I went to use it, however, and saw that it would not run on my distro. Too bad.
Sounds like you're running a pretty lame distro then.
Re:Sudo is only useful when there are lots of admi
on
Sudo vs. Root
·
· Score: 1
For a single-user system, sudo is pointless. Nearly everyone is just going to sudo into a shell to do anything where root is needed on their own personal box anyway.
No.
I recall arguing with someone in one of the Ubuntu IRC channels (back in my more vitriolic days) and they claimed that (arguably) the biggest draw for a desktop user using sudo is that things are separated very specifically. You access an administrative tool, for example, but that's the ONLY thing that you're doing with root access. As soon as you close that, you no longer have it at all. The same goes for anything else.
I think that a root terminal is more important for anyone who's doing a lot of administrative commands at once, but this isn't a typical scenario for a desktop user. Mac OS and Ubuntu (the only Linux distro I know of that touts the "sudo for everything" attitude) are geared for non-technical desktop users.
I used to hate sudo. However, I installed Ubuntu again in January and this time around I can appreciate using sudo a lot more. When I need to do "root stuff" at a terminal, I simply open the "Root Terminal" menu option under System Tools or su to root if I already have a terminal open. Otherwise, I just run commands with sudo or access things via the GUI (which runs gksudo). Very nice setup, if you ask me.
The article's author seems to be geared towards a server environment, in which case I ask why he's using a default sudo setup in the first place. Hell, maybe sudo isn't even a good idea at all on a server....
The real challenge is not the number of articles, but their quality; many articles have poor writing. I've noticed that once an article reaches a certain level of quality, it actually tends to get worse over time because of random, uncoordinated edits.
This was my thought exactly. Of course, I thought of posting here and imagined a possible response: "Well, you could have a higher-encoded MP3." But most people don't, and I'm still of a mind that the iPod should support FLAC audio.
This is why I can't support the Apple hegemony... though I am jealous that my IAUDIO doesn't have a slim and sleek hi-fi system to plug into... oh wait, I can just use a standard audio out. Fine by me!
My solution: I mostly run KDE-based apps in the Gnome DE. (While wishing XFCe would work 100%.)
I'd be interested to know why Xfce doesn't work for you; I'm an avid user and I find that running a few GNOME programs in Xfce is the way to go. If you want to comment here or contact me personally, really I'd be interested to know so maybe I could offer some help.
Your whole point about CDs costing less than iTunes is also bunk. Nearly every album on iTunes that can be bought as an album costs quite a bit LESS than any copy I can find in the stores on CD unless they are clearencing them out.
Baloney. Where did the GP mention that CDs were cheaper?
The only downside to the CD is that there are often only a half or a third of the songs on it that you'll actually listen to. That's a big downside though.
Sounds like you're buying the wrong CDs; I don't generally buy one that I don't enjoy completely.
Back in the early days of the internet,.MOD files and the whole Fasttracker scene was at it's peak. With a.MOD file, when you distribute your music you distribute all of the samples used to make the music and the charts itself. Anyone out on the internet could then edit or improve your music. A lot of the music I wrote early on was based on the works of others.
This is the case in most of the history of Western music. (I can't really speak about other cultures' music as much.) Bach, for example, arranged many Vivaldi and Marcello instrumental concertos for solo keyboard, which became not only an exercise in theory for Bach (which inspired his subsequent works) but also became great pieces for others to perform.
Bach's actually an excellent example because of the amount of "recycling" he did within his own work also. When he was writing cantatas every week, he would often pull out some of his better themes and retool them for the piece. To complete the analogy, it's almost like he wrote a common library for reuse. ^_^
The same goes down the pike: there are many pieces that were written as variations on a theme by so-and-so, and these often end up being seminal works that remain popular.
It was in this framework that I started reading about and using open-source software; it's no wonder I was almost immediately taken by it.:) It's certainly something I think about when programming: reading other's source is a learning experience, but also affords me the opportunity to reuse portions of it that are useful and/or elegant.
I don't know why they thought Winamp needed to be able to play videos but it did now. I don't know why they thought Winamp had to show stupid tripping-on-acid-harmonograph visualizations but it did now. I don't know why they thought Winamp had to melt songs together but it did now... etc.
If someone wanted to load up their iPod or iTunes or whatever with thousands of songs, the library would be a good place to utilize.
You're right about the library's selection; even a small library can afford many budget classical CDs, a lot of which are rather classic performances that are quite cheap and sound good on CD. There was a period of time when I felt it morally wrong to use P2P to download music, but I still felt OK ripping library CDs. The problem was that many of the CDs at my local library are very badly scratched, so much so that a full third of them have significant portions that are unlistenable. I always wondered why the library didn't make a backup CD and then release that to the public, so they'd have the original in case of damage or loss.
I wonder how long before [...] they demand that all media available at libraries is heavily DRM-ed.
That'd be a pity, huh? These days I use the libraries to hear new classical music, or new performances of some favorites (there's always more to hear!) so that I can buy them if I like them (Amazon.com samples do little justice to many classical performances) but if DRM hits the libraries, there's really no chance of this idea of a backup for the sake of quality. So yeah, yet another potential avenue that could (at least for me) alienate the listener.*
This really isn't news - Microsoft has been actively trying to limit hobbyists and small businesses entry into creating new applications for the PC for ten years or more.
Rejecting all invalid, yet interpretable, input is not a wise idea.
The problem is that Apple's input isn't done constructively, cooperatively, or corporately. The RSS is used by a community, and since the standard is open, people should communicate when they want to extend it. As Apple has replacement tags, I'm not sure the community would respond real well, but this was the case with MS's extensions, and the RSS community seemed to welcome the feedback.
Going off and acting as though you're implementing these things in a solipsism is a Bad Idea and garners ill will from the community. That's how these things should be.
Oh wait... you were talking about XML input... whoops.
4 of the top results from last year were Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Brad Pitt, and Angelina Jolie; how do we separate searches for the digs on these celebrities from people trying to see nude pictures of them?
From the weekly Zeitgeist results, it looks like people are definitely already looking for a lot of porn, if you want to construe it that way: 1. joe pichler 2. golden globes 3. james franco 4. james frey 5. angelina jolie pregnant 6. martin luther king 7. kim mathers 8. sasha cohen 9. smoking gun 10. denver broncos 11. naked news 12. hoodwinked 13. michelle wie 14. seahawks 15. friday the 13th
We have it all covered there: celebrities, wives/ex-wives/wives of celebrities, horror porn, and pregnant women....
Knowing how to use technical things in the prescribed manner does not make you a geek, any more than knowing the exits on an airplane makes you a flight attendent. Knowing how to use technical things in ways they were never meant to be used makes you a geek. (and this is only one small definition "geekiness.")
I see your point, but I just want to add some food for thought: according to your definition, using Linux or C (just examples) in their "prescribed manner" doesn't make you a geek. I would disagree. I think it's really more a question of motivation and enthusiasm, and simply doing things "out of the box" doesn't really make you a geek.
Being realistic, I don't think that most users wish to attain a deep understanding of their computers, so some of the hardware stuff is right out. However, I work in computer application support (mostly Microsoft Office stuff) and one thing that I find that users don't understand is the concept of files... and it's much to their detriment. Users think of their files as being "in" the application they use to work with them. This obfuscates the concepts of backing up, copying/moving, or accessing files on a shared/network drive. Sometimes, I've even seen it baffle people when they have files of a type spread across their drive because they expect ALL their files to be present when they click the Open button in the app.
I actually bounced this frustration off of my friend Z and he had a good analogy:
You have your paper files in your folders, in the cabinet. My Documents is like the folder that holds your paper in the filing cabinet that is your computer. Just as multiple people can look at the paper files in your cabinet, so too can multiple programs look at, or run, a single electronic file. Each program has a different specialty, just as each person. An engineer and a secretary can both look at the same file, but get very different things from it and do different things with it. An engineer could make design adjustments to a schematic, whereas a secretary may only be able to adjust formatting/spelling or produce copies of it. Even though they look at the file differently and can do different things with or to it, the file itself is no different. Certain computer files only really make sense to one program (just as schematics probably only make sense to the engineer and not the secretary), so that's we generally open them in that program (such as *.doc files in Word).
This may be too reductive and excedingly patronizing, but I gave it a shot.
I thought it was pretty good and the idea of non-technical analogies that people will already understand is a good inroad to computer education, in my opinion. A pat answer, but I don't think it can be overstated, especially since the "file cabinet" analogy is about as old as computer files (and is used in nearly every file/folder icon) but many people still don't seem to grasp it.
On a tangent, this specific difficulty does lend credence to the idea of a metadata/type file manager. (And that's something I'm reluctant to admit.)
FaceTime said that exploits can jump networks through IM "consolidation" applications, such as Trillian or Gaim, which let people combine contacts from multiple IM networks on one list.
Can anyone attest to or refute this? This kinda surprises me. Do these attacks get in through the browser, the protocol, or the client specifically? I can see them hopping protocols if they're getting down into the browser or OS (and then working back up to another protocol), but I can't imagine that these hackers hacking Gaim or Trillian since they have less marketshare (analogous to the paucity of viruses on Mac OS/Linux). Does this stand to reason?
I know it's out of context, but did this quote make anyone else wonder?
A cover note to the memorandum, apparently written by the Director of Central Intelligence William Colby himself, stated that "I confessed some question over need to protect since [...] If exposed don't we just say classified USAF work is done there?"
I'm not asserting anything, simply saying that Sol is a common name for our sun. That's it, no silly pedantic nitpicking necessary. I'm quite comfortable simply saying "the Sun".
Oh, I get it! You were nitpicking the conventional definition by correcting me with your personal ped^H^H^Hsemantic choice, of which I had no knowledge. How silly of me.
Slashdot Mirror
I recall arguing with someone in one of the Ubuntu IRC channels (back in my more vitriolic days) and they claimed that (arguably) the biggest draw for a desktop user using sudo is that things are separated very specifically. You access an administrative tool, for example, but that's the ONLY thing that you're doing with root access. As soon as you close that, you no longer have it at all. The same goes for anything else.
I think that a root terminal is more important for anyone who's doing a lot of administrative commands at once, but this isn't a typical scenario for a desktop user. Mac OS and Ubuntu (the only Linux distro I know of that touts the "sudo for everything" attitude) are geared for non-technical desktop users.
I used to hate sudo. However, I installed Ubuntu again in January and this time around I can appreciate using sudo a lot more. When I need to do "root stuff" at a terminal, I simply open the "Root Terminal" menu option under System Tools or su to root if I already have a terminal open. Otherwise, I just run commands with sudo or access things via the GUI (which runs gksudo). Very nice setup, if you ask me.
The article's author seems to be geared towards a server environment, in which case I ask why he's using a default sudo setup in the first place. Hell, maybe sudo isn't even a good idea at all on a server....
The real challenge is not the number of articles, but their quality; many articles have poor writing. I've noticed that once an article reaches a certain level of quality, it actually tends to get worse over time because of random, uncoordinated edits.
This was my thought exactly. Of course, I thought of posting here and imagined a possible response: "Well, you could have a higher-encoded MP3." But most people don't, and I'm still of a mind that the iPod should support FLAC audio.
This is why I can't support the Apple hegemony... though I am jealous that my IAUDIO doesn't have a slim and sleek hi-fi system to plug into... oh wait, I can just use a standard audio out. Fine by me!
Assuming I'm not the only one who had no idea what "I love bees" was, here are a few links:
:(
The site (Yeah, it is freaky!)
Wired News article about the game
Sounds like I missed the boat....
BTW, not to be a tool, but it is Xfce, not XFce. Common misconception.
How did you get modded up? Sheesh.
This is the case in most of the history of Western music. (I can't really speak about other cultures' music as much.) Bach, for example, arranged many Vivaldi and Marcello instrumental concertos for solo keyboard, which became not only an exercise in theory for Bach (which inspired his subsequent works) but also became great pieces for others to perform.
Bach's actually an excellent example because of the amount of "recycling" he did within his own work also. When he was writing cantatas every week, he would often pull out some of his better themes and retool them for the piece. To complete the analogy, it's almost like he wrote a common library for reuse. ^_^
The same goes down the pike: there are many pieces that were written as variations on a theme by so-and-so, and these often end up being seminal works that remain popular.
It was in this framework that I started reading about and using open-source software; it's no wonder I was almost immediately taken by it.
...and I just used up my first batch of mod points!
AOL.
If someone wanted to load up their iPod or iTunes or whatever with thousands of songs, the library would be a good place to utilize.
You're right about the library's selection; even a small library can afford many budget classical CDs, a lot of which are rather classic performances that are quite cheap and sound good on CD. There was a period of time when I felt it morally wrong to use P2P to download music, but I still felt OK ripping library CDs. The problem was that many of the CDs at my local library are very badly scratched, so much so that a full third of them have significant portions that are unlistenable. I always wondered why the library didn't make a backup CD and then release that to the public, so they'd have the original in case of damage or loss.
I wonder how long before [...] they demand that all media available at libraries is heavily DRM-ed.
That'd be a pity, huh? These days I use the libraries to hear new classical music, or new performances of some favorites (there's always more to hear!) so that I can buy them if I like them (Amazon.com samples do little justice to many classical performances) but if DRM hits the libraries, there's really no chance of this idea of a backup for the sake of quality. So yeah, yet another potential avenue that could (at least for me) alienate the listener.*
* Remember folks, the listener is the buyer.
...as if millions of geckos suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
This really isn't news - Microsoft has been actively trying to limit hobbyists and small businesses entry into creating new applications for the PC for ten years or more.
;)
I'd say at least thirty. (Well, a day short.
Seems I'm the only one around here who doesn't know who he is.... So here's the skinny:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tridgell
http://samba.org/~tridge
This would be better suited for slashback.
Or digg.com? Latest headline on Digg: "Awesome re-cut of the SNL 'Lazy Sunday' video by two 5th graders"
Uh... yeah.
The problem is that Apple's input isn't done constructively, cooperatively, or corporately. The RSS is used by a community, and since the standard is open, people should communicate when they want to extend it. As Apple has replacement tags, I'm not sure the community would respond real well, but this was the case with MS's extensions, and the RSS community seemed to welcome the feedback.
Going off and acting as though you're implementing these things in a solipsism is a Bad Idea and garners ill will from the community. That's how these things should be.
Oh wait... you were talking about XML input... whoops.
4 of the top results from last year were Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Brad Pitt, and Angelina Jolie; how do we separate searches for the digs on these celebrities from people trying to see nude pictures of them?
From the weekly Zeitgeist results, it looks like people are definitely already looking for a lot of porn, if you want to construe it that way:
1. joe pichler
2. golden globes
3. james franco
4. james frey
5. angelina jolie pregnant
6. martin luther king
7. kim mathers
8. sasha cohen
9. smoking gun
10. denver broncos
11. naked news
12. hoodwinked
13. michelle wie
14. seahawks
15. friday the 13th
We have it all covered there: celebrities, wives/ex-wives/wives of celebrities, horror porn, and pregnant women....
Why not post any of the 50 other articles on this same topic... in English?
I actually bounced this frustration off of my friend Z and he had a good analogy:
I thought it was pretty good and the idea of non-technical analogies that people will already understand is a good inroad to computer education, in my opinion. A pat answer, but I don't think it can be overstated, especially since the "file cabinet" analogy is about as old as computer files (and is used in nearly every file/folder icon) but many people still don't seem to grasp it.
On a tangent, this specific difficulty does lend credence to the idea of a metadata/type file manager. (And that's something I'm reluctant to admit.)
(emphasis mine)
I'm not asserting anything, simply saying that Sol is a common name for our sun. That's it, no silly pedantic nitpicking necessary. I'm quite comfortable simply saying "the Sun".
Oh, I get it! You were nitpicking the conventional definition by correcting me with your personal ped^H^H^Hsemantic choice, of which I had no knowledge. How silly of me.