"seriously, what sort of *nix system thinks you don't need a C compiler by default and makes you go looking for it in the repositories?"
One that targets non-developer desktop users ? Or even servers ? Ok for servers -- but as to non-developers, it just sort of goes back to another point - what good is *BSD, GNU/*, etc, really and practically, to those who are not interested in doing UNIX-y things. I could type documents, browse the web, and hang out on AIM just fine in Windows.
Maybe its just because of how I got into this all. I switched to FreeBSD in the 8th grade because I wanted to do C programing. I used X so I could run several term windows and a web browser. I didn't do it because I "hated Microsoft" or whatever have you.
When I was in high school I thought nothing of emailing back and forth with Ken Thompson and Denis Ritchie. It didn't occur to me that I shouldn't talk to them. If I had a question, I asked, and I always got a response. Hell, one time I sent Ken Thompson an email containing merely "syn syn enq" and got a response of "ack."
Jordan Hubbard used to hang out IRC on occasion, when he was in charge of the FreeBSD core team.
I didn't know anyone who used the system that didn't at least shell script. No one was just sitting around doing nothing.
Its not so much that way anymore. It boggles my mind that someone would merely want to "use" Linux or BSD to do basic PC things. I mean, I enjoy doing those things as well, but I also have my little projects and experiments.
so, if I don't get it, then I guess I just don't get it, but I guess it is how they say, "BSD is for people who love UNIX; Linux is for people who hate Windows."
When I first read of Shuttleworth's proposal, I figured that it might be easier to start the sync project among the community distributions which feed into the commercial ones. However, thinking further, there seems to be more issues involved and I'm starting to think that it might not be that great of an idea, or terribly important.
the Linux-based wing of the f/oss community in particular is reaching a point where they finally have a large swath of people who are merely "end users," and whose biggest gripes aren't about some flaw in some obscure patch to imblib (for example), but are "i can't play dvds out of the box, so linux is t3h gay."
For whatever reason, people have decided that a holy quest to "destroy Microsoft" and encourage wide-spread adoption of gnu/linux-based operating systems would be totally awesome. Ubuntu is geared at those "new recruits," with large amounts of hand-holding and media support. Mint is even better with its media support, but completely lacks dev tools if you install from the live image -- seriously, what sort of *nix system thinks you don't need a C compiler by default and makes you go looking for it in the repositories?
Trying to sync up Red Hat or SuSE who have more or less gotten out of the consumer market and are targeting professional users - developers, engineers, etc - in the workplace environment with some candy-for-kids distro is frankly a little weird.
The goal seems to be to increase homogeny across distributions - however, homogeny between ubuntu and rhel? quite frankly, why?
The systems are targeted at different sets of people with different requirements and philosophies. Holding off on releasing Red Hat until Ubuntu is ready, which requires KDE and GNOME to sync up (more or less) sounds a little ridiculous and over-the-top.
If FreeBSD were to wait until something they were trying to adopt from OpenBSD were ready, certain individuals with well known personality flaws very well might pull some sort of stunt just to make the others look bad. Given how high emotions seem to run between KDE and GNOME people, I wouldn't be surprised if one did something to spite the other, which then filtered down to Ubuntu and RH getting the shaft and looking dumb.
The "community" is a whole lot bigger than it was 10-15 years ago, a bit colder and less friendly to boot. I have serious doubts that in the current climate this could be pulled off, even if something were to be gained by all parties -- which again, I don't think is the case anymore.
We provide Japan's defense because they have proven themselves untrustworthy with offensive military force. That is different from arming Israel, then giving them billions in foreign aid, then invading Iraq because of "ties to terrorism," which amount to giving money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers... that sounds like Israel's problem, not America's.
anyway....
I would like to get back to the heart of what I was intending to argue from my first post. That is Judaism and National Socialism are, as codified manifestations of the folk-zeitgeist of their respective audiences, equivalent. They serve the same goal of cohesion and definition of folk, craft the laws for interaction with those outside of the tribe, and provide the framework and rationale from which to approach the world.
They are inherently exclusive, based on traditional national identity, espouse loyalty to one's own kind, and ultimately find political expression and manifestation. National Socialism required the NSDAP and the Reich, just as Judaism required the Zionists.
Looking at Old Testiment literature, anyone will see that Judaism was just as "barbaric," cut throat and blood thirsty as the ancient Norse. First, they get God's hitman to off all of the Egyptian kids, then they go and slaughter the Cananites and Philistines and jack their land. They say it's OK because God told them they're better than everyone else and that they can have the land.
Modern, political National Socialism of the 20th Century required the use of Norse mythology to fuel its political ideology. Zionism requires Judaism as its rationale, and the two are inextricably linked.
In fact, with the founding of a Zionist state, the requirement for philosophical National Socialism in the vein of Martin Heidegger are met, because the Jew can now enjoy a (semi) autochythonic relationship with his "homeland." He is therefore no longer the eternal wanderer, no longer das ewig jude -- the Jew regains the full identity as a national and political unit.
My argument, as you see, has precious little to actually do with any alleged atrocities. They are irrelevant to my comparison.
However, fair being fair, either Germany needed Poland as a buffer against the Soviets, or Israel doesn't really need Gaza or the West Bank.
Frankly, I would argue that some mick from south Boston is more Irish than the child of Nigerian immigrants to Dublin, drawing Euro 300 out of the national health service to get their hair cornrowed, as friends over yonder have informed me happens.
Personally, I am of Irish, English and German descent, but as my family on both sides has been in the US since the 1600s, I'm pretty sure that's all I really have a right to claim at this point.
My passport gives detailed instructions on how to give up my American citizenship. One can't become "ungerman" or "unjewish."
For instance, if I tell you my name is Pat Murphy (which it is not), you might/assume/ I'm Catholic. However, I might be protestant, atheist, agnostic or pagan. However, my Irishness is not in doubt.
Similarly, if my name is Saul Bergersteinowitzskimanheimer, it doesn't matter if I show up to Bill Grahm, Jr.'s every Sunday morning. I'm a Jew.
Karl Marx referenced the "final solution" to the "jewish question" decades before Hitler was born. He was an avoid atheist who suggested that Communism, by destroying international capital, would damage the very nature of the Jew and destroy Jews as a people. read here for more info.
However, despite being a "bad Jew," he still makes it into lists of prominent Jews kept by Jewish organizations. Same with Lev Bronstein, aka Leon Trotsky, who changed his name and feigned to be a gentile thereby.
That would suggest that it is something completely and totally different from being American.
As to your point about the Japanese - yes, I am familiar. However, we (Americans) whooped their ass, forced them to submit and now they're more or less harmless. My tax dollars do not go to buy them bombs to use on the Koreans.
However, my tax dollars are going to support a regieme that is racist, militarist and un-democratic, which has an expansionist foreign policy and which commits the type of war crimes that they accused Germany of on an almost daily basis.
Any criticism of their policies is greeted with cries of "naziracistanti-semite! holocaust! 9/11!!" Suggestions that Jews should NOT have their own ethnic state are "racist," while statements saying that Serbs should are ALSO racist? Double standard, I say.
When even Jimmy Carter is called a "nazi" and an "anti-semite" for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, its not fair to use tanks to shoot palestinan kids, then there is apparently no room for intelligent debate.
Well, Israeli is the longest-running National Socialist state -- National Socialism was just Judaism for Gentiles (what to eat, what to wear, new holiays, don't mess with non-white women, etc).
It's just that as with Highlander, there could be only one.
I have not tried this, or Apple TV, or anything similar - but I'm not sure I'd enjoy the experience anyway.
I have enough trouble trying to stream a crappy video off of Youtube via a cable connection. I have to worry about the bandwidth being used by the rest of the family, I have to worry about the amount of traffic at the other end, i have to worry about not getting screwed by the cable company who is trying to cram my whole neighbourhood into a tightly controlled unit.
It just doesn't seem like I'd be able to get a pleasant experience out of this -- and if I have to keep waiting while it buffers, I may as well just go rent a scratched DVD from the Blockbuster.
How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol?
Not that I can say I've had a problem performing this task WITHOUT their little patent, but interesting IBM would want it, seeing as how they've sold their laptop-making division already anyway.
They would likely sell the upgrade only, not a full new copy of the OS.
The computer already comes with the OS disks that were current when you bought it. Why, since the death of OS 9, would you even NEED a full new set of install disks if you were a "legitimate" Mac owner?
Alternatively, if you have damaged oem disks, they might let you trade them in a full copy of the same version -- you'd still have to buy the upgrade though.
That would enable them to kill off the clone market without inhibiting "legitimate" users.
Well, my karma is already "excellent" -- so unless there is a "nirvana" option that no one but Taco and Cowboy Neal have gotten to yet, then I don't need to try that hard.
Well, I went to the article that was linked from the summary and skimmed over it and looked at the photos. However, "E-Book Reader" is something VERY different from "book-shaped computer," which, if that is in fact what this thing is, might be sorta cool... i guess.
however, under MS's thumb, its still going to be fairly useless.
Well, it is if she were a victim of abstinence-only education which, in addition to being boring and therefor not helpful, also fails to teach kids to put on a damned condom, then it would be the school district's fault.
or Bush's... whichever option is worth more karma.
OLPC's goals have gone from providing a platform that allows full intellectual expression and room from growth and development, to running XP so maybe kids and type a book report or something, to now merely being a way to passively consume printed media?
And last week I thought that this project couldn't get any farther from good.
Of course not, they're fear-mongering hucksters, just like every other cause-head and extremist who is looking to validate their own personal existence by latching onto, and identifying themselves with, something which they perceive as "bigger" or more "eternal" in some way.
The same pattern has cropped up time and time again, from temperance advocates to Adolf Hitler. Frankly, it wears quite thin.
We'll never be able to find rational, thought out "best solutions" to problems so long as we have people who are trying to grand stand around the issue. Unfortunately, that probably means that people won't really be able to find meaningful solutions to problems other than just eliminate people entirely, as the grand-standing hucksterism seems to be a bug in human nature. I'm sure we've all been guilty of it once or twice ourselves.
Well, HP and Microsoft get attacked all the time anyway. You wouldn't want Nintendo and Apple to get lonely, would you? They might get depressed and desperate, commit corporate suicide, and then all we'd be left with is HP and Microsoft.
In the US, I've only ever seen black people wear Burberry. From what I know of Chavs, they are what we would call "wiggers." Frankly, yes - they were asking for trouble when they started making that stuff.
When I think of "luxury brands," I think of Rolex or Breiteling, Aston-Martin or Bentley, things like that... not t-shirts that come down to my knees and cost $75. That's just bullshit.
So, I get your definition of careless selling quite well. I'm just saying, putting up a sign saying "no chavs allowed" would be sort of asking for legal trouble. Would have been best not to making anything they'd want in the first place.
Carelessly selling? Are you saying they even had an option to refuse to sell to them? Inform store clerks to kick them out and not let them in?
I recently heard a news story over here(usa) that a car salesman was being sued because he refused to sell Maseratii, Porches, and the like to fatsos, oldies and crips because it would diminish the brand image.
Chances are that Burberry would have met with similar results.
Slashdot Mirror
One that targets non-developer desktop users ? Or even servers ? Ok for servers -- but as to non-developers, it just sort of goes back to another point - what good is *BSD, GNU/*, etc, really and practically, to those who are not interested in doing UNIX-y things. I could type documents, browse the web, and hang out on AIM just fine in Windows.
Maybe its just because of how I got into this all. I switched to FreeBSD in the 8th grade because I wanted to do C programing. I used X so I could run several term windows and a web browser. I didn't do it because I "hated Microsoft" or whatever have you.
When I was in high school I thought nothing of emailing back and forth with Ken Thompson and Denis Ritchie. It didn't occur to me that I shouldn't talk to them. If I had a question, I asked, and I always got a response. Hell, one time I sent Ken Thompson an email containing merely "syn syn enq" and got a response of "ack."
Jordan Hubbard used to hang out IRC on occasion, when he was in charge of the FreeBSD core team.
I didn't know anyone who used the system that didn't at least shell script. No one was just sitting around doing nothing.
Its not so much that way anymore. It boggles my mind that someone would merely want to "use" Linux or BSD to do basic PC things. I mean, I enjoy doing those things as well, but I also have my little projects and experiments.
so, if I don't get it, then I guess I just don't get it, but I guess it is how they say, "BSD is for people who love UNIX; Linux is for people who hate Windows."
When I first read of Shuttleworth's proposal, I figured that it might be easier to start the sync project among the community distributions which feed into the commercial ones. However, thinking further, there seems to be more issues involved and I'm starting to think that it might not be that great of an idea, or terribly important.
the Linux-based wing of the f/oss community in particular is reaching a point where they finally have a large swath of people who are merely "end users," and whose biggest gripes aren't about some flaw in some obscure patch to imblib (for example), but are "i can't play dvds out of the box, so linux is t3h gay."
For whatever reason, people have decided that a holy quest to "destroy Microsoft" and encourage wide-spread adoption of gnu/linux-based operating systems would be totally awesome. Ubuntu is geared at those "new recruits," with large amounts of hand-holding and media support. Mint is even better with its media support, but completely lacks dev tools if you install from the live image -- seriously, what sort of *nix system thinks you don't need a C compiler by default and makes you go looking for it in the repositories?
Trying to sync up Red Hat or SuSE who have more or less gotten out of the consumer market and are targeting professional users - developers, engineers, etc - in the workplace environment with some candy-for-kids distro is frankly a little weird.
The goal seems to be to increase homogeny across distributions - however, homogeny between ubuntu and rhel? quite frankly, why?
The systems are targeted at different sets of people with different requirements and philosophies. Holding off on releasing Red Hat until Ubuntu is ready, which requires KDE and GNOME to sync up (more or less) sounds a little ridiculous and over-the-top.
If FreeBSD were to wait until something they were trying to adopt from OpenBSD were ready, certain individuals with well known personality flaws very well might pull some sort of stunt just to make the others look bad. Given how high emotions seem to run between KDE and GNOME people, I wouldn't be surprised if one did something to spite the other, which then filtered down to Ubuntu and RH getting the shaft and looking dumb.
The "community" is a whole lot bigger than it was 10-15 years ago, a bit colder and less friendly to boot. I have serious doubts that in the current climate this could be pulled off, even if something were to be gained by all parties -- which again, I don't think is the case anymore.
Just my $0.02; your exchange rate my vary.
This is what I thought. Next thing, we'll be hearing of an "open source" alternative to Apache or some such nonsense.
We provide Japan's defense because they have proven themselves untrustworthy with offensive military force. That is different from arming Israel, then giving them billions in foreign aid, then invading Iraq because of "ties to terrorism," which amount to giving money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers... that sounds like Israel's problem, not America's.
anyway....
I would like to get back to the heart of what I was intending to argue from my first post. That is Judaism and National Socialism are, as codified manifestations of the folk-zeitgeist of their respective audiences, equivalent. They serve the same goal of cohesion and definition of folk, craft the laws for interaction with those outside of the tribe, and provide the framework and rationale from which to approach the world.
They are inherently exclusive, based on traditional national identity, espouse loyalty to one's own kind, and ultimately find political expression and manifestation. National Socialism required the NSDAP and the Reich, just as Judaism required the Zionists.
Looking at Old Testiment literature, anyone will see that Judaism was just as "barbaric," cut throat and blood thirsty as the ancient Norse. First, they get God's hitman to off all of the Egyptian kids, then they go and slaughter the Cananites and Philistines and jack their land. They say it's OK because God told them they're better than everyone else and that they can have the land.
Modern, political National Socialism of the 20th Century required the use of Norse mythology to fuel its political ideology. Zionism requires Judaism as its rationale, and the two are inextricably linked.
In fact, with the founding of a Zionist state, the requirement for philosophical National Socialism in the vein of Martin Heidegger are met, because the Jew can now enjoy a (semi) autochythonic relationship with his "homeland." He is therefore no longer the eternal wanderer, no longer das ewig jude -- the Jew regains the full identity as a national and political unit.
My argument, as you see, has precious little to actually do with any alleged atrocities. They are irrelevant to my comparison.
However, fair being fair, either Germany needed Poland as a buffer against the Soviets, or Israel doesn't really need Gaza or the West Bank.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/ -- look there for some more info.
P.S. -- I'm not defending Germany, I'm just sayin' is all.
Frankly, I would argue that some mick from south Boston is more Irish than the child of Nigerian immigrants to Dublin, drawing Euro 300 out of the national health service to get their hair cornrowed, as friends over yonder have informed me happens.
Personally, I am of Irish, English and German descent, but as my family on both sides has been in the US since the 1600s, I'm pretty sure that's all I really have a right to claim at this point.
My passport gives detailed instructions on how to give up my American citizenship. One can't become "ungerman" or "unjewish."
/assume/ I'm Catholic. However, I might be protestant, atheist, agnostic or pagan. However, my Irishness is not in doubt.
For instance, if I tell you my name is Pat Murphy (which it is not), you might
Similarly, if my name is Saul Bergersteinowitzskimanheimer, it doesn't matter if I show up to Bill Grahm, Jr.'s every Sunday morning. I'm a Jew.
Karl Marx referenced the "final solution" to the "jewish question" decades before Hitler was born. He was an avoid atheist who suggested that Communism, by destroying international capital, would damage the very nature of the Jew and destroy Jews as a people. read here for more info.
However, despite being a "bad Jew," he still makes it into lists of prominent Jews kept by Jewish organizations. Same with Lev Bronstein, aka Leon Trotsky, who changed his name and feigned to be a gentile thereby.
That would suggest that it is something completely and totally different from being American.
As to your point about the Japanese - yes, I am familiar. However, we (Americans) whooped their ass, forced them to submit and now they're more or less harmless. My tax dollars do not go to buy them bombs to use on the Koreans.
However, my tax dollars are going to support a regieme that is racist, militarist and un-democratic, which has an expansionist foreign policy and which commits the type of war crimes that they accused Germany of on an almost daily basis.
Any criticism of their policies is greeted with cries of "naziracistanti-semite! holocaust! 9/11!!" Suggestions that Jews should NOT have their own ethnic state are "racist," while statements saying that Serbs should are ALSO racist? Double standard, I say.
When even Jimmy Carter is called a "nazi" and an "anti-semite" for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, its not fair to use tanks to shoot palestinan kids, then there is apparently no room for intelligent debate.
Fuck Israel.
-- "Chosen Race" destined to rule over all others? (check)
... the list goes on and on.
-- 'God' figure says its OK to kill people and jack their land because you'll use it better? (check)
-- Someone is "one of us," whether they want to be or not, because they were born with our genes? (check)
Well, Israeli is the longest-running National Socialist state -- National Socialism was just Judaism for Gentiles (what to eat, what to wear, new holiays, don't mess with non-white women, etc).
It's just that as with Highlander, there could be only one.
I have not tried this, or Apple TV, or anything similar - but I'm not sure I'd enjoy the experience anyway.
I have enough trouble trying to stream a crappy video off of Youtube via a cable connection. I have to worry about the bandwidth being used by the rest of the family, I have to worry about the amount of traffic at the other end, i have to worry about not getting screwed by the cable company who is trying to cram my whole neighbourhood into a tightly controlled unit.
It just doesn't seem like I'd be able to get a pleasant experience out of this -- and if I have to keep waiting while it buffers, I may as well just go rent a scratched DVD from the Blockbuster.
No, that's Xtube.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Gun -- that's more like it.
So, that's saying that if I put my hand on the bottom of the laptop that its going to turn the computer on?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartgun -- kinda like that.
So, I'm not really "way off," just differently right that this is not really a ground-breaking idea.
How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol?
Not that I can say I've had a problem performing this task WITHOUT their little patent, but interesting IBM would want it, seeing as how they've sold their laptop-making division already anyway.
They would likely sell the upgrade only, not a full new copy of the OS.
The computer already comes with the OS disks that were current when you bought it. Why, since the death of OS 9, would you even NEED a full new set of install disks if you were a "legitimate" Mac owner?
Alternatively, if you have damaged oem disks, they might let you trade them in a full copy of the same version -- you'd still have to buy the upgrade though.
That would enable them to kill off the clone market without inhibiting "legitimate" users.
That smacks of Mormonism.... Too much BSG for you?
Well, my karma is already "excellent" -- so unless there is a "nirvana" option that no one but Taco and Cowboy Neal have gotten to yet, then I don't need to try that hard.
Well, I went to the article that was linked from the summary and skimmed over it and looked at the photos. However, "E-Book Reader" is something VERY different from "book-shaped computer," which, if that is in fact what this thing is, might be sorta cool... i guess.
however, under MS's thumb, its still going to be fairly useless.
Well, it is if she were a victim of abstinence-only education which, in addition to being boring and therefor not helpful, also fails to teach kids to put on a damned condom, then it would be the school district's fault.
or Bush's... whichever option is worth more karma.
OLPC's goals have gone from providing a platform that allows full intellectual expression and room from growth and development, to running XP so maybe kids and type a book report or something, to now merely being a way to passively consume printed media?
And last week I thought that this project couldn't get any farther from good.
Of course not, they're fear-mongering hucksters, just like every other cause-head and extremist who is looking to validate their own personal existence by latching onto, and identifying themselves with, something which they perceive as "bigger" or more "eternal" in some way.
The same pattern has cropped up time and time again, from temperance advocates to Adolf Hitler. Frankly, it wears quite thin.
We'll never be able to find rational, thought out "best solutions" to problems so long as we have people who are trying to grand stand around the issue. Unfortunately, that probably means that people won't really be able to find meaningful solutions to problems other than just eliminate people entirely, as the grand-standing hucksterism seems to be a bug in human nature. I'm sure we've all been guilty of it once or twice ourselves.
Well, HP and Microsoft get attacked all the time anyway. You wouldn't want Nintendo and Apple to get lonely, would you? They might get depressed and desperate, commit corporate suicide, and then all we'd be left with is HP and Microsoft.
In the US, I've only ever seen black people wear Burberry. From what I know of Chavs, they are what we would call "wiggers." Frankly, yes - they were asking for trouble when they started making that stuff.
When I think of "luxury brands," I think of Rolex or Breiteling, Aston-Martin or Bentley, things like that... not t-shirts that come down to my knees and cost $75. That's just bullshit.
So, I get your definition of careless selling quite well. I'm just saying, putting up a sign saying "no chavs allowed" would be sort of asking for legal trouble. Would have been best not to making anything they'd want in the first place.
Carelessly selling? Are you saying they even had an option to refuse to sell to them? Inform store clerks to kick them out and not let them in?
I recently heard a news story over here(usa) that a car salesman was being sued because he refused to sell Maseratii, Porches, and the like to fatsos, oldies and crips because it would diminish the brand image.
Chances are that Burberry would have met with similar results.
I buy cheap jeans and then rip them myself, you insensitive clod!
:(
Wait... that still just makes me poor