I got pulled over in some rural Georgia county on my way to Florida and the officer tried to say I was doing 98 in a 70. I looked at him and said "98? you do realize this is an Escort, right?" He laughed, started to walk off, and said he'd get his radar gun checked.
The parens spawn a subshell. The ampersand at the end backgrounds the subshell. His example is, in fact, right. As far as/bin/true not being as efficient... well, the idea is to load the CPU.
If you're writing software in a business environment, popularity is directly related to how easy/cheap it is to get ahold of programmers who have experience in a given area.
It's easy to find an adequate Java programmer. Not so much for Python, Ruby, or Lisp.
Of course, just like any other profession out there, good programmers are hard to come by regardless of language. Good programmers could get rolling in any of the languages I mentioned in a couple days anyway.
The business world mostly gets away with adequate programmers, though.
To make it worse they invariabley have a terrible attitude.
This is the only thing that angers me about blocklist operators. If someone calls/emails because they're on your blocklist (particularly if it appears they're collateral damage) there's no need to act like it's somehow their fault. By all means refuse to unblock them if your goals aren't met, but you can do so without being a jackass.
Blocklist operators invariably are, and it puts them squarely in the "asshole" column of anyone who deals with them.
I understand spam sucks, and I understand having to deal with it and the newbies who have no idea what's going on has gotta get frustrating eventually, but nobody's forcing you to run a blocklist, so if you're not doing it specifically because you like being an asshole to people there's no reason to deal with them that way.
I've actually never had to deal with these folks personally, but since they've been around I've heard many stories of friends/coworkers being listed, and in pretty much every single incident they've related to me that the person they eventually contacted went out of their way to make their day suck. All of these people were innocent bystanders AFAIK (I woulda clubbed them myself if I thought otherwise:P), and most of them were just dealing with personal mail servers, so I know they weren't too uppity about it.
I know I'm kind of rambling, and this is all second hand anecdotal stuff (ie. worthless), but it crosses my mind every time these guys are mentioned. If anyone reading this is involved with a blocklist, and a decent enough person, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about it. Maybe I'm just looking at things all wrong?
And you sound like a 15 year old on IRC, "OMG YUO GuyZ SHOUL DUZE GENoOO IT IZ DA BOM".
You think fighting with your OS's package manager is fun? Groovy. If installing linux-2.5.99-ac-XtReMe-leet-xfs-999 today because the linux-2.5.99-ac-XtReMe-leet-xfs-998 kernel you compiled yesterday "sux", then by all means go for it.
There was a point when I was enamored with the freedom of Linux (and UNIX in general) and that stuff seemed reasonable to me, too. Now I'd rather have something that works, that's reliable, and is reasonably up to date so I can spend my time on more interesting problems.
If that makes me an old coot, well, maybe someday I'll develop crippling ADHD and be "kewl" again.
No. The goal of the Debian Project is to build an OS. It happens that the way their project works actually makes it great as a base for building other distros, but AFAIK that's not their stated goal (and it's not what their website says).
If that's changed over the last few years, well, I've been away:).
I hate to say it, but this sounds about right. I ran Debian for years, and got many other people started on it. I've never considered myself a zealot about anything, but Debian was about as close as I've gotten.
It's just not relevant anymore. It feels like the HURD of distros. What's worse for their userbase is the fact that other distros (Ubuntu, Knoppix) have taken their base and made something that's actually worth using on top of it.
This is, of course, a good thing for the community as a whole, so it's hard to cry about it. Debian will either evolve or be folded into one of the projects it spawned. Nothing's lost either way, umm... hooray for open source?
As someone who felt the same way when I first moved here and was told about it, you really should go at least once. There's not a whole lot of cool things to do in Atlanta, but this is one of the ones you should at least try. Like eating at the Varsity.
They're actually about equal in terms of nastiness.
The only reason you'd have 50 Nautilus windows open, in spatial or browser mode, is because you need access to 50 directories at once. In that case, you'll need 50 windows open with either setup.
If you spend about 30 seconds (seriously, that's all it takes) you'll find that there are ways to navigate spatial Nautilus without having to open superfluous windows.
You are more than welcome to dislike spatial Nautilus. If you're used to Windows (or KDE), then it is different. I think it was a stupid decision to not initially make it easy to switch back to browser mode to accommodate people most familiar with the browser interface (let's face it, that's most people). That said, there's nothing inherently inferior about spatial Nautilus, and there are some good theoretical arguments in its favor.
Fact of the matter is, most end user folks aren't going to bother adding a menu item or desktop icon for a program. If the package doesn't add it (which shouldn't be a problem with sane package management and fd.o standards) the user is going to stop right there.
A menu editor is mainly useful to folks who want to compile and install software from source tarballs, or to customize the way their current menu is laid out. Neither of these is a particularly big deal for end users, and just about everyone who is going to be rabid about doing it is going to have the necessary skills to do it without a dedicated menu editor.
I can understand that many people want one, but I can't see it being something that is blocking widespread GNOME acceptance or anything like that.
Hey, I was using his words (for effect, mostly). That said, I understand reading more than a sentence or two at a time can be difficult for many folks. I'm sorry you're so afflicted.
Companies can (and, believe it or not, do) offer open source code, too. Show up with a check, watch your feature get implemented. Even better, you're not fucked if a vendor isn't cooperative.
You want a feature added to a Microsoft product? Go see Microsoft with a checkbook. If they don't want to do it, or they want too much money, you can either suck it up or pay someone to reimplement whatever piece of software you need (with the feature you want) from scratch.
You want a feature added to GNOME or any other open source product? Take that same checkbook and go see Red Hat. If they're unresponsive, go see SuSE, Mandrake, or one of the lead developers for the product in question. In fact, take bids on the feature you want from all interested parties and get an even lower price. No matter who does it they won't have to reinvent the wheel. If all else fails, and everyone in the world decides they don't like money anymore, you can still implement the feature yourself without having to start from scratch.
Why can't you see how much more intelligent this is? You're not a middle manager, are you?
If you're a customer of Red Hat's, and you're either worth enough money to them, or are willing to pay them to implement it, I'm sure their engineers will do it for you. If not, I'm sure SuSE will. If not, Mandrake. If not... well, there's always Microsoft (because they'll jump right on your feature requests, too; I'm sure they'll be in Longhorn... in 2010).
Obviously nobody who is capable of actually implementing a menu editor wants one that badly. Unless you're willing to make it worth the while of one of these people/companies, why do you feel entitled to bitch about it?
Lesson: Open source programmers are not your personal bitches. They're not here to do whatever you want for free. They write software for themselves or because a company pays them, and they are smart enough to see the benefit of donating that code back to the community. Ultimately they only have to answer to themselves or to their employers.
If something's that important to you, put up or shut up.
"If you don't like it, fuck off, take the code with you, do whatever you want to it, and turn it into whatever you want. Heck, take our code, build a service around it, and charge money for it. Just don't expect us to fall all over ourselves to implement things you want (yeah, because commercial software developers do that... hahaha) for free, and (in some cases) share your (probably trivial) modifications to our millions of lines of code with the world that gave you said code in the first place."
Slashdot Mirror
Care about karma a little too much?
Ah. Concurrent Version Squirrels.
Oh, yeah, the Escort is a great car alright.
I got pulled over in some rural Georgia county on my way to Florida and the officer tried to say I was doing 98 in a 70. I looked at him and said "98? you do realize this is an Escort, right?" He laughed, started to walk off, and said he'd get his radar gun checked.
The parens spawn a subshell. The ampersand at the end backgrounds the subshell. His example is, in fact, right. As far as /bin/true not being as efficient... well, the idea is to load the CPU.
Man, you are one convincing bot.
If you're writing software in a business environment, popularity is directly related to how easy/cheap it is to get ahold of programmers who have experience in a given area.
It's easy to find an adequate Java programmer. Not so much for Python, Ruby, or Lisp.
Of course, just like any other profession out there, good programmers are hard to come by regardless of language. Good programmers could get rolling in any of the languages I mentioned in a couple days anyway.
The business world mostly gets away with adequate programmers, though.
This is the only thing that angers me about blocklist operators. If someone calls/emails because they're on your blocklist (particularly if it appears they're collateral damage) there's no need to act like it's somehow their fault. By all means refuse to unblock them if your goals aren't met, but you can do so without being a jackass.
Blocklist operators invariably are, and it puts them squarely in the "asshole" column of anyone who deals with them.
I understand spam sucks, and I understand having to deal with it and the newbies who have no idea what's going on has gotta get frustrating eventually, but nobody's forcing you to run a blocklist, so if you're not doing it specifically because you like being an asshole to people there's no reason to deal with them that way.
I've actually never had to deal with these folks personally, but since they've been around I've heard many stories of friends/coworkers being listed, and in pretty much every single incident they've related to me that the person they eventually contacted went out of their way to make their day suck. All of these people were innocent bystanders AFAIK (I woulda clubbed them myself if I thought otherwise :P), and most of them were just dealing with personal mail servers, so I know they weren't too uppity about it.
I know I'm kind of rambling, and this is all second hand anecdotal stuff (ie. worthless), but it crosses my mind every time these guys are mentioned. If anyone reading this is involved with a blocklist, and a decent enough person, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about it. Maybe I'm just looking at things all wrong?
And you sound like a 15 year old on IRC, "OMG YUO GuyZ SHOUL DUZE GENoOO IT IZ DA BOM".
You think fighting with your OS's package manager is fun? Groovy. If installing linux-2.5.99-ac-XtReMe-leet-xfs-999 today because the linux-2.5.99-ac-XtReMe-leet-xfs-998 kernel you compiled yesterday "sux", then by all means go for it.
There was a point when I was enamored with the freedom of Linux (and UNIX in general) and that stuff seemed reasonable to me, too. Now I'd rather have something that works, that's reliable, and is reasonably up to date so I can spend my time on more interesting problems.
If that makes me an old coot, well, maybe someday I'll develop crippling ADHD and be "kewl" again.
Or, only people who have nothing better to do with their time than fuck around with their OS/kernel use either one.
Sorry, fighting with my OS and recompiling my kernel stopped being interesting about ten years ago. Someday you'll get there. Someday.
Nice troll, though. At least I went for it.
No. The goal of the Debian Project is to build an OS. It happens that the way their project works actually makes it great as a base for building other distros, but AFAIK that's not their stated goal (and it's not what their website says).
:).
If that's changed over the last few years, well, I've been away
I hate to say it, but this sounds about right. I ran Debian for years, and got many other people started on it. I've never considered myself a zealot about anything, but Debian was about as close as I've gotten.
It's just not relevant anymore. It feels like the HURD of distros. What's worse for their userbase is the fact that other distros (Ubuntu, Knoppix) have taken their base and made something that's actually worth using on top of it.
This is, of course, a good thing for the community as a whole, so it's hard to cry about it. Debian will either evolve or be folded into one of the projects it spawned. Nothing's lost either way, umm... hooray for open source?
Okay, Sony. I've got $300 with your name on it. Gimme a new Final Fantasy game and it's all yours.
It does harm to my eyeballs. Also, PDF killed my father.
As someone who felt the same way when I first moved here and was told about it, you really should go at least once. There's not a whole lot of cool things to do in Atlanta, but this is one of the ones you should at least try. Like eating at the Varsity.
They're actually about equal in terms of nastiness.
I'm willing to wager Senior Cocksucker at Pixar would be a step up for many of the folks here.
Not me, though. I rather like my job.
(Though I hear Steve is huge. Rawr.)
Replaced my PC laptop with a Powerbook. Haven't looked back.
Tell me more about the nun spankings.
The only reason you'd have 50 Nautilus windows open, in spatial or browser mode, is because you need access to 50 directories at once. In that case, you'll need 50 windows open with either setup.
If you spend about 30 seconds (seriously, that's all it takes) you'll find that there are ways to navigate spatial Nautilus without having to open superfluous windows.
You are more than welcome to dislike spatial Nautilus. If you're used to Windows (or KDE), then it is different. I think it was a stupid decision to not initially make it easy to switch back to browser mode to accommodate people most familiar with the browser interface (let's face it, that's most people). That said, there's nothing inherently inferior about spatial Nautilus, and there are some good theoretical arguments in its favor.
Fact of the matter is, most end user folks aren't going to bother adding a menu item or desktop icon for a program. If the package doesn't add it (which shouldn't be a problem with sane package management and fd.o standards) the user is going to stop right there.
A menu editor is mainly useful to folks who want to compile and install software from source tarballs, or to customize the way their current menu is laid out. Neither of these is a particularly big deal for end users, and just about everyone who is going to be rabid about doing it is going to have the necessary skills to do it without a dedicated menu editor.
I can understand that many people want one, but I can't see it being something that is blocking widespread GNOME acceptance or anything like that.
Hey, I was using his words (for effect, mostly). That said, I understand reading more than a sentence or two at a time can be difficult for many folks. I'm sorry you're so afflicted.
Are you really that stupid?
Companies can (and, believe it or not, do) offer open source code, too. Show up with a check, watch your feature get implemented. Even better, you're not fucked if a vendor isn't cooperative.
You want a feature added to a Microsoft product? Go see Microsoft with a checkbook. If they don't want to do it, or they want too much money, you can either suck it up or pay someone to reimplement whatever piece of software you need (with the feature you want) from scratch.
You want a feature added to GNOME or any other open source product? Take that same checkbook and go see Red Hat. If they're unresponsive, go see SuSE, Mandrake, or one of the lead developers for the product in question. In fact, take bids on the feature you want from all interested parties and get an even lower price. No matter who does it they won't have to reinvent the wheel. If all else fails, and everyone in the world decides they don't like money anymore, you can still implement the feature yourself without having to start from scratch.
Why can't you see how much more intelligent this is? You're not a middle manager, are you?
If you're a customer of Red Hat's, and you're either worth enough money to them, or are willing to pay them to implement it, I'm sure their engineers will do it for you. If not, I'm sure SuSE will. If not, Mandrake. If not... well, there's always Microsoft (because they'll jump right on your feature requests, too; I'm sure they'll be in Longhorn... in 2010).
Obviously nobody who is capable of actually implementing a menu editor wants one that badly. Unless you're willing to make it worth the while of one of these people/companies, why do you feel entitled to bitch about it?
Lesson: Open source programmers are not your personal bitches. They're not here to do whatever you want for free. They write software for themselves or because a company pays them, and they are smart enough to see the benefit of donating that code back to the community. Ultimately they only have to answer to themselves or to their employers.
If something's that important to you, put up or shut up.
"If you don't like it, fuck off, take the code with you, do whatever you want to it, and turn it into whatever you want. Heck, take our code, build a service around it, and charge money for it. Just don't expect us to fall all over ourselves to implement things you want (yeah, because commercial software developers do that... hahaha) for free, and (in some cases) share your (probably trivial) modifications to our millions of lines of code with the world that gave you said code in the first place."
Those open source assholes!
I usually start with some engorged, then follow it up with a good bit of moist.
A beta lasting two thousand years? It can't be...
Google = God?