This has nothing to do with installing without a network connection. It has to do with shutting down and rebooting to install. Read the summary and article. Besides, you can put the RPMs or DEBs on a cd/dvd/thumb drive and install them all now, and I think there is a group working on super-DEBs which are deb packages with the main app, plus all dependencies.
Also, I'm of the firm conviction that everybody should speak at least two languages.
When I lived in Florida and California I was glad I knew Spanish, but it's been so long that it was necessary that if I were to visit Puerto Rico tomorrow I'd probably have trouble buying a cervesa por mi cabesa. I learned enough Thai while in Thailand to order dinner or buy things in a store, but I remember very little of it now, 40 years later.
Knowing a second language is useful if you need to communicate in that language, but I don't see the utility of knowing a language you'll never need to use.
It used to be easy on an MS-only box, too -- fdisk/mbr. But I just recently discovered that fdisk seems to be missing from Windows, at least on the old XP box I was working on (Linux to the rescue on that one).
*sigh* Fool or troll? OK, I'll bite. There's nothing I need to do on a computer that my Linux box won't do (no, I'm not a professional digital artist so I don't need anything more powerful than Gimp), but there are a host of things that my Windows box won't that my Linux box will. Like stay online until I decide to reboot it, for one.
looks kinda like another ploy to make linux look/feel windows like
There's way too much of that already, IMO. If I wanted Windows I wouldn't reformat the hard disk! Why would anybody bother installing Linux if none of Linux's many advantages are there? And I consider never having to reboot one of those advantages.
They were much better off when they spoke 2 common tongues (Roman and Greek) and could communicate with one another easily
LOL, you forgot Aramaic (I probably spelled that wrong), Chinese, Japanese, Swahili, Inuit, and all the other native American languages. I'll bet a lot of the languages they're trying to preserve are native American tongues.
A computer can't have rights any more than a hammer can.
Very true; the guy's a law professor and not a computer guy, so he probably sees computers as being sentient. Sadly, a lot of people who should know better (because they post on/.) think as he does.
But as you say, the only difference between a computer and a hammer is the jobs these two tools do. A hammer has no rights, but its user does.
I don't know what Linkin Pork and NStynk is, maybe you're a dumb child and meant NSync and Linkin Park.
LOL, I'm 60 and was making fun of those terrible excuses for musicians.
Anyway, people cover those bands too, you're just not going to the right bar.
Every damned bar in downtown Springfield, damned near every bar (there are a few places I won't go, not many), sometimes at Bread Stretchers (a sandwich shop). The shows there have mostly teenaged audiences, and the bands mostly play punk and ska (two genres I do enjoy).
Music was always disposable.
That's true; as has been said often, 90% of everything is crap. Some of the worst music ever recorded was when I was in my twenties (disco; god but that shit was annoying).
There are some songs out right now that I could see myself listening 30 years from now, even if it's "new stuff".
Perhaps, but there's a dearth of good music that's worse than ever, at least from the major labels; a lot of the new indie stuff isn't bad, but you never hear it on the radio except the college stations.
Your taste changes
That's true, my taste in music has widened as I've gotten older. But I've always intensely disliked music that's only made for commercial purposes and devoid of any artistry; think The Archies or the other bublegum bands from the '60s. That's about the only kind of music you hear on the Clear Channel channels these days. I blame the Clear Channel monopoly and the RIAA ogliopoly.
Yes, you will be judged, for your good works. The confessional is understandable, you wouldn't confess if you hadn't repented. Christianity does make it clear that you do indeed have to repent your misdeeds, but as long as you're sorry, you're forgiven.
Are you suggesting that artists only release certain things for free or are you relying on me to donate to the artist voluntarily like shareware used to work.
I'm saying that a thing without substance is a thing without financial worth, although making it convinient can be. You can't sell music, but you can sell tickets to a venue, you can sell a physical recording, but you can't sell sound. The RIAA labels were incredibly stupid when they went after Napster. Had they used their marketing clout to tout the superiority of CDs over MP3s and used Napster to sell CDs, rather than iTunes to sell bits, CDs would still be selling well. And notice, people are still spending money on iTunes, even though they can get the same MP3s from the Pirate Bay?
Cory Doctorow makes a good living with his writing, even though he posts electronic versions of his books online at boingboing for free download. He credits his success to his posting his work online for free!
I can get all the free movies, books, and music I want for free, legally, right downtown at the city library. Reading books has always been free. Yet libraries, rather than putting authors out of business, promote them. Wanting everyone who reads your book to pay for it is exceedingly foolish; you're not going to sell very many at all that way.
The recording industry thought radio would kill their industry with its free music, yet radio made so many more sales for them that they wound up paying the stations to play their music, even though payola was illegal. The head of the MPAA in the '80s famously said "the VCR is to the movie industry what Jack the Ripper was to women," and look how much monet the studios made from rentals!
I am fairly sure I saw a statistic regarding shareware that only 10% of people who regularly used software actually felt the need to contribute to the creator.
They wouldn't have bought those titles if they couldn't get them as shareware, anyway. The shareware I saw was mostly in the form of you get one free game, register and you get the next n volumes. I bought the original Duke Nukem side scroller because the game was downright hilarious, when I finished it I wanted more. Apogee not only sent me parts two and three, but another game as well. It was worth the money. I found an excellent pinball game as shareware, the registration gave me nine more tables on CD. DOOM and Wolfenstein 3D were two more that one just had to keep playing. But I probably have hundreds of shareware floppies in the basement that were only run once and discarded. If I give you a free turd sandwich, I certainly shouldn't expect you to buy two more turd sandwiches. It wasn't the shareware model that killed them, it was the poor quality of the games. 10% seems high to me, considering the poor quality of most of it.
The current system is pretty crap, but it at least forces people like me to pay or risk breaking the law, something that I do not want to risk even though I am unlikely to be caught.
There are few like you, who don't want to take such a tiny risk. Millions of people smoke pot every day, despite the fact that you can be put in prison for it.
I would love to live in a world where most people would do the right thing just because the knew it to be morally right, but I think most people in this world only do the right thing because the law tells them to with the threat of enforcement hanging over them as well.
Odd, I know lots of pot smokers who are honest as the day is long. Most people have morals and don't need the usually empty threat of authority to make them do the right thing.
I think it important to try and keep digital goods restricted on the same terms in case it dissuades people from choosing certain careers just because they only produce new digital creations rather than physical ones.
Again, I think producing digital-only things is foolish. Like you say, if we had Star Trek-like replicators, there would be no need for money or commerce. And when it comes to art and music, that replicator is your computer. The genie is out of the bottle, and he's not about to go back in.
Look up the taxi cartels in any major city for a great example that's easy to understand.
He asked for examples of FEDERAL regulations. Would reducing emmissions controls enable smaller players to enter some fields of endeavors? Yes, but I was alive before those regs were enacted, and it was a damned filthy mess. Before drug regulation you had snake-oil salesmen selling poison as medicine. Before environmental regulations, rivers caught fire and the air around a monsanto plant burned your lungs.
You kids should read a little history, because you're advocating repeating the same mistakes made in the past.
The EPA doesn't protect the environment, it protects the companies from lawsuits.
Where were the lawsuits against Monsanto back in the '60s, when the air around one of the foul things burned your lungs as you drove past? Where were the lawsuits when rivers caught fire? That was what it was like before the EPA.
What a company opens near my home and starts polluting within the EPA regulations but it causes damage to me or my family?
The regs are strict enough that that the factory CAN'T cause damage to your family, and none of the regulations say that they are undemnified from lawsuits from injured parties. If you cause an auto accident that injures me, you're going to get sued, and lose, even if you followed all the laws.
What I would like to see is the government make it easier and cheaper to bring lawsuits forward.
Holy shit, how old are you, kid? Did your mother drink when she was pregnant with you?
One anthropological explanation for both is that, in general, humans commit (premeditated) crimes against members of a different tribe - that crime is effectively the kind of war that you get when two tribes are living in the same village. Once you identify an external enemy, be it the Germans or the 1%, then the local distinctions become less important and so the number of potential victims goes down.
That flies in the face of the actual numbers. Most murders and rapes are by people the victim knows. Murders of strangers are rare.
There were many scientists in earlier times when most people still believed in God
Most people still do believe in God or gods. Fully a third of the world's population is Chrisian, and nearly as many are Muslim. That's not even including Hindus and Bhuddists, who hold forms of multitheistic beliefs. Over half of all scientists believe in God, but it doesn't matter -- religion and science ask and answer different questions. Science answers "how", religion anwers "why".
Whoever told you that was trying to con you. Do you really think none of Enron's or Madoff's victims were honest? What's more truthful (in most cases) is you can't con a con; they know how the game is played, while an honest man doesn't.
Comparing crime rates from two different places is a tricky proposition. Different things are crimes in different places. For example, if you get caught smoking pot in Springfield it's a ticket. Get caught in East Saint Louis (same state) and it's a felony. There was an item in the news this morning about a father in Texas who caught another man molesting his daughter. He pulled the guy off and beat him to death. No charges were filed. In Illinois he'd likely be charged with first degree murder.
There are also differences in the way different police departments keep records. One with excellent record keeping will show a higher crime rate than one with mediocre record keeping.
A study is only as good as its data, and I don't see how you could get much useful data from this study. It's like determining what percentage of the population smokes pot or pirates movies; there are no good data.
Competetion is part of our nature, it works. It is sometimes called evolutionary pressure, survival of the fittest.
You misunderstand "survival of the fittest". It means species that fit their environment survive, those that don't, die. Gazelles that run faster than lions survive, because lions are part of their environment.
Take a herd of them. The least fit (the old, etc) will likely be eaten, because lions are part of the environment, and they don't fit the environment. The fastest gazelle will be at the front, where another pride of lions may be waiting. The gazelle with the greatest chance of surviving is the one that's closest to average, halfway between the fastest and the slowest; the one in the center of the herd. He is the one who fits his environment best.
I'd call the "need to compete for competetion's sake" a mental illness, because I've never met someone like that who was ever happy. Humans are social creatures, and like all social animals, do best when cooperating. I mean, look at Europe after WWI or WWII. Look at the US after the Civil War.
Cooperation is part of our nature; it works. Nobody could have made it to space by themselves, with no help from anyone. The "self-made man" is a myth.
Kirk vs Picard is debatable, but as someone who saw the original Star Trek at age 14 when it originally aired, saw the reruns as an adult, then saw STNG, I have to say the STNG is far better than STOS.
As to the various Starship captains, I like Sisko. His character (which is nothing like the character Brooks played in Spencer For Hire) is kind of Kirk-like when... he's... trying... to... control... his... temper! And he does it better than Shatner did.
Slashdot Mirror
"Counterfeit" is another. Pirating and counterfeiting are two different things.
This has nothing to do with installing without a network connection. It has to do with shutting down and rebooting to install. Read the summary and article. Besides, you can put the RPMs or DEBs on a cd/dvd/thumb drive and install them all now, and I think there is a group working on super-DEBs which are deb packages with the main app, plus all dependencies.
FTFY. Have a nice day.
Also, I'm of the firm conviction that everybody should speak at least two languages.
When I lived in Florida and California I was glad I knew Spanish, but it's been so long that it was necessary that if I were to visit Puerto Rico tomorrow I'd probably have trouble buying a cervesa por mi cabesa. I learned enough Thai while in Thailand to order dinner or buy things in a store, but I remember very little of it now, 40 years later.
Knowing a second language is useful if you need to communicate in that language, but I don't see the utility of knowing a language you'll never need to use.
It used to be easy on an MS-only box, too -- fdisk/mbr. But I just recently discovered that fdisk seems to be missing from Windows, at least on the old XP box I was working on (Linux to the rescue on that one).
to those who keep saying.. "i wish linux were more like windows"
Who's saying that??
An Iranian nuclear scientist was murdered in Iran by a guy with a car bomb just last year. It was in the papers...
*sigh* Fool or troll? OK, I'll bite. There's nothing I need to do on a computer that my Linux box won't do (no, I'm not a professional digital artist so I don't need anything more powerful than Gimp), but there are a host of things that my Windows box won't that my Linux box will. Like stay online until I decide to reboot it, for one.
looks kinda like another ploy to make linux look/feel windows like
There's way too much of that already, IMO. If I wanted Windows I wouldn't reformat the hard disk! Why would anybody bother installing Linux if none of Linux's many advantages are there? And I consider never having to reboot one of those advantages.
They were much better off when they spoke 2 common tongues (Roman and Greek) and could communicate with one another easily
LOL, you forgot Aramaic (I probably spelled that wrong), Chinese, Japanese, Swahili, Inuit, and all the other native American languages. I'll bet a lot of the languages they're trying to preserve are native American tongues.
IMO, anybody who can't be bothered to go to the polls shouldn't be voting anyway. I'm completely against online voting.
A computer can't have rights any more than a hammer can.
Very true; the guy's a law professor and not a computer guy, so he probably sees computers as being sentient. Sadly, a lot of people who should know better (because they post on /.) think as he does.
But as you say, the only difference between a computer and a hammer is the jobs these two tools do. A hammer has no rights, but its user does.
It's because recipes can't be patented or copyrighted.
I don't know what Linkin Pork and NStynk is, maybe you're a dumb child and meant NSync and Linkin Park.
LOL, I'm 60 and was making fun of those terrible excuses for musicians.
Anyway, people cover those bands too, you're just not going to the right bar.
Every damned bar in downtown Springfield, damned near every bar (there are a few places I won't go, not many), sometimes at Bread Stretchers (a sandwich shop). The shows there have mostly teenaged audiences, and the bands mostly play punk and ska (two genres I do enjoy).
Music was always disposable.
That's true; as has been said often, 90% of everything is crap. Some of the worst music ever recorded was when I was in my twenties (disco; god but that shit was annoying).
There are some songs out right now that I could see myself listening 30 years from now, even if it's "new stuff".
Perhaps, but there's a dearth of good music that's worse than ever, at least from the major labels; a lot of the new indie stuff isn't bad, but you never hear it on the radio except the college stations.
Your taste changes
That's true, my taste in music has widened as I've gotten older. But I've always intensely disliked music that's only made for commercial purposes and devoid of any artistry; think The Archies or the other bublegum bands from the '60s. That's about the only kind of music you hear on the Clear Channel channels these days. I blame the Clear Channel monopoly and the RIAA ogliopoly.
Yes, you will be judged, for your good works. The confessional is understandable, you wouldn't confess if you hadn't repented. Christianity does make it clear that you do indeed have to repent your misdeeds, but as long as you're sorry, you're forgiven.
Are you suggesting that artists only release certain things for free or are you relying on me to donate to the artist voluntarily like shareware used to work.
I'm saying that a thing without substance is a thing without financial worth, although making it convinient can be. You can't sell music, but you can sell tickets to a venue, you can sell a physical recording, but you can't sell sound. The RIAA labels were incredibly stupid when they went after Napster. Had they used their marketing clout to tout the superiority of CDs over MP3s and used Napster to sell CDs, rather than iTunes to sell bits, CDs would still be selling well. And notice, people are still spending money on iTunes, even though they can get the same MP3s from the Pirate Bay?
Cory Doctorow makes a good living with his writing, even though he posts electronic versions of his books online at boingboing for free download. He credits his success to his posting his work online for free!
I can get all the free movies, books, and music I want for free, legally, right downtown at the city library. Reading books has always been free. Yet libraries, rather than putting authors out of business, promote them. Wanting everyone who reads your book to pay for it is exceedingly foolish; you're not going to sell very many at all that way.
The recording industry thought radio would kill their industry with its free music, yet radio made so many more sales for them that they wound up paying the stations to play their music, even though payola was illegal. The head of the MPAA in the '80s famously said "the VCR is to the movie industry what Jack the Ripper was to women," and look how much monet the studios made from rentals!
I am fairly sure I saw a statistic regarding shareware that only 10% of people who regularly used software actually felt the need to contribute to the creator.
They wouldn't have bought those titles if they couldn't get them as shareware, anyway. The shareware I saw was mostly in the form of you get one free game, register and you get the next n volumes. I bought the original Duke Nukem side scroller because the game was downright hilarious, when I finished it I wanted more. Apogee not only sent me parts two and three, but another game as well. It was worth the money. I found an excellent pinball game as shareware, the registration gave me nine more tables on CD. DOOM and Wolfenstein 3D were two more that one just had to keep playing. But I probably have hundreds of shareware floppies in the basement that were only run once and discarded. If I give you a free turd sandwich, I certainly shouldn't expect you to buy two more turd sandwiches. It wasn't the shareware model that killed them, it was the poor quality of the games. 10% seems high to me, considering the poor quality of most of it.
The current system is pretty crap, but it at least forces people like me to pay or risk breaking the law, something that I do not want to risk even though I am unlikely to be caught.
There are few like you, who don't want to take such a tiny risk. Millions of people smoke pot every day, despite the fact that you can be put in prison for it.
I would love to live in a world where most people would do the right thing just because the knew it to be morally right, but I think most people in this world only do the right thing because the law tells them to with the threat of enforcement hanging over them as well.
Odd, I know lots of pot smokers who are honest as the day is long. Most people have morals and don't need the usually empty threat of authority to make them do the right thing.
I think it important to try and keep digital goods restricted on the same terms in case it dissuades people from choosing certain careers just because they only produce new digital creations rather than physical ones.
Again, I think producing digital-only things is foolish. Like you say, if we had Star Trek-like replicators, there would be no need for money or commerce. And when it comes to art and music, that replicator is your computer. The genie is out of the bottle, and he's not about to go back in.
That's true, but although many greedy people are dishonest, not all are.
Look up the taxi cartels in any major city for a great example that's easy to understand.
He asked for examples of FEDERAL regulations. Would reducing emmissions controls enable smaller players to enter some fields of endeavors? Yes, but I was alive before those regs were enacted, and it was a damned filthy mess. Before drug regulation you had snake-oil salesmen selling poison as medicine. Before environmental regulations, rivers caught fire and the air around a monsanto plant burned your lungs.
You kids should read a little history, because you're advocating repeating the same mistakes made in the past.
The EPA doesn't protect the environment, it protects the companies from lawsuits.
Where were the lawsuits against Monsanto back in the '60s, when the air around one of the foul things burned your lungs as you drove past? Where were the lawsuits when rivers caught fire? That was what it was like before the EPA.
What a company opens near my home and starts polluting within the EPA regulations but it causes damage to me or my family?
The regs are strict enough that that the factory CAN'T cause damage to your family, and none of the regulations say that they are undemnified from lawsuits from injured parties. If you cause an auto accident that injures me, you're going to get sued, and lose, even if you followed all the laws.
What I would like to see is the government make it easier and cheaper to bring lawsuits forward.
Holy shit, how old are you, kid? Did your mother drink when she was pregnant with you?
One anthropological explanation for both is that, in general, humans commit (premeditated) crimes against members of a different tribe - that crime is effectively the kind of war that you get when two tribes are living in the same village. Once you identify an external enemy, be it the Germans or the 1%, then the local distinctions become less important and so the number of potential victims goes down.
That flies in the face of the actual numbers. Most murders and rapes are by people the victim knows. Murders of strangers are rare.
There were many scientists in earlier times when most people still believed in God
Most people still do believe in God or gods. Fully a third of the world's population is Chrisian, and nearly as many are Muslim. That's not even including Hindus and Bhuddists, who hold forms of multitheistic beliefs. Over half of all scientists believe in God, but it doesn't matter -- religion and science ask and answer different questions. Science answers "how", religion anwers "why".
You cannot con an honest man!
Whoever told you that was trying to con you. Do you really think none of Enron's or Madoff's victims were honest? What's more truthful (in most cases) is you can't con a con; they know how the game is played, while an honest man doesn't.
Comparing crime rates from two different places is a tricky proposition. Different things are crimes in different places. For example, if you get caught smoking pot in Springfield it's a ticket. Get caught in East Saint Louis (same state) and it's a felony. There was an item in the news this morning about a father in Texas who caught another man molesting his daughter. He pulled the guy off and beat him to death. No charges were filed. In Illinois he'd likely be charged with first degree murder.
There are also differences in the way different police departments keep records. One with excellent record keeping will show a higher crime rate than one with mediocre record keeping.
A study is only as good as its data, and I don't see how you could get much useful data from this study. It's like determining what percentage of the population smokes pot or pirates movies; there are no good data.
Competetion is part of our nature, it works. It is sometimes called evolutionary pressure, survival of the fittest.
You misunderstand "survival of the fittest". It means species that fit their environment survive, those that don't, die. Gazelles that run faster than lions survive, because lions are part of their environment.
Take a herd of them. The least fit (the old, etc) will likely be eaten, because lions are part of the environment, and they don't fit the environment. The fastest gazelle will be at the front, where another pride of lions may be waiting. The gazelle with the greatest chance of surviving is the one that's closest to average, halfway between the fastest and the slowest; the one in the center of the herd. He is the one who fits his environment best.
I'd call the "need to compete for competetion's sake" a mental illness, because I've never met someone like that who was ever happy. Humans are social creatures, and like all social animals, do best when cooperating. I mean, look at Europe after WWI or WWII. Look at the US after the Civil War.
Cooperation is part of our nature; it works. Nobody could have made it to space by themselves, with no help from anyone. The "self-made man" is a myth.
W8 will probably accelerate the downwards slide.
I wonder about that W8. Is it "wait" as in "we're behind schedule on this damned thing" or is it "weight" as in "it's bloated and not very nimble?"
Kirk vs Picard is debatable, but as someone who saw the original Star Trek at age 14 when it originally aired, saw the reruns as an adult, then saw STNG, I have to say the STNG is far better than STOS.
As to the various Starship captains, I like Sisko. His character (which is nothing like the character Brooks played in Spencer For Hire) is kind of Kirk-like when... he's... trying... to... control... his... temper! And he does it better than Shatner did.