At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, I totally agree with you. Because it feels more like a message board we may shoot dozens of emails off a day (more like an IM). Previously we wouldn't write emails unless we had a lot to say, now we can communicate quickly about small tasks and it doesn't seem like the annoyance it once was.
That might not be clear, but its a good thing(TM).
I'm still playing AC after 6 years. I've been through more intense periods of addiction, but a couple years back took a look at what was happening and stepped back. I still play it, and enjoy it. I even think I enjoy it more now because theres no more pressure to play it all the time.
As for WoW I played it for 4 months and couldn't stand it. But with the easy curve I can imagine the constant rewards would be tempting.
Damn drowsy sinus meds.. I had a typo in my post, first sentence where I meant to say 'where I think he made deliberatly false comparisons'.
I believe (95%) that replying to your comment removes my moderations, so both of us have taken back our immediate actions. I was going for the mod-and-run style but to be honest I'd much rather discuss why I think the OP was wrong, so I thank you for the opportunity and the lack of hostility in response (get that a lot here).
I agree with your point about clutter since 2000. I run a 1.83Ghz Athlon XP, 1.5GB ram. That might be why linux and windows run without slowdowns (most everything desktop-oriented requires far less). However I still do not think a five year gap in technology can be compared:) If the reverse situation is compared, current XP vs debian circa 2000 you should find debian 2000 to be faster. I won't pretend I know enough to argue why, but perhaps it has less 'stuff'(TM).
Now to return you to your regularly scheduled day. Thanks for trying to keep slashdot a little civil.
I modded, but not just because I disagreed with it. More that it didn't make deliberatly false comparisons.
(For the record I triple-boot on this box, XP, Fedora Core 5 and latest Ubuntu pre-release)
Anyways, why I think it's not an insightful comment (mirrors another posters comments): compares windows 2000 to latest linux distros (5-6 year difference depending on distro). I bet windows 2000 is slow compared to windows 95 too.
Also compares install size of windows to a full blown linux install. A desktop linux install should be compared against an XP computer with all the software fully installed, since most of the latest desktop distro's come with a ton of software. (And you can trim off what you don't need making the point rather absurd anyways).
Personally I find XP and latest linux distros to be equal in speed, ie I don't notice slow downs in either.
If you compared a debian release from around 2000 to windows 2000 they would probably function about the same on the same hardware (perhaps on very old machines the difference might be more noticable).
Sinus medication really hurts any chance of me writing anything clear and concise, but I do believe it was a deliberate troll and certainly not insightful.
I have an ATi card and I agree with you. I don't have Ubuntu on right now, but I just check EasyUbuntu and it has an option to install the ATi drivers. But I've tried to get them working before, and something about a little option button seems a little to easy for those bears..
I had a similar problem with emailing myself backup stuff from college computers to get at later.
I found the best way was to just rename the extension of the.zip or.fakezip or anything other than zip. They only check on.zips. Send a.rar and it will also not be scanned.
Actually, I don't think you've made any good points in that whole rant.
I did say harsh comments, which yes includes flames. They might not be a great way of showing an argument, but if people are really pissed off about it, perhaps someone should look into it.
And no, its not my job to work on every open source program on the planet because I don't like their feature set or am not pleased with its look. For most people its a hobby, they have the time for it or they don't work on it. I don't have the time to work on GIMP, and most people don't.
I have no idea where you were going with the money thing. Maybe if you typed it out with a cool head you would get the point across clearer, but with your attitude I might not even going to bother to read your next reply.
Changing the name and uploading it wouldn't work, and you know why. You're just suggesting it because you have no better argument than 'do it yourself'. And no, I don't think its in the spirit of open source to grab someone elses work, change the name and upload it. Sure its perfectly fine within the license, but that doesn't make it right.
My type make you sick. I'm not even going to wonder how you justify grouping me with everyone bitching about GIMP when I was actually wondering how you could say money is the only reason programs turn out better than open source programs. Money and Marketing shouldn't make developers work harder than their 'pride and joy' homebrew programs. Perhaps they just don't care as much? To be fair, thats a perfectly good answer. No one is obligated to support their stuff forever. Maybe there are better ways of saying it, but thats my main problem I had initially.
And please drop your ranting attitude. I'd rather talk about GIMPs real problems, not toss crap back and forth. Basically, I think you defending GIMP vehemently doesn't make your arguments any more reasonable than mine.
So what your saying is he can't critique anything because you can't accept harsh comments?
I guess you just don't put your heart into making something beautiful, usable and fast unless you're paid for it? Why do you bother helping if you don't care enough to make it as best as it can be?
And you are one of many people who do like the current interface, but those many are hardly the majority.
What are you talking about exactly? The OP mentioned OpenSource, Google never came up at all.
He mentioned 'everything on the web' as being driven by ads, so your own bias has nothing to do with it.
Very true. But I assume that you would have a certain fault tolerance (would receive multiple bad blocks before shutting off the source), and many fake peers (easy to generate fake data). So it probably would waste a bit of bandwidth before it was all sorted out.
But yes your point is correct, in the end the anti-poisoning should work itself out.
30 gig is rather crazy. But just to chime in with my gmail stats..
You are currently using 616 MB (23%) of your 2650 MB.
I currently have 1793 emails (no, no porn sorry), and just eyeing it, i'd say 5% have attachments. So while 2.xGB from gmail may seem far away, when the random files people send each other get larger, email will have to adjust.. some places will just be in better shape when it does. and 30gig.com probably won't exist.
Slashdot Mirror
At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, I totally agree with you. Because it feels more like a message board we may shoot dozens of emails off a day (more like an IM). Previously we wouldn't write emails unless we had a lot to say, now we can communicate quickly about small tasks and it doesn't seem like the annoyance it once was.
That might not be clear, but its a good thing(TM).
Hail! RAmen.
I'm still playing AC after 6 years. I've been through more intense periods of addiction, but a couple years back took a look at what was happening and stepped back. I still play it, and enjoy it. I even think I enjoy it more now because theres no more pressure to play it all the time.
As for WoW I played it for 4 months and couldn't stand it. But with the easy curve I can imagine the constant rewards would be tempting.
Damn drowsy sinus meds.. I had a typo in my post, first sentence where I meant to say 'where I think he made deliberatly false comparisons'.
:) If the reverse situation is compared, current XP vs debian circa 2000 you should find debian 2000 to be faster. I won't pretend I know enough to argue why, but perhaps it has less 'stuff'(TM).
I believe (95%) that replying to your comment removes my moderations, so both of us have taken back our immediate actions. I was going for the mod-and-run style but to be honest I'd much rather discuss why I think the OP was wrong, so I thank you for the opportunity and the lack of hostility in response (get that a lot here).
I agree with your point about clutter since 2000. I run a 1.83Ghz Athlon XP, 1.5GB ram. That might be why linux and windows run without slowdowns (most everything desktop-oriented requires far less). However I still do not think a five year gap in technology can be compared
Now to return you to your regularly scheduled day. Thanks for trying to keep slashdot a little civil.
Judging by the arvert styled article, its marketing. "You NEED multi-cores to speed up that system!". etc.
I modded, but not just because I disagreed with it. More that it didn't make deliberatly false comparisons.
(For the record I triple-boot on this box, XP, Fedora Core 5 and latest Ubuntu pre-release)
Anyways, why I think it's not an insightful comment (mirrors another posters comments): compares windows 2000 to latest linux distros (5-6 year difference depending on distro). I bet windows 2000 is slow compared to windows 95 too.
Also compares install size of windows to a full blown linux install. A desktop linux install should be compared against an XP computer with all the software fully installed, since most of the latest desktop distro's come with a ton of software. (And you can trim off what you don't need making the point rather absurd anyways).
Personally I find XP and latest linux distros to be equal in speed, ie I don't notice slow downs in either.
If you compared a debian release from around 2000 to windows 2000 they would probably function about the same on the same hardware (perhaps on very old machines the difference might be more noticable).
Sinus medication really hurts any chance of me writing anything clear and concise, but I do believe it was a deliberate troll and certainly not insightful.
I just took a look, and it seems fine to me.
Minor disclaimer that I never looked at CNN.com before, but I don't see any mess.
Take a look at the new spike slashdot gave them, they should be happy now.
Firefox on WinXP.. I know the underlines you mention (damn them), but I don't have any in this article.
I have an ATi card and I agree with you. I don't have Ubuntu on right now, but I just check EasyUbuntu and it has an option to install the ATi drivers. But I've tried to get them working before, and something about a little option button seems a little to easy for those bears..
RAmen.
Just a question, if the password hash isn't stored anywhere, how do you compare the password you enter to the actual password?
I had a similar problem with emailing myself backup stuff from college computers to get at later.
.zip or .fakezip or anything other than zip. They only check on .zips. Send a .rar and it will also not be scanned.
I found the best way was to just rename the extension of the
Guess you missed the 'budget line' part in the summary then.
And what about hockey.
RAmen.
Jesus, you really don't listen.
I said change the name, WITHOUT ADDING FEATURES.
I understand you don't know very much, but get with the fucking program here.
Actually, I don't think you've made any good points in that whole rant.
I did say harsh comments, which yes includes flames. They might not be a great way of showing an argument, but if people are really pissed off about it, perhaps someone should look into it.
And no, its not my job to work on every open source program on the planet because I don't like their feature set or am not pleased with its look. For most people its a hobby, they have the time for it or they don't work on it. I don't have the time to work on GIMP, and most people don't.
I have no idea where you were going with the money thing. Maybe if you typed it out with a cool head you would get the point across clearer, but with your attitude I might not even going to bother to read your next reply.
Changing the name and uploading it wouldn't work, and you know why. You're just suggesting it because you have no better argument than 'do it yourself'. And no, I don't think its in the spirit of open source to grab someone elses work, change the name and upload it. Sure its perfectly fine within the license, but that doesn't make it right.
My type make you sick. I'm not even going to wonder how you justify grouping me with everyone bitching about GIMP when I was actually wondering how you could say money is the only reason programs turn out better than open source programs. Money and Marketing shouldn't make developers work harder than their 'pride and joy' homebrew programs. Perhaps they just don't care as much? To be fair, thats a perfectly good answer. No one is obligated to support their stuff forever. Maybe there are better ways of saying it, but thats my main problem I had initially.
And please drop your ranting attitude. I'd rather talk about GIMPs real problems, not toss crap back and forth. Basically, I think you defending GIMP vehemently doesn't make your arguments any more reasonable than mine.
So what your saying is he can't critique anything because you can't accept harsh comments?
I guess you just don't put your heart into making something beautiful, usable and fast unless you're paid for it? Why do you bother helping if you don't care enough to make it as best as it can be?
And you are one of many people who do like the current interface, but those many are hardly the majority.
try:
ps (or ps -A for all processes (ie from other users on the same server).
Example feedback from a logged in terminal (running nothing really):
PID TTY TIME CMD
92656 pts/0 0:00 ps
107760 pts/0 0:00 -ksh
What are you talking about exactly? The OP mentioned OpenSource, Google never came up at all.
He mentioned 'everything on the web' as being driven by ads, so your own bias has nothing to do with it.
Very true. But I assume that you would have a certain fault tolerance (would receive multiple bad blocks before shutting off the source), and many fake peers (easy to generate fake data). So it probably would waste a bit of bandwidth before it was all sorted out.
But yes your point is correct, in the end the anti-poisoning should work itself out.
Actually your client would have to download the chunk to check against the hash. If it's the other peer's responsibility, it could just lie.
30 gig is rather crazy. But just to chime in with my gmail stats..
You are currently using 616 MB (23%) of your 2650 MB.
I currently have 1793 emails (no, no porn sorry), and just eyeing it, i'd say 5% have attachments. So while 2.xGB from gmail may seem far away, when the random files people send each other get larger, email will have to adjust.. some places will just be in better shape when it does. and 30gig.com probably won't exist.
Well, according to my Mars temperature chart, there are less and less pirates on Mars as the years pass.