Re:They should stick with C
on
The GNOME Roadmap
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I feel just the opposite. I think Gnome's interface is elegant and KDE's inteface, while very colorful, it cluttered and knobby.
I can't put my finger on what it is, but there is something about KDE's interface that makes me angry. That may sound dumb, but I can only use KDE for a short while because it is emotionally exhausting to me and always leaves me feeling irritated.
KDE does many things right it my opinion (for example, their support for multiple keyboard layouts is excellent), but something about KDE is emotionally draining to me so I don't use it.
The problem with home clothes steamers is that they don't actually get rid of wrinkles, but rather uniformly wrinkle the clothes; albeit with smaller wrinkles.
Wouldn't the result be the same if one used this "robot"?
It would appear it is a combination of the weight of an iron, or press, and the heat that presses out the wrinkles, not just the heat alone.
I think the license is just the last straw. By itself, the license may not been that big a deal, but the XFree86 leadership has been doing a lot to piss off developers, avoid enhancements, and turn XFree86 into a stagnant project for quite a while now.
My drive casing came with a power cord that you can plug into the keyboard socket if you run into this problem. So far though, I haven't needed to use it.
I currently am using a 40GB laptop drive in a USB case. it is about the size of a deck of cards (just a bit longer) and requires no exteral power source. It is really handy.
Of course, it would even be better if it was smaller, so I can already feel that compulsive twitch in my hand as it dives for my wallet to fork over some bucks for one of these.
I installed Core 2 on an AMD 1800+ dual processor machine and on an AMD_64 machine. While my experience has been slightly different on each machine, neither one has been bad.
Everything installed as expected and works as expected. I have not been able to get my NVidia card to work in 3D mode, but my ATI card was detected and set up correctly by Core 2.
One of my machines had to be in Japanese. Core 2 performed this installation without a hitch (which is a lot more than I can say for SuSE 9.1. It failed miserably).
I don't normally like RPM based distributions, but Core 2 has been fine so far.
I realize that there are some bugs people have run into, but everything has worked great for me on my machines. SuSE 9.1 was a disaster on both of my machines (old packages, Japanese installation fails to find any packages to install, sound didn't work, several programs core dumped on me, etc.) so maybe after that experience, anything that worked would look good.
Finally, I like Gnome 2.6 quite well, and after using the new spatial nautilus for a week or so, I think I like it that way better.
I look at the "popular" music today and can't help but think, don't any of these bands actually know how to play their instruments anymore? Where's the talent.
It is at this point that I recall Ringo Star and bands like The Monkeys. Perhaps it has always been this way.
But, then I remember the musical genius of bands like Yes, ELP, Rush, etc., and think to myself, where are bands like that today? I guess there are some, but you never hear them on the radio.
My opinion is we should use up all the oil until there isn't a blasted drop left on this planet, and we should do it as quickly as possible. Only then can this tired, pointless, and self-righteous bickering be put to rest.
But alas, it won't be. Once the oil is gone, then every pomped up pontificator will turn their sites on flushing toilets and carbon dioxide pollution from walking too fast. Well spend millions on studies to link heavy farting to global warming and all you can eat buffets will be regulated into exinction.
I've owned several Zaurus machines (although only one of them ran Linux) and I've been quite pleased with all of them. They are well built and last a long time.
The Linux based one was a solid machine PLUS it had the ability to satisfy my compulsive need to change things all the time. I also liked the fact that I could use it to SSH into my web server to make changes. Very cool in my opinion.
I would like to offer my thanks to the OpenBSD team here on Slashdot, where it will promptly be lost in hundereds of other posts.
I have used OpenBSD since 2.7 as a firewall, a web server, and a file server. There are a lot of unix-like operating systems out there, but for me, nothing can beat the simplicity and security of OpenBSD in these areas.
I'm also extremely happy with the ease of applying patches on OpenBSD. It makes remote management the easiest thing in the world (well, from a unix perspective anyway).
If you haven't tried OpenBSD, and are looking for an excellent server OS, I highly recommend giving it a try. I would recommend supporting the effort by buying a CD too.
I must say that I completely disagree with your assessment. I believe speech is a vehicle for communication, and that free speech would be more accurately referred to as free communication. I also believe most others, including law, would agree with me.
There are other vehicles of communication that also enjoy the same protected status as speech. A few examples would be music, paintings, pictures, and even pornography to some extent. So this would indicate that it is not speech itself that is protected, but rather the more encompassing concept of communication, which can come in many forms.
Writing computer code is another form of communication. Yes, it can be compiled and run on a computer, and it is also near impossible for the untrained eye to discern its meaning, however, the same could be said of sheet music.
I am a coder as well, and I do not feel that my ability to read and write code should be considered any less of a communication medium than verbal or written speech. Take the source code at hand as an example. I clicked on the link to the code, read it, and now understand how it works. Why should this C# code be considered any less of a communication vehicle than if he wrote a dissertation in English explaining his work in detail? The fact is that it shouldn't. He communicated with many of the Slashdot crowd ideas and concepts that are readily understood by those working in his field of expertise. Is this not communication?
True, code would be considered a different kind of communication, just like speech, art, music, photography, etc., but it should enjoy the same lawful protections extended to other forms of communication.
Even in Utah 45K is low in my opinion. My first job as a tester (in Utah) paid 45K to start and went up to 60K after the six month probation was over. Most developers I know make over 70K - 80K in Utah.
I don't see any reason why a flat tax should have to be any more than %5 to %10 percent. If the government can't operate on that, then they are trying to do more than they should be.
My company has been experimenting with chimps in the HR department for years. Whenever there is a conflict at work, the parties can go complain and have their dispute resolved through the bonding experience of ducking dollops of hurled dung together.
I've been installing and supporting a dead beast of an OS on nice hardware for my clients for years. It only makes sense to install a nice OS on a dead beast for a change.
Yo have the right to your beliefs. What you don't have the right to do is inflict them on others. Your freedom ends where mine starts.
Very interesting. Does it work both ways? Do your rights end where mine start? Why do you have the right to demand that there is no God, but I don't have the right to demand that there is? A lack of belief is still a belief is it not? Why should yours take precedence? The fact of the matter is that it should not.
Judges have the right and the duty to interpret the laws of the land.
That is the key. The right to interpret. However, they have gone beyond that right to make laws by "interpreting" things that were never intended; thus bypassing the law-making process set forth in the constitution.
I don't understand why you would resent this function of the judiciary.
I don't resent the judicial process as it is intended to be, but the system has become corrupt and the judicial branch of the government is out of control. Using sophistry to claim you are "interpreting" the law is still a fraud. Many of our judges are nothing more than chalatans.
Now, if you could show me even one example where a judge has passed a law, as opposed to congress, I would reconsider.
I'll give you a few: 1) Abortion laws. 2) Gun laws. 3) Gay marriage laws (haven't become officially accepted yet, but give it time)
Let's focus for a moment on number two (although we could do the same with the others). Are you honestly trying to claim that the founders of our constitutional right to bear arms really only meant state militias (as one of your valiant judges has "interpreted")? Historical documentation clearly suggests that such is not the case. Sophistry is the act of presenting plausible, but patently false arguments with the intent to deceive. I mean no offense to you personally, but if you believe that judges do not use sophistry to make laws, then clearly these tactics have succeeeded in at least on case.
That's funny (not!). The constitution was written to form the legal basis of the United States of America. This includes the aforementioned seperation of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions.
Sorry I wasn't clear there (although I'm sure you understood my meaning). Just to be clear, you said that the part of the constitution that states that congress shall make no laws regarding religion was the "separation of church and state" part. However, this is not true. This part refers to congress' inability to create the Holy Church of America. Separation of church and state is a fallacy. To paraphrase an old adage, if you tell a lie long enough, people will start to believe it is true. Such it is with the concept of separation of church and state. It sounds good, it even rolls nicely off the tongue, but false it remains.
So, unless you can show me where judges have been given the power to write and pass laws, I have to disagree.
You haven't been paying attention. I never said that judges have been given the power to write and pass laws. They clearly haven't. What I said is that they are making laws in spite of the fact that they have no right whatsoever to do so.
I think evolving language is great, but replace the word fuck with any other adjective (cool, groovy, chic, heavy, hip, hot, etc.) and the utterer of the above sentence still comes across as a rube because he (or perhaps she) can't fumble through their brain for any kind of verbal variety to express their feelings of interest, happiness, fondness, or anything else. It is one dimensional speech and it makes the speaker look likewise.
That is the false doctrine that I'm talking about. This should be evident in the fact that in order to protect your freedom not to be religious, they have made laws that stomp on my right to be religious. Did it ever occur to you that your athiestic views are as offensive to me as my christian views are to you (assuming you are athiest). Why should you get preference? The fact of that matter is that you shouldn't.
Also, the laws that you are referring to were never made by congress, but rather by judges, who have no right to make such laws under the constitution; or otherwise.
As to you final comment. The constitution was written to prevent The Church of America from being formed. Your separation of church and state principle is one founded in sophistry and chicanery. Sorry to be the one to break that to you, but it's true.
I mean no offense to you, but your post stood out, so I'm adding my comment to it.
Personally, the word fuck does not offend me, but rather diminishes the percieved intelligence level of almost any phrase containing it (except for, of course, those rare phrases in which the word is used correctly).
I love listening to a well-formed sentence. Just as fine paintings please the eye, an eloquent phrase can please the ear. However, using the word fuck as a catch all adjective, in my opinion, is to speech what splatter fart-screening a blank canvas is to visual art.
There is also the issue of offense. Some people are offended by the word, so why not have the courtesy, especially on public airwaves, to dip into the cornucopia of other equally effective adjectives to accentuate your speech?
Slang and phrases spoken publicly are naturally assimilated into the collective speech of society. Must we all clothe ourselves in the mental habiliments of the obtuse? I think not.
Slashdot Mirror
I feel just the opposite. I think Gnome's interface is elegant and KDE's inteface, while very colorful, it cluttered and knobby.
I can't put my finger on what it is, but there is something about KDE's interface that makes me angry. That may sound dumb, but I can only use KDE for a short while because it is emotionally exhausting to me and always leaves me feeling irritated.
KDE does many things right it my opinion (for example, their support for multiple keyboard layouts is excellent), but something about KDE is emotionally draining to me so I don't use it.
I've been to SCO and they don't have 2-ply. Their supply is all that college ruled toilet paper that everyone fears.
Man, they are screwing people over everywhere you turn.
The problem with home clothes steamers is that they don't actually get rid of wrinkles, but rather uniformly wrinkle the clothes; albeit with smaller wrinkles.
Wouldn't the result be the same if one used this "robot"?
It would appear it is a combination of the weight of an iron, or press, and the heat that presses out the wrinkles, not just the heat alone.
I think the license is just the last straw. By itself, the license may not been that big a deal, but the XFree86 leadership has been doing a lot to piss off developers, avoid enhancements, and turn XFree86 into a stagnant project for quite a while now.
Richard Dawes probably doesn't care. I think David Dawes should be getting a clue though.
My drive casing came with a power cord that you can plug into the keyboard socket if you run into this problem. So far though, I haven't needed to use it.
I currently am using a 40GB laptop drive in a USB case. it is about the size of a deck of cards (just a bit longer) and requires no exteral power source. It is really handy.
Of course, it would even be better if it was smaller, so I can already feel that compulsive twitch in my hand as it dives for my wallet to fork over some bucks for one of these.
I installed Core 2 on an AMD 1800+ dual processor machine and on an AMD_64 machine. While my experience has been slightly different on each machine, neither one has been bad.
Everything installed as expected and works as expected. I have not been able to get my NVidia card to work in 3D mode, but my ATI card was detected and set up correctly by Core 2.
One of my machines had to be in Japanese. Core 2 performed this installation without a hitch (which is a lot more than I can say for SuSE 9.1. It failed miserably).
I don't normally like RPM based distributions, but Core 2 has been fine so far.
I realize that there are some bugs people have run into, but everything has worked great for me on my machines. SuSE 9.1 was a disaster on both of my machines (old packages, Japanese installation fails to find any packages to install, sound didn't work, several programs core dumped on me, etc.) so maybe after that experience, anything that worked would look good.
Finally, I like Gnome 2.6 quite well, and after using the new spatial nautilus for a week or so, I think I like it that way better.
Is that you Patrick?
If not, I have a buddy you HAVE to meet.
...can I shoot one at my boss so I'll always know where he is, or will it kill him?
Actually, never mind, it seems a win-win situation either way.
I look at the "popular" music today and can't help but think, don't any of these bands actually know how to play their instruments anymore? Where's the talent.
It is at this point that I recall Ringo Star and bands like The Monkeys. Perhaps it has always been this way.
But, then I remember the musical genius of bands like Yes, ELP, Rush, etc., and think to myself, where are bands like that today? I guess there are some, but you never hear them on the radio.
My opinion is we should use up all the oil until there isn't a blasted drop left on this planet, and we should do it as quickly as possible. Only then can this tired, pointless, and self-righteous bickering be put to rest.
But alas, it won't be. Once the oil is gone, then every pomped up pontificator will turn their sites on flushing toilets and carbon dioxide pollution from walking too fast. Well spend millions on studies to link heavy farting to global warming and all you can eat buffets will be regulated into exinction.
I've owned several Zaurus machines (although only one of them ran Linux) and I've been quite pleased with all of them. They are well built and last a long time.
The Linux based one was a solid machine PLUS it had the ability to satisfy my compulsive need to change things all the time. I also liked the fact that I could use it to SSH into my web server to make changes. Very cool in my opinion.
I would like to offer my thanks to the OpenBSD team here on Slashdot, where it will promptly be lost in hundereds of other posts.
I have used OpenBSD since 2.7 as a firewall, a web server, and a file server. There are a lot of unix-like operating systems out there, but for me, nothing can beat the simplicity and security of OpenBSD in these areas.
I'm also extremely happy with the ease of applying patches on OpenBSD. It makes remote management the easiest thing in the world (well, from a unix perspective anyway).
If you haven't tried OpenBSD, and are looking for an excellent server OS, I highly recommend giving it a try. I would recommend supporting the effort by buying a CD too.
I must say that I completely disagree with your assessment. I believe speech is a vehicle for communication, and that free speech would be more accurately referred to as free communication. I also believe most others, including law, would agree with me.
There are other vehicles of communication that also enjoy the same protected status as speech. A few examples would be music, paintings, pictures, and even pornography to some extent. So this would indicate that it is not speech itself that is protected, but rather the more encompassing concept of communication, which can come in many forms.
Writing computer code is another form of communication. Yes, it can be compiled and run on a computer, and it is also near impossible for the untrained eye to discern its meaning, however, the same could be said of sheet music.
I am a coder as well, and I do not feel that my ability to read and write code should be considered any less of a communication medium than verbal or written speech. Take the source code at hand as an example. I clicked on the link to the code, read it, and now understand how it works. Why should this C# code be considered any less of a communication vehicle than if he wrote a dissertation in English explaining his work in detail? The fact is that it shouldn't. He communicated with many of the Slashdot crowd ideas and concepts that are readily understood by those working in his field of expertise. Is this not communication?
True, code would be considered a different kind of communication, just like speech, art, music, photography, etc., but it should enjoy the same lawful protections extended to other forms of communication.
Even in Utah 45K is low in my opinion. My first job as a tester (in Utah) paid 45K to start and went up to 60K after the six month probation was over. Most developers I know make over 70K - 80K in Utah.
I don't see any reason why a flat tax should have to be any more than %5 to %10 percent. If the government can't operate on that, then they are trying to do more than they should be.
My company has been experimenting with chimps in the HR department for years. Whenever there is a conflict at work, the parties can go complain and have their dispute resolved through the bonding experience of ducking dollops of hurled dung together.
I've been installing and supporting a dead beast of an OS on nice hardware for my clients for years. It only makes sense to install a nice OS on a dead beast for a change.
Why oh why can't I curb my over-developed sense of curiosity? That was just wrong.
The government is more than happy to overcharge you on your taxes if you don't know about it, so I think the reverse should be just as valid.
Yo have the right to your beliefs. What you don't have the right to do is inflict them on others. Your freedom ends where mine starts.
Very interesting. Does it work both ways? Do your rights end where mine start? Why do you have the right to demand that there is no God, but I don't have the right to demand that there is? A lack of belief is still a belief is it not? Why should yours take precedence? The fact of the matter is that it should not.
Judges have the right and the duty to interpret the laws of the land.
That is the key. The right to interpret. However, they have gone beyond that right to make laws by "interpreting" things that were never intended; thus bypassing the law-making process set forth in the constitution.
I don't understand why you would resent this function of the judiciary.
I don't resent the judicial process as it is intended to be, but the system has become corrupt and the judicial branch of the government is out of control. Using sophistry to claim you are "interpreting" the law is still a fraud. Many of our judges are nothing more than chalatans.
Now, if you could show me even one example where a judge has passed a law, as opposed to congress, I would reconsider.
I'll give you a few:
1) Abortion laws.
2) Gun laws.
3) Gay marriage laws (haven't become officially accepted yet, but give it time)
Let's focus for a moment on number two (although we could do the same with the others). Are you honestly trying to claim that the founders of our constitutional right to bear arms really only meant state militias (as one of your valiant judges has "interpreted")? Historical documentation clearly suggests that such is not the case. Sophistry is the act of presenting plausible, but patently false arguments with the intent to deceive. I mean no offense to you personally, but if you believe that judges do not use sophistry to make laws, then clearly these tactics have succeeeded in at least on case.
That's funny (not!). The constitution was written to form the legal basis of the United States of America. This includes the aforementioned seperation of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions.
Sorry I wasn't clear there (although I'm sure you understood my meaning). Just to be clear, you said that the part of the constitution that states that congress shall make no laws regarding religion was the "separation of church and state" part. However, this is not true. This part refers to congress' inability to create the Holy Church of America. Separation of church and state is a fallacy. To paraphrase an old adage, if you tell a lie long enough, people will start to believe it is true. Such it is with the concept of separation of church and state. It sounds good, it even rolls nicely off the tongue, but false it remains.
So, unless you can show me where judges have been given the power to write and pass laws, I have to disagree.
You haven't been paying attention. I never said that judges have been given the power to write and pass laws. They clearly haven't. What I said is that they are making laws in spite of the fact that they have no right whatsoever to do so.
I think evolving language is great, but replace the word fuck with any other adjective (cool, groovy, chic, heavy, hip, hot, etc.) and the utterer of the above sentence still comes across as a rube because he (or perhaps she) can't fumble through their brain for any kind of verbal variety to express their feelings of interest, happiness, fondness, or anything else. It is one dimensional speech and it makes the speaker look likewise.
That is the false doctrine that I'm talking about. This should be evident in the fact that in order to protect your freedom not to be religious, they have made laws that stomp on my right to be religious. Did it ever occur to you that your athiestic views are as offensive to me as my christian views are to you (assuming you are athiest). Why should you get preference? The fact of that matter is that you shouldn't.
Also, the laws that you are referring to were never made by congress, but rather by judges, who have no right to make such laws under the constitution; or otherwise.
As to you final comment. The constitution was written to prevent The Church of America from being formed. Your separation of church and state principle is one founded in sophistry and chicanery. Sorry to be the one to break that to you, but it's true.
I mean no offense to you, but your post stood out, so I'm adding my comment to it.
Personally, the word fuck does not offend me, but rather diminishes the percieved intelligence level of almost any phrase containing it (except for, of course, those rare phrases in which the word is used correctly).
I love listening to a well-formed sentence. Just as fine paintings please the eye, an eloquent phrase can please the ear. However, using the word fuck as a catch all adjective, in my opinion, is to speech what splatter fart-screening a blank canvas is to visual art.
There is also the issue of offense. Some people are offended by the word, so why not have the courtesy, especially on public airwaves, to dip into the cornucopia of other equally effective adjectives to accentuate your speech?
Slang and phrases spoken publicly are naturally assimilated into the collective speech of society. Must we all clothe ourselves in the mental habiliments of the obtuse? I think not.