>>Debian is a great installation but has one of the more complicated, unfriendly installers out there.
That may be correct if you're not familiar with Linux,
I don't see what's so unfriendly about it. The worst part is not the process, but which floppies, then how many floppies, and the like. Once you know which floppies work, the installation process is a breeze. The questions are simple, and usually have an entire page explaining themselves! And if that isn't enough, you pointed out the idiot-proof manual.
However, I recommend Debian to newbies if they want to learn Linux and not be hand-held through the installation and configuration processes.
phitooey! If you want that try Slackware. Debian does *many* things for you. I agree, it isn't for beginniners coming from a Microsoft world, and there is much to learn from installing it. But compared to Slackware, well, Debian isn't hard.
here's not much to learn when your idea of filesystem allocation is a bar graph,
/me giggles
Therefore, I recommend that people search for packages [debian.org] they want, and install them with apt-get after the installation procedure.
Or use dselect to find which new packages exist. That is a bit of fun you know.
Sure, if you do little use of the system and then all source works the same. However, there a major differences.
I've started with Slackware and moved to Debian. I use Redhat at work. What the difference? Simple, Slackware required more work. Confusing it was. However, I actually learned a few things, and I am indebted to Pat Volkerding for putting me through that all. Unfortunately, I killed my system with a bad upgrade to libc6, and I decided that it was time to switch.
I took Debian, simply because they are community-centric. There are tons of choices, but they are all up to you. It handles the basics for you, but lets you know what's happening. As such, it (unstable) keeps me up to date and takes care of basic administration, but I have to do a bit here and there. I like this level, and I like Debian, so I am happy here.
Red Hat takes a different approach. RedHat does things for you. It does much more you than Debian does. This is great for quick starts onto system, or moving from a Microsoft world. However, for those who like to know what's going on, it does a bit too much. Red Hat 8 even went further with making KDE and GNOME desktops looking alike. That is the Red Hat way.
So, generally with Linux the distribution that you choose is a mixture of ease and control. But as one goes up the other goes down. Yes, you *could* force the system to do what you want, but then why not get a distribution that does it for you, and can be updated without breaking anything?
If there were only three distributions, they'd probably be Red Hat, Debian, and Slackware. I've heard this from others as well. If it's true or not is irrelevant. The point is, those who tried them see these three as representing three different approaches to a Linux distribution. I'd suggest trying them all at some point if you doubt their differences.
This month NASA tried to put an end to the controversy by commissioning a definitive account of the evidence for the landings. Days later it dropped the idea after criticism that it was wasting money by taking on the lunatic fringe
Kind of funny that they called lunar-doubters lunatics. It's sheer lunacy to call them that.:-)
The greatest problem I see is that when going graphical, the graphics are almost the things themselves. That is, clicking an icon, but mistakenly viewing the icon as the file itself.
The GUI or the command line is only for access to what is really there, files, commands, graphics, etc.
So, the first step is a better interface, would be to allow for many ways of getting to the same thing, at the same time. That is, keybindings should work at all times (somewhat similar to the way that MS does it in Windows). If there is a voice interface, it should not need a separate application. Think ST:TNG they talked and typed at the same time.
Allowing for all interfaces to be merely a layer to get to what is actually being done should help those who want speed to get it, and those who want comfort to get it. Eventually, the interface layers should be non-cumbersome to the point where developers focus on functionality not interface.
Watching people do things let me see different people either loving or hating:
key bindings
pop-up menus
global menus popping anywhere
voice
As a small stab to develop work, I would think that the computer needs a basic "language". For example, "execute". The user can then set some form of interface to "mean" execute. Such as a single-right-click, or -, the word "execute", etc. In fact, I'd separtate interface from applications completely, and come up with an agreed upon language to let the two communicate.
I think that once comfort becomes the norm, people will more readily ber able to realize the best GUI.
Want to know what a senator said? Well, you can read the journal that is printed everyday. Though, it'll take a long time to get anything from it.
Want to read a law in full? Probably not, they're really hard to read and full of jargon.
Want to know the text of messages sent between government offices? Many times they're too boring, or comminication is done between personal relationships that would suffer if all was to be non-personal for the public to see.
The government has a great deal of information online already. And they're probably going to make more public with time. What is needed is not more information (so much as) someone to cut through it all and give a non-biased assesment, with links to the full report for further study.
When you can find this mythical non-biased person, we can talk about giving it the job.
I did not read any of the books (and have no plans too, they sound stupid). Though I did watch the first movie. I thought the movie itself was stupid too. Or, maybe a better word is mediocre. In other words, it wasn't a waste of time, though I wouldn't (actively) reccomend that anyone bother seeing it.
Though, I was looking at the characters in the movie. And I mean either the character, the actor, or both.
Harry Potter himself did a horrible job. I think he can't act very well. Reminds me of the craze over Home Alone. Also a stupid movie with a horrible main actor.
Hermione is the absolute best actress is the film. She does an excellent job of playing the character (I don't meant in reference to the book, just that she was very consistent). To use the MBTI, she's an INFJ, and does an unbelieveably well job of acting it out. I'm wondering about anyone agrees with that, what they think about her in the second movie.
The red-haired kid. He does a very good job of his character too. Right down to the goofy smile. He just didn't seem to stand out to me in the movie, but that was due to the parts given him. I was wondering if they gave him more in the second movie and if he acted well.
The big guy on the flying motorcycle. Nice job too. (ISTP).
The other characters didn't seem to have enough show time for me to care about their skills.
Overall, I'd like to know because the only reason I'd care to see the second movie would be to see (Myeres-Birggs/Keirsey) character types done well.
On a side note, I find it odd that all the main "good guys" are introverts (Harry, Hermione, the red-haired kid, and the big flying motorcycle guy) while all the "bad guys" are extraverts (uncle, slick-haired kid, and the main evil guy). I wonder if Rowling herself is an introvert who had unpleasant runins with entraverts, which would explain her obsession with them.
Uzi is a Hebrew word that means, "my strength". King David used it is Psalms.
Nissan, is the name of the sixth Jewish month of the year. The origins of it came from Babylon. So is actually isn't Hebrew and much as it is Babylonian.
Just like you, I removed the library file. However, if you'd like to turn it on and off, I'd suggest a simple solution. Rename the library (maybe libflash.so ?). Then, when you find a page where you want it to work, add a symlink to the library.
After I removed the file, I found that in most cases I didn't want or need it. If the few cases where I did, I just used netscape instead of my uisual mozila.
Since democracies have started people have pointed out the flaws in the voting system. One specific critique was done by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (AKA Lewis Carrol) which talked about the British system. Unfortunately, it was ignored.
The University of Virginia, has been working with the Lewis Carrol Society of North America to print his many works (up to 3 of 9 last I checked). The third book, which is mathematical approach to politics, is availible here and here.
It's a 3com 10/100, and the MB has a built-in Promise 133 controller. So, it's unlikely to be due to timeouts.
Plus, there are *many* people reporting these problems, so it isn't that simple. Just do a quick search on groups.google.com and you ought to see what I mean.
Are you sure? I saw it on the first two or three bootups, after the initial SP reboot. I can check again if you really think there's no difference, though I'm pretty sure there is, and a check in these newsgroups showed others with the same issues.
The bible started out as a pretty diverse collection of documents.
If you refer to the Five Books of Moses, they were all written within a 39 year period, and were presenting as one who document. In fact, the splitting into five books only happened much much later.
These have been somewhat arbitrarily pared down and collected together.
Considering the amount of effort put into preserving every copy of the bible, I'd have to disagree with this point.
It's also changed substantially waht with translations and reeditings, to the point where it can be argued that there really is no 'original' bible.
That's ridiculous. The "original" Bible is the Hebrew version. And it is kept in exact tradition (except for a difference in tradition as to one letter which does not change the meaning of the word) for over three thousand years.
You can purchase Linux Programming By Example from bn.com
I started to purchase books from Amazon.com once I realized that BN doesn't post bad reviews. Maybe they do now though.
As much as Amazon may have patented a stupid thing, they don't seem to censor comments. Many books have many bad comments. And, that is why I am happy to buy from them.
Databases are more than just storage. Disregarding storing and retrieval, a good database has good design.
If the database won't be designed properly (as in many just-get-the-job-done small businesses) then a specific application may be better. But, if someone will spend the time doing design, the database forces logic and structure onto the system. While this may be an annoyance to sloppy coders, this helps ease usage (because of strict guidelines) and understanding. Yes, understanding. There are times that data is to some extent known, but to a lesser extent understood. A decent database layout increases understanding as the objects and relations must be logical.
I speak this as a DBA. And, as a DBA, for good or for bad, there is hardly a project that wouldn't benefit from clear data definitions.
I know of a reference circa 1200(?) on the tradition (Ran; Kiddushin). It specifically talks about why a gem (on a ring) is given at engagement, and only a plain ring at the wedding. My assumption is that it is much older than that.
Installing on Windows is not just a matter of ease. It is also a matter of knowing what works, and what doesn't work on all platforms. Hacking the registry is easy, *knowing when* to hack it is not so easy. InstallShield can be very complex, but it allows great flexibility. WISE is generally easier to use, and generally has what you need.
After seeing countless scripts, I can say that most people (of whose scripts I've seen) do not know what is going on. Luckily they used a tool, or else who knows what sort of damage they would have caused.
Considering a decent tool costs less than one thousand dollars, it is well worth the time you will save learning how to install files. Also, considering the main tools keep up with Microsoft rules (usually) there are less "gotchas" to worry about.
Both WISE and InstallShield have strong userbases. You can easily tap into a lot of knowledge with those tools.
Slashdot Mirror
I know this is silly, but the story had mor tha one paragraph in the main story. How often does that happen?
>>Debian is a great installation but has one of the more complicated, unfriendly installers out there.
That may be correct if you're not familiar with Linux,
I don't see what's so unfriendly about it. The worst part is not the process, but which floppies, then how many floppies, and the like. Once you know which floppies work, the installation process is a breeze. The questions are simple, and usually have an entire page explaining themselves! And if that isn't enough, you pointed out the idiot-proof manual.
However, I recommend Debian to newbies if they want to learn Linux and not be hand-held through the installation and configuration processes.
phitooey! If you want that try Slackware. Debian does *many* things for you. I agree, it isn't for beginniners coming from a Microsoft world, and there is much to learn from installing it. But compared to Slackware, well, Debian isn't hard.
here's not much to learn when your idea of filesystem allocation is a bar graph,
/me giggles
Therefore, I recommend that people search for packages [debian.org] they want, and install them with apt-get after the installation procedure.
Or use dselect to find which new packages exist. That is a bit of fun you know.
and the Alpha architecture earned a special place in my heart.
Wow! That must be one heck of a pacemaker.
That's strange, when I searched slashdot for it I found it right here.
:-P
Sure, if you do little use of the system and then all source works the same. However, there a major differences.
I've started with Slackware and moved to Debian. I use Redhat at work. What the difference? Simple, Slackware required more work. Confusing it was. However, I actually learned a few things, and I am indebted to Pat Volkerding for putting me through that all. Unfortunately, I killed my system with a bad upgrade to libc6, and I decided that it was time to switch.
I took Debian, simply because they are community-centric. There are tons of choices, but they are all up to you. It handles the basics for you, but lets you know what's happening. As such, it (unstable) keeps me up to date and takes care of basic administration, but I have to do a bit here and there. I like this level, and I like Debian, so I am happy here.
Red Hat takes a different approach. RedHat does things for you. It does much more you than Debian does. This is great for quick starts onto system, or moving from a Microsoft world. However, for those who like to know what's going on, it does a bit too much. Red Hat 8 even went further with making KDE and GNOME desktops looking alike. That is the Red Hat way.
So, generally with Linux the distribution that you choose is a mixture of ease and control. But as one goes up the other goes down. Yes, you *could* force the system to do what you want, but then why not get a distribution that does it for you, and can be updated without breaking anything?
If there were only three distributions, they'd probably be Red Hat, Debian, and Slackware. I've heard this from others as well. If it's true or not is irrelevant. The point is, those who tried them see these three as representing three different approaches to a Linux distribution. I'd suggest trying them all at some point if you doubt their differences.
Kind of funny that they called lunar-doubters lunatics. It's sheer lunacy to call them that. :-)
The GUI or the command line is only for access to what is really there, files, commands, graphics, etc.
So, the first step is a better interface, would be to allow for many ways of getting to the same thing, at the same time. That is, keybindings should work at all times (somewhat similar to the way that MS does it in Windows). If there is a voice interface, it should not need a separate application. Think ST:TNG they talked and typed at the same time.
Allowing for all interfaces to be merely a layer to get to what is actually being done should help those who want speed to get it, and those who want comfort to get it. Eventually, the interface layers should be non-cumbersome to the point where developers focus on functionality not interface.
Watching people do things let me see different people either loving or hating:
As a small stab to develop work, I would think that the computer needs a basic "language". For example, "execute". The user can then set some form of interface to "mean" execute. Such as a single-right-click, or -, the word "execute", etc. In fact, I'd separtate interface from applications completely, and come up with an agreed upon language to let the two communicate.
I think that once comfort becomes the norm, people will more readily ber able to realize the best GUI.
You'd have too much information.
Want to know what a senator said? Well, you can read the journal that is printed everyday. Though, it'll take a long time to get anything from it.
Want to read a law in full? Probably not, they're really hard to read and full of jargon.
Want to know the text of messages sent between government offices? Many times they're too boring, or comminication is done between personal relationships that would suffer if all was to be non-personal for the public to see.
The government has a great deal of information online already. And they're probably going to make more public with time. What is needed is not more information (so much as) someone to cut through it all and give a non-biased assesment, with links to the full report for further study.
When you can find this mythical non-biased person, we can talk about giving it the job.
What...was...your...first acting job? And, darnit, why did you have to choose acting?
Let me guess.
No.
First semester of college and you're taking Psych 101.
Nope.
Better sign up for Fundamentals of the English Language next semester.
Why? When I want to speak a better English I can.
I did not read any of the books (and have no plans too, they sound stupid). Though I did watch the first movie. I thought the movie itself was stupid too. Or, maybe a better word is mediocre. In other words, it wasn't a waste of time, though I wouldn't (actively) reccomend that anyone bother seeing it.
Though, I was looking at the characters in the movie. And I mean either the character, the actor, or both.
Harry Potter himself did a horrible job. I think he can't act very well. Reminds me of the craze over Home Alone. Also a stupid movie with a horrible main actor.
Hermione is the absolute best actress is the film. She does an excellent job of playing the character (I don't meant in reference to the book, just that she was very consistent). To use the MBTI, she's an INFJ, and does an unbelieveably well job of acting it out. I'm wondering about anyone agrees with that, what they think about her in the second movie.
The red-haired kid. He does a very good job of his character too. Right down to the goofy smile. He just didn't seem to stand out to me in the movie, but that was due to the parts given him. I was wondering if they gave him more in the second movie and if he acted well.
The big guy on the flying motorcycle. Nice job too. (ISTP).
The other characters didn't seem to have enough show time for me to care about their skills.
Overall, I'd like to know because the only reason I'd care to see the second movie would be to see (Myeres-Birggs/Keirsey) character types done well.
On a side note, I find it odd that all the main "good guys" are introverts (Harry, Hermione, the red-haired kid, and the big flying motorcycle guy) while all the "bad guys" are extraverts (uncle, slick-haired kid, and the main evil guy). I wonder if Rowling herself is an introvert who had unpleasant runins with entraverts, which would explain her obsession with them.
Uzi is a Hebrew word that means, "my strength". King David used it is Psalms.
Nissan, is the name of the sixth Jewish month of the year. The origins of it came from Babylon. So is actually isn't Hebrew and much as it is Babylonian.
Just like you, I removed the library file. However, if you'd like to turn it on and off, I'd suggest a simple solution. Rename the library (maybe libflash.so ?). Then, when you find a page where you want it to work, add a symlink to the library.
After I removed the file, I found that in most cases I didn't want or need it. If the few cases where I did, I just used netscape instead of my uisual mozila.
In the end Red Hat shall rule supreme, replacing Microsoft as the One true OS.
Since democracies have started people have pointed out the flaws in the voting system. One specific critique was done by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (AKA Lewis Carrol) which talked about the British system. Unfortunately, it was ignored.
The University of Virginia, has been working with the Lewis Carrol Society of North America to print his many works (up to 3 of 9 last I checked). The third book, which is mathematical approach to politics, is availible here and here.
It's a 3com 10/100, and the MB has a built-in Promise 133 controller. So, it's unlikely to be due to timeouts.
Plus, there are *many* people reporting these problems, so it isn't that simple. Just do a quick search on groups.google.com and you ought to see what I mean.
Are you sure? I saw it on the first two or three bootups, after the initial SP reboot. I can check again if you really think there's no difference, though I'm pretty sure there is, and a check in these newsgroups showed others with the same issues.
Don't forget how slow SP3 is. I tried it on one computer and bootup time was noticeably longer.
However, it is nice to see Microsoft going for some sort of help here. It would be much worse had they decided to flaunt it instead.
The bible started out as a pretty diverse collection of documents.
If you refer to the Five Books of Moses, they were all written within a 39 year period, and were presenting as one who document. In fact, the splitting into five books only happened much much later.
These have been somewhat arbitrarily pared down and collected together.
Considering the amount of effort put into preserving every copy of the bible, I'd have to disagree with this point.
It's also changed substantially waht with translations and reeditings, to the point where it can be argued that there really is no 'original' bible.
That's ridiculous. The "original" Bible is the Hebrew version. And it is kept in exact tradition (except for a difference in tradition as to one letter which does not change the meaning of the word) for over three thousand years.
You can purchase Linux Programming By Example from bn.com
I started to purchase books from Amazon.com once I realized that BN doesn't post bad reviews. Maybe they do now though.
As much as Amazon may have patented a stupid thing, they don't seem to censor comments. Many books have many bad comments. And, that is why I am happy to buy from them.
Databases are more than just storage. Disregarding storing and retrieval, a good database has good design.
If the database won't be designed properly (as in many just-get-the-job-done small businesses) then a specific application may be better. But, if someone will spend the time doing design, the database forces logic and structure onto the system. While this may be an annoyance to sloppy coders, this helps ease usage (because of strict guidelines) and understanding. Yes, understanding. There are times that data is to some extent known, but to a lesser extent understood. A decent database layout increases understanding as the objects and relations must be logical.
I speak this as a DBA. And, as a DBA, for good or for bad, there is hardly a project that wouldn't benefit from clear data definitions.
Yoda could use a Jedi mind trick or something. Goku isn't the smartest guy around.
ROTFL
Anyway, being Goku can read intentions, it may not work.
I kid you not, a comment!
How early is the diamond ring?
I know of a reference circa 1200(?) on the tradition (Ran; Kiddushin). It specifically talks about why a gem (on a ring) is given at engagement, and only a plain ring at the wedding. My assumption is that it is much older than that.
(A few years ago, I was employed by WISE Solutions.)
Installing on Windows is not just a matter of ease. It is also a matter of knowing what works, and what doesn't work on all platforms. Hacking the registry is easy, *knowing when* to hack it is not so easy. InstallShield can be very complex, but it allows great flexibility. WISE is generally easier to use, and generally has what you need.
After seeing countless scripts, I can say that most people (of whose scripts I've seen) do not know what is going on. Luckily they used a tool, or else who knows what sort of damage they would have caused.
Considering a decent tool costs less than one thousand dollars, it is well worth the time you will save learning how to install files. Also, considering the main tools keep up with Microsoft rules (usually) there are less "gotchas" to worry about.
Both WISE and InstallShield have strong userbases. You can easily tap into a lot of knowledge with those tools.