First off, you shouldn't have been modded Troll. It's a legit question. *shakes fist at mods*
It's not all-or-nothing. The code doesn't have to be super fast, just fast enough. Perl can (when running at it's normal speed) accomplish the needed task at a sufficient speed. If Perl couldn't get it done fast enough when running properly, then yes it would be the wrong tool for the job.
Psh. I can absolutely blow the minds of all the Joe Sixpacks out there when it comes to computers and make it seem as though I know far more than I do. It's very easy for me to mislead people because, well, I'm the expert as far as they can tell. This does not mean I'm going to be 100% truthful and not exploit the situation for my own personal gain. Of course this is all hypothetical... I'm completely altruistic, of course:D
Just because someone can throw technical jargon out at me doesn't necessarily mean I have to give up any differing stance I may have regarding the issue at hand. Of course it doesn't mean they're wrong, either.
Ever notice that when there is a political debate on TV between presidential candidates it *only* has Democrats and/or Republicans? It's much easier for either of them to only have to compete with one opponent rather than the plethora of actual opinions out there. It's similar here: So long as the public thinks the only choice is between MS Windows and Apple OSX, both of them are better off. It's not as though, by not supporting OSX here, people will not realize it's an option. Apple's marketing is ridiculous. In response to the EU, Microsoft made a whole bunch of promises about being cross-platform-supportive and what not. If they have to do that, may as well just do OSX.
There's plenty of other reasons as well, like how you can only (legally) use OSX on a Mac and hence the OS itself doesn't directly compete with Windows, but I don't have any fancy political analogies for that off hand ):
If you just want text and images you may be okay without an OS check. For more complicated things like streaming video the browser alone isn't going to handle it. Either it'll have to call a plugin (which may not be available for a given OS) or it'll launch another program (which may not be available for a given OS). It's perfectly justifiable to check the OS. What's not necessarily justifiable is to avoid using (more-)cross-platform solutions like Flash.
14+ years? Much of the preloaded stuff he's (re)selling is well over a 24 years, and is easily older than I am. After 18 years my parents lost a lot of the legal control they had over me. Imagine if those laws were treated as copyright is... *shudders*
Jesus Christ. If you're going to be a game-code-nazi, get it right:
The [start] isn't part of the code, nor is the [select]. After the last [a] the code is entered, the code input is done. You can hit [select] multiple times after the code trying to decide between single player and co-op and it will still work.
Just because Microsoft got away with that nonsense a good number of times before doesn't make it right.
The only reason for needing to up the requirements that I can think of is for added features (or to help hardware sales, but lets not go there for now). MS could have simply made multiple versions of their new OS's with varying levels of features (and system requirements) so Joe Sixpack could get a low-end, streamlined version for his older machine. Put a little table on the back of the box that shows what features are available on each version of of the OS to show what the user could get if they pay a bit more. That way the system requirements are actually justified, and those who don't want to buy a whole new computer can still find an excuse to pay Microsoft.
I could understand if MS did not do this because they feared too many versions would confuse the customers, but with Vista's plethora of versions I don't buy it. The only explanations I can think of are that either MS is purposefully screwing their customers to help hardware sales or that they're incompetent. Probably a bit of both, with a helping of we're-a-monopoly-so-we-don't-give-a-shit.
I don't see either of those being forever impassable for Linux. As more people use Linux - just like with Firefox - companies will be considering Linux as an option rather than just assuming we all use Windows. Remember when IE was a requirement for every other website?:D
I'm typing this right now on an Ubuntu-based system with an nVidia card running dual monitors. There's a number of "user-friendly" methods of installing nVidia drivers, like Envy, but I just do it the good 'ol fashioned way:
(1) Download from nVidia's site, just as you would with Windows drivers.
(2) Stop X
(With a standard Ubuntu install:)
Ctrl-Alt-F1 for command line
sudo/etc/init.d/gdm stop
(3) cd to the directory I downloaded the drivers too
(4) sudo sh [driver-file-name]
(4.5) Type password
(5) Hit "OK" or "Next" a whole bunch of times.
(6) Start X again
sudo/etc/init.d/gdm start
To configure it (for things like dual-monitors:)
(1) Open a command line while in the gui (I think it's Applications -> Console... something like that)
(2) sudo nvidia-settings
Next time you give it a go try those instructions, or try Envy.
I've also got an EeePC. The pre-installed Xandros really sucks, sadly. If you get one, go ahead and get an SDHC card with it. It can boot from an OS installed on either the main flash drive or the SDHC slot (or something through USB) - which means you can try to install Ubuntu (or another distro - anything but that icky pre-installed one) on the SDHC card without worrying messing up the software it comes with. I highly recommend checking out eeexubuntu. It's got the reasonably noob-friendly Ubuntu goodness tweeked for the eeepc.
Also, one last thing - if you have the time and patience (and aren't already familiar with it), take a look at vi. When I got the eeepc, I found I could not keep up with my professors in class on the limited keyboard - I've been dependent on things like home/end and pageup/down, which aren't quite as accessible as they are on a full keyboard. I was directed by a friend to vi (well, specifically vim) which is a great text editing program that functions fine with the eeepc's limited, cramped keyboard. While it's mostly popular with Linux folk, there's a solid Windows version you can try. It's very, very different and is not user friendly at all, but in terms of typing notes in class the improvement is enormous. I'd recommend you at least give it a look, even if you find it's too much to try to pick up and drop it.
PS: 'shot at replacing Windows' - Linux already has in some domains, and it never will in others.
Right, being open source it'll have a much harder time screw the end-user with things like vendor lock-in. The only other limitations will evaporate as market share continues to increase.
Mind elaborating exactly in what respect will it never be able to replace Windows?
You probably won't need books or irc. Linux is getting pretty accessible these days. The best thing is to have a buddy who is already comfortable with Linux. Lacking that, I'd recommend taking a look at the very noob-friendly Ubuntu forums and Ubuntu wiki. You should probably start by toying around with a virtual machine in windows, where you won't have to worry about things like drivers. You could also try playing around with a live boot CD.
After that you can take the plunge and install Ubuntu to the bare metal. In case something (eg: wifi) doesn't work, it's a good idea to have a laptop with internet access and a USB flash drive at hand when you start. Also make extra careful special sure you don't kill your mission critical Windows partition. Not yet anyways:D I got another old hard drive for Linux while I was still getting used to it, and disabled the Windows hard drive whenever I was going to do something maybe possibly risky.
Don't expect everything to go super smooth - there will be some hang up somewhere. Even if it's more user friendly than Windows, it's different, and there is stuff to learn.
Psh, that meme is almost but not entirely unlike crystal.
Hmmm...
Psh, that meme is almost but not entirely unlike crystal.
There we go. If you follow the line above the one you were referring to in my previous post first, it works a lot better.
Re:Anyone else find that quote hilarious?
on
A Quasi-Quasicrystal
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Seriously, though, I'd rather hear about what interesting/new discoveries come out of this strange material than just hear about the possibility of its existence.
When that's announced people will complain that the information is pretty useless and would rather hear about practical applications found for it.
When that's announced people will complain about why they haven't heard about this before. Others will complain about how it was on digg years ago and how slashdot is slow.
So shut up and discuss the interesting stuff we have know now:D
Or get high and stare at the trippy pictures:D
Or make an off topic meme-based joke:(
This comes back to the same ignorant licensing argument on Slashdot between GPL, BSD, and non-opersource licenses.
God forbid people make money to live on.
With your/.ID you've sure missed some longstanding points 'round here from even before my day.
It's perfectly feasible for a F/OSS company to make money. Redhat is usually the example here. What most/.'ers are arguing is that there are ways to make money without screwing people. If there isn't for a particular job, than it's probably not necessary because there is a better alternative. Capitalism, ya'know? All the record label company people could go make money with another job. Flip burgers, I don't care. The current stuff they're doing? Not really necessary. It's a lot easier to distribute information (and consequently become known) than it used to be.
It's more than just not paying the competition (I could use neither the F/OSS option or the competition and accomplish the same thing) or marketing. Using F/OSS and increasing F/OSS market share encourages open standards and interoperability, which in turn make life for the developers of the given F/OSS project much easier. Consider: thanks to Firefox's marketshare much of internet moved away from IE-specific websites. Got a big idea for some software Google should put on all their servers? It better run on Linux.
The hope is that it snowballs. The more people that see a box running Linux (especially if owned by a not-so-techy person), the more will inquire about it and possibly consider purchasing one. While 2.8% is not huge, it's enough that people will start to come across them. It'll move from "yeah I've heard of that somewhere" to "yeah I've seen that somewhere." The expected/hoped_for effect will be impressive, even if the current numbers aren't. Everything starts small.
So Google has open sourced its search engine? Cause all I've seen them open source is some fluff plus some contributions to projects that they use in order to provide their services (where the ratio between them receiving and giving is about zillion to one). No open sourcing of their golden eggs.
Open source is not about being anti-competitive-business. If I had to simplify it down to that level it'd be closer to anti-customer/end_user-abuse. It's perfectly reasonable for a company to be very pro-open source without giving away everything. In many cases, like Adobe's flash player, it seems obvious that if it were open sourced a better implementation would come about (either from a fork or just community assistance). This doesn't exactly correlate to Google's search engine.
If Google can make a zillion-to-one ratio by their contributions to things like Firefox it's win-win for both them and their customers. Such things are most certainly successful business tactics the open source community can fawn over which Microsoft definitely feels pressure from. For many not-so-savvy computer users, Firefox is the face of open source. It's something they can use with relative ease (not much to learn after jumping from something like IE) and is - even to them - obviously better than the best-known proprietary equivalent (IE). Funding Firefox is absolutely a huge boon for open source.
Honestly, I always saw Google's golden egg to be their reputation. Even if MS or Yahoo! suddenly had a better search engine Google could ride their reputation pretty far. This reputation goes beyond simply their excellent search engine to - you guessed it - their open source support.
So please Slashdotters, stop being such bitches for Google and Apple. Try to understand that for-profit companies have only two relationships with the GPL license: If they provide services or sell hardware, they love it. They can piggy back on the stuff others have built and make a buck. If they sell software, then they hate GPL because selling GPL'ed software is damn hard. (Not impossible, but hard.)
There's technical problems about being a bitch to a company as a F/OSS advocate. The beauty of F/OSS is how it keeps companies from being able to be abusive to their customers. Now, if someone supports a company which bases their business on things such as vendor lock in... "bitches" may be an appropriate term for their fans.
If a company like Google (which provides services) can have a successful mutually beneficial existence with the open source community why should we, the open source community, not feel grateful? If we can indirectly fund Firefox by backing Google, we get an awesome F/OSS web browser. We get improvements in WINE for Photoshop and further limit the reasons against moving to Linux or BSD. Etc, etc.
1. Microsoft is working very hard to improve its image.
An image like Google's?
Regulators have squeezed Microsoft's balls to publish their protocols and file formats and play nice with others.
Right, because those are icky closed source proprietary things. Pretty much everything Google does is sufficiently open to work with everyone else's everything, so they don't get pressured as Microsoft is. Again, Microsoft wants to be like Google here. (Even if it had to be beaten into their skulls)
3. Corporations that they sell a lot of licenses to demand they interop well with other operating systems and applications that they use.
Right, pleasing their customers by supporting their costumer's needs like interoperability with other platforms. Like Google.
Beyond Trolling, do you have a point? You've said nothing to show how the GP was incorrect: Some people high up in Microsoft have finally realized that it would be financially advisable at this point to start being nice to their customers, who have come to expect such treatment thanks to companies like Google.
Your argument for a hard 'G', as I understand it, is based on the pronunciation of other words 'gi-' words which - as you point out - have Romantic etymologies. The fact GIF is not decedent from another Romantic language essentially frees it of this obligation, no? The word is made up, and as such it does not rely on any etymology at all.
I do agree with your quote - English has changed over time based on the general public's understanding/use of the language irrelevant than what is proper. An (tech-related) example of sorts: Firefox is officially abbreviated 'fx,' although the vast majority of times I've seen it abbreviated it ended up being 'ff.' As Firefox, and along with it 'ff,' becomes more and more popular it doesn't matter what Mozilla says - 'ff' is what will be used.
How I interpret this, though, it only means that when one pronunciation is sufficiently popular it can be taken as the 'correct' pronunciation irrelevant of the official/original pronunciation. We would need a sufficiently disproportionate number of people pronouncing it one way for your quote to be relevant.
I did not know the developers pronounce it with a soft 'G' until I looked it up just before posting. I pronounce it such because that's how I've pretty much always heard it pronounced. While I know this is not a large amount of evidence for the popularity of either pronunciation it does make the possibility of a hard 'G' being substantially more popular less than likely.
Considering the fact that we don't have any sort of statistics (a/. poll would be nice), and considering the fact that GIF - being made up - has not etymological ties, the only thing we have to fall back on is what the developer's stance is.
The developers pronounce it with a soft 'G,' as in the peanut butter brand. When it comes up in conversation, most people I've heard use a soft 'G' in GIF. (I can't think of an exception, honestly.) It may be a local/regional kinda thing, like pop vs soda vs coke.
I've heard "Ubuntu" pronounced every way imaginable.
I warned you all! I've known for years the bad guy from Aladdin would eventually tire of stealing stuff from mysterious caves and start breaking into computers!
How about you turn off politics in your preferences? If other/.'ers want to discuss the matter - even if it often breaks down into flaming - it's our prerogative. You have no obligation to watch, let alone contribute.
P.S. How often is there anything almost notable in politics that isn't crap which leads to flaming?
P.P.S. Feel free to complain about anything in the Idle section, though. Either it's hiding very well or we can't turn it off.
It's not developer or lawyering costs that worries them, it's customers/monies.
I've heard your argument a lot, but it seems (to me) to be more of an issue of what *you* would want from a game than what the vast, vast majority of WoW's huge customer base wants. I have no idea what people see in WoW, but whatever it is it works.
Either Blizzard is selfish (and wants monies) or is altruistic (and wants to make the fans happy). Either way they would want to keep the game and its repetitiveness as is. If they have to lawyering to keep things in its current wonderful state they are I can't really blame them for doing it.
If you want to blame someone blame the bigjillions of people who play (and pay for) WoW despite (or due to?) the repetitiveness and legal shenanigans.
Plenty of people do that + normal passphrase. It's a great way to get past our silly limited human memory for such things.
If you want to be even trickier you can tar together several binaries to use as a key just before decrypting (into RAM), then removes the new tar. Bonus points if the binaries are on different media. Say, one on your USB keychain, one on your phone's microSD, one on your box's XP partition and one on your main filesystem? Even if you know someone's taring together binaries for the key, good luck brute forcing that:D
Slashdot Mirror
First off, you shouldn't have been modded Troll. It's a legit question. *shakes fist at mods*
It's not all-or-nothing. The code doesn't have to be super fast, just fast enough. Perl can (when running at it's normal speed) accomplish the needed task at a sufficient speed. If Perl couldn't get it done fast enough when running properly, then yes it would be the wrong tool for the job.
So, what, if he was confident he'd purposefully pick a running mate that would lose him votes?
Also comparing him to the ipod pre-huge-success kinda hints that he's going to come out on top, which isn't what I think you're trying to get across.
Seems to me it was a smart pick, irrelevant of his odds at taking the presidency this time around.
Psh. I can absolutely blow the minds of all the Joe Sixpacks out there when it comes to computers and make it seem as though I know far more than I do. It's very easy for me to mislead people because, well, I'm the expert as far as they can tell. This does not mean I'm going to be 100% truthful and not exploit the situation for my own personal gain. Of course this is all hypothetical... I'm completely altruistic, of course :D
Just because someone can throw technical jargon out at me doesn't necessarily mean I have to give up any differing stance I may have regarding the issue at hand. Of course it doesn't mean they're wrong, either.
Ever notice that when there is a political debate on TV between presidential candidates it *only* has Democrats and/or Republicans? It's much easier for either of them to only have to compete with one opponent rather than the plethora of actual opinions out there. It's similar here: So long as the public thinks the only choice is between MS Windows and Apple OSX, both of them are better off. It's not as though, by not supporting OSX here, people will not realize it's an option. Apple's marketing is ridiculous. In response to the EU, Microsoft made a whole bunch of promises about being cross-platform-supportive and what not. If they have to do that, may as well just do OSX.
There's plenty of other reasons as well, like how you can only (legally) use OSX on a Mac and hence the OS itself doesn't directly compete with Windows, but I don't have any fancy political analogies for that off hand ):
If you just want text and images you may be okay without an OS check. For more complicated things like streaming video the browser alone isn't going to handle it. Either it'll have to call a plugin (which may not be available for a given OS) or it'll launch another program (which may not be available for a given OS). It's perfectly justifiable to check the OS. What's not necessarily justifiable is to avoid using (more-)cross-platform solutions like Flash.
14+ years? Much of the preloaded stuff he's (re)selling is well over a 24 years, and is easily older than I am. After 18 years my parents lost a lot of the legal control they had over me. Imagine if those laws were treated as copyright is... *shudders*
One step at a time.
Jesus Christ. If you're going to be a game-code-nazi, get it right:
The [start] isn't part of the code, nor is the [select]. After the last [a] the code is entered, the code input is done. You can hit [select] multiple times after the code trying to decide between single player and co-op and it will still work.
Just because Microsoft got away with that nonsense a good number of times before doesn't make it right.
The only reason for needing to up the requirements that I can think of is for added features (or to help hardware sales, but lets not go there for now). MS could have simply made multiple versions of their new OS's with varying levels of features (and system requirements) so Joe Sixpack could get a low-end, streamlined version for his older machine. Put a little table on the back of the box that shows what features are available on each version of of the OS to show what the user could get if they pay a bit more. That way the system requirements are actually justified, and those who don't want to buy a whole new computer can still find an excuse to pay Microsoft.
I could understand if MS did not do this because they feared too many versions would confuse the customers, but with Vista's plethora of versions I don't buy it. The only explanations I can think of are that either MS is purposefully screwing their customers to help hardware sales or that they're incompetent. Probably a bit of both, with a helping of we're-a-monopoly-so-we-don't-give-a-shit.
I don't see either of those being forever impassable for Linux. As more people use Linux - just like with Firefox - companies will be considering Linux as an option rather than just assuming we all use Windows. Remember when IE was a requirement for every other website? :D
I'm typing this right now on an Ubuntu-based system with an nVidia card running dual monitors. There's a number of "user-friendly" methods of installing nVidia drivers, like Envy, but I just do it the good 'ol fashioned way:
/etc/init.d/gdm stop
/etc/init.d/gdm start
(1) Download from nVidia's site, just as you would with Windows drivers.
(2) Stop X
(With a standard Ubuntu install:)
Ctrl-Alt-F1 for command line
sudo
(3) cd to the directory I downloaded the drivers too
(4) sudo sh [driver-file-name]
(4.5) Type password
(5) Hit "OK" or "Next" a whole bunch of times.
(6) Start X again
sudo
To configure it (for things like dual-monitors:)
(1) Open a command line while in the gui (I think it's Applications -> Console... something like that)
(2) sudo nvidia-settings
Next time you give it a go try those instructions, or try Envy.
I've also got an EeePC. The pre-installed Xandros really sucks, sadly. If you get one, go ahead and get an SDHC card with it. It can boot from an OS installed on either the main flash drive or the SDHC slot (or something through USB) - which means you can try to install Ubuntu (or another distro - anything but that icky pre-installed one) on the SDHC card without worrying messing up the software it comes with. I highly recommend checking out eeexubuntu. It's got the reasonably noob-friendly Ubuntu goodness tweeked for the eeepc.
Also, one last thing - if you have the time and patience (and aren't already familiar with it), take a look at vi. When I got the eeepc, I found I could not keep up with my professors in class on the limited keyboard - I've been dependent on things like home/end and pageup/down, which aren't quite as accessible as they are on a full keyboard. I was directed by a friend to vi (well, specifically vim) which is a great text editing program that functions fine with the eeepc's limited, cramped keyboard. While it's mostly popular with Linux folk, there's a solid Windows version you can try. It's very, very different and is not user friendly at all, but in terms of typing notes in class the improvement is enormous. I'd recommend you at least give it a look, even if you find it's too much to try to pick up and drop it.
PS: 'shot at replacing Windows' - Linux already has in some domains, and it never will in others.
Right, being open source it'll have a much harder time screw the end-user with things like vendor lock-in. The only other limitations will evaporate as market share continues to increase.
Mind elaborating exactly in what respect will it never be able to replace Windows?
You probably won't need books or irc. Linux is getting pretty accessible these days. The best thing is to have a buddy who is already comfortable with Linux. Lacking that, I'd recommend taking a look at the very noob-friendly Ubuntu forums and Ubuntu wiki. You should probably start by toying around with a virtual machine in windows, where you won't have to worry about things like drivers. You could also try playing around with a live boot CD.
:D I got another old hard drive for Linux while I was still getting used to it, and disabled the Windows hard drive whenever I was going to do something maybe possibly risky.
After that you can take the plunge and install Ubuntu to the bare metal. In case something (eg: wifi) doesn't work, it's a good idea to have a laptop with internet access and a USB flash drive at hand when you start. Also make extra careful special sure you don't kill your mission critical Windows partition. Not yet anyways
Don't expect everything to go super smooth - there will be some hang up somewhere. Even if it's more user friendly than Windows, it's different, and there is stuff to learn.
Psh, that meme is almost but not entirely unlike crystal.
Hmmm... Psh, that meme is almost but not entirely unlike crystal.
There we go. If you follow the line above the one you were referring to in my previous post first, it works a lot better.
Seriously, though, I'd rather hear about what interesting/new discoveries come out of this strange material than just hear about the possibility of its existence.
When that's announced people will complain that the information is pretty useless and would rather hear about practical applications found for it.
:D :D :(
When that's announced people will complain about why they haven't heard about this before. Others will complain about how it was on digg years ago and how slashdot is slow.
So shut up and discuss the interesting stuff we have know now
Or get high and stare at the trippy pictures
Or make an off topic meme-based joke
This comes back to the same ignorant licensing argument on Slashdot between GPL, BSD, and non-opersource licenses.
God forbid people make money to live on.
With your /.ID you've sure missed some longstanding points 'round here from even before my day.
/.'ers are arguing is that there are ways to make money without screwing people. If there isn't for a particular job, than it's probably not necessary because there is a better alternative. Capitalism, ya'know? All the record label company people could go make money with another job. Flip burgers, I don't care. The current stuff they're doing? Not really necessary. It's a lot easier to distribute information (and consequently become known) than it used to be.
It's perfectly feasible for a F/OSS company to make money. Redhat is usually the example here. What most
It's more than just not paying the competition (I could use neither the F/OSS option or the competition and accomplish the same thing) or marketing. Using F/OSS and increasing F/OSS market share encourages open standards and interoperability, which in turn make life for the developers of the given F/OSS project much easier. Consider: thanks to Firefox's marketshare much of internet moved away from IE-specific websites. Got a big idea for some software Google should put on all their servers? It better run on Linux.
The hope is that it snowballs. The more people that see a box running Linux (especially if owned by a not-so-techy person), the more will inquire about it and possibly consider purchasing one. While 2.8% is not huge, it's enough that people will start to come across them. It'll move from "yeah I've heard of that somewhere" to "yeah I've seen that somewhere." The expected/hoped_for effect will be impressive, even if the current numbers aren't. Everything starts small.
So Google has open sourced its search engine? Cause all I've seen them open source is some fluff plus some contributions to projects that they use in order to provide their services (where the ratio between them receiving and giving is about zillion to one). No open sourcing of their golden eggs.
Open source is not about being anti-competitive-business. If I had to simplify it down to that level it'd be closer to anti-customer/end_user-abuse. It's perfectly reasonable for a company to be very pro-open source without giving away everything. In many cases, like Adobe's flash player, it seems obvious that if it were open sourced a better implementation would come about (either from a fork or just community assistance). This doesn't exactly correlate to Google's search engine.
If Google can make a zillion-to-one ratio by their contributions to things like Firefox it's win-win for both them and their customers. Such things are most certainly successful business tactics the open source community can fawn over which Microsoft definitely feels pressure from. For many not-so-savvy computer users, Firefox is the face of open source. It's something they can use with relative ease (not much to learn after jumping from something like IE) and is - even to them - obviously better than the best-known proprietary equivalent (IE). Funding Firefox is absolutely a huge boon for open source.
Honestly, I always saw Google's golden egg to be their reputation. Even if MS or Yahoo! suddenly had a better search engine Google could ride their reputation pretty far. This reputation goes beyond simply their excellent search engine to - you guessed it - their open source support.
So please Slashdotters, stop being such bitches for Google and Apple. Try to understand that for-profit companies have only two relationships with the GPL license: If they provide services or sell hardware, they love it. They can piggy back on the stuff others have built and make a buck. If they sell software, then they hate GPL because selling GPL'ed software is damn hard. (Not impossible, but hard.)
There's technical problems about being a bitch to a company as a F/OSS advocate. The beauty of F/OSS is how it keeps companies from being able to be abusive to their customers. Now, if someone supports a company which bases their business on things such as vendor lock in... "bitches" may be an appropriate term for their fans.
If a company like Google (which provides services) can have a successful mutually beneficial existence with the open source community why should we, the open source community, not feel grateful? If we can indirectly fund Firefox by backing Google, we get an awesome F/OSS web browser. We get improvements in WINE for Photoshop and further limit the reasons against moving to Linux or BSD. Etc, etc.
1. Microsoft is working very hard to improve its image.
An image like Google's?
Regulators have squeezed Microsoft's balls to publish their protocols and file formats and play nice with others.
Right, because those are icky closed source proprietary things. Pretty much everything Google does is sufficiently open to work with everyone else's everything, so they don't get pressured as Microsoft is. Again, Microsoft wants to be like Google here. (Even if it had to be beaten into their skulls)
3. Corporations that they sell a lot of licenses to demand they interop well with other operating systems and applications that they use.
Right, pleasing their customers by supporting their costumer's needs like interoperability with other platforms. Like Google.
Beyond Trolling, do you have a point? You've said nothing to show how the GP was incorrect: Some people high up in Microsoft have finally realized that it would be financially advisable at this point to start being nice to their customers, who have come to expect such treatment thanks to companies like Google.
Your argument for a hard 'G', as I understand it, is based on the pronunciation of other words 'gi-' words which - as you point out - have Romantic etymologies. The fact GIF is not decedent from another Romantic language essentially frees it of this obligation, no? The word is made up, and as such it does not rely on any etymology at all.
/. poll would be nice), and considering the fact that GIF - being made up - has not etymological ties, the only thing we have to fall back on is what the developer's stance is.
:D
I do agree with your quote - English has changed over time based on the general public's understanding/use of the language irrelevant than what is proper. An (tech-related) example of sorts: Firefox is officially abbreviated 'fx,' although the vast majority of times I've seen it abbreviated it ended up being 'ff.' As Firefox, and along with it 'ff,' becomes more and more popular it doesn't matter what Mozilla says - 'ff' is what will be used.
How I interpret this, though, it only means that when one pronunciation is sufficiently popular it can be taken as the 'correct' pronunciation irrelevant of the official/original pronunciation. We would need a sufficiently disproportionate number of people pronouncing it one way for your quote to be relevant.
I did not know the developers pronounce it with a soft 'G' until I looked it up just before posting. I pronounce it such because that's how I've pretty much always heard it pronounced. While I know this is not a large amount of evidence for the popularity of either pronunciation it does make the possibility of a hard 'G' being substantially more popular less than likely.
Considering the fact that we don't have any sort of statistics (a
Hence, a soft 'G' is more correct. QED?
The developers pronounce it with a soft 'G,' as in the peanut butter brand. When it comes up in conversation, most people I've heard use a soft 'G' in GIF. (I can't think of an exception, honestly.) It may be a local/regional kinda thing, like pop vs soda vs coke.
I've heard "Ubuntu" pronounced every way imaginable.
I warned you all! I've known for years the bad guy from Aladdin would eventually tire of stealing stuff from mysterious caves and start breaking into computers!
How about you turn off politics in your preferences? If other /.'ers want to discuss the matter - even if it often breaks down into flaming - it's our prerogative. You have no obligation to watch, let alone contribute.
P.S. How often is there anything almost notable in politics that isn't crap which leads to flaming?
P.P.S. Feel free to complain about anything in the Idle section, though. Either it's hiding very well or we can't turn it off.
It's not developer or lawyering costs that worries them, it's customers/monies.
I've heard your argument a lot, but it seems (to me) to be more of an issue of what *you* would want from a game than what the vast, vast majority of WoW's huge customer base wants. I have no idea what people see in WoW, but whatever it is it works.
Either Blizzard is selfish (and wants monies) or is altruistic (and wants to make the fans happy). Either way they would want to keep the game and its repetitiveness as is. If they have to lawyering to keep things in its current wonderful state they are I can't really blame them for doing it.
If you want to blame someone blame the bigjillions of people who play (and pay for) WoW despite (or due to?) the repetitiveness and legal shenanigans.
Plenty of people do that + normal passphrase. It's a great way to get past our silly limited human memory for such things.
:D
If you want to be even trickier you can tar together several binaries to use as a key just before decrypting (into RAM), then removes the new tar. Bonus points if the binaries are on different media. Say, one on your USB keychain, one on your phone's microSD, one on your box's XP partition and one on your main filesystem? Even if you know someone's taring together binaries for the key, good luck brute forcing that