonononononononono!
That's all wrong and complicated...
First spend a few days reading Gentoo Forums for advice on tweaking your /etc/make.conf. Set up your compiler options and USE flags.
Don't forget that; USE flags are important.
Then just type "emerge virus" and it will most beautifully compile and run efficientliestly.
(Yes, I'm a Gentoo user. Does it show?)
I recall an experiment...
Someone actually had enough free time to check WINE's compatibility with several DOS and Windows viruses.
Unfortunately, none of them worked.
It's kind of sad, I guess... knowing you have an almost-compatible system, but not quite.
Then again, maybe this explains the results published recently of WINE being faster than Windows... they probably forgot to include the antivirus overhead...
Oh. My.
There would be no more P2P pr0n... only source code for various types of girls.
A whole new meaning for Open Source...
Admit it: you want to replicate 7 of 9. Right?
Oh, I don't mind it scanning the drive once. I do mind it scanning the drive thrice for a single operation... it suggests sloppy programming - in the sense "we're not sure we can make a program that'll create a partition properly, so we'll have it scan everything every single time the user presses a key."
Wasn't Tasha Yar killed (i.e. kicked from the series) because of her alcohol problem?
And did it all start with that episode?
That still doesn't answer my question: Is Microsoft's fdisk still as crappy as before?