Doesn't all C code run as C++ code with no code changes by default? I'm not sure where I'm going with this but I am not a programmer (not a good one, at any rate) and I'm mostly curious. With my limited knowledge, well, I can't really think of any reason to switch but I can't see any harm in switching by default. So long as the practice was good in C shouldn't it also be good in C++? After all, I thought you could literally take the C and just put it in C++ and it worked natively?
They should separate them. Like Linux, Linux is just the kernel. With Windows the kernel is the explorer.exe process, more or less, and you can actually load a different shell instead. So, a security flaw in IE is not a security flaw in Windows. Just like a Heartbleed wasn't a security flaw in Linux. They need, and should be in, separate categories.
I confess that I didn't read a word of what you said. That's the problem. Why do you type like that? I mean, you have to specifically try it - it's not like it happens by accident. I'm just curious as to what would motivate you to do so. There's nothing wrong with some emphasis, really. However, when I see this sort of stuff I just scroll on by. I can't say that I've ever asked why someone would do this so I'm taking a minute to do so now.
It's just not something I read - I might have missed something worth reading but my eyeballs just hate it so I skip it. Literally, not one single word was read as far as I know. As soon as I see it my eyes move down the page and the scrolling begins. What's your motive? Care to type it out again (just cut and paste) in regular text? I'll read it then.
My memory is a little fuzzy but I seem to recall that the trend towards globalization and open trade policies was pushed by the left. The reason they pushed it was a feel good process. A rising tide raises all ships and those poor people in third world countries are living on less than a dollar a day and need jobs. This will better their lives and give them opportunities they've never had.
In hindsight, it just looks like they wanted to rape more people (figuratively). A few people have managed to make a little money but not a whole lot has changed except the standard of living here has gone down.
That (and below) shouldn't be read as an endorsement for the right. Not at all. It should be read as a condemnation of the left. (If you think those are synonymous then stop here.)
Sometimes, I still see them (the left) cry this tired battle cry. They try to use shame and call it 'protectionism' or 'nationalism' or the likes. To be honest, I don't know their motives nor who has brainwashed them. What's amusing is that they belittle the right for voting for policies or people who will harm them while pushing for those who'd push jobs overseas and reduce the power of the middle class and absolutely destroy those already impoverished in this country. I have to assume that there's some sort of plan here... I'm just not seeing it.
(This is not the place to interject a reply with a crazy wingnut conspiracy theory. But I am open to any ideas but try to keep them sane. It's probably not the fault of Jews, Masons, One World Order, Lizard People or Aliens.)
And, before you ask, I'm pretty far left. I support things like single payer health care, easily accessible education, human rights, equality (true equality, not privileges based on innate traits), reasonable taxes on wealth, seeking non-violent solutions, ending the war on drugs and on terrorism, and other lofty goals. I don't have any problem paying my taxes. I do not like how my taxes are spent. I'd happily pay more if they were spent properly. Instead, I make up the difference by donating to worthy causes - much of the donated total is beyond what can be used to reduce my tax burden. I do so because it is my social contract - I'm contractually obligated to contribute even if that contract isn't written. I'm a member, a signatory, of that contract by my presence and participation in society. I give to charities/worthy causes because it is my duty to do so and to help provide for those who can not.
Yes, yes I am a Libertarian. Sorry for the confusion. Not all Libertarians are insane - just most of them. *sighs* It's a political ideal, not an economic model. But, I've digressed enough and am tired.
No pure political or economic model will ever work. In their pure form they will always result in failure on a scale larger than a tribe. I don't care which one you think is best, it will not work in its pure form. No matter how hard you try. Humans are involved and will be the point of failure for each and every one. They simply can't work with a large group or a diverse group - not in the long term. This is why zealots are stupid.
Of course I like to point out that I'm zealous about being a moderate. I too am human, yes? I'd explain my own personal opinions but I've done so before and it wouldn't be read so I'll save us both the time. Suffice to say, I have all the answers and you don't. Go team, go! *nods* (Actually, that's pretty far from the truth but I include it as my piss poor attempt at humor.)
Screw it... It's not like I was doing anything better.
I'm a 'Classic Libertarian,' not to be confused with fans of Rand or Anarcho-Capitalists or even an economic model. I'm more closely aligned with socialists in many ways. The rights belong to the individual, to the society, and way down on the list businesses get a few rights but those are really unimportant when compared with your rights as an individual. Libertarianism is a political ideology and not an economic model. People who confuse the two are generally not that bright. Some confuse it because of the antics of those who've usurped the party.
Believe it or not, Wikipedia has a pretty damned good article on Libertarians. The first four paragraphs are excellent reading. I can certainly understand why people are confused about the party - the fault is my own and it is also the fault of my peers. We were wooed into allowing anyone to use the moniker and we ended up with some really stupid people speaking on our behalf. I'm slowly doing what I can to correct this. I'm one small voice in a very large crowd.
Anyhow, I think a blended system with proper checks and balances is ideal. Where the lines are drawn is subject to debate. What shouldn't be subject to debate is the need to eliminate the zealots from the discussion. What shouldn't be allowed is irrational people controlling the conversation. What needs to happen is some serious open and honest discussion about making changes to ensure the rights of the individual are protected. What will happen? Nothing... Nothing good at any rate. Each and every single law is, for better or worse, a restriction on a right. Legislators aren't just going to suddenly decide to stop making laws. They'll make more laws. And each new law will remove somebody's rights - sometimes that's a good thing like taking away a person's right to stop gay people from getting married. Usually, they're not so very good in my opinion but that's a topic for another day and is too much for this type of site.
Finally, in my disgust, I've simply decided to stick with the "Classic Libertarian" moniker. I am not powerful enough to overcome the damage done but I simply can't tolerate being continually associated with the idiots who self-identify as Libertarians. They're not. They're disgruntled social conservatives, anarcho-capitalists, or aspies who think the world can survive on avarice and have a strange notion that they're capable of doing it on their own or that those at the top have done so without the help of others. *sighs* Feel free to kick them in the nuts. They've got firearms but I'm pretty sure they don't know how to use them so you should be safe. They'll probably just whine anyhow.
I did propose a solution - open them as you need them and close them when you're done. However, use what works best for you and in the method that suits your work flow best. You can be that guy who emails himself links if you want...
What really confuses me is you exclaiming that this is something you do like it is some grand achievement. Let's use Slashdot as an example. So according to the description given they (and presumably you) open the main page. You then scroll through, reading and opening things in new tabs as you see fit, and then go to those new tabs and read those, correct? Except, by the time you've done this there have been all sorts of people who may have (or might not have) commented. By the time you get to the last Slashdot tab you opened you're quite late to the content and not viewing the more up-to-date conversation unless you refresh which is just silly because you could have saved yourself the effort and viewed each one, one at a time.
What possible good are you getting? And no, I'm absolutely not trying to get you to change your work flow. Do what suits your needs. I'm just letting you know that there's a better way that lets you interact with pages in a more timely fashion and with far less confusion than needing more tabs open than you can possibly read the titles for. Even if you span all these titles out across multiple monitors you're still not able to look at and visualize them all (or read their titles, I suppose) because they're too scrunched up to actually show you more than a portion of the first letter.
To continue with the Slashdot example, and here's my method, I go to the first unread page - and this kind of sucks but it's what I've come up with. I scroll down. I open a tab on a thread that I want to read. I read it. I close it. I am now back at the main page (well, page 2 for this example) and then I look up to see the next story and decide if I want to read the thread or not. If not then I go to the next one. Then I work my way back to page 0 (the real main page) that way. Auto-refresh or a big thread will still sometimes mess this work flow up a bit and it isn't perfect. However, it's better than having a bunch of tabs open (to my mind, at least) and then seeing now stale threads when I read the comments.
Perhaps you have a strange definition of trolling? Perhaps you just have a frail ego? I don't know but, for fuck's sake, don't think I'd do anything more than mock your use - I've nary a nickel invested and don't actually care how you use your computer. You're free to do it any way you want and your emotions (riled or not) aren't important to me so, rest assured, that trolling you hasn't a damned thing to do with my objectives. You're not that important.
What I do want is a reason - because you might actually be correct in your usage and it is I who can stand to learn a lesson. So far, nobody has given me a reason that makes their way seem superior. I'm certainly willing to try (and have) because my own system has its faults. I haven't even reached the mocking stage yet. In fact, I'm still hoping to learn something which is why I ask or comment - hoping someone will actually give me a new way. Perhaps that new way will be somewhere betwixt your solution and my own. I've yet to find it, read about it, or even be able to start on the trail to discovering this mythical ideal work flow - but that doesn't mean I'm not still trying.
"I open 400 browser tabs at once!" This is not a viable solution to a mere mortal. I'm not 100% positive but I bet it's slower - it was much slower when I tried this. At best I can deal with 20 or so per browser instance. I sometimes put multiple instances up in a few different desktops or on separate monitors. Usually I do not. Even then it's not as rapid as just using the address bar and a new tab as required. A history of closed tabs is also excellent. Either way, I'm still sure my method can be optimized and I'm 100% certain your method is inferior *for* me. I know, because I've tried the large number of tabs and i
Hmm... I wonder which FOSS application is going to be first sued out of existence because they eliminate a portion of anticipated market share for some proprietary alternative. It would not surprise me if someone tried. If what I've read is accurate (and it may not be) they might actually have a case.
Read them and close them. Why open them all up at once? That doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think it'd make you any faster. It just adds overhead, confusion, and means that when you do open them to read them they're no longer current (unless they update dynamically).
Don't forget cable TV. You'll have to buy your own television (an acquaintance came home with one and it is clear so you can see inside of it) but you can get cable. So, there's that. Many of them still have gyms and you can learn stuff like woodcraft. If you're special you can work in the fab shop and make your own shivs out of recycled steel bunks! If you're at all like the goatse guy you can even carry around your own cell phone. It's probably not a bad retirement plan if they offer wifi and allow you to bring your own device.
I'm not sure about that. How about if a jury nullifies what would have been a solid conviction for a police officer that shot an unarmed person in the back without even giving them any warning - complete with body cam footage of them doing exactly that? Is that a good thing? Is that just?
I've spent about $15,000 so far. I'm only running for the State Senate. I refuse donations of any kind - from businesses or people. I'll pay for the entire campaign on my own, thanks. People are free to contribute their time and money to campaign on my behalf but I will accept no financial donations of any kind. I am beholden to nobody other then the community as a whole and it is my job to understand them, represent them, and learn about the issues to make informed choices as they arise.
It's time consuming and takes some work. I don't even want to be in office, to be honest. We just aren't accurately represented so someone needs to step up and do the job right. I am in a position to do so. I will do so even though I've far more interesting things to do with my time - such as naval gazing. But, being that I am here and the job needs doing, I'm obligated to give the citizens a chance to elect me if they want. So, it's my civic duty and I'm doing it. We've far too many people who are content to complain instead of actually doing.
This is not my campaign forum and you certainly can't vote for me so I needn't go into more detail but if you've any specific questions then I might be able to answer them.
Umm... Okay then? I can only conclude you're delusional. I'm still moderated at 1. I post without a karma bonus even though I'm eligible for one, I consider it an unfair advantage. If you click the score, not the number, you'll see a popup that shows that my post hasn't been moderated at all. The post's moderation history is available for public viewing. (Of course, this is subject to change.)
Anyone can verify this. Even you.
Again, I don't post at +1 - that would be unfair. I'd post at -1 if I were able. Somehow, I'm not sure how, I've managed to achieve the highest possible karma rating. I could post at +1 but that'd just be silly. It's not that important, really. It just makes me wonder what else you mess up on. Most engineers are pretty cautious, especially mechanical engineers where things like faults and inaccurate assumptions result in tangible harm.
Given your desire to, again, act impulsively, with little information and no verification... Well... I'm really starting to think you're just irate and not actually an engineer. It's okay. On the internet nobody knows you're a fast food worker.
IIRC Nixon, in his younger days, had a bit to do with the whole 'accuse Hollywood of being full of communists' thing during the McCarthyism days. It's no surprise that the media was unkind to him after that. I seem to recall an interview with Khrushchev's advisors, one of them at any rate, where they shared his disbelief at Nixon going down for a 'fairly trivial' lapse in ethics on behalf of folks who worked for him. I was there, at the time, and probably wasn't as in-tune to it as I am now but I suspect there was a lot of media slant and bias during his administration. I can't imagine that Hollywood ever forgave the man who helped send some of their peers to jail over supposed ties with communism.
Funny, I don't see Republican's going against this new trade deal. Last I checked they have majority in both houses. They could vote no and stop this, but they'll all vote yes. But yeah, it's all Obama's fault right? Republican's just have to vote yes right?
Well, to be fair we do kind of yell at them when they vote no - we call them the obstructionist party.
It makes no sense to me but I don't know enough to opine accurately. I know enough to hurt myself and break stuff. I'd have assumed that acknowledging received packets is kind of important and that error correction is essential. Otherwise, how do you know the data sent is being accurately received? It doesn't close anything security wise (it seems) but, rather, opens it up to a MITM attack because there's no verification. I am confused.:/
That's what I was asking. I couldn't figure out how the hell they'd do error correction with snipped wires. I was also hoping some fleshing out might happen with regards to how this worked in the real world where packets do get dropped and the likes. It just doesn't make much sense to me which is why I also professed my ignorance.
I was reading your post and expecting it to end with a joke about Oracle being Republicans, hating browsers, wanting them to die, and that being the way of their kind. I must say, I'm kind of disappointed, actually. I guess I'll have to just imagine it.
Larry is a Republican. He hates the freedom offered by Mozilla. He hates everything, even children who use Firefox. He wants them and us to die. It is the way of their kind. He rides around on his yacht while children starve. He hates them and wants the children to die.
I've seen and questioned multiple Slashdotters who claim a need for (and beneficial use of) hundreds of tabs being open at the same time. I've asked and they've had a variety of reasons but not one of those reasons actually made sense to me. Yet they do it. I'm reminded of the user that would send himself links via email, open the email, open the link (that he'd already sent to himself), and then print the page. I start getting cluttered at 20 tabs or so. I am most comfortable in the 3 to 5 range. I'd probably do better with fewer but my memory isn't what it used to be.
This is one of those subjects where I just shut the fuck up and listen, for the most part. Sometimes I ask questions. I simply don't know enough. I can offer no opinions that are qualified. I can, and do, learn and that is a god thing.
I bought a half dozen of the RPi kits when they came out and I've only unboxed one. I played with it and did exactly nothing of value with it. I keep meaning to pick it up and learn more but I can't actually think of anything I'd want to do with it or with the rest of them. I'd donate them to the local school (they get a lot of my stuff) but they're just an elementary school. I'm not sure that they'd be able to take advantage of the donation. The IT guy (they have just one - the school has 56 students, up two from last year) might be able to use them.
Anyhow, I am quite curious and enjoy reading the banter between those who do know. I've reached the point where I think I understand enough of it to get started. I just can't think of a damned thing to do that isn't already done, done better, and actually will give me a sense of accomplishment. Maybe I can just get a Linux distro installed on one and call it good. That might be interesting enough.
I buy most of my ammo from Jack's Trading Post, down in Farmington, and do a lot of plinking. In fact, the sidearm I have with me is "just" a Mark II. I've never seen them completely run out of.22LR and I've even ordered whole cases of the stuff - even after Obama's election. I keep hearing people say there's a shortage and whatnot but I've not really seen much in the way of this shortage. I am not sure where the discrepancy lies.
It's obviously true that some people are experiencing shortages but, even when it was on the news and heavily covered, I didn't have any real problem with any shortages. There was about a month where the stock was pretty low on the shelves. Being the goober that I am, I already had plenty of my own stock so I didn't worry about it and just didn't buy any while the stock was that low.
That was for a period of maybe a month and only during the peak of the news cycle. So, while I saw it, it was a limited scope and didn't really last long and I've not noticed it since. It's not like I live in an area where we don't have a lot of enthusiasts. They're a pretty small store so it's not like they have special ties with the manufacturers or anything.
I must also admit that I've not asked other people in real life about it. I've not asked the owner for more information about it. I have no idea what their volume is (they're often pretty busy) nor do I know about their supply chain. I can only share that none of this has really impacted me. During the one month where there were only a few boxes on the shelves, I simply skipped buying any. It's not like I was in danger of running out or anything.
When I read it, it looked like they were saying that they bought themselves privilege. They're able to buy enough volume to be a priority. I'm not sure that this is special, unique in any way, or signifies anything other than a slow news day or an example of a poorly performed article selection.
The dumb terminals of yesteryear. That which is old is new again, and all that. I kind of liked the idea of thin clients then and I still do - they serve a function and fill a niche. With much of what we do being 'in the cloud' these days, well, it's a lot like the terminals of yesterday.
Personally, at this moment, I'm in west New York. My home is in N.W. Maine. I am using my laptop to connect to my home via VNC through the hotel's wireless. It gets worse... On the home machine I have GhostBSD running, as a VM, and it too has VNC enabled. Yes, yes I have logged into my machine at home, from a hotel, and have also logged into a VM on that machine (via VNC) and then browsed the 'net through there.
No, no I don't have a good reason for the last bit.
No, I don't tinker or get involved that much any more. I used to be pretty active in trying to break stuff, to learn stuff, and to see what changes did what. I'm much more a passive consumer now. Hell, half the time I'm not even booted to an installed OS - just running from a live disk. I do keep meaning to roll my own live disk.
Perhaps you're seeing things as black and white? It is not so. I don't get nearly as involved as I used to. I don't even try to break things that often. Hell, I haven't even suffered from real catastrophic data loss in a while. Very seldom do I download the source, even just to peek at it - never mind actually changing it.
I've become quite passive in my consumption. My only contributions are mind-numbingly facile forum posts, like this, or maybe helping someone out on one of the tech sites which is more my way of keeping connected to the community. I used to spend hours pouring over code, tweaking, poking, breaking, hacking, and generally being curious. I'm nowhere near that same person today and, if you're curious, I don't really know what changed. It's not like I went through a sudden life change or anything.
I'm sure I'll fluctuate over time. I suspect it will be an ebb and swell type effect, akin to the tides. But, for now, I don't seem inclined to do but more inclined to read or consume.
Does that explain it better for you? I'm not really sure how to explain it better than that.
I can see some complaints there. I'm assuming you're speaking about the general topic of the thread? And I agree - I mentioned that briefly in a post. It would suck to find out that the usual debugging commands have gone missing. However, my above post, was mostly in response to those likening this to systemd. With systemd, well, I've just needed to learn a few new commands and I'm okay with that part of it. I, too, have been around computers for a very long time. I've always had to learn new things.
But, back to what you're saying - I am pretty sure we're in agreement. I really want stuff like netstat to be in my base install. I also kind of want htop and whois installed by default too. I also want them to be consistent across the board. I haven't looked deeply but hopefully Debian doesn't play around too much. Doing so would be a slow march towards obscurity and, frankly, I don't want that. Even though I don't generally use Debian, I want them to succeed because a rising tide raises all ships.
As for your worries that we become complacent, that's applicable everywhere and with almost everything. These are no different and suffer the same potentials - namely harming people due to ignorance or greed or whatnot. This is true in most everything. Even too much oxygen is deadly. Most anything can be used to kill and we must always remain vigilant.
I see no evidence to suggest that the two in question are remarkably dissimilar than others and I see no reason to hold back progress just because people are afraid. There's lots of things we've done, as a species, that would have never been done at all if the people who were afraid were in control. There were people who decried the telephone, the automobile, the computer, the internet, singing, dancing, music, etc... Yet we can say that they've all been of benefit to more people than they've harmed.
It's not that I want to change your mind (who the hell am I to do that?) but that I don't understand you and usually I do. It's like finding out that someone you know is actually a believer in Scientology and yet you've known them for years. Something like that, at any rate.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't all C code run as C++ code with no code changes by default? I'm not sure where I'm going with this but I am not a programmer (not a good one, at any rate) and I'm mostly curious. With my limited knowledge, well, I can't really think of any reason to switch but I can't see any harm in switching by default. So long as the practice was good in C shouldn't it also be good in C++? After all, I thought you could literally take the C and just put it in C++ and it worked natively?
They should separate them. Like Linux, Linux is just the kernel. With Windows the kernel is the explorer.exe process, more or less, and you can actually load a different shell instead. So, a security flaw in IE is not a security flaw in Windows. Just like a Heartbleed wasn't a security flaw in Linux. They need, and should be in, separate categories.
I confess that I didn't read a word of what you said. That's the problem. Why do you type like that? I mean, you have to specifically try it - it's not like it happens by accident. I'm just curious as to what would motivate you to do so. There's nothing wrong with some emphasis, really. However, when I see this sort of stuff I just scroll on by. I can't say that I've ever asked why someone would do this so I'm taking a minute to do so now.
It's just not something I read - I might have missed something worth reading but my eyeballs just hate it so I skip it. Literally, not one single word was read as far as I know. As soon as I see it my eyes move down the page and the scrolling begins. What's your motive? Care to type it out again (just cut and paste) in regular text? I'll read it then.
My memory is a little fuzzy but I seem to recall that the trend towards globalization and open trade policies was pushed by the left. The reason they pushed it was a feel good process. A rising tide raises all ships and those poor people in third world countries are living on less than a dollar a day and need jobs. This will better their lives and give them opportunities they've never had.
In hindsight, it just looks like they wanted to rape more people (figuratively). A few people have managed to make a little money but not a whole lot has changed except the standard of living here has gone down.
That (and below) shouldn't be read as an endorsement for the right. Not at all. It should be read as a condemnation of the left. (If you think those are synonymous then stop here.)
Sometimes, I still see them (the left) cry this tired battle cry. They try to use shame and call it 'protectionism' or 'nationalism' or the likes. To be honest, I don't know their motives nor who has brainwashed them. What's amusing is that they belittle the right for voting for policies or people who will harm them while pushing for those who'd push jobs overseas and reduce the power of the middle class and absolutely destroy those already impoverished in this country. I have to assume that there's some sort of plan here... I'm just not seeing it.
(This is not the place to interject a reply with a crazy wingnut conspiracy theory. But I am open to any ideas but try to keep them sane. It's probably not the fault of Jews, Masons, One World Order, Lizard People or Aliens.)
And, before you ask, I'm pretty far left. I support things like single payer health care, easily accessible education, human rights, equality (true equality, not privileges based on innate traits), reasonable taxes on wealth, seeking non-violent solutions, ending the war on drugs and on terrorism, and other lofty goals. I don't have any problem paying my taxes. I do not like how my taxes are spent. I'd happily pay more if they were spent properly. Instead, I make up the difference by donating to worthy causes - much of the donated total is beyond what can be used to reduce my tax burden. I do so because it is my social contract - I'm contractually obligated to contribute even if that contract isn't written. I'm a member, a signatory, of that contract by my presence and participation in society. I give to charities/worthy causes because it is my duty to do so and to help provide for those who can not.
Yes, yes I am a Libertarian. Sorry for the confusion. Not all Libertarians are insane - just most of them. *sighs* It's a political ideal, not an economic model. But, I've digressed enough and am tired.
No pure political or economic model will ever work. In their pure form they will always result in failure on a scale larger than a tribe. I don't care which one you think is best, it will not work in its pure form. No matter how hard you try. Humans are involved and will be the point of failure for each and every one. They simply can't work with a large group or a diverse group - not in the long term. This is why zealots are stupid.
Of course I like to point out that I'm zealous about being a moderate. I too am human, yes? I'd explain my own personal opinions but I've done so before and it wouldn't be read so I'll save us both the time. Suffice to say, I have all the answers and you don't. Go team, go! *nods* (Actually, that's pretty far from the truth but I include it as my piss poor attempt at humor.)
Screw it... It's not like I was doing anything better.
I'm a 'Classic Libertarian,' not to be confused with fans of Rand or Anarcho-Capitalists or even an economic model. I'm more closely aligned with socialists in many ways. The rights belong to the individual, to the society, and way down on the list businesses get a few rights but those are really unimportant when compared with your rights as an individual. Libertarianism is a political ideology and not an economic model. People who confuse the two are generally not that bright. Some confuse it because of the antics of those who've usurped the party.
Believe it or not, Wikipedia has a pretty damned good article on Libertarians. The first four paragraphs are excellent reading. I can certainly understand why people are confused about the party - the fault is my own and it is also the fault of my peers. We were wooed into allowing anyone to use the moniker and we ended up with some really stupid people speaking on our behalf. I'm slowly doing what I can to correct this. I'm one small voice in a very large crowd.
Anyhow, I think a blended system with proper checks and balances is ideal. Where the lines are drawn is subject to debate. What shouldn't be subject to debate is the need to eliminate the zealots from the discussion. What shouldn't be allowed is irrational people controlling the conversation. What needs to happen is some serious open and honest discussion about making changes to ensure the rights of the individual are protected. What will happen? Nothing... Nothing good at any rate. Each and every single law is, for better or worse, a restriction on a right. Legislators aren't just going to suddenly decide to stop making laws. They'll make more laws. And each new law will remove somebody's rights - sometimes that's a good thing like taking away a person's right to stop gay people from getting married. Usually, they're not so very good in my opinion but that's a topic for another day and is too much for this type of site.
Finally, in my disgust, I've simply decided to stick with the "Classic Libertarian" moniker. I am not powerful enough to overcome the damage done but I simply can't tolerate being continually associated with the idiots who self-identify as Libertarians. They're not. They're disgruntled social conservatives, anarcho-capitalists, or aspies who think the world can survive on avarice and have a strange notion that they're capable of doing it on their own or that those at the top have done so without the help of others. *sighs* Feel free to kick them in the nuts. They've got firearms but I'm pretty sure they don't know how to use them so you should be safe. They'll probably just whine anyhow.
I did propose a solution - open them as you need them and close them when you're done. However, use what works best for you and in the method that suits your work flow best. You can be that guy who emails himself links if you want...
What really confuses me is you exclaiming that this is something you do like it is some grand achievement. Let's use Slashdot as an example. So according to the description given they (and presumably you) open the main page. You then scroll through, reading and opening things in new tabs as you see fit, and then go to those new tabs and read those, correct? Except, by the time you've done this there have been all sorts of people who may have (or might not have) commented. By the time you get to the last Slashdot tab you opened you're quite late to the content and not viewing the more up-to-date conversation unless you refresh which is just silly because you could have saved yourself the effort and viewed each one, one at a time.
What possible good are you getting? And no, I'm absolutely not trying to get you to change your work flow. Do what suits your needs. I'm just letting you know that there's a better way that lets you interact with pages in a more timely fashion and with far less confusion than needing more tabs open than you can possibly read the titles for. Even if you span all these titles out across multiple monitors you're still not able to look at and visualize them all (or read their titles, I suppose) because they're too scrunched up to actually show you more than a portion of the first letter.
To continue with the Slashdot example, and here's my method, I go to the first unread page - and this kind of sucks but it's what I've come up with. I scroll down. I open a tab on a thread that I want to read. I read it. I close it. I am now back at the main page (well, page 2 for this example) and then I look up to see the next story and decide if I want to read the thread or not. If not then I go to the next one. Then I work my way back to page 0 (the real main page) that way. Auto-refresh or a big thread will still sometimes mess this work flow up a bit and it isn't perfect. However, it's better than having a bunch of tabs open (to my mind, at least) and then seeing now stale threads when I read the comments.
Perhaps you have a strange definition of trolling? Perhaps you just have a frail ego? I don't know but, for fuck's sake, don't think I'd do anything more than mock your use - I've nary a nickel invested and don't actually care how you use your computer. You're free to do it any way you want and your emotions (riled or not) aren't important to me so, rest assured, that trolling you hasn't a damned thing to do with my objectives. You're not that important.
What I do want is a reason - because you might actually be correct in your usage and it is I who can stand to learn a lesson. So far, nobody has given me a reason that makes their way seem superior. I'm certainly willing to try (and have) because my own system has its faults. I haven't even reached the mocking stage yet. In fact, I'm still hoping to learn something which is why I ask or comment - hoping someone will actually give me a new way. Perhaps that new way will be somewhere betwixt your solution and my own. I've yet to find it, read about it, or even be able to start on the trail to discovering this mythical ideal work flow - but that doesn't mean I'm not still trying.
"I open 400 browser tabs at once!" This is not a viable solution to a mere mortal. I'm not 100% positive but I bet it's slower - it was much slower when I tried this. At best I can deal with 20 or so per browser instance. I sometimes put multiple instances up in a few different desktops or on separate monitors. Usually I do not. Even then it's not as rapid as just using the address bar and a new tab as required. A history of closed tabs is also excellent. Either way, I'm still sure my method can be optimized and I'm 100% certain your method is inferior *for* me. I know, because I've tried the large number of tabs and i
Hmm... I wonder which FOSS application is going to be first sued out of existence because they eliminate a portion of anticipated market share for some proprietary alternative. It would not surprise me if someone tried. If what I've read is accurate (and it may not be) they might actually have a case.
Read them and close them. Why open them all up at once? That doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think it'd make you any faster. It just adds overhead, confusion, and means that when you do open them to read them they're no longer current (unless they update dynamically).
Don't forget cable TV. You'll have to buy your own television (an acquaintance came home with one and it is clear so you can see inside of it) but you can get cable. So, there's that. Many of them still have gyms and you can learn stuff like woodcraft. If you're special you can work in the fab shop and make your own shivs out of recycled steel bunks! If you're at all like the goatse guy you can even carry around your own cell phone. It's probably not a bad retirement plan if they offer wifi and allow you to bring your own device.
I'm not sure about that. How about if a jury nullifies what would have been a solid conviction for a police officer that shot an unarmed person in the back without even giving them any warning - complete with body cam footage of them doing exactly that? Is that a good thing? Is that just?
I've spent about $15,000 so far. I'm only running for the State Senate. I refuse donations of any kind - from businesses or people. I'll pay for the entire campaign on my own, thanks. People are free to contribute their time and money to campaign on my behalf but I will accept no financial donations of any kind. I am beholden to nobody other then the community as a whole and it is my job to understand them, represent them, and learn about the issues to make informed choices as they arise.
It's time consuming and takes some work. I don't even want to be in office, to be honest. We just aren't accurately represented so someone needs to step up and do the job right. I am in a position to do so. I will do so even though I've far more interesting things to do with my time - such as naval gazing. But, being that I am here and the job needs doing, I'm obligated to give the citizens a chance to elect me if they want. So, it's my civic duty and I'm doing it. We've far too many people who are content to complain instead of actually doing.
This is not my campaign forum and you certainly can't vote for me so I needn't go into more detail but if you've any specific questions then I might be able to answer them.
Umm... Okay then? I can only conclude you're delusional. I'm still moderated at 1. I post without a karma bonus even though I'm eligible for one, I consider it an unfair advantage. If you click the score, not the number, you'll see a popup that shows that my post hasn't been moderated at all. The post's moderation history is available for public viewing. (Of course, this is subject to change.)
Anyone can verify this. Even you.
Again, I don't post at +1 - that would be unfair. I'd post at -1 if I were able. Somehow, I'm not sure how, I've managed to achieve the highest possible karma rating. I could post at +1 but that'd just be silly. It's not that important, really. It just makes me wonder what else you mess up on. Most engineers are pretty cautious, especially mechanical engineers where things like faults and inaccurate assumptions result in tangible harm.
Given your desire to, again, act impulsively, with little information and no verification... Well... I'm really starting to think you're just irate and not actually an engineer. It's okay. On the internet nobody knows you're a fast food worker.
IIRC Nixon, in his younger days, had a bit to do with the whole 'accuse Hollywood of being full of communists' thing during the McCarthyism days. It's no surprise that the media was unkind to him after that. I seem to recall an interview with Khrushchev's advisors, one of them at any rate, where they shared his disbelief at Nixon going down for a 'fairly trivial' lapse in ethics on behalf of folks who worked for him. I was there, at the time, and probably wasn't as in-tune to it as I am now but I suspect there was a lot of media slant and bias during his administration. I can't imagine that Hollywood ever forgave the man who helped send some of their peers to jail over supposed ties with communism.
Funny, I don't see Republican's going against this new trade deal. Last I checked they have majority in both houses. They could vote no and stop this, but they'll all vote yes. But yeah, it's all Obama's fault right? Republican's just have to vote yes right?
Well, to be fair we do kind of yell at them when they vote no - we call them the obstructionist party.
It makes no sense to me but I don't know enough to opine accurately. I know enough to hurt myself and break stuff. I'd have assumed that acknowledging received packets is kind of important and that error correction is essential. Otherwise, how do you know the data sent is being accurately received? It doesn't close anything security wise (it seems) but, rather, opens it up to a MITM attack because there's no verification. I am confused. :/
That's what I was asking. I couldn't figure out how the hell they'd do error correction with snipped wires. I was also hoping some fleshing out might happen with regards to how this worked in the real world where packets do get dropped and the likes. It just doesn't make much sense to me which is why I also professed my ignorance.
I was reading your post and expecting it to end with a joke about Oracle being Republicans, hating browsers, wanting them to die, and that being the way of their kind. I must say, I'm kind of disappointed, actually. I guess I'll have to just imagine it.
Larry is a Republican. He hates the freedom offered by Mozilla. He hates everything, even children who use Firefox. He wants them and us to die. It is the way of their kind. He rides around on his yacht while children starve. He hates them and wants the children to die.
*sighs*
It doesn't make me feel as good as I was hoping.
I've seen and questioned multiple Slashdotters who claim a need for (and beneficial use of) hundreds of tabs being open at the same time. I've asked and they've had a variety of reasons but not one of those reasons actually made sense to me. Yet they do it. I'm reminded of the user that would send himself links via email, open the email, open the link (that he'd already sent to himself), and then print the page. I start getting cluttered at 20 tabs or so. I am most comfortable in the 3 to 5 range. I'd probably do better with fewer but my memory isn't what it used to be.
This is one of those subjects where I just shut the fuck up and listen, for the most part. Sometimes I ask questions. I simply don't know enough. I can offer no opinions that are qualified. I can, and do, learn and that is a god thing.
I bought a half dozen of the RPi kits when they came out and I've only unboxed one. I played with it and did exactly nothing of value with it. I keep meaning to pick it up and learn more but I can't actually think of anything I'd want to do with it or with the rest of them. I'd donate them to the local school (they get a lot of my stuff) but they're just an elementary school. I'm not sure that they'd be able to take advantage of the donation. The IT guy (they have just one - the school has 56 students, up two from last year) might be able to use them.
Anyhow, I am quite curious and enjoy reading the banter between those who do know. I've reached the point where I think I understand enough of it to get started. I just can't think of a damned thing to do that isn't already done, done better, and actually will give me a sense of accomplishment. Maybe I can just get a Linux distro installed on one and call it good. That might be interesting enough.
I buy most of my ammo from Jack's Trading Post, down in Farmington, and do a lot of plinking. In fact, the sidearm I have with me is "just" a Mark II. I've never seen them completely run out of .22LR and I've even ordered whole cases of the stuff - even after Obama's election. I keep hearing people say there's a shortage and whatnot but I've not really seen much in the way of this shortage. I am not sure where the discrepancy lies.
It's obviously true that some people are experiencing shortages but, even when it was on the news and heavily covered, I didn't have any real problem with any shortages. There was about a month where the stock was pretty low on the shelves. Being the goober that I am, I already had plenty of my own stock so I didn't worry about it and just didn't buy any while the stock was that low.
That was for a period of maybe a month and only during the peak of the news cycle. So, while I saw it, it was a limited scope and didn't really last long and I've not noticed it since. It's not like I live in an area where we don't have a lot of enthusiasts. They're a pretty small store so it's not like they have special ties with the manufacturers or anything.
I must also admit that I've not asked other people in real life about it. I've not asked the owner for more information about it. I have no idea what their volume is (they're often pretty busy) nor do I know about their supply chain. I can only share that none of this has really impacted me. During the one month where there were only a few boxes on the shelves, I simply skipped buying any. It's not like I was in danger of running out or anything.
When I read it, it looked like they were saying that they bought themselves privilege. They're able to buy enough volume to be a priority. I'm not sure that this is special, unique in any way, or signifies anything other than a slow news day or an example of a poorly performed article selection.
The dumb terminals of yesteryear. That which is old is new again, and all that. I kind of liked the idea of thin clients then and I still do - they serve a function and fill a niche. With much of what we do being 'in the cloud' these days, well, it's a lot like the terminals of yesterday.
Personally, at this moment, I'm in west New York. My home is in N.W. Maine. I am using my laptop to connect to my home via VNC through the hotel's wireless. It gets worse... On the home machine I have GhostBSD running, as a VM, and it too has VNC enabled. Yes, yes I have logged into my machine at home, from a hotel, and have also logged into a VM on that machine (via VNC) and then browsed the 'net through there.
No, no I don't have a good reason for the last bit.
No, I don't tinker or get involved that much any more. I used to be pretty active in trying to break stuff, to learn stuff, and to see what changes did what. I'm much more a passive consumer now. Hell, half the time I'm not even booted to an installed OS - just running from a live disk. I do keep meaning to roll my own live disk.
Perhaps you're seeing things as black and white? It is not so. I don't get nearly as involved as I used to. I don't even try to break things that often. Hell, I haven't even suffered from real catastrophic data loss in a while. Very seldom do I download the source, even just to peek at it - never mind actually changing it.
I've become quite passive in my consumption. My only contributions are mind-numbingly facile forum posts, like this, or maybe helping someone out on one of the tech sites which is more my way of keeping connected to the community. I used to spend hours pouring over code, tweaking, poking, breaking, hacking, and generally being curious. I'm nowhere near that same person today and, if you're curious, I don't really know what changed. It's not like I went through a sudden life change or anything.
I'm sure I'll fluctuate over time. I suspect it will be an ebb and swell type effect, akin to the tides. But, for now, I don't seem inclined to do but more inclined to read or consume.
Does that explain it better for you? I'm not really sure how to explain it better than that.
I can see some complaints there. I'm assuming you're speaking about the general topic of the thread? And I agree - I mentioned that briefly in a post. It would suck to find out that the usual debugging commands have gone missing. However, my above post, was mostly in response to those likening this to systemd. With systemd, well, I've just needed to learn a few new commands and I'm okay with that part of it. I, too, have been around computers for a very long time. I've always had to learn new things.
But, back to what you're saying - I am pretty sure we're in agreement. I really want stuff like netstat to be in my base install. I also kind of want htop and whois installed by default too. I also want them to be consistent across the board. I haven't looked deeply but hopefully Debian doesn't play around too much. Doing so would be a slow march towards obscurity and, frankly, I don't want that. Even though I don't generally use Debian, I want them to succeed because a rising tide raises all ships.
As for your worries that we become complacent, that's applicable everywhere and with almost everything. These are no different and suffer the same potentials - namely harming people due to ignorance or greed or whatnot. This is true in most everything. Even too much oxygen is deadly. Most anything can be used to kill and we must always remain vigilant.
I see no evidence to suggest that the two in question are remarkably dissimilar than others and I see no reason to hold back progress just because people are afraid. There's lots of things we've done, as a species, that would have never been done at all if the people who were afraid were in control. There were people who decried the telephone, the automobile, the computer, the internet, singing, dancing, music, etc... Yet we can say that they've all been of benefit to more people than they've harmed.
It's not that I want to change your mind (who the hell am I to do that?) but that I don't understand you and usually I do. It's like finding out that someone you know is actually a believer in Scientology and yet you've known them for years. Something like that, at any rate.