Let's use this to our advantage. Find a way to make vitamins and vaccines long lived and embed them into plastics. Then make all the plastic producers mix them into everything. We can finally eradicate Measles and there is nothing the encephaletic anti-vaxers can do about it!
"You should believe in God once you can establish a practical purpose to such a belief. If that believe enables you to build skyscrapers, harvest crops, whatever."
This sounds like you are deciding what you believe based on what it can get you. How does that work? I don't think it does. I think it's just self delusion.
There is only one reality. Every proposition must be either true or false. If "believing" something that is false gets one something that is all well and good but it doesn't change what really does or does not exist nor what really did or did not happen.
Also, determining that "believing X will get me what I want" may cause me to want to believe X. If however I have seen Y or at least evidence of Y which conflicts with X then I know that X is not true. It doesn't matter what I want to be true, I know it. I can act like X is true but it's really just a self delusion. Perhaps if I avoid all evidence for Y and try really hard not to think about what I have seen I can eventually force my brain to push the fact that I really know X is false down into my subconscious so that on some level I do believe in X.
Semantics, Semantics Some people use the following definitions:
Agnostic = I don't KNOW that there is/is not some sort of god Atheist = I am CERTAIN that there is no god
Others use the following: Atheist = I have researched the question and lack a belief that there is a god Agnostic = I don't really know anything about the argument one way or the other They would add a third word, Antitheist to describe someone who is certain that there is not god.
The first set is most often (but not exclusively) used by religious people. It's easier for them to argue against atheists if they can create a strawman argument that the atheist is claiming to have personal knowledge that in all of reality there is no being that might fit any definition of the word god.
The second set is often used by atheists who spend or have spent a lot of time researching the evidence. Usually this is because they used to be religious themselves therefore the question is important to them. Often time having read the Bible and/or Quran several times as well as read many books on science, evolution, apollogetics, etc.. they find the label agnostic to be rather offensive. This is because taking it back to it's root words it literally means "lacking knowledge". Many atheists are not lacking knowledge at all and in fact are often more knowledgeable about religion than many of religion's so-called believers.
This does not mean that the atheist is claiming to have an absolute personal knowledge that no god exists. It only means that they know the evidence that has been put forth for and against and find the evidence for to be lacking.
Hah! By that definition, which version of Windows has Microsoft even 100% implemented?
Seriously though, why would you want them to do this? If developers have a choice, spend time developing some barely known, barely used part of windows X that hardly anyone cares about or implement some important feature of Windows Y that will allow some popular, important application to start working... do you really want them to chose the X?
I suspect that what you really want is for YOUR favorite application to work. Have you contributed anything towards making that happen? Have you documented how it fails and submitted a review to WineHQ? Have you submitted any code to Wine yourself?
If you can't do that you could at least send a message to the authors of the program you want to run. I would buy your software if... One person will not make a difference but one person alone can't write Wine either. Imagine if all software developers tested their produce in Wine and made adjustments before releasing! Or.. they could just build native Linux versions in the first place. Whichever floats their boat...
Being able to understand something that someone is explaining to you is NOT the same thing as figuring it out for yourself.
Just because you think you understand the dumbed down version that you were taught in your high school physics class does not mean that living in a time where no-one on the planet had already discovered relativity you could have pulled it out of a stack of experimental data, thought experiment and logic all by yourself.
Likewise just because you can explain it in such a way that a 9-year old might get the basic idea does NOT mean that a 9-year old could have discovered the whole thing by his/her self. And, if it did that would only set a lower limit on Einstein's intelligence although it might set an upper limit on that of his contemporaries who did not discover relativity.
People should try to teach their kids as much as they can. They really do learn more, easier when they are young. If you encourage their curiosity while they are young they will grow up to be smart people. If you act like everything is too complicated they will grow up to be your typical unscientific moron. It only makes sense, their brains are much more plastic at younger ages.
My daughter learned probably learned more science between the ages of 2 and 4 than most learn up through Junior high just because when she asks a question I give her a real answer. Also she loves to sit down together and research the things she finds interesting on Google.
These informal lessons get harder once keeping up with the set school curriculum becomes more demanding. She is 7 now and already bringing home daily homework making our 'informal lessons' much less frequent but I can still see the difference in her compared to kids whose parents just assumed they wouldn't understand things and didn't try to teach them.
Or.. it may just signal to patent trolls that if you have a case pending in East Texas (where you probably already one just based on location) you must continue with it no matter what. Otherwise they might get you from somewhere that the courts are less corrupt.
There is an open source Flash implementation but it is very incomplete. My understanding is that it can be used to view some subset of Flash videos and not much else.
There is Flash for Android although it is no longer supported and hasn't been updated in a few years. I'm not sure if it can even be installed in current Android versions or not. I don't think that it can. I know it wouldn't install on my 'latest' phone which is actually from 2013!
I'm pretty sure that outdated, discontinued Android apk is the only commonly available Flash support for ARM. As closed source software it's not like you are going to port it over to Rasbian or any other distro/OS either.
There may be some single purpose ARM devices out there like internet TVs or something. Those will be specifically built for that device and hidden away inside of a ROM chip. It's not like you are going to copy it out and run it on your Raspi.
- Closed Source Software: Most closed source software requires x86. Sure there isn't much of that for Linux but there is some, especially for niche applications. Also... Wine. Don't tell me Wine isn't usable.. I've used it.
- Flash: Thankfully the days when most of the content on the web required Flash are finally over. Good Fckng ridden! But.. there is still some crap out there that requires it. You can certainly live without that but if you really want to say you have access to the whole internet... nothing beats an x86.
- One Platform: Your desktop and/or laptop are almost 100% likely to be an x86. There's something to be said for using the same platform everywhere. Want to play around with bare metal programming on an SBC? Learn that on this thing and now you know low-level programming for 99% of desktops. Learn it on a Pi and you know low-level programming for... a Pi.
- Choice: Discounting Windows since that's what this post is about, still probably more than 99% of other OS/distributions available are for x86. The Pi can run... a strange version of Debian and a strange version of Gentoo.
- Long Term Support: Arm platforms aren't standardized the way x86 ones are. What will you do with your IoT project after Rasbian has moved to some future, incompatible Pi version and your board is no longer supported? IoT projects are appliances. They should just work. Once they do just work they should continue to do so. It's not like your desktop, after building your 'smarthouse' full of IoT devices based on Raspi do you relly want to have to replace all those Raspis? Or.. with them all connected to your network do you really want to keep running old, no longer secure software? Do you want to support updating them yourself?
It's hard to imagine the day when you can't get an easy update for x86 Linux free off the internet.
??? It was a 6% increase. Was that a typo that was supposed to read 6 - 7%?
Anyway, I'm not sure it matters. Look at the graph. It's not linear it's exponential. If that trend keeps up I would expect much more than 6 to 7% increases in the coming years.
That's just stupidity. To make a good analogy for Slashdot that's like saying the internet shouldn't have high bandwidth backbone lines because you can't run one to each and every user's house.
You don't need 50 LONG HAUL trucks traveling clear across the continent when you can have 1 train traveling to a distribution center where 50 SHORT HAUL trucks then distribute those goods to 50 LOCAL grocery stores.
I've even seen trains which were actually made up of flat cars with a semi trailer on each flat car. All they needed was a local driver at the train stop to then hitch up to the trailer and take it the last mile.
Unfortunately that is the exception to the rule. Here in the US at least railroad lines are constantly getting closed down and tore up. Instead we are getting more and more long distance trucks on the road choking up our air and, slowing down our freeways and breaking apart our taxpayer funded asphalt.
The one thing I would grant for using long haul trucks is that if sanity did somehow sneak it's way into our system and we started transitioning back to trains we should take it slowly so that we aren't flooding the workforce with too many unemployed drivers all at once.
It's a complicate two-sided situation. Remember thalidomide... sure, remember it. Also remember that while a medicine is in testing, not yet available to the public real people are suffering and even dying. Those people that die waiting for a cure... they aren't coming back... EVER!
Beyond all that the longer and more beurocratic you make the process the more expensive it is. No, I'm not arguing money over lives but that money could be used to save more lives. The cost of testing is either passed on to patients meaning some will not be able to afford treatment or it is pulled out of R&D meaning some other medicine never gets discovered. Either way.. more death and suffering.
What is needed is a proper balance. From the outside it does not appear that there currently is such a thing. Instead it appears that the medical field has gone from a period of overactive optimism jumping on unfounded treatments like thalidomide, lobotomies, leaches, etc... to an overly pessimistic period where everything that might have one day saved your life will instead be bogged down in decades of expensive and unproductive bureaucracy.
You might want to argue that this is untrue and that we do have a good balance today. If so please, do so and explain why you believe that. Simply explaining one side of it though, either side without acknowledging the other isn't very convincing.
"What you lose is remote x display but you weren't using that anyway." - Actually I do use that as well I just got sick of arguing that one and decided not to mention it. I use remote X at home on a terminal in my workshop, SSH + VNC from other places. It's great so long as I don't want sound.
"Also yes your complaint is perfectly valid but that's the "unix way"
I suppose. Actually.. I wouldn't mind having separate applications but wrapping a GUI around them. Just look at how Remmina wraps itself around vncclient and ssh to make tunneling less painful. It's not as easy as using Remote Desktop with it's built in encryption but it's good enough for me.
My problem is that there isn't really any equivalent client for sound. I always thought that was because X has the DISPLAY environment variable. Even if multiple people are logging in from multiple places, if things are set up right they each inherit a DISPLAY variable that automagically directs any GUI they run to their own X server or VNC client.
Even with audio servers like Arts and eSound there wasn't anything like that. You had to tell each application as you run it where to send the sound. That sucked!
I guess Pulse Audio is supposed to do something like this. It seems to work for multiple LOCAL sessions. That I find just annoying. I used to sometimes do things like Ctrl-Alt-F1 to a terminal to run pianobar or mpg123 and then Ctrl-Alt-F... back to X. Ok, there was never a real reason for me to do that but I just liked to sometimes. Now it silences as soon as you switch back because it 'knows' the session with the music player is not the currently visible one. Why would I want it to do that? Pianobar is certainly just fine heard but not seen!
On the other hand.. if I log in with a remote session... I have never seen it automatically know this and forward audio on to my local client like X would. I see hints that it is supposed to work there... there is some sort of X Pulse Audio plugin. I've tried all sorts of fiddling with PulseAudio configuration and have never managed to make it work though. At this point I don't think it does. I think Pulse's developers are fixated on some strange use case where a bunch of people are sharing a Linux desktop, none of them ever log off and they like to keep noisy things running.
I suspect remote operation was intended but never really debugged/fleshed out for Pulse. Probably, there is a generational issue where the kids have an allergy to remote access because they all prefer to just run crap locally on their tablets anyway... It's probably the same one affecting the Wayland devs.
I use Linux on the desktop and 90% of this stuff does not affect me. But.. what really gets on my nerves... remote desktop support.
Sure there is VNC but VNC has no sound! I guess Pulse can do it... That's what I keep reading but I can't make it work no matter how hard I try. Even if Pulse actually can provide remote sound.. (which I am begining to thing requires a visit from the friendly ghost of Leonert Poettering himself) it should be seamless with the remote desktop app to be considered good enough for 2001 (let alone 2016). Look how easy it is in Windows! Check the fucking box and it works. That's what I want to see in Linux.
Yes, there have been other sound servers over the years, eSound, aRts. I remember eSound even having a java client so I could hear my Linux Desktop from someone's Mac or Windows box. So what... they still were not (click a box) integrated AND they were only supported in certain applications.
Once upon a time, when I was first switching to Linux I was super impressed by remote X display. Windows had no native remote desktop back then, you had to pay a bunch of money to PC Anywhere to get that. Linux was light years ahead in my eyes in that it ran over the network natively.
What the hell happened? All those years, Windows gets Remote Desktop which seamlessly incorporates sound AND on terminal servers even separates the sounds by login session. I can log in to Windows remotely while a buddy does the same and we can listen to separate sounds on our respective terminals.
Linux has what? VNC plus PulseAudio? WTF?
I could rant about VNC not having built in encryption too. I guess RealVNC has it.. for a price. I think TightVNC can do SSL but you have to use the Java client. That sucks. At least SSH tunneling gives me a solution to that though. Still waiting for such a simple sound solution.
Alas... Linux seems to be finally changing on this front. IN THE WRONG FUCKING DIRECTION! Now we are supposed to be switching to Wayland and relying on each respective desktop environment to independantly invent and implement a remote protocol for us to use?
I think the Linux Desktop is in the process of self destructing. Where to now?
Glass won't be a successful product unti the price is reasonable.
There are plenty of reasons that something like Glass would be useful. I want one and I'm not even interested in taking your picture.
It's anoying though that so many people are so offended by a wearable computer because all they can see is a camera. I used to have friends that really liked to fight. If I ever get Glass maybe I'll look them back up. I can be their bait. I'll sit on my bar stool enjoying my drink and minding my own business. Nobody will know who I am with until some douchebag decides he has to do something about the technology in his presence.
You really had to run off to OSX because of Systemd? I call BS.
First, there are still distros that do not use Systemd. Sure, switching distros might involve a learning curve but you just switched operating systems!
Second, While I mainly use Gentoo I just spent a couple months with playing with other distros on my laptop. I had desktops set up in both Debian Jessie and Ubuntu. I wasn't quite sure... was Ubuntu using Systemd or Upstart? Yeah.. that's how much it mattered for desktop use... not at all!
Eventually I switched back to Gentoo and good old OpenRC but it wasn't because of Systemd not working. I went back to Gentoo for reasons that had nothing to do with init and OpenRC only because it's what I know best.
Why did I bother switching away? Gentoo lets you have things your way. I mean.. really really your way. After figuring out what all my favorites were back in about 2001 Gentoo never really made me change them. It just happily builds the latest releases of all that old software. I had to switch away for a while to get a better feel of what is out there so that I could come back and set up a less ancient feeling desktop! Once I came back I just had to 'emerge' my 'perfect' combination of my new and old favorites. Now I am good to go again for a while.
So.. if there is something you won't let them take away until they pry it from your cold dead hands... like your favorite init system... just switch over to Gentoo, not OSX! WTF were you thinking?
Oh.. and compiling isn't really a big deal. Just do it in the background in a screen session. If you want to use your computer before you even have the base system compile that's doable too. Skip the Gentoo CD and use your favorite Linux Live CD. Yes, you can build Gentoo from there... inside screen... while you use all those desktop apps anyway. You can even set your builds to a high nice level if you are afraid that background building will interfere with your computer use although I rarely find it necessary to do so even on my nearly fossilized hardware.
It doesn't sound like there is much you can do. But.. you could just filter your email so that this particular error report, when their particular ip is attached goes straight to trash.
Oh please, the cost to maintain and backup a database... Distributed among millions of users.. all of them with less than 1kB of data in the database...
"Especially at government service rates."
Yes.. that's my point exactly. Those government service rates are jacked up. Any time rates are jacked up somebody is pocketing the money.
"so that miscreant drone operators can be held accountable"
And you are calling me stupid? If someone doesn't know or doesn't care that they shouldn't be using a drone near an airport, over a crowd, etc... why the fuck would they know or care that they are required to register? This is just another money grab and only just another money grab. There is no value in a drone registry. Well.. unless maybe you are an advertiser.
A drone registry is a way that politicians can do the two things they do best. Appease ignorant voters and suck money.
Just put it somewhere in coal country. You don't even need to dig, just pour it right into the local wells. The locals won't mind, they will fiercely defend you so long as you employ them to do it.
The screens are pretty nice. Obviously there is no comparison to the big screen but the quality is better than most old CRT TVs. You might miss some detail though simply because it is too small to notice. I watch movies and tv shows on my cellphone all the time. So long as I am watching for the story and not for the effects it's just fine.
But the sound...
The sound of any cellphone is shit. Stereo? Even if you have a left and a right speaker in your cellphone there is no separation. They would have to be closer together than your ears are! Stereo does not work that way.
Fortunately though watching stuff on a cellphone is almost universaly a solitary experience. Two people just aren't going to want to share such a small screen. So.. use headphones.
How much does it cost to generate a number and keep it in a database? I'm thinking it's somewhere less than a penny. The rest of that $5 is profit. Now multiply it by how many registrations there are likely to be over the life of this absurd law...
No, speakers pretty much still look like speakers. Well.. we do have a lot of ultra-portable equipment around like our phones and tablets which have flat speakers. Those all sound like shit though. If you open up anything with a half-way decent sound and look inside a speaker is still a cone with a magnet on the end. Don't open your stuff up? Do you have a car? Can't you see the speakers from underneath every time you open your trunk?
Slashdot Mirror
Let's use this to our advantage. Find a way to make vitamins and vaccines long lived and embed them into plastics. Then make all the plastic producers mix them into everything. We can finally eradicate Measles and there is nothing the encephaletic anti-vaxers can do about it!
If you believe that you know something is true but you also believe that it is unknowable then either you are lying to yourself or you are insane.
No, under your definitions at least you cannot be an agnostic theist.
"You should believe in God once you can establish a practical purpose to such a belief. If that believe enables you to build skyscrapers, harvest crops, whatever."
This sounds like you are deciding what you believe based on what it can get you. How does that work? I don't think it does. I think it's just self delusion.
There is only one reality. Every proposition must be either true or false. If "believing" something that is false gets one something that is all well and good but it doesn't change what really does or does not exist nor what really did or did not happen.
Also, determining that "believing X will get me what I want" may cause me to want to believe X. If however I have seen Y or at least evidence of Y which conflicts with X then I know that X is not true. It doesn't matter what I want to be true, I know it. I can act like X is true but it's really just a self delusion. Perhaps if I avoid all evidence for Y and try really hard not to think about what I have seen I can eventually force my brain to push the fact that I really know X is false down into my subconscious so that on some level I do believe in X.
But... is that healthy?
NO!
Semantics, Semantics
Some people use the following definitions:
Agnostic = I don't KNOW that there is/is not some sort of god
Atheist = I am CERTAIN that there is no god
Others use the following:
Atheist = I have researched the question and lack a belief that there is a god
Agnostic = I don't really know anything about the argument one way or the other
They would add a third word, Antitheist to describe someone who is certain that there is not god.
The first set is most often (but not exclusively) used by religious people. It's easier for them to argue against atheists if they can create a strawman argument that the atheist is claiming to have personal knowledge that in all of reality there is no being that might fit any definition of the word god.
The second set is often used by atheists who spend or have spent a lot of time researching the evidence. Usually this is because they used to be religious themselves therefore the question is important to them. Often time having read the Bible and/or Quran several times as well as read many books on science, evolution, apollogetics, etc.. they find the label agnostic to be rather offensive. This is because taking it back to it's root words it literally means "lacking knowledge". Many atheists are not lacking knowledge at all and in fact are often more knowledgeable about religion than many of religion's so-called believers.
This does not mean that the atheist is claiming to have an absolute personal knowledge that no god exists. It only means that they know the evidence that has been put forth for and against and find the evidence for to be lacking.
Hah! By that definition, which version of Windows has Microsoft even 100% implemented?
Seriously though, why would you want them to do this? If developers have a choice, spend time developing some barely known, barely used part of windows X that hardly anyone cares about or implement some important feature of Windows Y that will allow some popular, important application to start working... do you really want them to chose the X?
I suspect that what you really want is for YOUR favorite application to work. Have you contributed anything towards making that happen? Have you documented how it fails and submitted a review to WineHQ? Have you submitted any code to Wine yourself?
If you can't do that you could at least send a message to the authors of the program you want to run. I would buy your software if... One person will not make a difference but one person alone can't write Wine either. Imagine if all software developers tested their produce in Wine and made adjustments before releasing! Or.. they could just build native Linux versions in the first place. Whichever floats their boat...
That's just plain stupid.
Being able to understand something that someone is explaining to you is NOT the same thing as figuring it out for yourself.
Just because you think you understand the dumbed down version that you were taught in your high school physics class does not mean that living in a time where no-one on the planet had already discovered relativity you could have pulled it out of a stack of experimental data, thought experiment and logic all by yourself.
Likewise just because you can explain it in such a way that a 9-year old might get the basic idea does NOT mean that a 9-year old could have discovered the whole thing by his/her self. And, if it did that would only set a lower limit on Einstein's intelligence although it might set an upper limit on that of his contemporaries who did not discover relativity.
People should try to teach their kids as much as they can. They really do learn more, easier when they are young. If you encourage their curiosity while they are young they will grow up to be smart people. If you act like everything is too complicated they will grow up to be your typical unscientific moron. It only makes sense, their brains are much more plastic at younger ages.
My daughter learned probably learned more science between the ages of 2 and 4 than most learn up through Junior high just because when she asks a question I give her a real answer. Also she loves to sit down together and research the things she finds interesting on Google.
These informal lessons get harder once keeping up with the set school curriculum becomes more demanding. She is 7 now and already bringing home daily homework making our 'informal lessons' much less frequent but I can still see the difference in her compared to kids whose parents just assumed they wouldn't understand things and didn't try to teach them.
Or.. it may just signal to patent trolls that if you have a case pending in East Texas (where you probably already one just based on location) you must continue with it no matter what. Otherwise they might get you from somewhere that the courts are less corrupt.
There is an open source Flash implementation but it is very incomplete. My understanding is that it can be used to view some subset of Flash videos and not much else.
There is Flash for Android although it is no longer supported and hasn't been updated in a few years. I'm not sure if it can even be installed in current Android versions or not. I don't think that it can. I know it wouldn't install on my 'latest' phone which is actually from 2013!
I'm pretty sure that outdated, discontinued Android apk is the only commonly available Flash support for ARM. As closed source software it's not like you are going to port it over to Rasbian or any other distro/OS either.
There may be some single purpose ARM devices out there like internet TVs or something. Those will be specifically built for that device and hidden away inside of a ROM chip. It's not like you are going to copy it out and run it on your Raspi.
- Closed Source Software: Most closed source software requires x86. Sure there isn't much of that for Linux but there is some, especially for niche applications. Also... Wine. Don't tell me Wine isn't usable.. I've used it.
- Flash: Thankfully the days when most of the content on the web required Flash are finally over. Good Fckng ridden! But.. there is still some crap out there that requires it. You can certainly live without that but if you really want to say you have access to the whole internet... nothing beats an x86.
- One Platform: Your desktop and/or laptop are almost 100% likely to be an x86. There's something to be said for using the same platform everywhere. Want to play around with bare metal programming on an SBC? Learn that on this thing and now you know low-level programming for 99% of desktops. Learn it on a Pi and you know low-level programming for... a Pi.
- Choice: Discounting Windows since that's what this post is about, still probably more than 99% of other OS/distributions available are for x86. The Pi can run... a strange version of Debian and a strange version of Gentoo.
- Long Term Support: Arm platforms aren't standardized the way x86 ones are. What will you do with your IoT project after Rasbian has moved to some future, incompatible Pi version and your board is no longer supported? IoT projects are appliances. They should just work. Once they do just work they should continue to do so. It's not like your desktop, after building your 'smarthouse' full of IoT devices based on Raspi do you relly want to have to replace all those Raspis? Or.. with them all connected to your network do you really want to keep running old, no longer secure software? Do you want to support updating them yourself?
It's hard to imagine the day when you can't get an easy update for x86 Linux free off the internet.
They will no when someone other than the government figures out the back door and makes off with their identities.
"if a 67% increase per year"
??? It was a 6% increase. Was that a typo that was supposed to read 6 - 7%?
Anyway, I'm not sure it matters. Look at the graph. It's not linear it's exponential. If that trend keeps up I would expect much more than 6 to 7% increases in the coming years.
That's just stupidity. To make a good analogy for Slashdot that's like saying the internet shouldn't have high bandwidth backbone lines because you can't run one to each and every user's house.
You don't need 50 LONG HAUL trucks traveling clear across the continent when you can have 1 train traveling to a distribution center where 50 SHORT HAUL trucks then distribute those goods to 50 LOCAL grocery stores.
I've even seen trains which were actually made up of flat cars with a semi trailer on each flat car. All they needed was a local driver at the train stop to then hitch up to the trailer and take it the last mile.
Unfortunately that is the exception to the rule. Here in the US at least railroad lines are constantly getting closed down and tore up. Instead we are getting more and more long distance trucks on the road choking up our air and, slowing down our freeways and breaking apart our taxpayer funded asphalt.
The one thing I would grant for using long haul trucks is that if sanity did somehow sneak it's way into our system and we started transitioning back to trains we should take it slowly so that we aren't flooding the workforce with too many unemployed drivers all at once.
It's a complicate two-sided situation. Remember thalidomide... sure, remember it. Also remember that while a medicine is in testing, not yet available to the public real people are suffering and even dying. Those people that die waiting for a cure... they aren't coming back... EVER!
Beyond all that the longer and more beurocratic you make the process the more expensive it is. No, I'm not arguing money over lives but that money could be used to save more lives. The cost of testing is either passed on to patients meaning some will not be able to afford treatment or it is pulled out of R&D meaning some other medicine never gets discovered. Either way.. more death and suffering.
What is needed is a proper balance. From the outside it does not appear that there currently is such a thing. Instead it appears that the medical field has gone from a period of overactive optimism jumping on unfounded treatments like thalidomide, lobotomies, leaches, etc... to an overly pessimistic period where everything that might have one day saved your life will instead be bogged down in decades of expensive and unproductive bureaucracy.
You might want to argue that this is untrue and that we do have a good balance today. If so please, do so and explain why you believe that. Simply explaining one side of it though, either side without acknowledging the other isn't very convincing.
"What you lose is remote x display but you weren't using that anyway." - Actually I do use that as well I just got sick of arguing that one and decided not to mention it. I use remote X at home on a terminal in my workshop, SSH + VNC from other places. It's great so long as I don't want sound.
"Also yes your complaint is perfectly valid but that's the "unix way"
I suppose. Actually.. I wouldn't mind having separate applications but wrapping a GUI around them. Just look at how Remmina wraps itself around vncclient and ssh to make tunneling less painful. It's not as easy as using Remote Desktop with it's built in encryption but it's good enough for me.
My problem is that there isn't really any equivalent client for sound. I always thought that was because X has the DISPLAY environment variable. Even if multiple people are logging in from multiple places, if things are set up right they each inherit a DISPLAY variable that automagically directs any GUI they run to their own X server or VNC client.
Even with audio servers like Arts and eSound there wasn't anything like that. You had to tell each application as you run it where to send the sound. That sucked!
I guess Pulse Audio is supposed to do something like this. It seems to work for multiple LOCAL sessions. That I find just annoying. I used to sometimes do things like Ctrl-Alt-F1 to a terminal to run pianobar or mpg123 and then Ctrl-Alt-F... back to X. Ok, there was never a real reason for me to do that but I just liked to sometimes. Now it silences as soon as you switch back because it 'knows' the session with the music player is not the currently visible one. Why would I want it to do that? Pianobar is certainly just fine heard but not seen!
On the other hand.. if I log in with a remote session... I have never seen it automatically know this and forward audio on to my local client like X would. I see hints that it is supposed to work there... there is some sort of X Pulse Audio plugin. I've tried all sorts of fiddling with PulseAudio configuration and have never managed to make it work though. At this point I don't think it does. I think Pulse's developers are fixated on some strange use case where a bunch of people are sharing a Linux desktop, none of them ever log off and they like to keep noisy things running.
I suspect remote operation was intended but never really debugged/fleshed out for Pulse. Probably, there is a generational issue where the kids have an allergy to remote access because they all prefer to just run crap locally on their tablets anyway... It's probably the same one affecting the Wayland devs.
I use Linux on the desktop and 90% of this stuff does not affect me. But.. what really gets on my nerves... remote desktop support.
Sure there is VNC but VNC has no sound! I guess Pulse can do it... That's what I keep reading but I can't make it work no matter how hard I try. Even if Pulse actually can provide remote sound.. (which I am begining to thing requires a visit from the friendly ghost of Leonert Poettering himself) it should be seamless with the remote desktop app to be considered good enough for 2001 (let alone 2016). Look how easy it is in Windows! Check the fucking box and it works. That's what I want to see in Linux.
Yes, there have been other sound servers over the years, eSound, aRts. I remember eSound even having a java client so I could hear my Linux Desktop from someone's Mac or Windows box. So what... they still were not (click a box) integrated AND they were only supported in certain applications.
Once upon a time, when I was first switching to Linux I was super impressed by remote X display. Windows had no native remote desktop back then, you had to pay a bunch of money to PC Anywhere to get that. Linux was light years ahead in my eyes in that it ran over the network natively.
What the hell happened? All those years, Windows gets Remote Desktop which seamlessly incorporates sound AND on terminal servers even separates the sounds by login session. I can log in to Windows remotely while a buddy does the same and we can listen to separate sounds on our respective terminals.
Linux has what? VNC plus PulseAudio? WTF?
I could rant about VNC not having built in encryption too. I guess RealVNC has it.. for a price. I think TightVNC can do SSL but you have to use the Java client. That sucks. At least SSH tunneling gives me a solution to that though. Still waiting for such a simple sound solution.
Alas... Linux seems to be finally changing on this front. IN THE WRONG FUCKING DIRECTION! Now we are supposed to be switching to Wayland and relying on each respective desktop environment to independantly invent and implement a remote protocol for us to use?
I think the Linux Desktop is in the process of self destructing. Where to now?
Glass won't be a successful product unti the price is reasonable.
There are plenty of reasons that something like Glass would be useful. I want one and I'm not even interested in taking your picture.
It's anoying though that so many people are so offended by a wearable computer because all they can see is a camera. I used to have friends that really liked to fight. If I ever get Glass maybe I'll look them back up. I can be their bait. I'll sit on my bar stool enjoying my drink and minding my own business. Nobody will know who I am with until some douchebag decides he has to do something about the technology in his presence.
It will be fun!
You really had to run off to OSX because of Systemd? I call BS.
First, there are still distros that do not use Systemd. Sure, switching distros might involve a learning curve but you just switched operating systems!
Second, While I mainly use Gentoo I just spent a couple months with playing with other distros on my laptop. I had desktops set up in both Debian Jessie and Ubuntu. I wasn't quite sure... was Ubuntu using Systemd or Upstart? Yeah.. that's how much it mattered for desktop use... not at all!
Eventually I switched back to Gentoo and good old OpenRC but it wasn't because of Systemd not working. I went back to Gentoo for reasons that had nothing to do with init and OpenRC only because it's what I know best.
Why did I bother switching away? Gentoo lets you have things your way. I mean.. really really your way. After figuring out what all my favorites were back in about 2001 Gentoo never really made me change them. It just happily builds the latest releases of all that old software. I had to switch away for a while to get a better feel of what is out there so that I could come back and set up a less ancient feeling desktop! Once I came back I just had to 'emerge' my 'perfect' combination of my new and old favorites. Now I am good to go again for a while.
So.. if there is something you won't let them take away until they pry it from your cold dead hands... like your favorite init system... just switch over to Gentoo, not OSX! WTF were you thinking?
Oh.. and compiling isn't really a big deal. Just do it in the background in a screen session. If you want to use your computer before you even have the base system compile that's doable too. Skip the Gentoo CD and use your favorite Linux Live CD. Yes, you can build Gentoo from there... inside screen... while you use all those desktop apps anyway. You can even set your builds to a high nice level if you are afraid that background building will interfere with your computer use although I rarely find it necessary to do so even on my nearly fossilized hardware.
It doesn't sound like there is much you can do. But.. you could just filter your email so that this particular error report, when their particular ip is attached goes straight to trash.
Oh please, the cost to maintain and backup a database...
Distributed among millions of users.. all of them with less than 1kB of data in the database...
"Especially at government service rates."
Yes.. that's my point exactly. Those government service rates are jacked up. Any time rates are jacked up somebody is pocketing the money.
"so that miscreant drone operators can be held accountable"
And you are calling me stupid? If someone doesn't know or doesn't care that they shouldn't be using a drone near an airport, over a crowd, etc... why the fuck would they know or care that they are required to register? This is just another money grab and only just another money grab. There is no value in a drone registry. Well.. unless maybe you are an advertiser.
A drone registry is a way that politicians can do the two things they do best. Appease ignorant voters and suck money.
Just put it somewhere in coal country. You don't even need to dig, just pour it right into the local wells. The locals won't mind, they will fiercely defend you so long as you employ them to do it.
You had me until the speakers.
The screens are pretty nice. Obviously there is no comparison to the big screen but the quality is better than most old CRT TVs. You might miss some detail though simply because it is too small to notice. I watch movies and tv shows on my cellphone all the time. So long as I am watching for the story and not for the effects it's just fine.
But the sound...
The sound of any cellphone is shit. Stereo? Even if you have a left and a right speaker in your cellphone there is no separation. They would have to be closer together than your ears are! Stereo does not work that way.
Fortunately though watching stuff on a cellphone is almost universaly a solitary experience. Two people just aren't going to want to share such a small screen. So.. use headphones.
How much does it cost to generate a number and keep it in a database? I'm thinking it's somewhere less than a penny. The rest of that $5 is profit. Now multiply it by how many registrations there are likely to be over the life of this absurd law...
No, speakers pretty much still look like speakers. Well.. we do have a lot of ultra-portable equipment around like our phones and tablets which have flat speakers. Those all sound like shit though. If you open up anything with a half-way decent sound and look inside a speaker is still a cone with a magnet on the end. Don't open your stuff up? Do you have a car? Can't you see the speakers from underneath every time you open your trunk?
Tomorowland is a documentary to you isn't it?