I run a Windows VMware machine under Linux, and have no performance problems at all; I also do the converse on my Windows box. One thing I found made a huge difference in perceived speed is having the 'VMware tools' installed -- it gives much better mouse in video performance; these are two major things that can contribute to the appearance of slow operation.
It always seems clear to me. I'm sure this crowd will beat me down for this, but when listening to the fox NEWS broadcasts, I don't hear any appreciable differences in what is reported & how than from CNN, MSNBC, etc.
When listening to opinion broadcasts on Fox, it's pretty clear that it's opinion -- such as the bashing of the Daily Show. You won't find that in any news broadcast, including Fox's.
Now please excuse me while I clean up -- pissing into the wind is messy business.
Good idea in theory. In practice, that's communism. And as we already know, that didn't and continues not to do so well.
I don't follow how paying the person responsible for the work -- the person without whom the work would not exist -- equates to communism. Please clarify?
Compare: someone who polishes turds. Should he get paid for the hard work he does?
Of course he should -- if there's a market for polished turds. But more to the point -- should the poor sot who crapped out the turd be getting paid for use of his product? (Eh? Yeah, I know. This isn't relevant at all, but the imagery made me chuckle.)
Exactly. A good test to see how the speed on how the proposed system would perform is using terminal services (obviously on a remote computer). Even with gigabit ethernet the speed is going to drag on many applications.
Do you have anything to back this up? I regularly run RDP to a gateway server, then RDP over that to my WinXP desktop, all over VPN on an 8mbps cable connection. The only time speed is a factor is when viewing graphical files (there's not much call for me to do that) and during high-traffic times (if the office is closed due to weather, for example).
And to top it all off, I've been running this configuration within a VM lately, so that I don't lock out my LAN with the VPN connection.
Why do so many people get "Fox News" shows confused with "Fox opinion and commentary" shows? Is it just because it's on the same network? That's a pretty broad criteria...
Why did his second troll got modded "informative"? If he speaks truth, then he's basically saying his no point to the original post, since there's nothing to change. Except that it's still irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and insulting to no purpose.
But they will be free to use that explanation for far more in the legislative arena - to make more pernicious anticircumvention laws, foist universal DRM on us, etc, etc, etc. Everything they can to prop up their failing business model (in particular, anything they can to try and outlaw or deprecate independent music publishing) all the while saying, "Won't someone think of the pirates?"
Isn't that a little extreme? Even with all their undoubtedly purchased politicians, they won't be able to convince anyone to declare the First Amendment null and void. As far as foisting universal DRM -- I think my original point still applies. If nobody is buying their products, then it won't matter what they try to do.
However, that being said, it ain't gonna happen. We all know that at most 1% of the music-listening population actually cares about DRM; the rest haven't a clue. And in my experience, those who are made aware of it don't really care -- they feel they're getting their money's worth, and don't think it's unreasonable that they have some limitations in what they can do. And that is the real problem -- it will be very difficult to convince those people that they should be able to do more "on principle" -- because it has no effect on the things they want to do.
I've noticed something common to online discussion of any controversial topic. Someone can make a logical, well-laid-out post (such as your own), and the fanatics will answer maybe one point in ten. The rest -- the part they can't answer -- they will ignore, or deride with illogical statements (as done here) or ad hominem attacks. The disappointing aspect of this is that it truly seems to be a universal behavior -- even on Slashdot, where the community members pride themselves on being logical individuals who are a step above the rest of the sheep.
the trouble is that they can distinguish between A and B, but not B and illegal copying. So in fact you're right - there shouldn't be a problem. But the industry will claim that the explanation is anything BUT option B regardless of whether that is true or not.
I think part parent's point is that if their sales nosedived, and people were actually not stealing[infringing], they can blame piracy all they want -- and it won't matter, because they would have nobody to sue.
As an Atlantan I'm all for Coke being the "standard" black soft drink, but I'd rather the name stayed specific to the brand
You had to go and bring race into it, didn't you. I've heard that about you Southerners...
Yes. This was a joke. I wasn't going to clarify, but given some of the comments I've seen modded as "Insightful", "Flamebait", "Interesting" and "Troll", I felt it best to be safe.
With no more ID problem than Yahoo, Excite or Gmail presents, current socio-political issues could be posted (to a centralized site) with a "Yay or Nay" button choice that when clicked would deliver ones opinion to their local political representitives and/or other principals in any given story
There is such a site. The problem is that electronically delivered form-letters, petitions, or other such pleas fall on deaf ears -- and I can't blame the politicians for that. First, consider the normal volume of spam that one will receive from having a public email address in. Add to that the fact that any fool with a computer can send hundreds of emails, enter hundreds of electronic signatures, or cast hundreds of votes -- all pretending to be from a different person. That adds up to thousands of messages per day in your inbox; would you read them? Would you take them seriously?
I'd give the e-petitions about as much consideration as V 1 A G R 4 4 F R E E ! ! !
It is a sad state of affairs when the technical people of the most powerful and mega-nuclear-trigger happy country on Earth cannot tell the difference between "Hungry" and "Hungary" and haven't a clue to where it is.
It is a sad state of affairs when the expatriate Americans living in the the world's most underfed nation can't tell the difference between a joke and reality.
It's kind of interesting to know how many (or few) will be affected by this. I know several people who 'play' with Ruby as a fun new toy, but I know of few if any large-scale, high-traffic sites that use it.
I appreciate the time you spent looking into it; the only flaw I see is that the acroreader dependency should be disocunted -- b eceause if you don't have Acrobat installed, it won't exist -- and it's not an MS product. If we assume that the size is larger because there's more compiled code (most likely a safe assumption), then by these results it's definitely true that IE is more complex in terms of dependencies.
On the other hand, I'm not convinced that this is bad thing. (BTW, avid firefox & linux user & developer here... just for the record.) Those same DLLs used by IE are also used by many, many Windows applications. There -- theoretically -- are no concerns around versioning, and a developer [assuming he develops only for XP SP2+] is virtually guaranteed that all of the dependencies he's using are going to be installed on client workstations.
When developing for Windows vs Linux (before I gave up and just switched to Java), a huge headache was managing dependencies and versions for Linux. Sure, the problems existed in Windows -- but to a much lesser extent. As far as I've seen, these kinds of issues are the single biggest reason why there are no consistent standards defining how to install and manage software across Linux distros. (And don't get me started about LSB.)
This comparison doesn't even make sense. You've compared source dependencies to binary dependencies? That's silly. If you looked at binary dependencies for Firefox on Windows, you would find that it has 16 internal DLLs. And that's before any of the built in OS-level dependencies, many of which are the same as IE.
I don't disagree that it's despicable, though I contend it's a fairly morally bankrupt thing for any party to do: Republican, Democrat, or Armani Suits. My point is that singling out one group for using a PR firm-- whose job consists of manipulating public opinion -- of being more wrong than any other group or company that does the same doesn't seem particularly reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, I wonder how many more mod points people will waste on "redundant".
Nice misinformation. The amendments would not retroactively protect policymakers -- it seeks to protect the people who implement the policy -- i.e., those following orders. Reference: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/08/08/AR2006080801276_pf.html
I run a Windows VMware machine under Linux, and have no performance problems at all; I also do the converse on my Windows box. One thing I found made a huge difference in perceived speed is having the 'VMware tools' installed -- it gives much better mouse in video performance; these are two major things that can contribute to the appearance of slow operation.
It always seems clear to me. I'm sure this crowd will beat me down for this, but when listening to the fox NEWS broadcasts, I don't hear any appreciable differences in what is reported & how than from CNN, MSNBC, etc.
When listening to opinion broadcasts on Fox, it's pretty clear that it's opinion -- such as the bashing of the Daily Show. You won't find that in any news broadcast, including Fox's.
Now please excuse me while I clean up -- pissing into the wind is messy business.
Good idea in theory. In practice, that's communism. And as we already know, that didn't and continues not to do so well.
I don't follow how paying the person responsible for the work -- the person without whom the work would not exist -- equates to communism. Please clarify?Compare: someone who polishes turds. Should he get paid for the hard work he does?
Of course he should -- if there's a market for polished turds. But more to the point -- should the poor sot who crapped out the turd be getting paid for use of his product? (Eh? Yeah, I know. This isn't relevant at all, but the imagery made me chuckle.)
Exactly. A good test to see how the speed on how the proposed system would perform is using terminal services (obviously on a remote computer). Even with gigabit ethernet the speed is going to drag on many applications.
Do you have anything to back this up? I regularly run RDP to a gateway server, then RDP over that to my WinXP desktop, all over VPN on an 8mbps cable connection. The only time speed is a factor is when viewing graphical files (there's not much call for me to do that) and during high-traffic times (if the office is closed due to weather, for example).
And to top it all off, I've been running this configuration within a VM lately, so that I don't lock out my LAN with the VPN connection.
Why do so many people get "Fox News" shows confused with "Fox opinion and commentary" shows? Is it just because it's on the same network? That's a pretty broad criteria...
Why did his second troll got modded "informative"? If he speaks truth, then he's basically saying his no point to the original post, since there's nothing to change. Except that it's still irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and insulting to no purpose.
But they will be free to use that explanation for far more in the legislative arena - to make more pernicious anticircumvention laws, foist universal DRM on us, etc, etc, etc. Everything they can to prop up their failing business model (in particular, anything they can to try and outlaw or deprecate independent music publishing) all the while saying, "Won't someone think of the pirates?"
Isn't that a little extreme? Even with all their undoubtedly purchased politicians, they won't be able to convince anyone to declare the First Amendment null and void. As far as foisting universal DRM -- I think my original point still applies. If nobody is buying their products, then it won't matter what they try to do.
However, that being said, it ain't gonna happen. We all know that at most 1% of the music-listening population actually cares about DRM; the rest haven't a clue. And in my experience, those who are made aware of it don't really care -- they feel they're getting their money's worth, and don't think it's unreasonable that they have some limitations in what they can do. And that is the real problem -- it will be very difficult to convince those people that they should be able to do more "on principle" -- because it has no effect on the things they want to do.
I've noticed something common to online discussion of any controversial topic. Someone can make a logical, well-laid-out post (such as your own), and the fanatics will answer maybe one point in ten. The rest -- the part they can't answer -- they will ignore, or deride with illogical statements (as done here) or ad hominem attacks. The disappointing aspect of this is that it truly seems to be a universal behavior -- even on Slashdot, where the community members pride themselves on being logical individuals who are a step above the rest of the sheep.
Yep, s'pose I'll get modded Troll now.
the trouble is that they can distinguish between A and B, but not B and illegal copying. So in fact you're right - there shouldn't be a problem. But the industry will claim that the explanation is anything BUT option B regardless of whether that is true or not.
I think part parent's point is that if their sales nosedived, and people were actually not stealing[infringing], they can blame piracy all they want -- and it won't matter, because they would have nobody to sue.Dear sir:
We regret to inform you that this comment was deemed Unfunny.
Sincerely,
The Moderators
Dear sir:
So was this one.
- Mods
Was it a personalized response, or an equally cookie-cutter letter?
85% of people pretending to be terrorists were identified as threats?
Sounds like an 85% false positive rate to me...
As an Atlantan I'm all for Coke being the "standard" black soft drink, but I'd rather the name stayed specific to the brand
You had to go and bring race into it, didn't you. I've heard that about you Southerners...
Yes. This was a joke. I wasn't going to clarify, but given some of the comments I've seen modded as "Insightful", "Flamebait", "Interesting" and "Troll", I felt it best to be safe.
With no more ID problem than Yahoo, Excite or Gmail presents, current socio-political issues could be posted (to a centralized site) with a "Yay or Nay" button choice that when clicked would deliver ones opinion to their local political representitives and/or other principals in any given story
There is such a site. The problem is that electronically delivered form-letters, petitions, or other such pleas fall on deaf ears -- and I can't blame the politicians for that. First, consider the normal volume of spam that one will receive from having a public email address in. Add to that the fact that any fool with a computer can send hundreds of emails, enter hundreds of electronic signatures, or cast hundreds of votes -- all pretending to be from a different person. That adds up to thousands of messages per day in your inbox; would you read them? Would you take them seriously?
I'd give the e-petitions about as much consideration as V 1 A G R 4 4 F R E E ! ! !
Disclaimer: This comment is meant to be funny, please take it as such.
Dear sir:
We regret to inform you that this comment was deemed Unfunny.
Sincerely,
The Moderators
You read much into a comment that was simply an honest question. And your right, I probably should've distinguished between Ruby & Ruby on Rails.
It is a sad state of affairs when the technical people of the most powerful and mega-nuclear-trigger happy country on Earth cannot tell the difference between "Hungry" and "Hungary" and haven't a clue to where it is.
It is a sad state of affairs when the expatriate Americans living in the the world's most underfed nation can't tell the difference between a joke and reality.It's kind of interesting to know how many (or few) will be affected by this. I know several people who 'play' with Ruby as a fun new toy, but I know of few if any large-scale, high-traffic sites that use it.
Something tells me that users should not be writing test cases.
Yeah, you're right. Those users, they don't know how the application should be used.
I appreciate the time you spent looking into it; the only flaw I see is that the acroreader dependency should be disocunted -- b eceause if you don't have Acrobat installed, it won't exist -- and it's not an MS product. If we assume that the size is larger because there's more compiled code (most likely a safe assumption), then by these results it's definitely true that IE is more complex in terms of dependencies.
On the other hand, I'm not convinced that this is bad thing. (BTW, avid firefox & linux user & developer here... just for the record.) Those same DLLs used by IE are also used by many, many Windows applications. There -- theoretically -- are no concerns around versioning, and a developer [assuming he develops only for XP SP2+] is virtually guaranteed that all of the dependencies he's using are going to be installed on client workstations.
When developing for Windows vs Linux (before I gave up and just switched to Java), a huge headache was managing dependencies and versions for Linux. Sure, the problems existed in Windows -- but to a much lesser extent. As far as I've seen, these kinds of issues are the single biggest reason why there are no consistent standards defining how to install and manage software across Linux distros. (And don't get me started about LSB.)
This comparison doesn't even make sense. You've compared source dependencies to binary dependencies? That's silly. If you looked at binary dependencies for Firefox on Windows, you would find that it has 16 internal DLLs. And that's before any of the built in OS-level dependencies, many of which are the same as IE.
I don't disagree that it's despicable, though I contend it's a fairly morally bankrupt thing for any party to do: Republican, Democrat, or Armani Suits. My point is that singling out one group for using a PR firm-- whose job consists of manipulating public opinion -- of being more wrong than any other group or company that does the same doesn't seem particularly reasonable.
If they want to use a broken browser, have a popup window say 'your browser is broken, use firefox', and that's it, end of story.
And advertising Firefox in popups... that's soooo much better.