Google doesn't care about indexing the entire web, if something is linked to they already know about it, and if its not then its not worth indexing anyways. The idea here is to track what you do, so they can sell it to advertisers. Google sells ads, that's the entire point of the company.
Sorry, the DMCA was "fought by the industry" too. Just like it was "purchased by the industry". You see, there is no singular entity called "the industry". Different companies do different things, and you can't lump them all together and pretend they all supported or all opposed anything. There were plenty of companies on both sides of both issues, that's sorta the definition of a contraversial issue.
No, there's nothing wrong with the way its worded. I don't have the time nor the skill to personally audit the source code of every piece of software I use. This means I have to trust people. Someone who uses their real name would be risking their reputation and possible legal consequences if they distributed malicious code. Someone hiding their identity is less trustworthy.
I am not strongly opposed to corporations, I am strongly opposed to people praising them for no reason, and sticking up for them when they don't need or deserve it.
I've made it as clear as humanely possible: I am not complaining about apple, I am saying stop acting like they are nice, they have not done anything to help open source.
If you can only ignore everything I say just so you have something to argue about, then feel free to do it by yourself, you don't need me.
Adding dependancies to core services is always bad. It adds potential bugs, security and reliability issues, etc. Its all just a question of wether or not that new dependancy adds enough benefit to outweigh the downsides. XML does not add anything here, the tools involved are not using all kinds of different config file formats or any other such nonsense, they are simple shell scripts. And just because the XML you make is valid, doesn't mean it will actually do what you think it will, you still have to test your changes just like you do now. Downsides and no upsides add up to a stupid idea.
And no, init and cron do not do the same task, saying "they both start services" shows a complete lack of understanding. Starting a program is just fork(); exec();, this is trivial, done by tons of software, and is the only thing they have in common. The majority of the code of init and cron have nothing to do with this, and are not at all the same.
Your shell does fork(); exec(); all the time, but that doesn't mean its "pretty much the same" as init, cron, sendmail, and apache. Or did you guys want to mash all those together with an XML library too?
And none of this is needed to be able to start services in parallel. Shell scripts can do this just fine, and that's what you init scripts are. Just because current linux distros seem to universally choose hideous sysv style init scripts, doesn't mean they couldn't do it another way. NetBSD's init scripts could easily be changed to add parallel service starting, if it doesn't already support it.
Adding XML to to core services like init is beyond stupid, and merging several independant utilities into one monolithic tool is the exact opposite of how unix works. A single, simple tool to do a single simple task. I can't imagine why any other unix system would want this thing.
The quarter from the limo line is pretty accurate isn't it? Apple is a wealthy corporation, and we should not kiss their ass or claim they are heros because they meet their obligations as minimally as they can. Why are you so desperate to not only defend big corporations who do nothing for you, but also to be insulted for them by proxy?
You don't have to wait for vendors to do jack. YOU DO NOT NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE. Why is this so hard to grasp? You can simply make a class that handles this for you, and use that class. This is no more or less useful or easy than making a new keyword and using that.
This is the entire point I am making, that modifying the language's syntax is not needed to solve problems, and does not make things easier or simpler. This is the standard lisp misdirection, trying to claim that what lisp does is helpful because lisp does it. That doesn't prove anything, show me an actual, real problem that can be solved significantly easier in lisp than in a typical dynamic language.
Sure programmers forgetting to close open streams is a real world problem. Its also a real world problem that can easily be solved in shitty old C++ just with a simple, ordinary class, nevermind dynamic languages. The only thing that sets your example apart is that you make up a nonsense restriction "add a keyword to the language" which has no effect on solving the actual problem. The problem is solved just fine without adding a keyword, and that's the only thing that makes the lisp solution different. That's not better, that's just different.
And yes, I don't fully understand lisp macros, that's the whole point. You are supposed to be explaining how lisp is so superior to everything else, for those of us who don't know it. Instead, you are being typical lisp weenie and claiming its better by making up bullshit reasons that don't matter, and saying "you don't understand" whenever anyone points out that your example is retarded.
Now, quit being a fucking moron and give a real world example of a problem that can be solved significantly easier in lisp than a typical dynamic language like python, ruby or pike.
No, nothing here makes apple evil. Nobody said they are. The point is that the KDE guys want morons to stop claiming that apple is wonderful and open source friendly and helps them, when it is completely and totally not true. They don't want anything from apple, they want morons to stop spreading lies.
Yeah, I am really inclined to trust software written by someone who's afraid to use his real name, and uses a psudenym based on his jealousy of another free software developer who actually does use his real name. Does NetBSD really allow anonymous developers like this?
In fact, I can't think of any way that could possibly be worse than what you are doing now. Running a RAID1 over a network block device is horribly innefficient, and slow as all hell. This just backs things up when you want to, not all the time constantly with every trivial change like a network mirror does.
What would be more perfect is simply being a competant admin in the first place, and not letting your users have permissions to fuck everything up. Nevermind that this is for NetBSD, which doesn't have a whole lot of viruses, nor a defrag program.
How about you go ahead and do a diff on those, and see the HUGE PILE OF CRAP that you get from it. Diffing two totally seperate codebases with tons of massive incompatabilities does not work. Its easy to post on slashdot and feel 1337 because you figured out diff, but its harder to actually contribute something. This is open source software, if you think its so simple, go fix it and everyone will love you.
Since its so easy to merge patches from safari into khtml, why don't you stfu and do it? Clearly you are so much smarter than the konq developers since you find this such a trivial task, so go ahead and do it. Prove how smart you are. Its open source, you are welcome to help. Or are you really only capable of critisizing others anonymously when you don't even understand what you are talking about?
My desktop is running arch linux, which lets me stay up to date just by running a single command too. Only it takes a fraction of the time to do so because it downloads already compiled packages. Similarly, all my BSD servers let me stay up to date without having to stop the working system.
The difference is the system isn't at 100% CPU usage compiling shit for a day with BSDs and good linux distros. You still have to reboot a gentoo machine for kernel upgrades, just like with any other system. So in fact, you are getting no magical updating benefits, just having your server be slow as hell while it compiles everything for a day.
So, you know full well that your example is simple to impliment in dozens of languages, but you want to add a stupid restriction that doesn't actually make a difference in solving a problem, just to make it seem like lisp is special? I don't care if you want me to add a new keyword to my language, that doesn't solve a problem, and has no practical relevance. Present a real problem that is significantly easier to solve using lisp than it is in a typical dynamic language.
Like I said, bullshit doesn't change reality. I know you can name some solaris users. Just like I can name some openvms users. That doesn't mean either is popularly used. Again, there are literally HUNDREDS of times more places using windows and/or linux than there are using solaris. That would mean solaris is not common. Why are you so personally insulted by this fact, were you a solaris developer?
Its still an order of magnitude faster to just install binaries that someone else compiled for you. This is the entire purpose of a linux distro. If you want to compile everything from scratch you don't need a distro. There is no reason that portage can't work just like the BSDs ports, where packages are compiled from ports, which can then easily be distributed so you only need to compile from ports if you need custom configuration options for that particular piece of software.
Making stuff up is a good way to make your point. I didn't say there were freebsd machines there, I said it USED TO RUN FREEBSD, until MS bought it, and in 2000 started moving it over to windows. Pretending solaris was ever involved only makes you look stupid.
I know there are old out of touch places that still run solaris, and there are literally HUNDREDS of times more places not running solaris. That would equal rarely used if you were capable of rational thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Google doesn't care about indexing the entire web, if something is linked to they already know about it, and if its not then its not worth indexing anyways. The idea here is to track what you do, so they can sell it to advertisers. Google sells ads, that's the entire point of the company.
Sorry, the DMCA was "fought by the industry" too. Just like it was "purchased by the industry". You see, there is no singular entity called "the industry". Different companies do different things, and you can't lump them all together and pretend they all supported or all opposed anything. There were plenty of companies on both sides of both issues, that's sorta the definition of a contraversial issue.
No, there's nothing wrong with the way its worded. I don't have the time nor the skill to personally audit the source code of every piece of software I use. This means I have to trust people. Someone who uses their real name would be risking their reputation and possible legal consequences if they distributed malicious code. Someone hiding their identity is less trustworthy.
Where did you get a cleaver that does 2d6? If I knew kitchen utensils did that much damage I would have tried playing a chef instead of a cleric.
Oh right, I forgot that neither major political party accepts bribes, err, contributions from corporations who purchased the DMCA in the first place.
They don't both use cryptography. The DMCA just involves circumventing copy protection technology, it doesn't have to be crypto at all.
What they do have in common is that they are both efforts to take away freedom from Americans, for the benefit of the government.
Luckily they have made such a festering pile of crap that nobody will ever buy it.
Just when exactly do you need to be born to be a Scorporio? Or is this a new version of the zodiac and I am a Tauraurus?
I am not strongly opposed to corporations, I am strongly opposed to people praising them for no reason, and sticking up for them when they don't need or deserve it.
I've made it as clear as humanely possible: I am not complaining about apple, I am saying stop acting like they are nice, they have not done anything to help open source.
If you can only ignore everything I say just so you have something to argue about, then feel free to do it by yourself, you don't need me.
Adding dependancies to core services is always bad. It adds potential bugs, security and reliability issues, etc. Its all just a question of wether or not that new dependancy adds enough benefit to outweigh the downsides. XML does not add anything here, the tools involved are not using all kinds of different config file formats or any other such nonsense, they are simple shell scripts. And just because the XML you make is valid, doesn't mean it will actually do what you think it will, you still have to test your changes just like you do now. Downsides and no upsides add up to a stupid idea.
And no, init and cron do not do the same task, saying "they both start services" shows a complete lack of understanding. Starting a program is just fork(); exec();, this is trivial, done by tons of software, and is the only thing they have in common. The majority of the code of init and cron have nothing to do with this, and are not at all the same.
Your shell does fork(); exec(); all the time, but that doesn't mean its "pretty much the same" as init, cron, sendmail, and apache. Or did you guys want to mash all those together with an XML library too?
And none of this is needed to be able to start services in parallel. Shell scripts can do this just fine, and that's what you init scripts are. Just because current linux distros seem to universally choose hideous sysv style init scripts, doesn't mean they couldn't do it another way. NetBSD's init scripts could easily be changed to add parallel service starting, if it doesn't already support it.
Adding XML to to core services like init is beyond stupid, and merging several independant utilities into one monolithic tool is the exact opposite of how unix works. A single, simple tool to do a single simple task. I can't imagine why any other unix system would want this thing.
The quarter from the limo line is pretty accurate isn't it? Apple is a wealthy corporation, and we should not kiss their ass or claim they are heros because they meet their obligations as minimally as they can. Why are you so desperate to not only defend big corporations who do nothing for you, but also to be insulted for them by proxy?
You don't have to wait for vendors to do jack. YOU DO NOT NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE. Why is this so hard to grasp? You can simply make a class that handles this for you, and use that class. This is no more or less useful or easy than making a new keyword and using that.
This is the entire point I am making, that modifying the language's syntax is not needed to solve problems, and does not make things easier or simpler. This is the standard lisp misdirection, trying to claim that what lisp does is helpful because lisp does it. That doesn't prove anything, show me an actual, real problem that can be solved significantly easier in lisp than in a typical dynamic language.
Sure programmers forgetting to close open streams is a real world problem. Its also a real world problem that can easily be solved in shitty old C++ just with a simple, ordinary class, nevermind dynamic languages. The only thing that sets your example apart is that you make up a nonsense restriction "add a keyword to the language" which has no effect on solving the actual problem. The problem is solved just fine without adding a keyword, and that's the only thing that makes the lisp solution different. That's not better, that's just different.
And yes, I don't fully understand lisp macros, that's the whole point. You are supposed to be explaining how lisp is so superior to everything else, for those of us who don't know it. Instead, you are being typical lisp weenie and claiming its better by making up bullshit reasons that don't matter, and saying "you don't understand" whenever anyone points out that your example is retarded.
Now, quit being a fucking moron and give a real world example of a problem that can be solved significantly easier in lisp than a typical dynamic language like python, ruby or pike.
No, nothing here makes apple evil. Nobody said they are. The point is that the KDE guys want morons to stop claiming that apple is wonderful and open source friendly and helps them, when it is completely and totally not true. They don't want anything from apple, they want morons to stop spreading lies.
Yeah, I am really inclined to trust software written by someone who's afraid to use his real name, and uses a psudenym based on his jealousy of another free software developer who actually does use his real name. Does NetBSD really allow anonymous developers like this?
In fact, I can't think of any way that could possibly be worse than what you are doing now. Running a RAID1 over a network block device is horribly innefficient, and slow as all hell. This just backs things up when you want to, not all the time constantly with every trivial change like a network mirror does.
What would be more perfect is simply being a competant admin in the first place, and not letting your users have permissions to fuck everything up. Nevermind that this is for NetBSD, which doesn't have a whole lot of viruses, nor a defrag program.
How about you go ahead and do a diff on those, and see the HUGE PILE OF CRAP that you get from it. Diffing two totally seperate codebases with tons of massive incompatabilities does not work. Its easy to post on slashdot and feel 1337 because you figured out diff, but its harder to actually contribute something. This is open source software, if you think its so simple, go fix it and everyone will love you.
Since its so easy to merge patches from safari into khtml, why don't you stfu and do it? Clearly you are so much smarter than the konq developers since you find this such a trivial task, so go ahead and do it. Prove how smart you are. Its open source, you are welcome to help. Or are you really only capable of critisizing others anonymously when you don't even understand what you are talking about?
My desktop is running arch linux, which lets me stay up to date just by running a single command too. Only it takes a fraction of the time to do so because it downloads already compiled packages. Similarly, all my BSD servers let me stay up to date without having to stop the working system.
The difference is the system isn't at 100% CPU usage compiling shit for a day with BSDs and good linux distros. You still have to reboot a gentoo machine for kernel upgrades, just like with any other system. So in fact, you are getting no magical updating benefits, just having your server be slow as hell while it compiles everything for a day.
So, you know full well that your example is simple to impliment in dozens of languages, but you want to add a stupid restriction that doesn't actually make a difference in solving a problem, just to make it seem like lisp is special? I don't care if you want me to add a new keyword to my language, that doesn't solve a problem, and has no practical relevance. Present a real problem that is significantly easier to solve using lisp than it is in a typical dynamic language.
Like I said, bullshit doesn't change reality. I know you can name some solaris users. Just like I can name some openvms users. That doesn't mean either is popularly used. Again, there are literally HUNDREDS of times more places using windows and/or linux than there are using solaris. That would mean solaris is not common. Why are you so personally insulted by this fact, were you a solaris developer?
Its still an order of magnitude faster to just install binaries that someone else compiled for you. This is the entire purpose of a linux distro. If you want to compile everything from scratch you don't need a distro. There is no reason that portage can't work just like the BSDs ports, where packages are compiled from ports, which can then easily be distributed so you only need to compile from ports if you need custom configuration options for that particular piece of software.
Making stuff up is a good way to make your point. I didn't say there were freebsd machines there, I said it USED TO RUN FREEBSD, until MS bought it, and in 2000 started moving it over to windows. Pretending solaris was ever involved only makes you look stupid.
I know there are old out of touch places that still run solaris, and there are literally HUNDREDS of times more places not running solaris. That would equal rarely used if you were capable of rational thought.