How can you be "insightful" for a comment like that? The university is by definition a place where ideas are shared and discussed. By acting like that, La Sapienza has put itself to shame, because discussion (notice, you are free to disagree to whatever is being discussed, that is not the point) is not equal for everyone, only for those "approved".
Again, a perfect example of "one-way tolerance", where tolerance works only if you are addressing someoone more "open minded" than you, but not the other way. That however is closed-mindedness.
Do you realize you're talking about something that hasn't even had an alpha release? A lot may change, or may not, but there's no guarantee at this point.
Re:Configurable?
on
KDE 4.0 Is Out
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Let's quote the Plasma FAQ (disclaimer: I'm no KDE dev, but I wrote it):
Q. I can't my favorite [ insert feature here ]!
Don't forget that Plasma is still in its infancy (it's brand new, after all) and that KDE 3 was an extremely polished codebase: it took seven years to get to that, while Plasma had about 18 months to get to its current status. With time, the Plasma developers plan on reintroducing features that have been missing and fix regressions. As KDE progresses through the KDE4 cycle, Plasma will improve with it.
For heaven's sake, don't spread FUD! That "stable code base" you talk about was a mess to mantain (note that Aaron J. Seigo, the Plasma lead developer, was also kicker's mantainer) and to add new features you broke others etc. Plasma it is not by any means aseigo's pet project: there are quite a number of developers involved in developing and polishing it. It matures at an amazingly fast pace, even.
The "fanboys" you talked about were people rightfully ticked off by the constant, uncostructive and negative attitude on the part of the complainers, which did not bring any improvement and only demotivated the developers. Those people did not even bother testing later revisions (right now there's a daily VM image floating around), report bugs or even offer *constructive* criticism.
I hope this doesn't sound like an ad hominem, but your post incarnates the attitude I was writing about in my other message. Calling it "rubbish" does not make you any better of the religion you despise, even though you may have all the logic behind you. Pride in a religion is nothing wrong unless you start killing people in its name. And yet, it would be the person's fault, or fault of the people who indoctrinate... but not of religion itself.
In that case, you realize that the scriptures, like everything else, are product of their times. Even if Catholicism believes they're "inspired", a good theologist will tell you that even so, they must be interpreted with regards of the historical and social context of the time. I've seen a Jesuit theologist talk about that in the context of Noah's Ark, and he made perfectly valid arguments without being "blasphemous".
Unlike other variants of Christians, Catholicism does not really promote a literal interpretation of the Bible. Surely you'll find people who tell you otherwise, but it is not the case "officially".
Bonifacius? Are you sure? It was a proclamation by Pope Urbanus (of which there are multiple transcribed versions, so there is uncertainty on what had been actually said) and it was just a "call to arms", but he himself did not expect the reaction.
Talking about a war of religion is an understatement of the Crusades (but nice for people trying to push ideologies), a mixture of many different factors, and which represent part of the medieval mentality (a strange, complex one, but not certainly the one of a "Dark Age"). Let's not even bring the Templars in this discussion, as way too many hiistorically inaccurate facts have been said about them.
However, religion bashing has come to a point where even admitting of being religious is a cause of ridicule or arrogance. Don't forget that tolerance works both ways - from "less open" to "more open" and from "more open" to "less open". I've only seen the former, which in turn causes a lot of people to behave rather arrogantly.
Religion by itself is not a curse, nor a tainting mark. I do science and I am religious. Is there something wrong in that?
Now that you mention the Crusades, I advise you to read up some history books before saying "it was all the Church's fault" or "it was a war of religion".
Although it is a legal precedent, it must be noted that Italian law is not based on precedents, like UK or USA. Even the rulings of our "Corte di Cassazione" (akin to the Supreme Court) are not completely binding (i.e. they show the "correct" interpretation of the law but judges can decide differently).
I bet that the government will pass the law in another form: As a data protection law which will say that everyone who keeps a file with personal information will have to register with the government (or an authority - which is the same thing in my opinion).
That won't happen easily. The privacy laws here are *very* strict, and often governments or other institutions have been slapped for violating them, publicly. To use personal data you have to state exactly why are you using them, and you can always have them removed. Even when there are cameras for crime prevention, usually there are notices and the data, unless there is a court order, must be destroyed within a small time frame (IIRC, 48 hours).
Italy has many faults, but the privacy law was not one of them.
And about the Constitution, you are mistaken: although IMO it needs to change in other areas (it is still the product of a compromise done in 1948), it has a rather strong perception in the public and political view. That doesn't prevent people to try and mess up with it, of course, but such changes won't go too unnoticed.
Well, I try my best at English but I'm not a native speaker, therefore some errors may creep up. That is one of those, as the Italian equivalent is "incostituzionale", without the "n".
First, I'd suggest you to avoid putting a spin to what I said. I don't hold our Constiution, the product of a compromise, a so something sacred. However, that is not the point of my post at all: I am merely stating that such a law proposal contrasts with it. Art.5 of the new proposal violates art.3 comma 2, art.9, art.21 and art.41 of the Constitution. That is why it won't pass or it will be easily struck down.
Aside all the political siding here (which adds nothing to the discussion), you should notice that some articles of the law contradict the Constitution (the Italian Constitution, that is), therefore this law won't make it anywhere. Also, a minor correction: the main Italian newspaper is "Il Corriere della Sera", not "La Repubblica" (important, but not the main). The rest of the post is off-topic, although debatable, so I'm not going to comment on it.
Well, at least in the name, BACs (Bacterial Artificial Chromosome) and YACs (Yeast Artificial Chromosome) have been used for years. Granted, they're mostly used for cloning (IIRC), but by concept, they already exist.
Has someone got a link to a more scientific-oriented explanation? Current details are a bit scarce to me.
Some of us prefer to do only work related matters at work. Note that small "distractions" (and I don't mean porn) can happen, but as long as they are temporary, no problem. Even if a guy would get his work done, I *would* have a problem if he browsed for porn while at work.
I admit I haven't RTFA'd, but as far as I know, it may be not linked to radio frequencies but instead to a known effect in pathology. Basically, it has been known for a while that implanting any artificial matter in mice or other laboratory animals will increase and most likely induce the formation of tumors. As works with prostethic arms or other artificial organs (like hearts, heart valves, etc) this is clearly not the case with humans. Not that I like RFID implants or anything, just my personal opinion on the matter.
I'm a Catholic but I deeply dislike the Opus Dei. I happened to be in a school where most staff had unofficial connections with them, and it was hardly bearable, mostly due to their overzealous and fanatical views on religious and related matters.
X.Org 7.3 should be released around today. Although I don't know if it will eliminate the config file (probably not), I know it makes a step in the right direction by implementing input device hotplugging.
Slashdot Mirror
How can you be "insightful" for a comment like that? The university is by definition a place where ideas are shared and discussed. By acting like that, La Sapienza has put itself to shame, because discussion (notice, you are free to disagree to whatever is being discussed, that is not the point) is not equal for everyone, only for those "approved". Again, a perfect example of "one-way tolerance", where tolerance works only if you are addressing someoone more "open minded" than you, but not the other way. That however is closed-mindedness.
No, you should wait at least until there is at least one release such as an alpha. Amarok is changing quite constantly.
However there is a traditional menu available. Look under the Add Widgets dialog.
Do you realize you're talking about something that hasn't even had an alpha release? A lot may change, or may not, but there's no guarantee at this point.
Let's quote the Plasma FAQ (disclaimer: I'm no KDE dev, but I wrote it):
Q. I can't my favorite [ insert feature here ]!
Don't forget that Plasma is still in its infancy (it's brand new, after all) and that KDE 3 was an extremely polished codebase: it took seven years to get to that, while Plasma had about 18 months to get to its current status. With time, the Plasma developers plan on reintroducing features that have been missing and fix regressions. As KDE progresses through the KDE4 cycle, Plasma will improve with it.
For heaven's sake, don't spread FUD! That "stable code base" you talk about was a mess to mantain (note that Aaron J. Seigo, the Plasma lead developer, was also kicker's mantainer) and to add new features you broke others etc. Plasma it is not by any means aseigo's pet project: there are quite a number of developers involved in developing and polishing it. It matures at an amazingly fast pace, even.
The "fanboys" you talked about were people rightfully ticked off by the constant, uncostructive and negative attitude on the part of the complainers, which did not bring any improvement and only demotivated the developers. Those people did not even bother testing later revisions (right now there's a daily VM image floating around), report bugs or even offer *constructive* criticism.
I hope this doesn't sound like an ad hominem, but your post incarnates the attitude I was writing about in my other message. Calling it "rubbish" does not make you any better of the religion you despise, even though you may have all the logic behind you.
Pride in a religion is nothing wrong unless you start killing people in its name. And yet, it would be the person's fault, or fault of the people who indoctrinate... but not of religion itself.
In that case, you realize that the scriptures, like everything else, are product of their times. Even if Catholicism believes they're "inspired", a good theologist will tell you that even so, they must be interpreted with regards of the historical and social context of the time. I've seen a Jesuit theologist talk about that in the context of Noah's Ark, and he made perfectly valid arguments without being "blasphemous".
Unlike other variants of Christians, Catholicism does not really promote a literal interpretation of the Bible. Surely you'll find people who tell you otherwise, but it is not the case "officially".
Bonifacius? Are you sure? It was a proclamation by Pope Urbanus (of which there are multiple transcribed versions, so there is uncertainty on what had been actually said) and it was just a "call to arms", but he himself did not expect the reaction.
Talking about a war of religion is an understatement of the Crusades (but nice for people trying to push ideologies), a mixture of many different factors, and which represent part of the medieval mentality (a strange, complex one, but not certainly the one of a "Dark Age"). Let's not even bring the Templars in this discussion, as way too many hiistorically inaccurate facts have been said about them.
However, religion bashing has come to a point where even admitting of being religious is a cause of ridicule or arrogance. Don't forget that tolerance works both ways - from "less open" to "more open" and from "more open" to "less open". I've only seen the former, which in turn causes a lot of people to behave rather arrogantly.
Religion by itself is not a curse, nor a tainting mark. I do science and I am religious. Is there something wrong in that?
Now that you mention the Crusades, I advise you to read up some history books before saying "it was all the Church's fault" or "it was a war of religion".
Foundation or not, ODF is still an ISO standard, don't forget.
Although it is a legal precedent, it must be noted that Italian law is not based on precedents, like UK or USA. Even the rulings of our "Corte di Cassazione" (akin to the Supreme Court) are not completely binding (i.e. they show the "correct" interpretation of the law but judges can decide differently).
That won't happen easily. The privacy laws here are *very* strict, and often governments or other institutions have been slapped for violating them, publicly. To use personal data you have to state exactly why are you using them, and you can always have them removed. Even when there are cameras for crime prevention, usually there are notices and the data, unless there is a court order, must be destroyed within a small time frame (IIRC, 48 hours).
Italy has many faults, but the privacy law was not one of them.And about the Constitution, you are mistaken: although IMO it needs to change in other areas (it is still the product of a compromise done in 1948), it has a rather strong perception in the public and political view. That doesn't prevent people to try and mess up with it, of course, but such changes won't go too unnoticed.
Well, I try my best at English but I'm not a native speaker, therefore some errors may creep up. That is one of those, as the Italian equivalent is "incostituzionale", without the "n".
But it means it won't pass or it will be struck down. Don't forget it's just a proposal for a law.
- It is uncostitutional: see here (link in Italian);
- It won't be proposed in this form due to the huge debate it has raised.
Please, Slashdot editors... do at least some basic research before posting stuff like this.There's a good writeup here (link in Italian), which describes well why it is uncostitutional (the author is a lawyer, as well).
First, I'd suggest you to avoid putting a spin to what I said. I don't hold our Constiution, the product of a compromise, a so something sacred. However, that is not the point of my post at all: I am merely stating that such a law proposal contrasts with it. Art.5 of the new proposal violates art.3 comma 2, art.9, art.21 and art.41 of the Constitution. That is why it won't pass or it will be easily struck down.
Oh, and IANAL.
Aside all the political siding here (which adds nothing to the discussion), you should notice that some articles of the law contradict the Constitution (the Italian Constitution, that is), therefore this law won't make it anywhere.
Also, a minor correction: the main Italian newspaper is "Il Corriere della Sera", not "La Repubblica" (important, but not the main).
The rest of the post is off-topic, although debatable, so I'm not going to comment on it.
Well, at least in the name, BACs (Bacterial Artificial Chromosome) and YACs (Yeast Artificial Chromosome) have been used for years. Granted, they're mostly used for cloning (IIRC), but by concept, they already exist.
Has someone got a link to a more scientific-oriented explanation? Current details are a bit scarce to me.
Some of us prefer to do only work related matters at work. Note that small "distractions" (and I don't mean porn) can happen, but as long as they are temporary, no problem.
Even if a guy would get his work done, I *would* have a problem if he browsed for porn while at work.
I admit I haven't RTFA'd, but as far as I know, it may be not linked to radio frequencies but instead to a known effect in pathology. Basically, it has been known for a while that implanting any artificial matter in mice or other laboratory animals will increase and most likely induce the formation of tumors.
As works with prostethic arms or other artificial organs (like hearts, heart valves, etc) this is clearly not the case with humans. Not that I like RFID implants or anything, just my personal opinion on the matter.
I'm a Catholic but I deeply dislike the Opus Dei. I happened to be in a school where most staff had unofficial connections with them, and it was hardly bearable, mostly due to their overzealous and fanatical views on religious and related matters.
X.Org 7.3 should be released around today. Although I don't know if it will eliminate the config file (probably not), I know it makes a step in the right direction by implementing input device hotplugging.