I do all my work in a subversion repository so that I have versioning and I have the same work files on all my computers (office, home, laptops). However, I don't put my pictures and music into the repository because of the disk space required. A subversion working directory stores two copies of the files, plus one of the computers must host the actual database, another copy (plus all historical data). So the data I have would explode into either twice or more than three times the size. I don't have large enough disks to do that, especially not on my small laptop that only has a couple spare gigs. That's why versioned file systems don't work effectively transparently. Not to mention that some process must maintain the filesystem, an administrator account could toy with the filesystem all it wants to.
Quite alright, I just read one too many comments talking about all these cool weapons.
I just sort of feel like we've got enough powerful weapons. If it comes to war, most of the stuff is going to be absolutely useless anyway. I'm not talking about bombing countries we shouldn't be flying over, we're really good at that. I mean a war where countries actually mobilize against each other. What we have is an amazing war machinery with more information, resources, and high tech gizmos than anyone else. However, most of that is useless in the middle of a battlefield if more time is required analysing information than in making rational, clever, and effective descisions. War is chaotic, and anti-missile missiles and such things get lost in the instability.
It's not very nice to highlight his name. If he's designing quantum computers, he either had a dislexic moment or got misquoted. My guess is the latter.
I was running through the thread trying to find this post.
Spot on, there have been debates on whether photovoltaic cells actually produce more energy in their life than it took to manufacture them. I don't know about that, since people wouldn't buy them if that was the case. But in any case, photovoltaic isn't as green as people seem to think.
Personally, I would hate reading a complete n00b book on linux. I enjoy knowing the inside out of the command prompt and doing things in glorious piped heaven. I already know where most of my config files are on various distributions. And I know how to man and google to find out the rest. Why would I care about a book which starts from the very beginning. Except, of course, to give as a reference so I don't have to explain it myself to people.
Why is it you keep sounding almost apologetic and saying that companies should do this study for themselves. Since results may be different depending on circumstances?
It sounds like your study supports Windows because of a quirk in setup, but that you don't.
yeah, lameness filter, I realize that's an awful long string of letters. How does the filter work anyway? I mean, those are obviously not words and it doesn't like their length.
I've been slowly working my way through it, and it's quite amazing what they actually wrote down. Quite an interesting read, well if you like very repetitive lists of names and knowing how many cubits things in ancient temples were.
Anyway, I also assume you don't boil kids (goats) in their mothers milk (don't care enough to find reference) nor eat anything that only shews cud or has cloven hoofs (Deuteronomy 14:7).
You also don't store money in banks which give an interest rate, unless of course you're a foreigner or it's a foreign bank, in which case it's all right. (Deuteronomy 23:20)
Way to go on the install guide, I might have used it years ago when I was lost and confused, not to mention afraid installing linux.
On another note, shouldn't news about Fedora have the Fedora logo next to it, instead of Red Hat? Subtle point, and I don't want to bash Red Hat, they're great, and will be supporting Fedora, but they're not the same thing anymore.
I hear your pain. Sometimes I just take the easy way out and export directly to trees, it seems to do the trick.:) Though I usually use LaTex these days.
um...I didn't say I downgraded from debian, in this case I think I had had it with Mandrake and wanted to try a different distribution. I tried debian first, after the 2.2 fiasco, on a laptop no less, I quickly tried something else.
yes, but if I specify GPL version 2 as linus does...then that's the only valid one. Hire a lawyer to really find out. I've wondered about this myself, but all the evidence points to the author having to include "or any later version" in their notice.
well, assuming that some weird hole is discovered in GPL X, I would want my code to be usable under GPL X+1, without that hole. Therefore, I license my GPLed code under Version 2 or later. I trust that FSF won't screw me over with the next version. Linus does not, since he licensed the kernel under GPL 2 and ONLY GPL 2. I take one risk, he takes another, unless you're RMS you have to choose. It's a matter of trust.
There is too much freedom for even the distributions to make cores effectively. Debian doesn't develop the software, they package it. They have no direct control over compatibility issues between versions in their software. This makes their job a whole lot harder than in commercial OS's where one entity controls both the core software and the packaging.
They also don't have the resources to making security patches for every package without upgrading to a newer version of said package (i.e. backporting). They really do a phenominal job given their constraints.
Well duh, if you wait that long between release cycles...you're going to have some major problems upgrading, as everything you had was ancient and everything you're upgrading to is mearly old.
I love debian for their philosophy; however, when I tried their distribution and it downgraded the kernel from 2.4 to 2.2 when 2.6 had already come out....I don't think I even started X before deleting it. Maybe I'd have had a different experience if someone had told me "testing" didn't mean what it usually does.
All of that said, it seems these problems could probably have been avoided with more testing,:( .
I don't think they mean actually translating the text, I think they just want to word it more redundantly so that it is clear in different copyright domains with slightly different laws. Language of text remains English.
Currently, all translations are "unofficial" and carry no legal weight. They all say, but if you're a lawyer, go read the real license in English.
look for the one that's registered and you'll know which it is.
macintel.com is not available macintel.net is not available macintel.org is not available macintel.us is Available! macintel.info is not available macintel.biz is not available
apptel.com is not available apptel.net is Available! apptel.org is Available! apptel.us is Available! apptel.info is Available! apptel.biz is not available
appintel.com is not available appintel.net is not available appintel.org is Available! appintel.us is Available! appintel.info is Available! appintel.biz is Available!
Slashdot Mirror
You got your twin paradox messed up:
S R/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/
getting the (usually watered-down) message out to the unwashed.
:)
so they can be clean...
I do all my work in a subversion repository so that I have versioning and I have the same work files on all my computers (office, home, laptops). However, I don't put my pictures and music into the repository because of the disk space required. A subversion working directory stores two copies of the files, plus one of the computers must host the actual database, another copy (plus all historical data). So the data I have would explode into either twice or more than three times the size. I don't have large enough disks to do that, especially not on my small laptop that only has a couple spare gigs. That's why versioned file systems don't work effectively transparently. Not to mention that some process must maintain the filesystem, an administrator account could toy with the filesystem all it wants to.
Quite alright, I just read one too many comments talking about all these cool weapons.
I just sort of feel like we've got enough powerful weapons. If it comes to war, most of the stuff is going to be absolutely useless anyway. I'm not talking about bombing countries we shouldn't be flying over, we're really good at that. I mean a war where countries actually mobilize against each other. What we have is an amazing war machinery with more information, resources, and high tech gizmos than anyone else. However, most of that is useless in the middle of a battlefield if more time is required analysing information than in making rational, clever, and effective descisions. War is chaotic, and anti-missile missiles and such things get lost in the instability.
Wow, looks like we win!
we're so cool.
It's not very nice to highlight his name. If he's designing quantum computers, he either had a dislexic moment or got misquoted. My guess is the latter.
I was running through the thread trying to find this post.
Spot on, there have been debates on whether photovoltaic cells actually produce more energy in their life than it took to manufacture them. I don't know about that, since people wouldn't buy them if that was the case. But in any case, photovoltaic isn't as green as people seem to think.
You must live in that red room that keeps moving away?
Personally, I would hate reading a complete n00b book on linux. I enjoy knowing the inside out of the command prompt and doing things in glorious piped heaven. I already know where most of my config files are on various distributions. And I know how to man and google to find out the rest. Why would I care about a book which starts from the very beginning. Except, of course, to give as a reference so I don't have to explain it myself to people.
Why is it you keep sounding almost apologetic and saying that companies should do this study for themselves.
Since results may be different depending on circumstances?
It sounds like your study supports Windows because of a quirk in setup, but that you don't.
Let the flaming begin.
I would use one of the following:
i cation
publication
or maybe one of the alternatives.
publizing
publicatizing
publicication
pubish
publishizing
publicizing
yeah, lameness filter, I realize that's an awful long string of letters. How does the filter work anyway? I mean, those are obviously not words and it doesn't like their length.
You believe everything else in that book?
I've been slowly working my way through it, and it's quite amazing what they actually wrote down. Quite an interesting read, well if you like very repetitive lists of names and knowing how many cubits things in ancient temples were.
Anyway, I also assume you don't boil kids (goats) in their mothers milk (don't care enough to find reference) nor eat anything that only shews cud or has cloven hoofs (Deuteronomy 14:7).
You also don't store money in banks which give an interest rate, unless of course you're a foreigner or it's a foreign bank, in which case it's all right. (Deuteronomy 23:20)
Way to go on the install guide, I might have used it years ago when I was lost and confused, not to mention afraid installing linux.
On another note, shouldn't news about Fedora have the Fedora logo next to it, instead of Red Hat? Subtle point, and I don't want to bash Red Hat, they're great, and will be supporting Fedora, but they're not the same thing anymore.
I hear your pain. Sometimes I just take the easy way out and export directly to trees, it seems to do the trick. :) Though I usually use LaTex these days.
um...I didn't say I downgraded from debian, in this case I think I had had it with Mandrake and wanted to try a different distribution. I tried debian first, after the 2.2 fiasco, on a laptop no less, I quickly tried something else.
yes, but if I specify GPL version 2 as linus does...then that's the only valid one. Hire a lawyer to really find out. I've wondered about this myself, but all the evidence points to the author having to include "or any later version" in their notice.
well, assuming that some weird hole is discovered in GPL X, I would want my code to be usable under GPL X+1, without that hole. Therefore, I license my GPLed code under Version 2 or later. I trust that FSF won't screw me over with the next version. Linus does not, since he licensed the kernel under GPL 2 and ONLY GPL 2. I take one risk, he takes another, unless you're RMS you have to choose. It's a matter of trust.
yeah, that thing will probably outlive us. No need to worry for a while. You picked the right distribution for what you wanted.
Give it a rest.
The Linux Standard Base is dead.
There is too much freedom for even the distributions to make cores effectively. Debian doesn't develop the software, they package it. They have no direct control over compatibility issues between versions in their software. This makes their job a whole lot harder than in commercial OS's where one entity controls both the core software and the packaging.
They also don't have the resources to making security patches for every package without upgrading to a newer version of said package (i.e. backporting). They really do a phenominal job given their constraints.
Well duh, if you wait that long between release cycles...you're going to have some major problems upgrading, as everything you had was ancient and everything you're upgrading to is mearly old.
:( .
I love debian for their philosophy; however, when I tried their distribution and it downgraded the kernel from 2.4 to 2.2 when 2.6 had already come out....I don't think I even started X before deleting it. Maybe I'd have had a different experience if someone had told me "testing" didn't mean what it usually does.
All of that said, it seems these problems could probably have been avoided with more testing,
I don't think they mean actually translating the text, I think they just want to word it more redundantly so that it is clear in different copyright domains with slightly different laws. Language of text remains English.
Currently, all translations are "unofficial" and carry no legal weight. They all say, but if you're a lawyer, go read the real license in English.
As is a large part of Linux (meaning the kernel). I don't think Linus trusts the FSF.
yeah, much more accurate,
:)
though
GPL - Free as in mine
doesn't paint the perfect picture of reality either.
look for the one that's registered and you'll know which it is.
macintel.com is not available
macintel.net is not available
macintel.org is not available
macintel.us is Available!
macintel.info is not available
macintel.biz is not available
apptel.com is not available
apptel.net is Available!
apptel.org is Available!
apptel.us is Available!
apptel.info is Available!
apptel.biz is not available
appintel.com is not available
appintel.net is not available
appintel.org is Available!
appintel.us is Available!
appintel.info is Available!
appintel.biz is Available!
etc...
I think this started with Apple buying out Intel. Then he went to look at how big the respective companies were. The rest was all coercion of facts.