Wait? You need texting to alert you that a 40 second process has completed?
Maybe if it's one of the commercial office installations that takes 20kg of beans and is plumbed in, to inform the manufacturer of any service needs and re-order the beans, but for home use? Really?
Shrug, it's quicker and easier for me to hang clothes than to sort them, put them in the dryer, iron them afterwards.
Shit, for £5/week my cleaner will do all my laundry for me, including drying and folding. That's cheaper than buying a washing machine, a dryer, paying for electricity, water and detergent, and I wouldn't have to do it myself.
I just appreciate the convenience and flexibility that doing my own laundry allows, and as a result have the capital expenses anyway. May as well drive value from that investment.
I still don't need a dryer though. Two minutes (not ten) to hang clothes, less if it's something big like bedsheets, and it gives the cats somewhere to hang out in the spare room. Win all around.
A lot of Europeans do also own a dryer. They just choose to minimise its use.
I don't even own one. Haven't missed it, haven't needed it, haven't had any issues waiting for clothes to dry. If I really need something dry quickly I'll put it on a radiator.
I'm confused about this whole 'three hour' quote anyway. Never owned a washing machine that took three hours for a washload. My current one is taking about 80 minutes for a full load, although I can chop that down to 20 minutes or (if I could be arsed) program a ten minute wash.
No, we're in the age of options. Most machines accept hot and cold feeds but I always only add the cold feed and let the machine heat the water - my hot water is too hot for washing clothes.
I have a 'front loader' washing machine and your description of them confuses me.
As I said, try mud - the only thing that works is massive quantities of water, otherwise everything just turns orange.
Last time I played rugby (a contact sport played on fields that are muddy by the end of the match) my clothes went straight into the washing machine and came out clean. This isn't a terribly onerous requirement.
Just how much mud are we talking about here? You're emptying a bucketful into the machine with your clothes? How the hell are you getting that muddy in the first place? If you're doing dirt bike racing or something then get someone to hose you down or let the clothes dry and brush them before washing - doesn't really matter how much water you put in, a single wash wont clear that much mud anyway.
. I get my wash done faster and cleaner without any weird programming tricks.
Strange. I put my clothes into the machine, hit three buttons (in under a second) and it starts washing them. Come back later and they're done.
There is no $250 circuit board to replace - just a simple $40 mechanical timer.
You can buy a whole machine for $250. But I've never had the circuit board go anyway. My last one died to extensive wear and tear, partly due to my negligence in allowing small pieces of metal into the workings. Still, it survived for over a decade.
There is no maintenance at all, no need for anti-fungal or anti-bacterial agents to reduce smells - no need to leave the door open.
Agreed, that's my experience with front-loaders too.
I can use any detergent that happens to be available and put as much or as little in as I like.
Oddly enough, so can I.
Overall either US front loading machines are forty years behind UK ones or you just haven't tried one in that time.
No. You can not GPL your own code and make proprietary binaries.
Of course you can. It's still your code, you still choose how to distribute it and if you produce proprietary binaries, you don't have to release those under the GPL.
To create a proprietary version the original copyright holder has to dual license. Have two copies of their source code, one under GPL and one under something proprietary compatible. Only binaries built from the non-GPL version of the source code can remain proprietary.
So you agree with me, and with the person to whom you replied, even though this contradicts your earlier statement.
Sure, but if you want a cinema to exited by people in tears nothing quite touches Requiem for a Dream.
Back on topic, I don't have a favourite sci-fi film. I love many of them. Blade Runner and Aliens are the two best films among them though, and anybody that disagrees must refrain from quoting either of them.
Morris' worm relied on people failing to secure their servers. A rapist relies on someone foolishly allowing themselves to become unconscious in a vulnerable location. Someone perpetrating a DDOS is doing it against someone that inexplicably left their service accessible to the internet.
Did you even fucking read what I posted
Yes. It was stupid and facile, I've made the point very clearly and you're still incapable of understanding. I fear the issue lies between your ears.
Ahh, you have a vested interest. Nevermind then. Nothing you say has any credibility in this matter.
Having an interest does not remove credibility. It is merely an additional factor to consider when assessing what has been said.
At least he was honest enough to give you that additional information. Right he's looking a fuck of a lot more credible than an AC that dismisses people out of hand based on crude and stupid judgements.
To me, you are hardly to be distinguished from someone with an IQ of 80, AC
Given the person you're responding to is likely to have an IQ in the 110 to 140 range (given this is Slashdot) your inability to differentiate their intelligence from someone with an IQ of 80 puts you right at the bottom of the scale.
There are clearly discernable differences, and you don't need to be very intelligent yourself to spot them.
But hey, pretend you're superior to everyone else. Just don't go getting all surprised when we fucking laugh at you.
This sort of thing shouldn't be a felony in the first place; the CFAA is a bad law.
The whole law, or parts of it? Seems sensible to have some legal constraints on using (and abusing) computers that belong to other people.
Google shouldn't be allowed to abuse its near-monopoly by censoring, tampering with, or editorializing search results.
It can't be a useful search engine without tampering with results. You want every internet search to return several pages of SEO spam? Blocking BK from subverting the search capabilities to the detriment of users is exactly what I want Google to do.
we should all be using something we control ourselves (like YaCy)
Sure. I could spend my time building and configuring a web search engine, or I could delegate to someone with the skills to do it better. Like Google.
You want us to all grow our own food, mine our own minerals and build computers from silicon, copper and crude oil?
Devices with voice recognition should process it locally, not send everyone's private utterances to third-parties (which are inherently untrustworthy).
That wouldn't prevent the BK attack.
I do agree with some of your points but you seem to lack an understanding of reality.
By your logic I can use an open window to enter your house, find your PC switched on and use your online banking to transfer all your money to a small llama farm in the south of Argentina and it's all perfectly legal because you didn't make me actually break anything to do all this.
Next you'll be telling me that DDOS attacks are legal, that Morris shouldn't have been prosecuted for his worm or that it's perfectly fine to rape a person that's unconscious.
Slashdot Mirror
What if someone's using it to heat something and it needs to remain on and immobile?
Then there's a 99.9% chance they're a fuckwit that needs saving from their own stupidity.
The other 0.1% can buy a different iron.
Wait? You need texting to alert you that a 40 second process has completed?
Maybe if it's one of the commercial office installations that takes 20kg of beans and is plumbed in, to inform the manufacturer of any service needs and re-order the beans, but for home use? Really?
I'll help educate you! In North America, the weather is freezing for several months of the year
Your condescension is matched only by your ignorance:
http://www.usclimatedata.com/c...
Oh, and btw:
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk...
Oh look. Europe also has a varied climate, heavily influenced by latitude.
Shrug, it's quicker and easier for me to hang clothes than to sort them, put them in the dryer, iron them afterwards.
Shit, for £5/week my cleaner will do all my laundry for me, including drying and folding. That's cheaper than buying a washing machine, a dryer, paying for electricity, water and detergent, and I wouldn't have to do it myself.
I just appreciate the convenience and flexibility that doing my own laundry allows, and as a result have the capital expenses anyway. May as well drive value from that investment.
I still don't need a dryer though. Two minutes (not ten) to hang clothes, less if it's something big like bedsheets, and it gives the cats somewhere to hang out in the spare room. Win all around.
If you bring them inside, they will become a dripping mess
Get a washing machine with a decent spinner then. After a couple of minutes at 1600rpm there's no dripping at all from my laundry.
As for interior, my current apartment doesn't have room for me to put a drying rack anywhere that I won't trip over it.
Get a retractable rack to put over the bath.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Braba...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/FINER...
A lot of Europeans do also own a dryer. They just choose to minimise its use.
I don't even own one. Haven't missed it, haven't needed it, haven't had any issues waiting for clothes to dry. If I really need something dry quickly I'll put it on a radiator.
It's deemed an aesthetic nuisance. Where I lived in Germany it was illegal to have washing visible outside on a Sunday, even on the balcony of a flat.
It's a stupid farcical rule but some people appear to have a strange phobia of seeing other people living their lives.
And yet, somehow, everybody in Europe manages.
How could this possibly be?
I'm confused about this whole 'three hour' quote anyway. Never owned a washing machine that took three hours for a washload. My current one is taking about 80 minutes for a full load, although I can chop that down to 20 minutes or (if I could be arsed) program a ten minute wash.
No, we're in the age of options. Most machines accept hot and cold feeds but I always only add the cold feed and let the machine heat the water - my hot water is too hot for washing clothes.
I have a 'front loader' washing machine and your description of them confuses me.
As I said, try mud - the only thing that works is massive quantities of water, otherwise everything just turns orange.
Last time I played rugby (a contact sport played on fields that are muddy by the end of the match) my clothes went straight into the washing machine and came out clean. This isn't a terribly onerous requirement.
Just how much mud are we talking about here? You're emptying a bucketful into the machine with your clothes? How the hell are you getting that muddy in the first place? If you're doing dirt bike racing or something then get someone to hose you down or let the clothes dry and brush them before washing - doesn't really matter how much water you put in, a single wash wont clear that much mud anyway.
. I get my wash done faster and cleaner without any weird programming tricks.
Strange. I put my clothes into the machine, hit three buttons (in under a second) and it starts washing them. Come back later and they're done.
There is no $250 circuit board to replace - just a simple $40 mechanical timer.
You can buy a whole machine for $250. But I've never had the circuit board go anyway. My last one died to extensive wear and tear, partly due to my negligence in allowing small pieces of metal into the workings. Still, it survived for over a decade.
There is no maintenance at all, no need for anti-fungal or anti-bacterial agents to reduce smells - no need to leave the door open.
Agreed, that's my experience with front-loaders too.
I can use any detergent that happens to be available and put as much or as little in as I like.
Oddly enough, so can I.
Overall either US front loading machines are forty years behind UK ones or you just haven't tried one in that time.
Ignoring submitted patches leaves you in no worse a position than choosing not to GPL in the first place, so there's still a community benefit.
You can also invite the submitter to hand over copyright (remunerated or otherwise) and incorporate into the non-GPL releases.
But yes, if you want to maintain and build a dual-licenced codebase you have extra work to do.
No. A single code base can be shared under GPL and published in binary form under a different licence.
The non-GPL is an entirely separate work.
It can be built from the same code base. The GPL does not prevent this, where the code is owned by the person creating the non-GPL licenced version.
No. You can not GPL your own code and make proprietary binaries.
Of course you can. It's still your code, you still choose how to distribute it and if you produce proprietary binaries, you don't have to release those under the GPL.
To create a proprietary version the original copyright holder has to dual license. Have two copies of their source code, one under GPL and one under something proprietary compatible. Only binaries built from the non-GPL version of the source code can remain proprietary.
So you agree with me, and with the person to whom you replied, even though this contradicts your earlier statement.
Well, worth keeping around to play the original..
It was the three hour grudge matches against the AI that became wars of raw attrition that really made TA shine though.
When you can't advance on the enemy because of the wreckage from previous fights blocking the way, you know you've had a battle.
Sure, but if you want a cinema to exited by people in tears nothing quite touches Requiem for a Dream.
Back on topic, I don't have a favourite sci-fi film. I love many of them. Blade Runner and Aliens are the two best films among them though, and anybody that disagrees must refrain from quoting either of them.
Did BK exploit a known vulnerability in an otherwise perfectly functional device? Yes.
Oh look, just like the Morris worm.
Morris' worm relied on people failing to secure their servers.
A rapist relies on someone foolishly allowing themselves to become unconscious in a vulnerable location.
Someone perpetrating a DDOS is doing it against someone that inexplicably left their service accessible to the internet.
Did you even fucking read what I posted
Yes. It was stupid and facile, I've made the point very clearly and you're still incapable of understanding. I fear the issue lies between your ears.
Cheap for 70 years of relative world peace though.
Ahh, you have a vested interest. Nevermind then. Nothing you say has any credibility in this matter.
Having an interest does not remove credibility. It is merely an additional factor to consider when assessing what has been said.
At least he was honest enough to give you that additional information. Right he's looking a fuck of a lot more credible than an AC that dismisses people out of hand based on crude and stupid judgements.
To me, you are hardly to be distinguished from someone with an IQ of 80, AC
Given the person you're responding to is likely to have an IQ in the 110 to 140 range (given this is Slashdot) your inability to differentiate their intelligence from someone with an IQ of 80 puts you right at the bottom of the scale.
There are clearly discernable differences, and you don't need to be very intelligent yourself to spot them.
But hey, pretend you're superior to everyone else. Just don't go getting all surprised when we fucking laugh at you.
This sort of thing shouldn't be a felony in the first place; the CFAA is a bad law.
The whole law, or parts of it? Seems sensible to have some legal constraints on using (and abusing) computers that belong to other people.
Google shouldn't be allowed to abuse its near-monopoly by censoring, tampering with, or editorializing search results.
It can't be a useful search engine without tampering with results. You want every internet search to return several pages of SEO spam? Blocking BK from subverting the search capabilities to the detriment of users is exactly what I want Google to do.
we should all be using something we control ourselves (like YaCy)
Sure. I could spend my time building and configuring a web search engine, or I could delegate to someone with the skills to do it better. Like Google.
You want us to all grow our own food, mine our own minerals and build computers from silicon, copper and crude oil?
Devices with voice recognition should process it locally, not send everyone's private utterances to third-parties (which are inherently untrustworthy).
That wouldn't prevent the BK attack.
I do agree with some of your points but you seem to lack an understanding of reality.
By your logic I can use an open window to enter your house, find your PC switched on and use your online banking to transfer all your money to a small llama farm in the south of Argentina and it's all perfectly legal because you didn't make me actually break anything to do all this.
Next you'll be telling me that DDOS attacks are legal, that Morris shouldn't have been prosecuted for his worm or that it's perfectly fine to rape a person that's unconscious.
You must be a little kid who doesn't remember voice recognition running perfectly on original Pentiums.
I don't see voice recognition running perfectly anywhere even now.
It's got a lot lot better but it still struggles.