Getting Blender, IMHO the 3d tool with the most rapidly growing community, to run "best" on Windows would help thwart adoption of Linux. Not just adoption by users but adoption by hardware makers. If you can keep hardware makers focused on building for your platform, users will not leave. Ermm... is the marketshare of people purchasing hardware for 3d rendering high enough to show up on anybody's radar, Microsoft's or otherwise? I work in 3D for a living and never got the impression that it even made up 1 whole percent of the computer market.
This is like saying global warming either does exist because today was the hottest on record, or does not exist because today was the coldest on record. Why are these analogous? Because in both situations, you're only considering one data point, which does not even begin to indicate a trend. If statements like that are annoying, this should be considered before making grandiose claims about Open Source down the road. The higher the pedestal you put it on, the bigger the noise when something comes along to show that it's imperfect.
You should take a bow. That strikes a chord with me, no bars to use. No rest for the evil. And the finale! Sounds like the whole progression ended on a good note. And watch out for flying chairs from Washington because Steve Ballmer likes to throw chairs and he lives in Washington and he did that once a long time ago and... uh.. oh man. Why is that joke funny 300 times but no 301?
I suppose I do try to reply in such a way that doesn't unnecessarily insult people or use language that tends to draw ire. But that's part of my personality - I try to do that in person with friends and co-workers, and I don't see any reason why I should behave differently online when posting in a forum. I don't think you fully get what I'm saying, here. I'm not talking about being polite. I'm talking about walking on egg-shells on certain topics because both the general Slashdot public and the moderators have decided a particular point of view is right. Worse, people shooting for +5 scores say things that tempt you into debating with them. (Notice I said debate, not discuss.) You've got to go way out of your way to make a point from a contradictory view. You wouldn't have to if the moderation system was actually fair. Then again, without the moderation system, you'd be more inclined to discuss instead of debate.
You asked me before where I've seen a better moderation system. There are two VBulletin based forums I frequent. They're both far less hostile, you can actually have an opinion on something, and discussions take place. Their basic form of moderation is "Behave or we ban you." Plus they don't encourage you to say things that sound intelligent. There is far less need to tippie-toe around those places than here on Slashdot.
Unfortunately, at the point where you stop believing what I tell you about myself, we then stop having a meaningful conversation. What were to happen if I simply said "I don't believe that you've been mod-bombed that badly without some sort of provocation"? The conversation then dies or devolves into meaningless debate, because there's nowhere left to go once we can't accept others' viewpoints as sincere and honest. What would happen if you said you didn't believe me about the mod-bombing? Not much. Even if I had the transcript incscribed in stone and verified by an indpendent panel of UN Investigators, it doesn't make that big of difference to my point. It's an isolated incident. But that's drifting from the point a bit. You could choose to de-evolve the conversation by trying to prove me wrong, but that's not your only option. You could ask why I wouldn't believe you. I'd explain, then you could tell me where you feel the flaw in my rationale is, etc. Like I said, though, Slashdot encourages debate, not discussion. I'm doing it. You're doing it. This place breeds it.
I think it says more about the individual who does this than anything if they end up posting only what they think will be popular with the 'in' crowd. I simply post my opinion, and let the chips fall where they may. That may not reflect well on the individuals, but it's really so common that it's hard to take Slashdot seriously on some rather major topics. Besides that, if you were to actually tell me that you've never paused to consider the political phrasing of your posts to avoid unwanted moderations, I doubt I'd believe you. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, here. I'm saying this not only from personal experience, but from experiences I've heard others describe. Your expressions are being shaped by those who can silence you.
Sure, people are more likely to mod up something they agree with, but I think you're making the same mistake a lot of people make - assuming "Slashdot" as a whole has only one narrow opinion. Oh boy. I hate getting into this. Let's be realistic, here: There are biases on this site. Speak ill of Microsoft, be rewarded. Speak ill of Apple, but punished. Yes, there are lots of individuals that are posting and moderating. Yes there are opposing views. No, you still have to be aligned with public opinion to 'succeed' on this site. You're talking to somebody who was actually mod-bombed so much (30+ negative moderations) that I was banned from Slashdot for several weeks AND I had to change nicknames. I'm not in any way claiming or implying that that's common. I'm just giving you a fair head's up so you understand why I'll have difficulty agreeing with you on this topic. My old account didn't get mod-points. It used to, but one day I found a 'troll' post about Microsoft. It actually wasn't a troll, it was true in nature, but nobody wanted to accept that Windows NT rarely blue screened. I gave it a positive mod, and several people M2'd that down. Never saw mod-points again. That's a cute trick, isn't it? Silence the mods that disagree with you. Pftbtb.
How often have you seen two posts, side by side, in complete disagreement with each other, and both marked +5 insightful. That, to me, is the mark of a good moderation system. Usually when I see that somebody posts in a rush to get that cheap 'insightful' mod. (see my sound in space example.) Somebody else chimes in with a rebuttal. Sometimes it's because they actually know better, or sometimes they're aiming for their own 'insightful' mod. Often it's a pointless exercise in pendanticism. It's an artificial debate complete with its own scoreboard.
Look, if I felt like we were getting honest reactions from the people making the high scoring posts, I'd probably agree with you. But I don't. Instead what I see is the moderation system maintaining specific lines of expression. I'm sorry, I don't see that as good. I'm sure they started with good intentions, but right now it's not even a discussion forum, it's a bullshit-factory.
Let them add as much DRM as they want, once they are all out-of-business from a lack of customers then DRM goes with them. That only works if it's plainly clear that DRM is what caused it. So long as cracks exist, for example, they'll cry 'piracy'. Simply not buying products won't actually get you the result you want, especially when it involves products whose success is utterly unpredictable. "We had no sales this month!""It must be because Iron Mn came out!"
It's not a simple solution, it never was, and you're not special for suggesting it.
Please note, I didn't say it was perfect. Obviously you occasionally get bad moderations (yes, it's happened to me). I simply stated it was the best I had seen. Maybe you know of a better user-moderation system in use somewhere? The Slashdot moderation system encourages people to earn an 'insightful' mod. The moderator system is driven by people that read the site, therefore they mod those 'insightful' that agree with their opinions. The result is generally a bunch of insincere noise. "This new sci-fi movie is coming out.""Yeah, but the trailer depicts sound in space, so it must be bad! (Score: +5, Insightful)"
I do not consider a moderation system that encourages group-think to be 'good'. Baa.
They might be a net generator of power, but they are ultimately using other power sources some of the time. Or simply storage. The world is simply not that black and white.
Funny enough, I think Slashdot has the most effective and elegant user-moderation system I've seen. Only somebody that is firmly planted on the side of public opinion would think this.
"requiring registration, logging IPs and banning abusers?"
none of the above does anything to stop abusers. Registration and banning of offenders raises the required interest level of the abuser to be much higher than most would need to actually sit down and use methods of evasion to cause trouble. Just becaues it's impossible to keep somebody incredibly determined out of a site doesn't mean it does 'nothing' to help.
Clearly this is the result of having FAR too much free time. Maybe. But it's far more respectable than the hordes of people trying to rehash a Balmer-throwing-chair joke, then the rush for people with mod points to mod it up.
"Coke.. okay, maybe. Hoover? I never hear anyone say, "go get the Hoover."
I've heard the term 'hoovering' used to describe vacuuming. I think over in Englad it was more widely used that way. (That is if TV has actually taught me something.)
No unix using a non-encrypted file system is secure if you have physical access to the machine...Why would you assume it's any different with Windows?
I'd just boot knoppix and mount the partition. There, I have access to all the files. That goes for windows AND unix/linux.
If you really depend on the password for anything other than stopping casual or remote access, you're just fooling yourself. I just bought a Mac laptop and one of the things I ran across while I was reading about it was the File Vault. According to the really really enthusiastic article I read about it, it'll encrypt all the data on my home folder based on my login password. In theory, it sounds like even if somebody mirrored the drive, they'd have trouble (assuming the password is good...) getting at my data. I just wanted to ask: From a practical point of view, does this offer me much more protection? Or is there still some braindead easy way (short of beating the password out of me:P) that data can be recovered? Supposing it does work as advertised, am I at risk for having a single point of failure? Is there a realistic possibility of a badly timed computer freeze causing me to lose it all?
And neither do McDonald's employees. What's your point? I was a McDonald's employee for 2 years and I don't think I brought in near the amount of money that RIAA artists have. Still, though, I was proud to work at a Fortune 500 company.
So? I do too. And for that, I prefer not to use a portion of my screen which I do use while coding. You don't have to chop it off just because it's not useful for movies. Depends on which display you get. The laptops I've been looking at weren't lopped off, the pixels were added.
No. You are choosing to use it incorrectly. OMG! Could this be, perhaps, a matter of style and preference? If you had originally phrased it as such, sure. But now you've got righteousness and willful-ignorance mixed in with it. I really don't know what you expect to accomplish with inflexibility.
Again, kinda pointless. No need to chop my screen weight just because you don't use it for some uses, just because it's so kewl and slick. You sound awful. I prescribe Googlin.
And, like I said in my other post, my sight must be either thinner or taller than yours, because 16:9 is nothing like what I see. I see something like 3:2 at most. Then I offer my condolences for the loss of your eye.
I neverunderstood what's with this widescreen obsession. People watch DVDs on their laptops.
Just because a few metrosexual stylists decided the newest fad was to have widescreen screens, vendors have thrown actual usability and requirements out of the window. Um, no they haven't.
Text is harder to read when lines are too wide; browsers won't automatically columnize text (and it'd be kinda useless to do that); I don't need to have things side by side because I work in full screen; You're choosing to use it incorrectly.
pictures and people accomodate better in 4:3 screens (and I don't know about theirs, but in my town, people is taller than wide) Not scenery. Not cars. Not... well do I reaaaally need to put down a list of things people take pictures of that you failed to include in your list?
and most of all, the area of vision of our fucking human eyes is more similar to 4:3 than it is to that fucking stylist fad. Utterly, utterly, wrong. You (and the dipstick that modded your post up) really ought to head to Google and find out a few things like what the aspect ratio of the human eye is or how to make use of a windowing operating system.
"So this person who has proven that he does not care about the property rights of others (at a minimum!) is identified so it will be more difficult for him to rip off more people in the future." Okay. I have a question, though: It sounds all good and stuff that an apparent theif was caught, afterall the evidence seems pretty cut and dry. But suppose people like this turned their guns (metaphorically speaking) on somebody who turned out to be innocent? What would be done to repair his reputation? Would the video of his arrest, for example, be removed? Replaced with a clarification and an apology, perhaps? Would this guy even get a fair chance to defend the charges against him?
Honestly, I find your 'alternative interpretation' chilling.
"est" says that it is the absolute and there are no planets younger than it, known or unknown. Right, that's why the word 'discovered' is important. If we're discovering things, then 'known' is redundant.
Slashdot Mirror
You asked me before where I've seen a better moderation system. There are two VBulletin based forums I frequent. They're both far less hostile, you can actually have an opinion on something, and discussions take place. Their basic form of moderation is "Behave or we ban you." Plus they don't encourage you to say things that sound intelligent. There is far less need to tippie-toe around those places than here on Slashdot. Unfortunately, at the point where you stop believing what I tell you about myself, we then stop having a meaningful conversation. What were to happen if I simply said "I don't believe that you've been mod-bombed that badly without some sort of provocation"? The conversation then dies or devolves into meaningless debate, because there's nowhere left to go once we can't accept others' viewpoints as sincere and honest. What would happen if you said you didn't believe me about the mod-bombing? Not much. Even if I had the transcript incscribed in stone and verified by an indpendent panel of UN Investigators, it doesn't make that big of difference to my point. It's an isolated incident. But that's drifting from the point a bit. You could choose to de-evolve the conversation by trying to prove me wrong, but that's not your only option. You could ask why I wouldn't believe you. I'd explain, then you could tell me where you feel the flaw in my rationale is, etc. Like I said, though, Slashdot encourages debate, not discussion. I'm doing it. You're doing it. This place breeds it.
Look, if I felt like we were getting honest reactions from the people making the high scoring posts, I'd probably agree with you. But I don't. Instead what I see is the moderation system maintaining specific lines of expression. I'm sorry, I don't see that as good. I'm sure they started with good intentions, but right now it's not even a discussion forum, it's a bullshit-factory.
It's not a simple solution, it never was, and you're not special for suggesting it.
I do not consider a moderation system that encourages group-think to be 'good'. Baa.
none of the above does anything to stop abusers. Registration and banning of offenders raises the required interest level of the abuser to be much higher than most would need to actually sit down and use methods of evasion to cause trouble. Just becaues it's impossible to keep somebody incredibly determined out of a site doesn't mean it does 'nothing' to help.
"Coke.. okay, maybe. Hoover? I never hear anyone say, "go get the Hoover."
I've heard the term 'hoovering' used to describe vacuuming. I think over in Englad it was more widely used that way. (That is if TV has actually taught me something.)
Hmm.. I dunno if you'll see this now, but I reread it and I think I was being undeservedly abrasive. I'm sorry man.
I'd just boot knoppix and mount the partition. There, I have access to all the files. That goes for windows AND unix/linux.
If you really depend on the password for anything other than stopping casual or remote access, you're just fooling yourself. I just bought a Mac laptop and one of the things I ran across while I was reading about it was the File Vault. According to the really really enthusiastic article I read about it, it'll encrypt all the data on my home folder based on my login password. In theory, it sounds like even if somebody mirrored the drive, they'd have trouble (assuming the password is good...) getting at my data. I just wanted to ask: From a practical point of view, does this offer me much more protection? Or is there still some braindead easy way (short of beating the password out of me
Honestly, I find your 'alternative interpretation' chilling.
I tried to commit suicide once by taking a thousand aspirin pills. But after the first two, I felt better.
1) Somebody downloads one album. Likes it so much, they're first in line for the next album that comes along.
2) Somebody downloads a bunch of different individual songs. Likes them. Buys an album or two from which one of those songs came.
It's all based on the idea that if somebody is excited about music, they'll spend money on it.