Have my GPS calculate optimal routes - the routes I get now are pretty crappy etc.
Really? The ones I get turn out to be pretty optimal most of the time. I mean, sure, there might be other ones that save 5 minutes on a 4 hour drive, but whatever.
Once the memetic structures guaranteeing avalanches of abortions all over the world are in place, we may finally be able to dilute our species' population trends enough to reverse some (but not all) of the horrific things we've done to our environment and food supplies.
Seems a pretty contrived and roundabout way. Certainly it is much easier to convince or educate people to practice other birth control than to make them endorse wide-scale abortion. Also: people in general don't have babies because they are too stupid to avoid them. They have them because they need or want them.
If you talk to or read about this people, you consistently find that the immense majority are of the "I hate abortion, but I can see no other way" type.
Thanks. And I am dumbfounded by how some readers could take it any other way. Mention guns, abortion, or economics on Slashdot and watch the intelligence and critical facilities of much of the US geek crowd disappear in an instant.
Nobody is pro-war. And yet there's still a useful distinction between the Anti-War crowd and... the others.
But there is also a useful distinction between those who view war as an evil that is sometimes necessary and in any case ingrained in human behavior under particular circumstances, and those who are pro-war out of principle.
Confusing the two groups by giving them a common "pro-war" label is stupid.
Also, I don't see what is wrong with "pro choice".
I doubt it. I am pro-choice myself. I accept everyone's right to control their own body, and so on and so forth . But this does not make me "pro" abortion, and I doubt that you run around trying to convince everyone to have abortions instead of using other means of birth control.
And yet several are performed every year. Unless someone forced the doctors or the patients somone in this country is pro-abortion.
So? Several people die of cancer every year, does this mean that there are pro-cancer people? Some people accept a person's control over her body, and the fact that abortion will happen in any case. This does not make them "pro-abortion".
Yeah well I did not advocate ntfs for a general-purpose fs. We were talking about disks to move stuff around if the disks are too large to use fat. I appreciate your points, but I fail to see what they have to do with this scenario.
You seem very knowledgeable regarding filesystems in general.
Dude, it should have been a hint when tytso wrote,
I was the e2fsprogs maintainer, and especially in the last year, as the most experienced upstream kernel developer have been responsible for patch quality assurance and pushing the patches upstream.
I probably used the present tense incorrectly. Here he mentions that he made his living from consulting work for the second half of the eighties (I guess he was available for consulting work if you needed stuff done in the code he maintained): http://www.stallman.org/articles/texas.html Here's an interview with him from the time: http://www.gnu.org/gnu/byte-interview.html
I seem to remember to have read about him doing consulting work in the nineties, too, but I cannot give a link and might be wrong. In any case, I once read about or heard quoted what he can charge, and it was a whole lot of money ($1000 per hour? Something like that, I think, but my memory is hazy). That, the MacArthur grant [1], and his priorities (which he made very clear) make me doubt that he ever was jealous about Mozilla's profits.
The problem was not with the trademark as such, but with Mozilla requiring that you could (can?) not fix bugs in Firfox (under that name) without approval from Mozilla. Which was a stupid move.
But you may not change the proprietary parts of the BSD sandwich, so if you don't like it you are fucked. Better to start with a GPL sandwich and be free to change as you see fit.
Or you could just stop putting words in his mouth and accept that he said he just doesn't know if they fixed those two things, but if they did then it's free software. It's not that hard.
And re jealous about the profit: do you know what RMS charges for consultant work?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious what you consider "worse".
Have my GPS calculate optimal routes - the routes I get now are pretty crappy etc.
Really? The ones I get turn out to be pretty optimal most of the time. I mean, sure, there might be other ones that save 5 minutes on a 4 hour drive, but whatever.
Ok then :)
Interesting thoughts, indeed. Thanks for sharing.
Once the memetic structures guaranteeing avalanches of abortions all over the world are in place, we may finally be able to dilute our species' population trends enough to reverse some (but not all) of the horrific things we've done to our environment and food supplies.
Seems a pretty contrived and roundabout way. Certainly it is much easier to convince or educate people to practice other birth control than to make them endorse wide-scale abortion. Also: people in general don't have babies because they are too stupid to avoid them. They have them because they need or want them.
If you talk to or read about this people, you consistently find that the immense majority are of the "I hate abortion, but I can see no other way" type.
Thanks. And I am dumbfounded by how some readers could take it any other way. Mention guns, abortion, or economics on Slashdot and watch the intelligence and critical facilities of much of the US geek crowd disappear in an instant.
Nobody is pro-war. And yet there's still a useful distinction between the Anti-War crowd and... the others.
But there is also a useful distinction between those who view war as an evil that is sometimes necessary and in any case ingrained in human behavior under particular circumstances, and those who are pro-war out of principle.
Confusing the two groups by giving them a common "pro-war" label is stupid.
Also, I don't see what is wrong with "pro choice".
Oh really now? I am.
I doubt it. I am pro-choice myself. I accept everyone's right to control their own body, and so on and so forth . But this does not make me "pro" abortion, and I doubt that you run around trying to convince everyone to have abortions instead of using other means of birth control.
And yet several are performed every year.
Unless someone forced the doctors or the patients somone in this country is pro-abortion.
So? Several people die of cancer every year, does this mean that there are pro-cancer people?
Some people accept a person's control over her body, and the fact that abortion will happen in any case. This does not make them "pro-abortion".
http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_hack#Reflections_on_Trusting_Trust
it is very hard to analyze the security of a system even with open source, but it at least becomes possible.
You have a point, but we could just as well throw our hand up in the air, we are fucked anyway.
anti-abortion... who can't even see what that implies about the people with opposite stances...
Nobody is pro-abortion.
"They cannot get a clean copy" is simply an invention. Have you been to China?
Do you really think you can get a clean copy of Debian off the Chinese internet? The view from the average citizen's perspective remains grim.
As long as they are using FOSS software, the integrity should be quite easy to verify.
Yeah well I did not advocate ntfs for a general-purpose fs. We were talking about disks to move stuff around if the disks are too large to use fat. I appreciate your points, but I fail to see what they have to do with this scenario.
ntfs comes to mind. It seems well-enough supported in linux distros for data disks you move around.
You seem very knowledgeable regarding filesystems in general.
Dude, it should have been a hint when tytso wrote,
I was the e2fsprogs maintainer, and especially in the last year, as the most experienced upstream kernel developer have been responsible for patch quality assurance and pushing the patches upstream.
Oh STFU.
I probably used the present tense incorrectly. Here he mentions that he made his living from consulting work for the second half of the eighties (I guess he was available for consulting work if you needed stuff done in the code he maintained):
http://www.stallman.org/articles/texas.html
Here's an interview with him from the time:
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/byte-interview.html
I seem to remember to have read about him doing consulting work in the nineties, too, but I cannot give a link and might be wrong. In any case, I once read about or heard quoted what he can charge, and it was a whole lot of money ($1000 per hour? Something like that, I think, but my memory is hazy). That, the MacArthur grant [1], and his priorities (which he made very clear) make me doubt that he ever was jealous about Mozilla's profits.
[1] http://tech.mit.edu/V110/N30/rms.30n.html
The vast vast vast majority of consumers dont give a shit about any of this.
Now try to wrap your head around the concept that "consumers" are a tiny minority of software users.
The problem was not with the trademark as such, but with Mozilla requiring that you could (can?) not fix bugs in Firfox (under that name) without approval from Mozilla. Which was a stupid move.
But you may not change the proprietary parts of the BSD sandwich, so if you don't like it you are fucked. Better to start with a GPL sandwich and be free to change as you see fit.
Based on what? On the fact that he has refused to use proprietary software for decades, based on his principles?
Or you could just stop putting words in his mouth and accept that he said he just doesn't know if they fixed those two things, but if they did then it's free software. It's not that hard.
And re jealous about the profit: do you know what RMS charges for consultant work?
I hope you are not suggesting that Ubuntu ever removed those?