With BitCoin, anyone can create new IOUs without doing any useful work
In fact, it's just the opposite. They waste electricity and computer cycles. That's my biggest problem with it. Surely we can do better than that if we're going to design an electronic currency from scratch.
Classic story. So you got busted for riding a bike with "fictitious tags, no license, and no insurance", and your biggest complaint is about the "redneck" cop who was yelling at his dog? And you admit to doing 70 in a 35? You're such a dick you don't even realize it.
You imply all nations that kicked jews out of their lands are bad
First of all, there was this bit of history called the Crusades, where Christianity as a whole was acting like the dicks you make the Jews out to be. In general, people have been acting like dicks to each other over cultural, religious, and ethnic differences for quite some time.
Second, you don't talk about all the nations where Jews weren't kicked out, and having lived in the United States my entire life among Jews, I call bullshit over your attempts to denigrate an entire class of people.
Especially since it has been happening to the jews since ancient Egyptian times and in many nations that are not the same.
Yeah, and many nations enslaved entire races of people as a routine matter. World history has been pretty ugly. Do you think you have the right to own a black slave, or have you moved beyond that?
Are you jewish?
No. I'm an atheist, secular humanist, and have no Jewish genealogy.
On antisemitism, I didn't write the list in that link but your reaction shows defensive posture on your part. If anyone is racist, it's jews, and from their own laws in the talmud.
Of course you didn't write it. You just copy-pasted it from some antisemitic propaganda site and took it as unadulterated truth without any skepticism because it feeds your loony, Internet hatred to give some purpose to your otherwise meaningless life.
Says the Fetus who thinks that nobody was here when he got here. I've been ONLINE cince 1986 exploring UUNET before you were even though of. There are a lot of us old farts here that are the real natives, not you come later johnny's that think you own this place.
The piece was written, if the basic facts of Wikipedia are correct, in 1996 by somebody who is now age 64 and:
"In 1986, Barlow joined The WELL online community, then known for a strong Deadhead presence. He served on the company's board of directors for several years. In 1990, Barlow founded the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) along with fellow digital-rights activists John Gilmore and Mitch Kapor. As a founder of EFF, Barlow helped publicize the Secret Service raid on Steve Jackson Games."
Prove it using a reliable source. Anybody can take the writings, for example, of the KKK and pretend they are part of an official religious text, or just make something up outright, but that doesn't make it true. If what you wrote is true, instead of just parroting some antisemitic propaganda, then it will have been documented and be online as part of a whole.
I did explain it, but you completely ignored it. "Ethnicity, religion, being seen as outsiders, jealousy, and scapegoats." It's not like this kind of thing hasn't been going on for different classes of people throughout history.
Now answer my question: "The question is why do people like you still fixate so much on a class of people. What is it with the Internet loonies and antisemitism?"
Ethnicity, religion, being seen as outsiders, jealousy, and scapegoats. The question is why do people like you still fixate so much on a class of people. What is it with the Internet loonies and antisemitism?
I've known several Jews personally, and they were mostly good people, and they were just people with the same strengths, foibles, and concerns as the rest of us.
Must be a truly advanced, ethical mind that keeps getting backstabbed in a predictable manner. It reminds me of those idiotic cartoon shows where the hero always either let the evil villain live or saved him, only to be attacked again.
Go into any thread from the early days of Stuxnet and you'll find people claiming this and many other silly theories (to dismiss the obvious conclusion).
I looked at 40 comments rated 3 or higher, and not one mentioned that this was a false flag attack used to gain sympathy. About as close as it came was one person mentioning the possibility of dissidents within Iran.
Another one of the more prominent theories is that Russia and/or Saudi Arabia made it. Russia--because it was Russian contractors who infected the first PLC's in Iran. And Saudi Arabia because they supposedly have more to lose than Israel if Iran goes nuclear.
Now you're backpedalling. Those are at least plausible theories, unlike your ridiculous strawman: "Of course, some willfully-blind, retarded shill out there is going to reply to this and say that those scientists killed themselves and that Stuxnet and Flame were actually created by Iran in an incredibly convoluted attempt to gain world sympathy. Such is true delusion."
Red Hat's solutions permits their users the right to help themselves and cooperate with the community.
They put up barriers, such as restricting how many copies of the software you can run, or by preventing others from copying their software without first "cleansing" it of their trademarks, both of which go against the spirit and probably the letter of the GPL.
And free software is not always gratis. Red Hat runs a billion dollars a year business with free software.
One of my favorite pet peeves. They do this by actively trying to thwart the "freedoms" that GPL is supposed to give you. For some reason Stallman gives them a free pass, but went after TiVo.
But the great thing about Linux is that I can tell it to ignore the built-in graphics chip.
I'd be very surprised if your BIOS didn't have an option to disable the built-in one. It's a very common use case to buy a more capable graphics card to replace integrated graphics.
I could talk endlessly about the "good old days" of the 80s. Sure, when I was 6, I wasn't very aware, but by 1984 I was already 10 and can still remember Apple's landmark Superbowl commercial. I'm familiar with the 80s movies: Terminator, Risky Business, Poltergeist, the second Star Wars, the John Hughes hits, the list goes on and on. Television: The Cosby Show, Family Ties, the rise of Fox with the controversial Married with Children, etc. Fashion: Big hair, big shoulder pads, silly accessories, Valley Girls). Politics: Reagan and the height of the Cold War, with the pervasive fear of a nuclear war.
Of course I've grown since then, but I can say that every 10 years. The point is at the time I was a sponge and those were very formative years.
At 38, you'd be "pushing 40" in 2012, so you'd have been born in 1974 which means you were six in 1980.
Which is, in fact, correct.
Your awareness of the larger culture outside your momma's house would be pretty sketchy. By 1990, you'd be sixteen and beginning to understand what was going on outside momma's house. So basically you missed the 80's in terms of the understanding the culture and technology of the time.
Not correct. Growing up between the age of 6 and 16 were very formative years, and I have a lot of nostalgic memories from the time and am quite familiar with a lot of the culture, from politics, to music and movies, fashion styles, tech, and so on. For example, I clearly remember the PC boom. The 90s were also formative years as a young adult. By the time the 2000s rolled around, I was already starting to tune out on various bits of culture.
I don't know what experience you are drawing from. Maybe you led a sheltered life or just didn't absorb as much from your youth.
If you remember the "good old days" of the 80s and 90s clearly, you're pushing 50 or older now.
I'm not sure how I follow your math. I grew up in that time period and am "only" starting to push 40 (though am still under). Anyways, Slashdot had its heyday during the dotcom boom, in the late 90s through the early 2000s, and it was dominated by male techies and largely still is judging by the comments.
If you can't recognize the liberal bias, then you're too steeped in it to even recognize it.
On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides - and they don't have crackpots representing the other side either.
Yes, in general they do a good job about that. However, whether it's the topics they cover, or the general disposition of their hosts, it's obvious a bias exists. I say this as somebody who likes NPR and has been leaning Democrat for several years now.
He's so opposed to it he merged it into the kernel.
8 years after the fact, and he even noted his long stance against it, and you even linked to his original stance against it while ignoring it and then embracing it and now ignoring it again. You also ignored how you were wrong on the BitKeeper issue, again.
Plonk!
Battle cry of the defeated. Good riddance. It's really annoying talking to dick-sucking, douchebag fanboys with blinders on.
Why don't you link to it? You fucked up your link, twice now (the first time you linked to it you ignored the contents and quoted from something else). And since you posted it before, why should I have to link to it again?
Linus correctly is against relying on debuggers, and he doesn't want morons like you who rely on them writing code for the kernel.
Funny how your position has changed. First you claimed he wasn't opposed to a kernel debugger, yet when proved otherwise instead of admitting your mistake you now claim his position is correct.
Then you completely ignore the second example involving Tridgell and BitKeeper, where you were again proven wrong.
Like I said. The truth hurts. Choke on it.
Given how embarrassingly wrong you were on both of your claims, I find your own ego rather amusing, especially considering that you're nothing but a dick-sucking, douchebag fanboy.
You're about as clueless as a person can be, aren't you? [..] Linus didn't "shit all over" anyone. He simply did what a great Open Source developer does, and developed something better for free.
This is the part where I correct you and make you look like the clueless fuck you claimed I was:
"Tridge could have done something constructive: he could have written the best damn SCM on the planet, and believed that open source generates better things, and competed against BitKeeper that way.
He'd have been a hero to me. It's unquestionably true that BitKeeper has advanced the state of SCM technology. Anybody who argues against that just doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. But I'd have loved even an "almost-as- good" open source SCM, because that would obviously just be a good idea.
But that's not what Tridge did. He didn't write a "better SCM than BK". He didn't even try - it wasn't his goal. He just wanted to see what the protocols and data was, without actually producing any replacement for the (inevitable) problems he caused and knew about.
He didn't create something new and impressive. He just tore down something new (and impressive) because he could, and rather than helping others, he screwed people over. And you expect me to _respect_ that kind of behaviour?"
Linus wasn't opposed to a kernel debugger. He was opposed to one that wasn't small and clean: From LWN
Now this is truly hysterical. You apparently did some searching and found the original email from 2000 where he absolutely tears into kernel debuggers and the people who use them, and that's what you linked to, but you quoted from the email where 8 years later he finally merged in support.
Here's what he said in 2000, per your link:
"But I'm not going to help you use one, and I wuld frankly prefer people not to use kernel debuggers that much. So I don't make it part of the standard distribution, and if the existing debuggers aren't very well known I won't shed a tear over it."
And that's just the part that just cuts to the chase. He's much more derogatory earlier on. This is what happens when you're a douchebag fanboy. You can't even read what Linus told you himself:
"I'm a bastard. I have absolutely no clue why people can ever think otherwise. Yet they do. People think I'm a nice guy, and the fact is that I'm a scheming, conniving bastard who doesn't care for any hurt feelings or lost hours of work if it just results in what I consider to be a better system."
If you ever dig up a legitimate one let me know... ROTFLMAO.
Did you know git came about because an accomplished open source person dared to try and reverse engineer the protocol from the proprietary source control Linus was using, and Linus shit all over him for it? Did you know that Linus refused to support a kernel debugger because he doesn't like them?
There are other examples that I'd have to dig up as I don't remember off the top of my head. In other words, the simple fact is that he's an egotistical asshole and you're a douchebag fanboy.
Lots of people write books to cash in on the latest marketing trend. There's been many names for this type of computing. These days everybody attaches "cloud" to everything they do, but there's nothing original here.
Slashdot Mirror
With BitCoin, anyone can create new IOUs without doing any useful work
In fact, it's just the opposite. They waste electricity and computer cycles. That's my biggest problem with it. Surely we can do better than that if we're going to design an electronic currency from scratch.
Classic story. So you got busted for riding a bike with "fictitious tags, no license, and no insurance", and your biggest complaint is about the "redneck" cop who was yelling at his dog? And you admit to doing 70 in a 35? You're such a dick you don't even realize it.
You imply all nations that kicked jews out of their lands are bad
First of all, there was this bit of history called the Crusades, where Christianity as a whole was acting like the dicks you make the Jews out to be. In general, people have been acting like dicks to each other over cultural, religious, and ethnic differences for quite some time.
Second, you don't talk about all the nations where Jews weren't kicked out, and having lived in the United States my entire life among Jews, I call bullshit over your attempts to denigrate an entire class of people.
Especially since it has been happening to the jews since ancient Egyptian times and in many nations that are not the same.
Yeah, and many nations enslaved entire races of people as a routine matter. World history has been pretty ugly. Do you think you have the right to own a black slave, or have you moved beyond that?
Are you jewish?
No. I'm an atheist, secular humanist, and have no Jewish genealogy.
On antisemitism, I didn't write the list in that link but your reaction shows defensive posture on your part. If anyone is racist, it's jews, and from their own laws in the talmud.
Of course you didn't write it. You just copy-pasted it from some antisemitic propaganda site and took it as unadulterated truth without any skepticism because it feeds your loony, Internet hatred to give some purpose to your otherwise meaningless life.
The media today isn't the press of 1890s.
Hilarious. You guys think that the same pressures to sell news didn't occur in the past?
Says the Fetus who thinks that nobody was here when he got here. I've been ONLINE cince 1986 exploring UUNET before you were even though of. There are a lot of us old farts here that are the real natives, not you come later johnny's that think you own this place.
The piece was written, if the basic facts of Wikipedia are correct, in 1996 by somebody who is now age 64 and:
"In 1986, Barlow joined The WELL online community, then known for a strong Deadhead presence. He served on the company's board of directors for several years. In 1990, Barlow founded the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) along with fellow digital-rights activists John Gilmore and Mitch Kapor. As a founder of EFF, Barlow helped publicize the Secret Service raid on Steve Jackson Games."
Get off his lawn.
Prove it using a reliable source. Anybody can take the writings, for example, of the KKK and pretend they are part of an official religious text, or just make something up outright, but that doesn't make it true. If what you wrote is true, instead of just parroting some antisemitic propaganda, then it will have been documented and be online as part of a whole.
I did explain it, but you completely ignored it. "Ethnicity, religion, being seen as outsiders, jealousy, and scapegoats." It's not like this kind of thing hasn't been going on for different classes of people throughout history.
Now answer my question: "The question is why do people like you still fixate so much on a class of people. What is it with the Internet loonies and antisemitism?"
So you're going to back up a discredited source by using the same discredited source?
I'd like you to explain why it is jews got kicked from nearly every european nation then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_antisemitism
Ethnicity, religion, being seen as outsiders, jealousy, and scapegoats. The question is why do people like you still fixate so much on a class of people. What is it with the Internet loonies and antisemitism?
I've known several Jews personally, and they were mostly good people, and they were just people with the same strengths, foibles, and concerns as the rest of us.
Must be a truly advanced, ethical mind that keeps getting backstabbed in a predictable manner. It reminds me of those idiotic cartoon shows where the hero always either let the evil villain live or saved him, only to be attacked again.
http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/van_hyning.html
Go into any thread from the early days of Stuxnet and you'll find people claiming this and many other silly theories (to dismiss the obvious conclusion).
OK, here's an early story: http://it.slashdot.org/story/10/09/26/1736224/stuxnet-infects-30000-industrial-computers-in-iran
I looked at 40 comments rated 3 or higher, and not one mentioned that this was a false flag attack used to gain sympathy. About as close as it came was one person mentioning the possibility of dissidents within Iran.
Another one of the more prominent theories is that Russia and/or Saudi Arabia made it. Russia--because it was Russian contractors who infected the first PLC's in Iran. And Saudi Arabia because they supposedly have more to lose than Israel if Iran goes nuclear.
Now you're backpedalling. Those are at least plausible theories, unlike your ridiculous strawman: "Of course, some willfully-blind, retarded shill out there is going to reply to this and say that those scientists killed themselves and that Stuxnet and Flame were actually created by Iran in an incredibly convoluted attempt to gain world sympathy. Such is true delusion."
Red Hat's solutions permits their users the right to help themselves and cooperate with the community.
They put up barriers, such as restricting how many copies of the software you can run, or by preventing others from copying their software without first "cleansing" it of their trademarks, both of which go against the spirit and probably the letter of the GPL.
And free software is not always gratis. Red Hat runs a billion dollars a year business with free software.
One of my favorite pet peeves. They do this by actively trying to thwart the "freedoms" that GPL is supposed to give you. For some reason Stallman gives them a free pass, but went after TiVo.
But the great thing about Linux is that I can tell it to ignore the built-in graphics chip.
I'd be very surprised if your BIOS didn't have an option to disable the built-in one. It's a very common use case to buy a more capable graphics card to replace integrated graphics.
C# 1.0 was pretty close Delphi with syntax replaced with something vaguely Java-like.
Vaguely Java-like? It was almost a direct copy. Sure, they added some features on top, but it was pretty much a clone of Java.
I could talk endlessly about the "good old days" of the 80s. Sure, when I was 6, I wasn't very aware, but by 1984 I was already 10 and can still remember Apple's landmark Superbowl commercial. I'm familiar with the 80s movies: Terminator, Risky Business, Poltergeist, the second Star Wars, the John Hughes hits, the list goes on and on. Television: The Cosby Show, Family Ties, the rise of Fox with the controversial Married with Children, etc. Fashion: Big hair, big shoulder pads, silly accessories, Valley Girls). Politics: Reagan and the height of the Cold War, with the pervasive fear of a nuclear war.
Of course I've grown since then, but I can say that every 10 years. The point is at the time I was a sponge and those were very formative years.
At 38, you'd be "pushing 40" in 2012, so you'd have been born in 1974 which means you were six in 1980.
Which is, in fact, correct.
Your awareness of the larger culture outside your momma's house would be pretty sketchy. By 1990, you'd be sixteen and beginning to understand what was going on outside momma's house. So basically you missed the 80's in terms of the understanding the culture and technology of the time.
Not correct. Growing up between the age of 6 and 16 were very formative years, and I have a lot of nostalgic memories from the time and am quite familiar with a lot of the culture, from politics, to music and movies, fashion styles, tech, and so on. For example, I clearly remember the PC boom. The 90s were also formative years as a young adult. By the time the 2000s rolled around, I was already starting to tune out on various bits of culture.
I don't know what experience you are drawing from. Maybe you led a sheltered life or just didn't absorb as much from your youth.
If you remember the "good old days" of the 80s and 90s clearly, you're pushing 50 or older now.
I'm not sure how I follow your math. I grew up in that time period and am "only" starting to push 40 (though am still under). Anyways, Slashdot had its heyday during the dotcom boom, in the late 90s through the early 2000s, and it was dominated by male techies and largely still is judging by the comments.
And I don't know why it called "Liberal".
If you can't recognize the liberal bias, then you're too steeped in it to even recognize it.
On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides - and they don't have crackpots representing the other side either.
Yes, in general they do a good job about that. However, whether it's the topics they cover, or the general disposition of their hosts, it's obvious a bias exists. I say this as somebody who likes NPR and has been leaning Democrat for several years now.
He's so opposed to it he merged it into the kernel.
8 years after the fact, and he even noted his long stance against it, and you even linked to his original stance against it while ignoring it and then embracing it and now ignoring it again. You also ignored how you were wrong on the BitKeeper issue, again.
Plonk!
Battle cry of the defeated. Good riddance. It's really annoying talking to dick-sucking, douchebag fanboys with blinders on.
Why don't you link to the whole post?
Why don't you link to it? You fucked up your link, twice now (the first time you linked to it you ignored the contents and quoted from something else). And since you posted it before, why should I have to link to it again?
Linus correctly is against relying on debuggers, and he doesn't want morons like you who rely on them writing code for the kernel.
Funny how your position has changed. First you claimed he wasn't opposed to a kernel debugger, yet when proved otherwise instead of admitting your mistake you now claim his position is correct.
Then you completely ignore the second example involving Tridgell and BitKeeper, where you were again proven wrong.
Like I said. The truth hurts. Choke on it.
Given how embarrassingly wrong you were on both of your claims, I find your own ego rather amusing, especially considering that you're nothing but a dick-sucking, douchebag fanboy.
You're about as clueless as a person can be, aren't you? [..] Linus didn't "shit all over" anyone. He simply did what a great Open Source developer does, and developed something better for free.
This is the part where I correct you and make you look like the clueless fuck you claimed I was:
"Tridge could have done something constructive: he could
have written the best damn SCM on the planet, and believed
that open source generates better things, and competed
against BitKeeper that way.
He'd have been a hero to me. It's unquestionably true that
BitKeeper has advanced the state of SCM technology. Anybody
who argues against that just doesn't know what the hell he
is talking about. But I'd have loved even an "almost-as-
good" open source SCM, because that would obviously just
be a good idea.
But that's not what Tridge did. He didn't write a "better
SCM than BK". He didn't even try - it wasn't his goal. He
just wanted to see what the protocols and data was,
without actually producing any replacement for the
(inevitable) problems he caused and knew about.
He didn't create something new and impressive. He just
tore down something new (and impressive) because he could,
and rather than helping others, he screwed people over.
And you expect me to _respect_ that kind of behaviour?"
Linus wasn't opposed to a kernel debugger. He was opposed to one that wasn't small and clean: From LWN
Now this is truly hysterical. You apparently did some searching and found the original email from 2000 where he absolutely tears into kernel debuggers and the people who use them, and that's what you linked to, but you quoted from the email where 8 years later he finally merged in support.
Here's what he said in 2000, per your link:
"But I'm not going to help you use one, and I wuld frankly prefer people not to use kernel debuggers that much. So I don't make it part of the standard distribution, and if the existing debuggers aren't very well known I won't shed a tear over it."
And that's just the part that just cuts to the chase. He's much more derogatory earlier on. This is what happens when you're a douchebag fanboy. You can't even read what Linus told you himself:
"I'm a bastard. I have absolutely no clue why people can ever think otherwise. Yet they do. People think I'm a nice guy, and the fact is that I'm a scheming, conniving bastard who doesn't care for any hurt feelings or lost hours of work if it just results in what I consider to be a better system."
If you ever dig up a legitimate one let me know ... ROTFLMAO.
Yep, you're quite the joke.
Wow, suck his dick much?
Did you know git came about because an accomplished open source person dared to try and reverse engineer the protocol from the proprietary source control Linus was using, and Linus shit all over him for it? Did you know that Linus refused to support a kernel debugger because he doesn't like them?
There are other examples that I'd have to dig up as I don't remember off the top of my head. In other words, the simple fact is that he's an egotistical asshole and you're a douchebag fanboy.
Lots of people write books to cash in on the latest marketing trend. There's been many names for this type of computing. These days everybody attaches "cloud" to everything they do, but there's nothing original here.
What is the "cloud", please?
The latest marketing term for Internet services.