You joke, but I tried to read the Dick Cheney article the other day [Citation Needed]. It was unreadable because every sentence was marked as Citation Needed [Citation Needed]. It looks "Citation Needed" is now an officially-approved to render a paragraph that you don't like unreadable [Citation Needed].
Anyone have a Greasemonkey script to remove them, or at least dim them a bit out so they can be ignored?
I'm surprised that any self-respecting geek leaves those useless balloon tips on. I used XP for all of about fifteen seconds before figuring out the registry setting to turn these evil things off. The sad thing is you can't shut off the sound effect. Bloop! Thock! Bloop! Bloop!
This is a good point. Sounds like you had KDE installed, but not updated it to the latest version. (Hell, I do the same thing. I just don't care most minor updates. When I update I want features or bugfixes that affect me personally!) If you have the "base" and "updates" repositories enabled, then a smart package manager could let you download the slightly older build of kdevelop to match the libraries you already have. Yeah, it might be a bit out of date, but it would probably be 1/10th the size.
The downside is if you're "half-updated" with some of the new updates (say a new version of glibc), then strict dependencies will probably force you to download everything that sits on top of that. Them's the breaks. Waiting for a big download is far preferable to DLL hell and resolving dependencies manually.
I think the way to work around that, is not to subscribe to the "updates" repository if you don't want them. This way you are saying you installation speed over having the latest updates.
No kidding. I accidentally discovered this a few years ago! I found out that I can use online banking to figure out where my wife is. Unlike GPS, it works indoors! Each bank card is like a satellite, the more you have the more accurate it becomes. Thus, the poor-man's GPS: in more ways than one.
If one doesn't like being called at 6pm on a Sunday, one should get a different job.
No doubt, but it doesn't mean they are purposefully causing the problems it for job security as you assert. Perhaps a few retarded sociopaths are, but normal people don't. Why make yourself extra work, when you're not going to get more money out of it?
Your IT guy is not trying to sabotage you precisely because it's his problem when it doesn't work.
Sorry, I don't do IT, but I know plenty that do. Most don't like being called at 6pm on a Sunday because a laptop crapped out due to spyware that the VP installed.
A lot of software, if not most, is out of control of your IT guy. Big companies have managers buying software with no "skin in the game" - they buy it despite the fact that all the users and IT people hate it. How many companies used Notus Lotes as an email system, despite it absolutely sucking golf balls for that purpose? The deal is made on a golf course or yacht, the sales suits smile and drink and congratulate each other and get 50K bonuses, and you have to deal with the results.
It's pretty obvious that people estimate risk badly, and I agree with you.
But don't try and actually tell anyone this. You will be labeled a bad parent (because you don't worry about stranger kidnappings as much as car accidents), un-American (because you don't worry about turr'ism as much as dying from heart disease), or a host of other things. Do not try to explain to anyone why. People tell gravely tell you "I don't need proof, know in my heart that the world is a more dangerous place today" despite that crime has been going down for the last 20 years.
Keep it to yourself, and just be happy that you're smarter than your average bear.
Ha, got a great laugh about that XP USB menu. Which of the 7 entires do I click?
I cobbled together a box of junk parts out the company's basement for my 5-year old, and dumped Ubuntu on it. (No, not going to go rabid and force him to use Linux. Having two OSes in the house should make him realizes there's more to life than Windows.) I'm rather shocked how easy it was to install - I've spent 10x the amount of time trying to get a basic Fedora Core going here at work.
But, I'm more impressed on how they slimmed down the desktop. Yeah, to us geeks, the lack of options to control everything is disturbing. But the they've really organized it quite well, and the lack of clutter makes it easy to find the basics. I would go as far to say it's easier to deal with than XP.
I'm seriously thinking of setting my parents up with it. XP breaks every few months and I have to remote admin it to fix whatever crapped out (yay, TightVNC). The main sticking point will be digital camera software, if I can convince them to use whatever replacement there is. They're already used to FireFox and Thunderbird, so most of the battle is won.
You probably need to prioritize TCP ACKs across saturated asymmetric connections. Otherwise outstanding upstream ACKs will slow the downstream side. My el-cheapo router does this, once I reverse-engineered what the marketing department named it ("TurboTCP"). You can probably do it in software if you look hard enough.
I've called them, and told them I don't want those channels. I told them that when I ordered, and I told them that when I plugged the cable in my TV and saw extra channels than what I ordered.
What am I supposed to do? Unprogram the extra channels from the TV and not watch them? How would that protect me from being fined?
Or are you saying I must *fork* over $60 for the service they are giving me, even if I don't want it? If that's the case, then why are they selling basic cable at all, if only by ordering it, you'll be fined because they deliver it incorrectly?
Sound like an extortion scheme to me: sure, you can buy the cheaper product but we'll just give you a more expensive product anyway, refuse to give you the cheaper one when you ask, and then fine you if you use it anyway.
I get HD channels and digital cable, pay $9 a month, and have no box. How?
Ordered basic analog cable ("2-13"), plugged it into my TV w/QAM tuner, and bang, I have all the analog channels, a ton of digital channels, and a handful of HD ones. I don't care for PPV or any pay channels. But if you cared, you'd already have it.
I've called them and told them that it does this, so I'm not accused of stealing. They don't care.
So, the question is why BUY digital cable, as opposed to why HAVE digital cable?
If someone can write natural-sounding English without any definite articles, it's hard to support a claim that such common words are necessary and must survive.
Good idea. Some people have written whole books without the letter E. We can get rid of all those words, too!
I never heard that, as OO certainly doesn't have the "ribbon" interface. Practically speaking, I expect there always will be some lag, more so in areas that are less important like custom dictionary management.
(The third would be gestational, and typically goes away after pregnancy, but not always. My grandmother was gestational, but it turned into Type 1 afterwards. My wife had it, but recovered.)
The naming is unfortunate. My 4-year old son has type 1, and the first thing people think when hearing it is that he ate too much sugar or is a fat couch potato. He's skinny as a rail, rarely eats junk (we never let him, even before diagnosis), and active as any healthy 4-year old.
We can chalk that up to the naming of the disease by symptom (elevated blood glucose) and poor news reporting that doesn't distinguish between the types. But diabetes is a very old disease - the ancient Greeks knew how to diagnose it by, of all things, tasting the patient's urine for sugar. It was named long before they actually knew what the separate causes were.
Even type 2 isn't caused by self-neglect, although there is a correlation with obesity. There millions of fat people without diabetes -- that alone breaks causation.
I can see getting stumped by this. English is pretty vague, and those words might mean sqrt(3 * sqrt(3/2)). I need a calculator for that!
If he meant (sqrt(3) * sqrt(3)) / 2... well, that's easy. But I had to write it down to see it, so I could at least arrange it into something easily solvable. Just hearing it or reading the words, wasn't immediately obvious.
Web shortcuts never work as well as application shortcuts. They have focus problems, because they have to compete with the browser's shortcuts. All the good, easy, modeless ones are taken.
OK, I'll try it in gmail. I type 'c'. Nothing. Oh, first I have to enable them. Got it.
So 'c' is compose, I type it, but it didn't work. I just see a 'c'. Huh? Wait, my cursor happens to be in the search box. OK, so I tab over to the next button. I press 'c', and... Mozilla matches on the "Google Checkout" link. Wait, now my focus seems completely lost, and I can't click on any links at all. Sure, probably a Mozilla bug.
Where do I put my cursor? Ah, I have to click with the mouse on some whitespace to put it into "shortcut" mode. Or press ESC when I'm in a text box.
In other words, the shortcuts are modal like... vi!
Would you stand for shortcuts like this in a normal GUI application?
No webmail for me, well, I have it but don't really use it. I'm not paranoid, it's just applications inside a browser tend to such if you like keyboard shortcuts. Mouse mouse mouse mouse, drag drag drag, don't you dare touch that keyboard! Keyboard are for words, never commands, no no no you naughty boy! If I see another Web 2.0 nested scrollbar that is drawn with skinnable gradient-shaded in-browser popup translucent animated glowing brushed-metal AJAX WebKit JavaFaces++, 3 pixles wide on a 24" monitor so I can't even hit it, and it doesn't support PAGE UP and PAGE DOWN, but only drag, no, not even click under the scrollbar for a page-up click, I'm going to puke!
I had an interesting conversation with a very successful and wealthy friend. He sends his daughter to a very well-known private school in MA, and I asked him why he decided this. I was expecting "because public school sucks", much for the reasons you say, but that's not the case. He said he was "a public school kind of guy", but there were two things where the public schools *here* aren't up to par. (Note I say here, as she was in public school in another state.) One is foreign language: his wife is French and so his daughter is already bilingual, yet he insist she learned another language fluently. Two is music. We play in a band together, and he realizes that the trend of clipping out the arts from education is detrimental. Imagine that, one of most successful business guys around (he's created and sold 3 or 4 companies and just does it for fun now) and, he thinks art is important than the "bad kids" in public schools.
I've always wondered about this. My BMI is in the same range and I'm technically obese based on the weight/height charts I've seen. I agree, I could stand to lose about 20-30 pounds. But, if you look at the charts, even if I did so, I'd still be "overweight".
Now, for my height, that charts says I'd have to get down to about 155 to not be overweight. 155? In college, I lost a lot of weight when I was doing a lot running, and I might have hit 160 or 165 or so. I got down to 31" waist. Now, I have big shoulders, and this made me look really thin. Any clothes that fit me in the shoulders would be swimmingly loose in the gut. But, I was still "overweight" compared to these charts. If I barely got to the "not overweight" state, I'd be a skeleton! Really. Which, I think would be impossible for me... as you exercise more you get heavier in muscle. I cruised up to 175-180 with no waist change, all muscle. And I drank a lot of beer.
I remember thinking at the time, oh, I have 10 or 15 pounds to go, but now I realize that was pretty damn thin, and didn't need to lose anything else.
If you have low blood sugar such that you look like you are driving drunk, you shouldn't be driving anyway.
Low blood sugar isn't a long-term state, it can happen in an instant. Whereas nobody can get that drunk that fast. You can drop from 300 (dangerously high) to 50 (dangerously low) in the span of a few minutes. I've seen it. Sorry, but you you don't know how diabetes works. At all.
If they know they're low, I can assure that every diabetic would rather correct that low first, than get into the car. It's a pretty simple thing - if you don't correct a low, you might pass out, go in a coma, or possibly die. And that's not even considering the car.
So, you're in the middle of traffic jam at 20mph on the interstate. You get a low, do you deserve a DUI? Maybe, if you refuse to try to control your diabetes. There aren't a lot of people like that, since they tend to quickly die. Does a person who has a heart-attack get a DUI?
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone have a Greasemonkey script to remove them, or at least dim them a bit out so they can be ignored?
I'm surprised that any self-respecting geek leaves those useless balloon tips on. I used XP for all of about fifteen seconds before figuring out the registry setting to turn these evil things off. The sad thing is you can't shut off the sound effect. Bloop! Thock! Bloop! Bloop!
The downside is if you're "half-updated" with some of the new updates (say a new version of glibc), then strict dependencies will probably force you to download everything that sits on top of that. Them's the breaks. Waiting for a big download is far preferable to DLL hell and resolving dependencies manually.
I think the way to work around that, is not to subscribe to the "updates" repository if you don't want them. This way you are saying you installation speed over having the latest updates.
There is way too much awesome in this post for a 5 to represent. 5 is not enough, obviously Slashcode needs to be fixed.
No kidding. I accidentally discovered this a few years ago! I found out that I can use online banking to figure out where my wife is. Unlike GPS, it works indoors! Each bank card is like a satellite, the more you have the more accurate it becomes. Thus, the poor-man's GPS: in more ways than one.
No doubt, but it doesn't mean they are purposefully causing the problems it for job security as you assert. Perhaps a few retarded sociopaths are, but normal people don't. Why make yourself extra work, when you're not going to get more money out of it?
Your IT guy is not trying to sabotage you precisely because it's his problem when it doesn't work.
A lot of software, if not most, is out of control of your IT guy. Big companies have managers buying software with no "skin in the game" - they buy it despite the fact that all the users and IT people hate it. How many companies used Notus Lotes as an email system, despite it absolutely sucking golf balls for that purpose? The deal is made on a golf course or yacht, the sales suits smile and drink and congratulate each other and get 50K bonuses, and you have to deal with the results.
IT GUY: Your PC is insecure.
CEO: It's your job to secure it, dumbfuck. Give me a secure computer.
IT GUY: Yes sir.
But don't try and actually tell anyone this. You will be labeled a bad parent (because you don't worry about stranger kidnappings as much as car accidents), un-American (because you don't worry about turr'ism as much as dying from heart disease), or a host of other things. Do not try to explain to anyone why. People tell gravely tell you "I don't need proof, know in my heart that the world is a more dangerous place today" despite that crime has been going down for the last 20 years.
Keep it to yourself, and just be happy that you're smarter than your average bear.
Ha, got a great laugh about that XP USB menu. Which of the 7 entires do I click?
I cobbled together a box of junk parts out the company's basement for my 5-year old, and dumped Ubuntu on it. (No, not going to go rabid and force him to use Linux. Having two OSes in the house should make him realizes there's more to life than Windows.) I'm rather shocked how easy it was to install - I've spent 10x the amount of time trying to get a basic Fedora Core going here at work.
But, I'm more impressed on how they slimmed down the desktop. Yeah, to us geeks, the lack of options to control everything is disturbing. But the they've really organized it quite well, and the lack of clutter makes it easy to find the basics. I would go as far to say it's easier to deal with than XP.
I'm seriously thinking of setting my parents up with it. XP breaks every few months and I have to remote admin it to fix whatever crapped out (yay, TightVNC). The main sticking point will be digital camera software, if I can convince them to use whatever replacement there is. They're already used to FireFox and Thunderbird, so most of the battle is won.
You probably need to prioritize TCP ACKs across saturated asymmetric connections. Otherwise outstanding upstream ACKs will slow the downstream side. My el-cheapo router does this, once I reverse-engineered what the marketing department named it ("TurboTCP"). You can probably do it in software if you look hard enough.
What am I supposed to do? Unprogram the extra channels from the TV and not watch them? How would that protect me from being fined?
Or are you saying I must *fork* over $60 for the service they are giving me, even if I don't want it? If that's the case, then why are they selling basic cable at all, if only by ordering it, you'll be fined because they deliver it incorrectly?
Sound like an extortion scheme to me: sure, you can buy the cheaper product but we'll just give you a more expensive product anyway, refuse to give you the cheaper one when you ask, and then fine you if you use it anyway.
I get HD channels and digital cable, pay $9 a month, and have no box. How?
Ordered basic analog cable ("2-13"), plugged it into my TV w/QAM tuner, and bang, I have all the analog channels, a ton of digital channels, and a handful of HD ones. I don't care for PPV or any pay channels. But if you cared, you'd already have it.
I've called them and told them that it does this, so I'm not accused of stealing. They don't care.
So, the question is why BUY digital cable, as opposed to why HAVE digital cable?
I never heard that, as OO certainly doesn't have the "ribbon" interface. Practically speaking, I expect there always will be some lag, more so in areas that are less important like custom dictionary management.
You have to drop down the console and enter God mode, then you can kick Jesus' ass. I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!
Hm, this sounds familiar. While I agree with you, you can't blame this particular one just on open source.
The naming is unfortunate. My 4-year old son has type 1, and the first thing people think when hearing it is that he ate too much sugar or is a fat couch potato. He's skinny as a rail, rarely eats junk (we never let him, even before diagnosis), and active as any healthy 4-year old.
We can chalk that up to the naming of the disease by symptom (elevated blood glucose) and poor news reporting that doesn't distinguish between the types. But diabetes is a very old disease - the ancient Greeks knew how to diagnose it by, of all things, tasting the patient's urine for sugar. It was named long before they actually knew what the separate causes were.
Even type 2 isn't caused by self-neglect, although there is a correlation with obesity. There millions of fat people without diabetes -- that alone breaks causation.
If he meant (sqrt(3) * sqrt(3)) / 2... well, that's easy. But I had to write it down to see it, so I could at least arrange it into something easily solvable. Just hearing it or reading the words, wasn't immediately obvious.
OK, I'll try it in gmail. I type 'c'. Nothing. Oh, first I have to enable them. Got it.
So 'c' is compose, I type it, but it didn't work. I just see a 'c'. Huh? Wait, my cursor happens to be in the search box. OK, so I tab over to the next button. I press 'c', and... Mozilla matches on the "Google Checkout" link. Wait, now my focus seems completely lost, and I can't click on any links at all. Sure, probably a Mozilla bug.
Where do I put my cursor? Ah, I have to click with the mouse on some whitespace to put it into "shortcut" mode. Or press ESC when I'm in a text box.
In other words, the shortcuts are modal like... vi!
Would you stand for shortcuts like this in a normal GUI application?
Wait, what? Sorry.
I had an interesting conversation with a very successful and wealthy friend. He sends his daughter to a very well-known private school in MA, and I asked him why he decided this. I was expecting "because public school sucks", much for the reasons you say, but that's not the case. He said he was "a public school kind of guy", but there were two things where the public schools *here* aren't up to par. (Note I say here, as she was in public school in another state.) One is foreign language: his wife is French and so his daughter is already bilingual, yet he insist she learned another language fluently. Two is music. We play in a band together, and he realizes that the trend of clipping out the arts from education is detrimental. Imagine that, one of most successful business guys around (he's created and sold 3 or 4 companies and just does it for fun now) and, he thinks art is important than the "bad kids" in public schools.
Now, for my height, that charts says I'd have to get down to about 155 to not be overweight. 155? In college, I lost a lot of weight when I was doing a lot running, and I might have hit 160 or 165 or so. I got down to 31" waist. Now, I have big shoulders, and this made me look really thin. Any clothes that fit me in the shoulders would be swimmingly loose in the gut. But, I was still "overweight" compared to these charts. If I barely got to the "not overweight" state, I'd be a skeleton! Really. Which, I think would be impossible for me... as you exercise more you get heavier in muscle. I cruised up to 175-180 with no waist change, all muscle. And I drank a lot of beer.
I remember thinking at the time, oh, I have 10 or 15 pounds to go, but now I realize that was pretty damn thin, and didn't need to lose anything else.
You ALMOST fooled me, but the "Motif is the only way to go if you want to retain your sanity" bit gave you away.
Low blood sugar isn't a long-term state, it can happen in an instant. Whereas nobody can get that drunk that fast. You can drop from 300 (dangerously high) to 50 (dangerously low) in the span of a few minutes. I've seen it. Sorry, but you you don't know how diabetes works. At all.
If they know they're low, I can assure that every diabetic would rather correct that low first, than get into the car. It's a pretty simple thing - if you don't correct a low, you might pass out, go in a coma, or possibly die. And that's not even considering the car.
So, you're in the middle of traffic jam at 20mph on the interstate. You get a low, do you deserve a DUI? Maybe, if you refuse to try to control your diabetes. There aren't a lot of people like that, since they tend to quickly die. Does a person who has a heart-attack get a DUI?