Usually I don't do that, but it's the second time I read "copywritten" within a span of a few comments, so I want to point out that it's about a right to copy, not about a something written, and therefore it's "copyrighted".
Gosh, I thought the misunderstood meaning of this statement as died out by now, but you must have missed it. Data wants to be free in the same way as water wants to leak. That's all it ever really meant.
Small fish. Waldheim probably knew of war crimes, but was not directly involved in them. He became significant as a symbol for the way Austria neglected to deal with its history: when he ran for Austrian president and his time in the Wehrmacht was challenged, he resorted to "I just did my duty" and "I don't remember".
They seem to update the theme for ever Long Term Support release, i.e., every 18 months or so. Fine with me. 8.04 (Hardy) will have an all-new theme, but none if it has landed in the alphas yet AFAICT.
Regarding a darker brown: earlier Ubuntus actually were like that, but childish people with anal issues bitched about it until they turned it into caramel-like as it is now.
Re turning on their monitors to stare at bark: maybe, but as I wrote in another reply, plenty of people furnish their houses and apartments using wood, to live in it, so I really don't see the issue people have with brown.
In any case, plenty of themes are installed to choose from.
I think you are confused. You can have hypotheses and with mounting evidence you have a theory. But as I wrote numerous times in this thread, there is no place for quasi-religious conviction.
Anyway, you of course pulled out a stupid example, you should have said something about planet and stars instead to make it look even more ridiculous. Yeah, so earthquakes are kinda hard to replicate full-size. But, for example, the cold fusion guys were certainly asked to demonstrate their claims. So yes, anyone claiming to be 100% sure that life and non-life is completely the same will be asked to demonstrate the transformation. And again, I didn't argue against the idea (learn to read!), just against the quasi-religious conviction (without a shred of proof by the way. For all we know, hundreds of years of tries have failed so far).
Ati and Nvidia proprietary drivers are included in Ubuntu and enabled by default (hm, ati's might be default only in 8.04), no compiler needed. vmware player is in the repos.
Good point. I can only imagine one reason: stone cold fear. Because let's face it, at this point Adobe porting full CS3 could trigger an avalanche with unforeseeable results, in the end possibly forcing MS to port Office; in any case MS would suffer a massive financial blow. And if Adobe didn't change Photoshop to make it work but contributed to Wine instead, this could possibly lead to a fully functional and stable Office 2003 or at least XP, along with many other apps that would profit. With, say, Ubuntu desktops running MS Office 2003, Adobe CS3, and Lotus Notes 8, MS would be pretty fucked.
Adobe may not think that they can survive the blind wrath of a heavily wounded MS, or they may think the whole idea is not worth it. Maybe they are waiting for Bush to leave Office.
Work seems to be on its way: http://www.canonical.com/projects/landscape. No word on licensing though, but I trust Canonical so far, and non-free would kill their cred anyway, and so is unlikely.
Ubuntu's target group includes mainly non-expert users who don't compile stuff, and expert users who can be expected to know what to do to compile stuff. Thus there is no libc6-dev by default to save space on the installer CD, to help facilitate the complete install from one CD. You just need to install build-essentials. Google has a page full of hits with straight solutions if you search for "ubuntu can't compile executables".
Yes yes. I didn't say anything against this. I just remarked that before there is proof, quasi-religious statements of certainty are uncalled for. And even after there is proof (or what is considered proof outside of mathematics), such behavior has little place in science. It's like saying, "there is nothing mystical about the orbit of the planets, it's just F = G *(m1*m2)/sq(r)".
What are you trying to tell me? For one, I think I made it clear that I don't condone that. And actually being Austrian (are you?), I don't think you can beat me in a tournament of citing despicable Austrian traits;)
"People like me" just don't treat the current state of science as religion. FYI, I am not religious and I don't believe in souls as such. I just see that we know very little, even within the scientific realm, and I know that there are realms beside that in which science might never help us (no option to create testable hypotheses, etc.), and I don't believe that this invalidates research of these realms. Once you demonstrate artificially-created life that exhibits the same properties as other life, I will treat it as "really" alive until there is evidence to the contrary.
In 1991. The war ended in 1945. By 1991, the vast majority of Nazi victims were dead. Also, former Nazis were invited to high German governments posts as well as prosecutors, judges, and so an and so forth, See, for example, this.
Yeah, I am aware that hard-core materialists postulate this. Until this concept has proven itself by creating life from non-life in the lab, I would be a bit more cautious with the judgment that there really isn't anything more to it.
Slashdot Mirror
Usually I don't do that, but it's the second time I read "copywritten" within a span of a few comments, so I want to point out that it's about a right to copy, not about a something written, and therefore it's "copyrighted".
Gosh, I thought the misunderstood meaning of this statement as died out by now, but you must have missed it. Data wants to be free in the same way as water wants to leak. That's all it ever really meant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Waldheim/
Small fish. Waldheim probably knew of war crimes, but was not directly involved in them. He became significant as a symbol for the way Austria neglected to deal with its history: when he ran for Austrian president and his time in the Wehrmacht was challenged, he resorted to "I just did my duty" and "I don't remember".
No, what I was referring to people like Heinrich Gross.
If you are looking for a book to teach you UI design
To teach, maybe. But there are several good and useful books, such as Designing from Both Sides of the Screen, Observing the User Experience (well that's more about your user testing), and others that are at the office and which I can't remember right now.
Thx for the insight.
They seem to update the theme for ever Long Term Support release, i.e., every 18 months or so. Fine with me. 8.04 (Hardy) will have an all-new theme, but none if it has landed in the alphas yet AFAICT.
Regarding a darker brown: earlier Ubuntus actually were like that, but childish people with anal issues bitched about it until they turned it into caramel-like as it is now.
Re turning on their monitors to stare at bark: maybe, but as I wrote in another reply, plenty of people furnish their houses and apartments using wood, to live in it, so I really don't see the issue people have with brown.
In any case, plenty of themes are installed to choose from.
I think you are confused. You can have hypotheses and with mounting evidence you have a theory. But as I wrote numerous times in this thread, there is no place for quasi-religious conviction.
Anyway, you of course pulled out a stupid example, you should have said something about planet and stars instead to make it look even more ridiculous. Yeah, so earthquakes are kinda hard to replicate full-size. But, for example, the cold fusion guys were certainly asked to demonstrate their claims. So yes, anyone claiming to be 100% sure that life and non-life is completely the same will be asked to demonstrate the transformation. And again, I didn't argue against the idea (learn to read!), just against the quasi-religious conviction (without a shred of proof by the way. For all we know, hundreds of years of tries have failed so far).
Ah, jokes, yeah I heard about them ;)
Good point, but they could install the package from the CD after the system is installed to HD. I didn't ask for it being available in the Live CD
Dunno about you but my part of the planet tends to be green.
Year but there's a lot of brown everywhere if you open your eyes. Anyway, it's also the color of wood, people don't seem opposed to live in that.
You think LA is big compared to central US country, Siberia, Africa, et al.?
Ati and Nvidia proprietary drivers are included in Ubuntu and enabled by default (hm, ati's might be default only in 8.04), no compiler needed. vmware player is in the repos.
Good point. I can only imagine one reason: stone cold fear. Because let's face it, at this point Adobe porting full CS3 could trigger an avalanche with unforeseeable results, in the end possibly forcing MS to port Office; in any case MS would suffer a massive financial blow. And if Adobe didn't change Photoshop to make it work but contributed to Wine instead, this could possibly lead to a fully functional and stable Office 2003 or at least XP, along with many other apps that would profit. With, say, Ubuntu desktops running MS Office 2003, Adobe CS3, and Lotus Notes 8, MS would be pretty fucked.
Adobe may not think that they can survive the blind wrath of a heavily wounded MS, or they may think the whole idea is not worth it. Maybe they are waiting for Bush to leave Office.
build-essentials is on the installer cd--it's just not installed by default.
Ah ok, thanks for the correction. Any idea why it is not installed then? It seems kind of pointless if it's on the CD anyway.
Work seems to be on its way: http://www.canonical.com/projects/landscape. No word on licensing though, but I trust Canonical so far, and non-free would kill their cred anyway, and so is unlikely.
Shit, earth, tree bark, yeah. Half the world is brown. How can you stand that?
"build-essential" (singular), sorry. n/t (stupid slashdot won't let me post w/o body text)
Ubuntu's target group includes mainly non-expert users who don't compile stuff, and expert users who can be expected to know what to do to compile stuff. Thus there is no libc6-dev by default to save space on the installer CD, to help facilitate the complete install from one CD. You just need to install build-essentials. Google has a page full of hits with straight solutions if you search for "ubuntu can't compile executables".
Okidoki, I thought so, but you never know on /. And yeah, it is kinda funny, but ooold :)
Yes yes. I didn't say anything against this. I just remarked that before there is proof, quasi-religious statements of certainty are uncalled for. And even after there is proof (or what is considered proof outside of mathematics), such behavior has little place in science. It's like saying, "there is nothing mystical about the orbit of the planets, it's just F = G *(m1*m2)/sq(r)".
What are you trying to tell me? For one, I think I made it clear that I don't condone that. And actually being Austrian (are you?), I don't think you can beat me in a tournament of citing despicable Austrian traits ;)
"People like me" just don't treat the current state of science as religion. FYI, I am not religious and I don't believe in souls as such. I just see that we know very little, even within the scientific realm, and I know that there are realms beside that in which science might never help us (no option to create testable hypotheses, etc.), and I don't believe that this invalidates research of these realms.
Once you demonstrate artificially-created life that exhibits the same properties as other life, I will treat it as "really" alive until there is evidence to the contrary.
Germany enacted specific legislation in 1991
In 1991. The war ended in 1945. By 1991, the vast majority of Nazi victims were dead. Also, former Nazis were invited to high German governments posts as well as prosecutors, judges, and so an and so forth, See, for example, this.
Yeah, I am aware that hard-core materialists postulate this. Until this concept has proven itself by creating life from non-life in the lab, I would be a bit more cautious with the judgment that there really isn't anything more to it.
Only real diffrence is that evolutionary theory suggests that everything is completely random and the best pops out as successful
Actually, it doesn't. That's just what uninformed people think. Read, e.g., Rupert Riedl to get an idea of how far the theory has come since.