I'm going to take advantage of the low post number due to the blackout and mention my situation.
First, I don't mind the ads. I'm glad they're not too intrusive for me and you guys are still getting the revenue from me being here, subscription or no.
Second, thanks for the credit card option. I was worried about PayPal, so I can subscribe now.
But I won't, at least not yet. I'm still a student with 0 income, so I can't afford to subscribe here, as much as I'd like to. Once I have an income, you guys and Penny Arcade are going to be the first subscriptions I get, but not until I can afford it. I'm guessing that since there are a lot of students around here, I'm not outside of a general trend.
As for what I want, I like the idea of having a five to ten minute delay for non-subscribers on new stories, so that subscribers can initiate discussion. The subscribers are likely to be the ones who care about the site most, and are most willing to post intelligently. It'll provide a good baseline of quotes to start an intelligent discussion.
I'd like to see subscribers who got $rtbl'ed get their mod priveleges back. These are people who care about the site (perhaps too much) enough to subscribe, and simply trying to improve the site by modding a discussion on it shouldn't deny them the ability to fully participate. While this could be seen as buying your way back in, it is much easier to just make a new account and karma whore your way to the top than subscribing. Subscribing shows that they care enough to deserve mod privledges.
I like the idea of giving all subscribers the +1 bonus at a lower base karma, for the same reasons. These people care enough to subscribe, so perhaps give them +1 at 15 or 10.
All in all, subscription benefits should target posters and posting in general. Those who subscribe will do so because they care about the real content of the site, which is the discussion. As such, they deserve to be rewarded in that area. I believe Taco when he says that most people only pay attention to the front page, but I think he, and all the other editors, also know that the comments are what make the site what it is, which is why I'm not participating in the blackout. Subscribing should be used, like the mod system before it, in order to facilitate and improve the comments. Because without the discussion, what is/. but a bunch of daily links?
One idea is that I'd like to see who mods me down. I think somebody'd be more careful about modding me down as troll when they know that I know who's doing it
I disagree with this idea. It's the same reason why we have anonymous voting in political elections. You don't want to start vendettas. "Well, this person modded me down as troll when I wasn't trolling, so I'm going to make sure I get them back when I have mod points myself!" This would completely defeat the moderation system.
Granted, this is a very childish scenario that assumes both parties are fairly immature, but then, this is/.
Just out of curiosity, don't you want to improve your grammar just for your own personal betterment as a human being? I mean, English is your first language, right? Don't you want to feel like you're competent in it? I don't mind spelling or grammar errors at all, and I don't really see why people get so upset over them, as though they can't interpret what you're saying (well, unless the grammar is really really bad) but I think that you and everyone else would want to improve their spelling and grammar just so you don't look back on what you read later and feel like an idiot.
It's a skill like anything else in life. Just because you want your work to have that authentic feel to it doesn't mean that you can't pay attention to what you type. This goes for everyone, especially the/. readers who bitch about grammar and spelling with posts containing errors of their own.
I hadn't thought about this before, but this draws from a long line of precedent. I'm taking a class in late Romantic Literature right now, and we're studying Pierce Shelley. We just read his epic "Prometheus Unbound", which actually shares some of the same tenents. The idea that we are masters of our own destiny, and that we have created our own God in order to enslave ourselves was formulated here as a refutation of Christianity. While Shelley's work would also defy Scientology, which places the external force of an cosmic warlord from "outside" as enslaving us, the idea of breaking free from enslavement is still present.
So while Hubbard's load of crap may seem funny and stupid, it does bear some baggage from the best thinkers of the Enlightenment. I think this is some small part of what makes it attractive to many people now, despite its obvious stupidity.
That said, Shelley and all his ilk would have hated Scientology because it degrades its members in to the lowest form of slavery imaginable, which is why we need great sites like xenu.net (which I've been telling everyone I can about) in order to really get the word out.
I feel pity for your customers. I'll guess that you're the type of guy that always has the raised eyebrow, exclaiming about how dumb the average Joe is, while at the same time wallowing in your own ignorance.
Fair enough, but is that really the point anyway? UT is a great game, and it's getting kind of long in the tooth now, but it's still a blast. UT 2003 is going to be a kickass game if it follows the model of its predecessor.
The thing that caught my eye more than the graphics and the new HUD look was the message at the bottom of the shot saying "You have the ball, deliver it to the enemy base!" I don't know if this is a mod that's already out there, but it seems like it's based on sports like football, soccer (the other white football), and games like it. More modes of play means more fun which means a better game, graphics aside. If my computer can run it when it comes out, it'll be in my hands ASAP.
I think this depends on what you're looking at. Sure, when typing up a simple memo, this can take a lot more work, depending on what the person producing it wants or needs. However, take a look at the other side. Simple, or even very complex, documents can be created with relative ease thanks to modern tools. I'm not just talking about Word, but TeX, PowerPoint, Arcview, Excel, and the whole host of other programs. The types of documents made by these programs are generally more complex, and time is saved overall in making them. If it takes the same amount of time to create the thing, then often more work is put in to the content itself or the appearance. Granted, they are often overkill for something simple, but the options are there to manage complexity.
It is, by the way, complexity that the parent post is talking about. Being able to increase the flow of information by putting information in a figure as well as text, or automatically generating a reference in LyX, or adding an easy scatter plot for your data with Excel. You simply can't do these things with a typewriter. Modern technology allows us to stream more information at people than ever before, and while this does have its obvious and many downsides, I don't think that the fact can be ignored.
And while you're right about the increased work hours, I don't feel that you can blame technology for it. After all, if we really wanted to work less, we would. But we don't, and we can't. The overall psyche of the nation is tooled in such a way that we have to work 60, 70, and 80 hour workweeks on average, no matter the consequences. This isn't because of technology, it's the modern mindset that is the cause of this, which runs far deeper.
Does this mean perl is now trying to compete with Emacs? This could get ugly...
Ruby vs Python vs Perl running Perlbox vs Emacs running everything vs Linux running KDE vs BSD running Gnome vs Windows vs Solaris running Emacs vs OSX running Virtual PC running Activestate Perl running Perlbox...
Interesting... how much work is this project going to entail? I don't know much about encoding, but if you could point me towards whatever docs need to be read to help out, I'd like to help. I feel like I've been waiting for a portable vorbis player forever, and if this would really be the key, then I'd like to help.
The parent post makes a good point though (one that I hadn't thought of before), that things like the ability to look at porn are not allowed by age 18 either. While almost everyone before this age has or does obtain pornography by this time, the law is set up against it, sending the message that it is wrong to be educated about these things. This makes it hard for kids to educate themselves (which is a critical thing in the real world) and also sends a message to parents that they can delay educating their kids until that 18th birthday.
I think there should be some kind of gradient, rather than this magical age where everything is possible. We already have it with driving, where kids get their licenses at 16. Many states, including mine, now restrict that initial license and slowly add priveledges, like being able to drive with other minors. This is a very good technique, and sharpens slightly what is really a stupid, blunt tool for shaping behavior. The problem is that sex is a much more controversial topic than driving, so this sort of thing would be an uphill battle.
Is there any techincal reason why no one supports vorbis yet? I know... I know... it's not as popular as MP3 and therefore probably not worth the money, but in terms of the purely technical, why isn't there a portable ogg player? The project is in the 1.0RC phase, and we all know it's a high quality product. Given that the software itself is free, how hard would it be to put the decoder in to one of these things? I just don't understand.
Apple really ought to make an effort to get OpenOffice working really, really well as a native Mac OS X application.
As a Mac user, I really hope they don't. OpenOffice is awful compared to the Mac version of Office and OO is being developed to be cross platform and then ported. Office for Mac is written specifically for the Mac. I don't want crappy ported software that looks like it belongs on Windows, I want good Mac software (same argument applies in reverse when I'm using my Windows box btw).
How can you say something like this? If Apple puts resources in to making OO run great on OSX, why would you complain about that? Or, perhaps you don't like choice, especially when Microsoft holds so much power over the office suites on Mac. Yes, Appleworks is great (I've been a big fan since ClarisWorks) but it's not really a competitor to MS Office, in large part because it doesn't focus on cross-platform support the way OO is. The fact that MS Office is dominant on Windows goes the majority of the way towards making it the dominant office suite on Macs. I personally agree with the parent and think Apple should pour at least some resources in to OO and eventually release their own version of the thing, with the UI set up to work perfectly with OSX. Would you complain about this?
And as for Mozilla... it might suck now on OSX, but it's a damn fine piece of technology, and the fact that it can be heavily customized means that it can be configured for full OSX style UI with some Javascript and CSS. You're not forced to use it, but this could be the default behavior for the OSX binary distribution of the program. Apple could even do it themselves, or... hell, even you could do it! Anyone can! Meanwhile, you're still stuck with a dated version of IE (which is hideously slow whenever I've used it on Mac) and Omniweb, which still needs DOM work. With these as your alternate choices, how can you say that this would be a bad thing?
But then... I left the Mac because I wanted the freedom to choose for myself what to use rather than what was handed to me. I guess things haven't changed that much then. sigh
You make an excellent point, but I think that cost is a big issue. If you look at some book by someone you've never heard of, with only one review, you might be more inclined to give it, and the author, a try if you can save a few bucks on a used copy. This sort of thing is occassionally done with new CD's, where they have a "discovery price" of $10 new. It's rare, but it shows faith in the artist. The comfort in knowing that the book was a bargin to begin with will soften the blow if you don't like what you bought, or will make you treasure a good find all the more satisfying.
No one is threatening to shut down Amazon, please read the article before being stupid. It's more like GM asking its dealers' webpages to link to carprice rather than autotrader because they didn't agree with autotrader's practices.
They're threatening no one. Read the article please. They are asking their member authors to not link to Amazon. No law suits. No EULAs. No absurd new bills. They are simply asking their members to not link to Amazon. Why is this so bad again? Hell, they're not even forcing their members to do this, they are simply urging them to do so. Don't the authors have a right to decide who they link to? Or is this too "selfish" for you?
Come on... you're putting a sensationalist spin on this one that's just not fair to the Author's Guild at all. Of course they got money on the first sale, and of course you have the right to sell the book if you want to. That's not the point.
The point is that they are upset with the prominent placement these used editions are getting on the website, because people will generally prefer the cheaper used edition to the new one. This will prevent the author from getting that second or third new copy sold, and thus 1/2 or 1/3 of the potential money. They are not trying to restrict your rights in any way at all, so stop being so sensationalist about it.
The fact is that both sides have a very good point, if you bothered to read the article. The authors are concerned that they will get less sales of new books (which is a tough thing to get if you're not someone like Anne Rice or Steven King to begin with) which will decrease their profits. Note that this isn't the publishers talking (like the equivalent of the RIAA) but it is the Author's Guild, which represents the authors themselves.
However, in the end I think I like Amazon's position: "It encourages customers to explore authors or genres they might not otherwise try because of the price," said spokeswoman Patty Smith. "That ends up helping authors and publishers." This is a good thing for new authors that won't really hurt the established authors or the publishers themselves. Either way, no one is trying to slap a EULA on your books, so please try and calm down a bit before you post.
I don't think I agree with you. Kpackage is already available, and supports apt just fine, at least in Debian, and presumably it should work fine for Redhat et al as well.
Packaging and distribution of software is exactly the job of a distro, because what's a distro if not a neat collection of nicely packaged software scattered about the net? Ximian has usurped the job of the distro with RedCarpet. Not that I think this is totally bad, but I think they should have kept their focus on the tool itself, rather than the service through the tool. Sadly, this is their plan to make money (best of luck to them) but it does duplicate the functions of the distros.
I, for one, will never download Ximian packages on to my Debian box because Ximian will simply never do as good a job supporting them as the Debian maintainer will. I'd imagine this is true for just about all distros.
All in all, I think KDE is right not to work on a package like RedCarpet. I think a graphical installer along the lines of installshield would be a good project, perhaps as a frontend to compliment apt and Kpackage, but on the whole I think the strength of the KDE project is that they have focus. They know what they want to provide: the best desktop environment for UNIX, and they seem to be doing it. There's no attempts to sell services or any such thing, they are simply building the best software they can to suit themselves, and the results have been fantastic. They know that their job is not to package software and set it up for people to download easily, that's the job of the distro. Instead, they provide a tool like KPackage which integrates as a frontend for the distro's system, and they leave it at that. KPackage itself can, and will, be improved, but it will never attempt to provide all that functionality itself. And if one day we're all using KPackage or RedCarpet as frontends to apt downloading either rpm's or debs as set up by your distro (which appears to me to be the way things are headed, thankfully) then I think we'll all be better off for it.
Aside from the obvious speed of development and ease of programming, there seem to be two big advantages. That I can tell.
The first is that the options you pass to trick the program are actually python code, if you look at the tutorial on the site.
The second is that you can easily extend the thing to write new tricks without recompilation. The tutorial actually demonstrates how the current tricks are written so that you can write your own. Granted, you could do this just as well in C or whatever, but this way the program can be directly modified with ease and no recompiles. This is important both to the original developer and the user who wants to extend it (which will be plenty of users, I'm sure).
Overall, he says that a lot of the code will be moved in to C at some point for additional speed, but I'd imagine that prototyping your trick in python first will be the standard. Hmmm... it might finally be time for me to sit down and learn Python after doging it for years.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to take advantage of the low post number due to the blackout and mention my situation.
/. but a bunch of daily links?
First, I don't mind the ads. I'm glad they're not too intrusive for me and you guys are still getting the revenue from me being here, subscription or no.
Second, thanks for the credit card option. I was worried about PayPal, so I can subscribe now.
But I won't, at least not yet. I'm still a student with 0 income, so I can't afford to subscribe here, as much as I'd like to. Once I have an income, you guys and Penny Arcade are going to be the first subscriptions I get, but not until I can afford it. I'm guessing that since there are a lot of students around here, I'm not outside of a general trend.
As for what I want, I like the idea of having a five to ten minute delay for non-subscribers on new stories, so that subscribers can initiate discussion. The subscribers are likely to be the ones who care about the site most, and are most willing to post intelligently. It'll provide a good baseline of quotes to start an intelligent discussion.
I'd like to see subscribers who got $rtbl'ed get their mod priveleges back. These are people who care about the site (perhaps too much) enough to subscribe, and simply trying to improve the site by modding a discussion on it shouldn't deny them the ability to fully participate. While this could be seen as buying your way back in, it is much easier to just make a new account and karma whore your way to the top than subscribing. Subscribing shows that they care enough to deserve mod privledges.
I like the idea of giving all subscribers the +1 bonus at a lower base karma, for the same reasons. These people care enough to subscribe, so perhaps give them +1 at 15 or 10.
All in all, subscription benefits should target posters and posting in general. Those who subscribe will do so because they care about the real content of the site, which is the discussion. As such, they deserve to be rewarded in that area. I believe Taco when he says that most people only pay attention to the front page, but I think he, and all the other editors, also know that the comments are what make the site what it is, which is why I'm not participating in the blackout. Subscribing should be used, like the mod system before it, in order to facilitate and improve the comments. Because without the discussion, what is
I disagree with this idea. It's the same reason why we have anonymous voting in political elections. You don't want to start vendettas. "Well, this person modded me down as troll when I wasn't trolling, so I'm going to make sure I get them back when I have mod points myself!" This would completely defeat the moderation system.
Granted, this is a very childish scenario that assumes both parties are fairly immature, but then, this is
Just out of curiosity, don't you want to improve your grammar just for your own personal betterment as a human being? I mean, English is your first language, right? Don't you want to feel like you're competent in it? I don't mind spelling or grammar errors at all, and I don't really see why people get so upset over them, as though they can't interpret what you're saying (well, unless the grammar is really really bad) but I think that you and everyone else would want to improve their spelling and grammar just so you don't look back on what you read later and feel like an idiot.
/. readers who bitch about grammar and spelling with posts containing errors of their own.
It's a skill like anything else in life. Just because you want your work to have that authentic feel to it doesn't mean that you can't pay attention to what you type. This goes for everyone, especially the
I hadn't thought about this before, but this draws from a long line of precedent. I'm taking a class in late Romantic Literature right now, and we're studying Pierce Shelley. We just read his epic "Prometheus Unbound", which actually shares some of the same tenents. The idea that we are masters of our own destiny, and that we have created our own God in order to enslave ourselves was formulated here as a refutation of Christianity. While Shelley's work would also defy Scientology, which places the external force of an cosmic warlord from "outside" as enslaving us, the idea of breaking free from enslavement is still present.
So while Hubbard's load of crap may seem funny and stupid, it does bear some baggage from the best thinkers of the Enlightenment. I think this is some small part of what makes it attractive to many people now, despite its obvious stupidity.
That said, Shelley and all his ilk would have hated Scientology because it degrades its members in to the lowest form of slavery imaginable, which is why we need great sites like xenu.net (which I've been telling everyone I can about) in order to really get the word out.
"The difference between a cult and a religion is about a hundred years."
sigh... Move!
Maybe he enjoys being a stereotype though.
Yeah, I'm kind of worried about that myself. I'm graduating this year and I'm going to have to find myself a workweek as well, wherever I can.
Fair enough, but is that really the point anyway? UT is a great game, and it's getting kind of long in the tooth now, but it's still a blast. UT 2003 is going to be a kickass game if it follows the model of its predecessor.
The thing that caught my eye more than the graphics and the new HUD look was the message at the bottom of the shot saying "You have the ball, deliver it to the enemy base!" I don't know if this is a mod that's already out there, but it seems like it's based on sports like football, soccer (the other white football), and games like it. More modes of play means more fun which means a better game, graphics aside. If my computer can run it when it comes out, it'll be in my hands ASAP.
Yeah, but it's still not very portable, is it?
I think this depends on what you're looking at. Sure, when typing up a simple memo, this can take a lot more work, depending on what the person producing it wants or needs. However, take a look at the other side. Simple, or even very complex, documents can be created with relative ease thanks to modern tools. I'm not just talking about Word, but TeX, PowerPoint, Arcview, Excel, and the whole host of other programs. The types of documents made by these programs are generally more complex, and time is saved overall in making them. If it takes the same amount of time to create the thing, then often more work is put in to the content itself or the appearance. Granted, they are often overkill for something simple, but the options are there to manage complexity.
It is, by the way, complexity that the parent post is talking about. Being able to increase the flow of information by putting information in a figure as well as text, or automatically generating a reference in LyX, or adding an easy scatter plot for your data with Excel. You simply can't do these things with a typewriter. Modern technology allows us to stream more information at people than ever before, and while this does have its obvious and many downsides, I don't think that the fact can be ignored.
And while you're right about the increased work hours, I don't feel that you can blame technology for it. After all, if we really wanted to work less, we would. But we don't, and we can't. The overall psyche of the nation is tooled in such a way that we have to work 60, 70, and 80 hour workweeks on average, no matter the consequences. This isn't because of technology, it's the modern mindset that is the cause of this, which runs far deeper.
No debian packages, at least in unstable.
And as for compiling it... it's perl! You don't have to compile anything yourself.
Does this mean perl is now trying to compete with Emacs? This could get ugly...
Ruby vs Python vs Perl running Perlbox vs Emacs running everything vs Linux running KDE vs BSD running Gnome vs Windows vs Solaris running Emacs vs OSX running Virtual PC running Activestate Perl running Perlbox...
I think we need big a flow chart for this one.
I'm not much of a Redhat guy, so I don't know how they issue updates. Are those 500MB all security updates, or are they full updates to the system?
Interesting... how much work is this project going to entail? I don't know much about encoding, but if you could point me towards whatever docs need to be read to help out, I'd like to help. I feel like I've been waiting for a portable vorbis player forever, and if this would really be the key, then I'd like to help.
The parent post makes a good point though (one that I hadn't thought of before), that things like the ability to look at porn are not allowed by age 18 either. While almost everyone before this age has or does obtain pornography by this time, the law is set up against it, sending the message that it is wrong to be educated about these things. This makes it hard for kids to educate themselves (which is a critical thing in the real world) and also sends a message to parents that they can delay educating their kids until that 18th birthday.
I think there should be some kind of gradient, rather than this magical age where everything is possible. We already have it with driving, where kids get their licenses at 16. Many states, including mine, now restrict that initial license and slowly add priveledges, like being able to drive with other minors. This is a very good technique, and sharpens slightly what is really a stupid, blunt tool for shaping behavior. The problem is that sex is a much more controversial topic than driving, so this sort of thing would be an uphill battle.
Is there any techincal reason why no one supports vorbis yet? I know... I know... it's not as popular as MP3 and therefore probably not worth the money, but in terms of the purely technical, why isn't there a portable ogg player? The project is in the 1.0RC phase, and we all know it's a high quality product. Given that the software itself is free, how hard would it be to put the decoder in to one of these things? I just don't understand.
How can you say something like this? If Apple puts resources in to making OO run great on OSX, why would you complain about that? Or, perhaps you don't like choice, especially when Microsoft holds so much power over the office suites on Mac. Yes, Appleworks is great (I've been a big fan since ClarisWorks) but it's not really a competitor to MS Office, in large part because it doesn't focus on cross-platform support the way OO is. The fact that MS Office is dominant on Windows goes the majority of the way towards making it the dominant office suite on Macs. I personally agree with the parent and think Apple should pour at least some resources in to OO and eventually release their own version of the thing, with the UI set up to work perfectly with OSX. Would you complain about this?
And as for Mozilla... it might suck now on OSX, but it's a damn fine piece of technology, and the fact that it can be heavily customized means that it can be configured for full OSX style UI with some Javascript and CSS. You're not forced to use it, but this could be the default behavior for the OSX binary distribution of the program. Apple could even do it themselves, or... hell, even you could do it! Anyone can! Meanwhile, you're still stuck with a dated version of IE (which is hideously slow whenever I've used it on Mac) and Omniweb, which still needs DOM work. With these as your alternate choices, how can you say that this would be a bad thing?
But then... I left the Mac because I wanted the freedom to choose for myself what to use rather than what was handed to me. I guess things haven't changed that much then. sigh
Not if the robots are Jack Valenti.
Don't forget pheremones. But then, sex sells, so they probably don't want to endanger that market.
You make an excellent point, but I think that cost is a big issue. If you look at some book by someone you've never heard of, with only one review, you might be more inclined to give it, and the author, a try if you can save a few bucks on a used copy. This sort of thing is occassionally done with new CD's, where they have a "discovery price" of $10 new. It's rare, but it shows faith in the artist. The comfort in knowing that the book was a bargin to begin with will soften the blow if you don't like what you bought, or will make you treasure a good find all the more satisfying.
No one is threatening to shut down Amazon, please read the article before being stupid. It's more like GM asking its dealers' webpages to link to carprice rather than autotrader because they didn't agree with autotrader's practices.
They're threatening no one. Read the article please. They are asking their member authors to not link to Amazon. No law suits. No EULAs. No absurd new bills. They are simply asking their members to not link to Amazon. Why is this so bad again? Hell, they're not even forcing their members to do this, they are simply urging them to do so. Don't the authors have a right to decide who they link to? Or is this too "selfish" for you?
Come on... you're putting a sensationalist spin on this one that's just not fair to the Author's Guild at all. Of course they got money on the first sale, and of course you have the right to sell the book if you want to. That's not the point.
The point is that they are upset with the prominent placement these used editions are getting on the website, because people will generally prefer the cheaper used edition to the new one. This will prevent the author from getting that second or third new copy sold, and thus 1/2 or 1/3 of the potential money. They are not trying to restrict your rights in any way at all, so stop being so sensationalist about it.
The fact is that both sides have a very good point, if you bothered to read the article. The authors are concerned that they will get less sales of new books (which is a tough thing to get if you're not someone like Anne Rice or Steven King to begin with) which will decrease their profits. Note that this isn't the publishers talking (like the equivalent of the RIAA) but it is the Author's Guild, which represents the authors themselves.
However, in the end I think I like Amazon's position: "It encourages customers to explore authors or genres they might not otherwise try because of the price," said spokeswoman Patty Smith. "That ends up helping authors and publishers." This is a good thing for new authors that won't really hurt the established authors or the publishers themselves. Either way, no one is trying to slap a EULA on your books, so please try and calm down a bit before you post.
I don't think I agree with you. Kpackage is already available, and supports apt just fine, at least in Debian, and presumably it should work fine for Redhat et al as well.
Packaging and distribution of software is exactly the job of a distro, because what's a distro if not a neat collection of nicely packaged software scattered about the net? Ximian has usurped the job of the distro with RedCarpet. Not that I think this is totally bad, but I think they should have kept their focus on the tool itself, rather than the service through the tool. Sadly, this is their plan to make money (best of luck to them) but it does duplicate the functions of the distros.
I, for one, will never download Ximian packages on to my Debian box because Ximian will simply never do as good a job supporting them as the Debian maintainer will. I'd imagine this is true for just about all distros.
All in all, I think KDE is right not to work on a package like RedCarpet. I think a graphical installer along the lines of installshield would be a good project, perhaps as a frontend to compliment apt and Kpackage, but on the whole I think the strength of the KDE project is that they have focus. They know what they want to provide: the best desktop environment for UNIX, and they seem to be doing it. There's no attempts to sell services or any such thing, they are simply building the best software they can to suit themselves, and the results have been fantastic. They know that their job is not to package software and set it up for people to download easily, that's the job of the distro. Instead, they provide a tool like KPackage which integrates as a frontend for the distro's system, and they leave it at that. KPackage itself can, and will, be improved, but it will never attempt to provide all that functionality itself. And if one day we're all using KPackage or RedCarpet as frontends to apt downloading either rpm's or debs as set up by your distro (which appears to me to be the way things are headed, thankfully) then I think we'll all be better off for it.
Aside from the obvious speed of development and ease of programming, there seem to be two big advantages. That I can tell.
The first is that the options you pass to trick the program are actually python code, if you look at the tutorial on the site.
The second is that you can easily extend the thing to write new tricks without recompilation. The tutorial actually demonstrates how the current tricks are written so that you can write your own. Granted, you could do this just as well in C or whatever, but this way the program can be directly modified with ease and no recompiles. This is important both to the original developer and the user who wants to extend it (which will be plenty of users, I'm sure).
Overall, he says that a lot of the code will be moved in to C at some point for additional speed, but I'd imagine that prototyping your trick in python first will be the standard. Hmmm... it might finally be time for me to sit down and learn Python after doging it for years.