Dude, no offense, but what year are you living in? Qt has been free software for a very long time now, even though it wasn't free originally. Gnome is less restrictive since it's licensed under the LGPL, but reciprocal GPL fans can't object to KDE anymore.
I may give it another shot some time in the future, but the last time I tried a debian install (on my work machine, so I didn't really care as much) the installer didn't even give me the option to choose my desktop environment, sticking me with gnome when I wanted KDE. If there was a way to select individual packages, I didn't see it; instead I got questions like "What kind of machine do you want" with options for Desktop, Web Server, FTP Server, Samba Server, a billion other kinds of "servers", etc.
Of course, Ubuntu's installer is worse. I managed to resize the wrong partition thanks to its ambiguity, as did several of my friends. My point is that minimalist net installations are really the only way to not get screwed over.
While voting with dollars against crapware is a noble gesture, every time you get the crapware and don't use it, the companies paying for the advertising and bundling lose money. Kind of like click fraud from the advertiser's perspective. One would only hope that they'd eventually wise up and realize it's not working for them.
Okay, I finished reading all the wellingtongrey archives, made a note of a T-shirt I may want to buy, and saved several comics to disk in case I want to print them out and put them on my door or case later, like I did with xkcd.
That's why the RIAA/MPAA would love it - it would be another opportunity to try to shift the liability for copyright infringement to the ISP, who would then be forced to police content like the copyright tyrants wanted all along.
On the other hand, if the ISPs were to remain neutral and simply torrent what their customer requests regardless of legality - and argue that they're transferring the bits as a technical matter and not in a copying/distribution manner - then this would at least make it easier for the ??IAs to get customer information. It sort of leads into a system whereby you have a more centralized list of what's being exchanged.
Are you kidding me? They would love for the majority of P2P to be under more direct control by corporations instead of individuals - it makes them more accountable.
Even better would be if the user could submit torrents to their ISP's local hub for download at fiber optic speeds, and then simply transfer the result from there once per household. Any bandwidth consumed by this non-last-mile torrenting on the customer's behalf would be attributed to the customer's account and charged accordingly.
Hell you could do the same thing for other non-P2P services that ISPs typically don't like customers using. Turn every account into a hosting agreement with various limitations.
Which is why even censoring hate speech is dangerous to our freedom of expression. A group should not become immune to certain criticism simply because it gets itself listed as a religious institution, and if this means the mainstream religions have to put up with more crap from ignoramouses, so be it.
I find it incredibly absurd that there's no criminal law against intentionally inflicting extreme emotional distress on a person. At the least, I would think that she could be charged with harassment of a minor - I suppose the technical term would be endangering the welfare of a child.
It's not that I mean to be offensive, but I just don't know any other adequate way of putting it: you fucking fail at reading and understanding the subject matter that you just commented on. I know it's slashdot so you probably didn't RTFA, but I encourage you to click the second link to understand what kind of precedent they're talking about.
Hint: No one is suggesting that the woman shouldn't be held accountable for her actions. It's a matter of expanding or validating a certain use of the law to prosecute this one case, that could then be abused to wreck terror on the rest of us.
Yeah, really. There's no glory in "finding" a zero day exploit; it's not as if it's inherently more severe or damning than any other flay. But it sure looks better on the headlines.
Linux users/developers don't want corporate support for drivers anywhere near as badly as they want openness in hardware specifications. Teach a man to fish, etc., etc.
Disks I'll grant, but LANs? I'm having a hard enough time finding a use for the 100 Mb/s I have. Before I go gigabit I'd have to manufacture a reason by trying to build myself a HTPC or something. Anyway, yeah, I can see why more RAM for caching would be better than faster RAM for computations.
But since patches are decentralized and often independent of one another (whereas in SVN they're sequential), you have to take extra care to make sure everyone has a complete copy of the full, up to date project, and not just a widely distributed older variation.
The article summary looks like utter crap, so can some one please spare me the pain of having to click the link myself and just tell the rest of us exactly what the fuss is about?
I saw that too; since the article is actually correct and says a yottabyte is one thousand zettabytes, either Lucas or Taco screwed up this one.
Messing up prefixes like this on a tech site is just embarrassing. If I wanted to see drastic mis-estimations of orders of magnitudes, I'd read PCWorld.
I dunno, I saw a committee meeting about the ISS on CSPAN*, and they looked more than happy to throw more money at it. Not that I mind; if we're going to hemorrhage money, I think I'd prefer it to go to orbit of all places. The witnesses stressed the point that there was a lot of worthy research that was just waiting to be done, and it all depended on having a means of getting there now that we're losing the shuttles. I can't argue against that, but it was interesting how no one with a contesting view point was present at the committee.
* So it's come to that... Either my prefrontal cortex is coming in, or television just has nothing better to offer anymore.
I am no climate change expert, but given that there's a good, simple scientific theory behind the notion that pumping enormous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere causes an increase in average global temperature, under what grounds do you dispute it? Have you an alternate theory that explains historic atmospheric readings better than our current one?
Trends are trends. Measurements are measurements. Observations are observations. Proofs are proofs. Theories are theories. Models are models. I could go on with a list of things that you can instantiate the reflexivity property of equality with, but that seems unnecessary. You obtain models/theories by/i> analyzing patterns and recalling the properties of known scientific phenomena; what's the problem?
Its intellectually lazy to claim that climatology which has had such a short life as a science at all is as robust as you claim that it is.
It is also intellectually lazy to claim any study of a chaotic system can even be robust at all.
I think the term "intellectually lazy" is very applicable to not educating oneself on a topic, and inaccurate or meaningless in the way you're trying to use it here. I'd personally go with "naive" if I wanted to communicate that point, but I don't dismiss scientific theory simply based on its age alone. I don't like the chaotic system comment either, but I don't know enough about the topic to argue that.
Because the wikipedia is not measuring information/time. It's measuring attention, i.e. time*person. For instance, you might spend an hour watching TV, or an hour assimilating all the knowledge these puny humans have ever discovered as you prepare your fleet for its impending victory over the pink apes.. Ahem.. But as long as you're the only one working on that task, the attention quantity remains the same, even though the information content is completely different.
No, no, a Library of Congress is a measurement of information quantity, and a Wikipedia is a measurement of attention; the dimensions are not equal at all.
However, 1e8 person * hours is an incredibly bad choice for the definition of a Wikipedia. Why not make it more metric, defining it to be something like 1 person * second of attention? Then the SI standard unit would be a megawikipedia, or MWp. This is equivalent to one person studying something for one and a half weeks, or all of America witnessing an event that lasts a third of a second.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, no offense, but what year are you living in? Qt has been free software for a very long time now, even though it wasn't free originally. Gnome is less restrictive since it's licensed under the LGPL, but reciprocal GPL fans can't object to KDE anymore.
I got hooked on Gentoo the moment I first emerged kde-base/kdebase-startkde and ended up with a blank, pristine desktop, without even a kicker.
I may give it another shot some time in the future, but the last time I tried a debian install (on my work machine, so I didn't really care as much) the installer didn't even give me the option to choose my desktop environment, sticking me with gnome when I wanted KDE. If there was a way to select individual packages, I didn't see it; instead I got questions like "What kind of machine do you want" with options for Desktop, Web Server, FTP Server, Samba Server, a billion other kinds of "servers", etc.
Of course, Ubuntu's installer is worse. I managed to resize the wrong partition thanks to its ambiguity, as did several of my friends. My point is that minimalist net installations are really the only way to not get screwed over.
While voting with dollars against crapware is a noble gesture, every time you get the crapware and don't use it, the companies paying for the advertising and bundling lose money. Kind of like click fraud from the advertiser's perspective. One would only hope that they'd eventually wise up and realize it's not working for them.
Okay, I finished reading all the wellingtongrey archives, made a note of a T-shirt I may want to buy, and saved several comics to disk in case I want to print them out and put them on my door or case later, like I did with xkcd.
Damn you.
That's why the RIAA/MPAA would love it - it would be another opportunity to try to shift the liability for copyright infringement to the ISP, who would then be forced to police content like the copyright tyrants wanted all along.
On the other hand, if the ISPs were to remain neutral and simply torrent what their customer requests regardless of legality - and argue that they're transferring the bits as a technical matter and not in a copying/distribution manner - then this would at least make it easier for the ??IAs to get customer information. It sort of leads into a system whereby you have a more centralized list of what's being exchanged.
That kinda scares me, now that I think about it.
Are you kidding me? They would love for the majority of P2P to be under more direct control by corporations instead of individuals - it makes them more accountable.
Even better would be if the user could submit torrents to their ISP's local hub for download at fiber optic speeds, and then simply transfer the result from there once per household. Any bandwidth consumed by this non-last-mile torrenting on the customer's behalf would be attributed to the customer's account and charged accordingly.
Hell you could do the same thing for other non-P2P services that ISPs typically don't like customers using. Turn every account into a hosting agreement with various limitations.
Well, unless you changed your root certs, your browser already does.
Which is why even censoring hate speech is dangerous to our freedom of expression. A group should not become immune to certain criticism simply because it gets itself listed as a religious institution, and if this means the mainstream religions have to put up with more crap from ignoramouses, so be it.
What the hell are you talking about? A hydra can burrow and wait for a queen to broodling it. The dragoon doesn't stand a chance.
More like the engine on a spaceship. To find a torpedo-robot.
I find it incredibly absurd that there's no criminal law against intentionally inflicting extreme emotional distress on a person. At the least, I would think that she could be charged with harassment of a minor - I suppose the technical term would be endangering the welfare of a child.
It's not that I mean to be offensive, but I just don't know any other adequate way of putting it: you fucking fail at reading and understanding the subject matter that you just commented on. I know it's slashdot so you probably didn't RTFA, but I encourage you to click the second link to understand what kind of precedent they're talking about.
Hint: No one is suggesting that the woman shouldn't be held accountable for her actions. It's a matter of expanding or validating a certain use of the law to prosecute this one case, that could then be abused to wreck terror on the rest of us.
Yeah, really. There's no glory in "finding" a zero day exploit; it's not as if it's inherently more severe or damning than any other flay. But it sure looks better on the headlines.
The GTK hater in me says, why would anyone want to make Qt look more like GTK rather than the other way around?
*clicks link* My God, they actually have GIMP looking quite reasonable, if only it weren't for its multi-window interface.
Now, I wonder if you could get in some sort of infinite loop if you used both this and GTK-Qt at the same time.
Linux users/developers don't want corporate support for drivers anywhere near as badly as they want openness in hardware specifications. Teach a man to fish, etc., etc.
Disks I'll grant, but LANs? I'm having a hard enough time finding a use for the 100 Mb/s I have. Before I go gigabit I'd have to manufacture a reason by trying to build myself a HTPC or something. Anyway, yeah, I can see why more RAM for caching would be better than faster RAM for computations.
But since patches are decentralized and often independent of one another (whereas in SVN they're sequential), you have to take extra care to make sure everyone has a complete copy of the full, up to date project, and not just a widely distributed older variation.
The article summary looks like utter crap, so can some one please spare me the pain of having to click the link myself and just tell the rest of us exactly what the fuss is about?
I saw that too; since the article is actually correct and says a yottabyte is one thousand zettabytes, either Lucas or Taco screwed up this one.
Messing up prefixes like this on a tech site is just embarrassing. If I wanted to see drastic mis-estimations of orders of magnitudes, I'd read PCWorld.
I dunno, I saw a committee meeting about the ISS on CSPAN*, and they looked more than happy to throw more money at it. Not that I mind; if we're going to hemorrhage money, I think I'd prefer it to go to orbit of all places. The witnesses stressed the point that there was a lot of worthy research that was just waiting to be done, and it all depended on having a means of getting there now that we're losing the shuttles. I can't argue against that, but it was interesting how no one with a contesting view point was present at the committee.
* So it's come to that... Either my prefrontal cortex is coming in, or television just has nothing better to offer anymore.
Trends are trends. Measurements are measurements. Observations are observations. Proofs are proofs. Theories are theories. Models are models. I could go on with a list of things that you can instantiate the reflexivity property of equality with, but that seems unnecessary. You obtain models/theories by/i> analyzing patterns and recalling the properties of known scientific phenomena; what's the problem?
I think the term "intellectually lazy" is very applicable to not educating oneself on a topic, and inaccurate or meaningless in the way you're trying to use it here. I'd personally go with "naive" if I wanted to communicate that point, but I don't dismiss scientific theory simply based on its age alone. I don't like the chaotic system comment either, but I don't know enough about the topic to argue that.
Because the wikipedia is not measuring information/time. It's measuring attention, i.e. time*person. For instance, you might spend an hour watching TV, or an hour assimilating all the knowledge these puny humans have ever discovered as you prepare your fleet for its impending victory over the pink apes.. Ahem.. But as long as you're the only one working on that task, the attention quantity remains the same, even though the information content is completely different.
No, no, a Library of Congress is a measurement of information quantity, and a Wikipedia is a measurement of attention; the dimensions are not equal at all.
However, 1e8 person * hours is an incredibly bad choice for the definition of a Wikipedia. Why not make it more metric, defining it to be something like 1 person * second of attention? Then the SI standard unit would be a megawikipedia, or MWp. This is equivalent to one person studying something for one and a half weeks, or all of America witnessing an event that lasts a third of a second.