And if you, or they, think they're going to write a secure system from scratch... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH... AHAHAHAHAHAHA... well, you get the idea.
I use emacs with a custom Lisp function (that took me a day to get right) that creates a fullscreen frame with the text centered and 65 columns wide, and turns the colors to black on green. It's like writing on a typewriter.
And now the Kennedys are about done. There's a few generations of powerful people after one person amasses an obscene about of wealth, and there's perpetual hereditary power. They are two different beasts.
You VASTLY overestimate the length of most dynasties. Royal families tend to murder and replace each other every couple of generations (at least, from the fall of the Roman Republic through to the 19th century in Europe anyway).
Few hereditary posts of any significance actually stayed within the same family any longer than the Roosevelts, Kennedys, and Bushes have dominated respectively dominated American politics (or, going further back, the Adamses, Lees, etc.)--each of those families had a solid run of 75-125 years, comparable to most European dynasties of the last two thousand years.
So, on Windows it's C:\, D:\, E:\,... Z:\, on Linux it would be/mnt/hda1,/mnt/hdb1,/mnt/smb1,.../mnt/smb5
(and/mnt/hda1 is longer than C:\)
No...
On my system it's/home/myusername/Music,/home/myusername/Video,/home/myusername/Documents--the separate drives are mounted seamlessly as if they were all one drive from the user's perspective. Not as a RAID, so they aren't a logically unified drive, but in terms of usage experience, they may as well be.
1) Your argument against CLI is a moronic volume mounting system designed explicitly to only be used with a GUI. Really, the whole C:, D:, E: thing was fucking moronic. The Unix scheme of mounting seamlessly as a folder under/, in a way which renders the underlying volumes invisible is far saner (which is, of course, an entirely separate debate from the merits of CLI vs. GUI, but a personal pet peeve with Windows).
2) Tab completion. I don't think I've ever typed more than 5 letters of a filename, of any length.
Your entire argument is specious--it boils down to thinking that because people don't already know it, it's too hard. With logic like that we'd still be living in the Stone Age.
Much 'easier' than typing it out on the CLI
No. Marginally easier. And that's the bottom line--GUIs make already easy tasks marginally easier, and they make hard tasks (like one of your other repliers suggestion) vastly harder. Unless you never use your computer to do anything complicated, the GUI is a step back.
but oh no, thats not artificial intelligence because we know how it works
No, it's not AI because it lacks any of the features of actual intelligence--it doesn't learn or modify it's behaviors in response to experience. It's a simple (pre-determined) decision tree based on sensory input--that's not intelligence, not because we understand it, but because it doesn't fit the definition of intelligence.
That reality distortion field is mighty powerful. You don't know what socialism is.
We've had an oligarchical government propped up by a varyingly legal/extra-legal patronage system since the early 19th century (arguably even longer than that, but that's quibbling over irrelevant details at that point). Is that a long enough time? But it isn't a socialist one. It's worse than a socialist one in fact.
Denying it just lets the problem get worse and makes it less likely we'll be able to fix it.
And treating cancer with antiobiotics does nothing. Treating the problems we have as if they were 'socialist' will make things worse, because you're ignoring the real problem in favor of a bogeyman you think you know how to fight.
People claiming that National Socialism (Nazism) and Socialism are the same, because they both have the word socialism in them--it's like they never read Orwell. This is double plus ungood.
National Health Care, Social Security, Welfare, HUD, there are a whole lot of programs that the US has been starting and enlarging over the last 100 years that are socialist. Like them or not is debatable. Socialist or not is not debatable.
Sure it is.
I would argue that they have more in common with traditional patronage systems (dating back at least to the Roman Republic) than they do with modern socialist thought. All of those programs function to pacify lower social orders to the net benefit of established social elites (it's hard to keep your mansion when people want to murder you, ask Marie Antoinette).
They are wrapped in socialist rhetoric, I would agree, but they are hardly socialist in function (notice how actual socialists are as unhappy with those programs as anyone else).
There's plenty of reasons not to like Obama. Socialism isn't one of them. Throwing words around meaninglessly does not help anything--it just helps to marginalize those with actual coherent complaints and causes more harm. That's my point.
Hate Obama's policies all you like. There's plenty to hate. But hate them for what they are, not for the bogeyman they aren't.
Nice incoherent rant. Bonus points for the non-sequitur bit about reading the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. How about you go read the Second Treatise on Government? It's equally irrelevant to my point.
You have no idea what socialism is. If you're going to be so angsty (and there's certainly plenty to be angsty about these days), try coming up with coherent reasons for it. Right now, you just sound like a lunatic.
People are making lots of stupid posts today. Yes. The universe is between 12 and 14 billion years old. Want a cookie for doing a good job of bringing up an irrelevant point that has nothing to do with my post?
The sun is roughly 5 billion years old. Gilese 581 could conceivably be much older, 7, 8 or even 9 billion years (though, with rocky planets, it's probably at least a second generation star), and easily have another 10 or 20 to go before it dims out. That was my point. The planetary system could be 50% older than ours. That's a long fucking time, lot's of time for planets to get tidally locked.
Slashdot Mirror
The $400 hammer joke died 10 years ago.
Not if you're retarded.
That they only bought 187 of before shutting down the production lines because it doesn't meet actual military needs?
And if you, or they, think they're going to write a secure system from scratch ... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH ... AHAHAHAHAHAHA ... well, you get the idea.
Probably DoD or DoE.
Doh. Yes.
I use emacs with a custom Lisp function (that took me a day to get right) that creates a fullscreen frame with the text centered and 65 columns wide, and turns the colors to black on green. It's like writing on a typewriter.
For the curious:
(defun black-green ()
(interactive)
(set-background-color "black")
(set-foreground-color "green")
(set-face-foreground 'mode-line "gray15")
(set-face-background 'mode-line "black")
(set-face-foreground 'fringe "gray15")
(set-face-background 'fringe "black"))
(defun write-room ()
(interactive)
(let ((wr (make-frame '((minibuffer . 12)
(vertical-scroll-bars . nil)
(left-fringe . 315); no fringe
(right-fringe . 315)
(fringe-mode . none)
(background-mode . dark)
(background-color . "black")
(foreground-color . "green")
(cursor-color . "green")
(border-width . 0)
(border-color . "black"); should be unnecessary
(internal-border-width . 64); whitespace!
(cursor-type . box)
(menu-bar-lines . 0)
(tool-bar-lines . 0)
(mode-line-format . nil)
(fullscreen . fullboth)
(unsplittable . t)))))
(select-frame wr)
(text-mode)
(set-fill-column 64)
(black-green)
(select-frame (car (cdr (frame-list))))
(delete-frame)
))
It makes perfect sense, if you're seen the graph, and the rivers that are drawn on it--the timeline is a unidimensional map of Napoleon's route.
I know what one is, and so did Minard
Hey may have, but he didn't use one. His graph was a spatial line--from Paris on the left, to Not-Moscow on the right, and back again.
flaming hypocrites
Gay republicans? Inconceivable!
(like the Great Australian Firewall)
I prefer Great Barrier Router of Australia, personally.
And now the Kennedys are about done. There's a few generations of powerful people after one person amasses an obscene about of wealth, and there's perpetual hereditary power. They are two different beasts.
You VASTLY overestimate the length of most dynasties. Royal families tend to murder and replace each other every couple of generations (at least, from the fall of the Roman Republic through to the 19th century in Europe anyway).
Few hereditary posts of any significance actually stayed within the same family any longer than the Roosevelts, Kennedys, and Bushes have dominated respectively dominated American politics (or, going further back, the Adamses, Lees, etc.)--each of those families had a solid run of 75-125 years, comparable to most European dynasties of the last two thousand years.
Rule 34 my wayward son, carry on.
So, on Windows it's C:\, D:\, E:\, ... Z:\, on Linux it would be /mnt/hda1, /mnt/hdb1, /mnt/smb1, ... /mnt/smb5
(and /mnt/hda1 is longer than C:\)
No...
On my system it's /home/myusername/Music, /home/myusername/Video, /home/myusername/Documents--the separate drives are mounted seamlessly as if they were all one drive from the user's perspective. Not as a RAID, so they aren't a logically unified drive, but in terms of usage experience, they may as well be.
1) Your argument against CLI is a moronic volume mounting system designed explicitly to only be used with a GUI. Really, the whole C:, D:, E: thing was fucking moronic. The Unix scheme of mounting seamlessly as a folder under /, in a way which renders the underlying volumes invisible is far saner (which is, of course, an entirely separate debate from the merits of CLI vs. GUI, but a personal pet peeve with Windows).
2) Tab completion. I don't think I've ever typed more than 5 letters of a filename, of any length.
Your entire argument is specious--it boils down to thinking that because people don't already know it, it's too hard. With logic like that we'd still be living in the Stone Age.
Much 'easier' than typing it out on the CLI
No. Marginally easier. And that's the bottom line--GUIs make already easy tasks marginally easier, and they make hard tasks (like one of your other repliers suggestion) vastly harder. Unless you never use your computer to do anything complicated, the GUI is a step back.
but oh no, thats not artificial intelligence because we know how it works
No, it's not AI because it lacks any of the features of actual intelligence--it doesn't learn or modify it's behaviors in response to experience. It's a simple (pre-determined) decision tree based on sensory input--that's not intelligence, not because we understand it, but because it doesn't fit the definition of intelligence.
What? Are you on drugs?
I was making a JOKE. Well sort of. Really, poor sanitation has killed more people than anything else in human history.
How you managed to take that as a serious political statement is just...you must be high.
That reality distortion field is mighty powerful. You don't know what socialism is.
We've had an oligarchical government propped up by a varyingly legal/extra-legal patronage system since the early 19th century (arguably even longer than that, but that's quibbling over irrelevant details at that point). Is that a long enough time? But it isn't a socialist one. It's worse than a socialist one in fact.
Denying it just lets the problem get worse and makes it less likely we'll be able to fix it.
And treating cancer with antiobiotics does nothing. Treating the problems we have as if they were 'socialist' will make things worse, because you're ignoring the real problem in favor of a bogeyman you think you know how to fight.
People claiming that National Socialism (Nazism) and Socialism are the same, because they both have the word socialism in them--it's like they never read Orwell. This is double plus ungood.
National Health Care, Social Security, Welfare, HUD, there are a whole lot of programs that the US has been starting and enlarging over the last 100 years that are socialist. Like them or not is debatable. Socialist or not is not debatable.
Sure it is.
I would argue that they have more in common with traditional patronage systems (dating back at least to the Roman Republic) than they do with modern socialist thought. All of those programs function to pacify lower social orders to the net benefit of established social elites (it's hard to keep your mansion when people want to murder you, ask Marie Antoinette).
They are wrapped in socialist rhetoric, I would agree, but they are hardly socialist in function (notice how actual socialists are as unhappy with those programs as anyone else).
Tyranny's a good word for it.
There's plenty of reasons not to like Obama. Socialism isn't one of them. Throwing words around meaninglessly does not help anything--it just helps to marginalize those with actual coherent complaints and causes more harm. That's my point.
Hate Obama's policies all you like. There's plenty to hate. But hate them for what they are, not for the bogeyman they aren't.
No, the idea that leaving our garbage and shit right where we live is ok killed more people than any other idea in the history of human civilization.
Nice incoherent rant. Bonus points for the non-sequitur bit about reading the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. How about you go read the Second Treatise on Government? It's equally irrelevant to my point.
You have no idea what socialism is. If you're going to be so angsty (and there's certainly plenty to be angsty about these days), try coming up with coherent reasons for it. Right now, you just sound like a lunatic.
Do you even know what socialism is? Because it isn't this.
People are making lots of stupid posts today. Yes. The universe is between 12 and 14 billion years old. Want a cookie for doing a good job of bringing up an irrelevant point that has nothing to do with my post?
The sun is roughly 5 billion years old. Gilese 581 could conceivably be much older, 7, 8 or even 9 billion years (though, with rocky planets, it's probably at least a second generation star), and easily have another 10 or 20 to go before it dims out. That was my point. The planetary system could be 50% older than ours. That's a long fucking time, lot's of time for planets to get tidally locked.