If you were using Debian, you would just add the path to your sources.list and do `apt-get update ; apt-get install [package]`, and it'll automatically download any dependencies.
With my 56kbit/s Lucent software modem in Linux, I was able to get a ping to my ISP of 115ms. With my 56kbit/s Cirrus Logic hardware modem, I could get only 125ms, minimum.
I used the Lucent modem on a Pentium 133MHz for about 2 years, and noticed no slowdown at all.
Oh, and the command `setserial/dev/[modem] low_latency` lowers ping about 10ms, from my experience.
> I do agree with you that raising genetically engineered animals is wrong
Are you a vegetarian? If not, what basis do you have to say that raising genetically engineered animals is wrong?
And don't give me the "I eat to survive" excuse. People don't eat meat to surive anymore--they eat it because it tastes good. There are plenty much healthier and cheaper foods that don't involve the slaughter of animals.
Don't misunderstand me though... I eat animals.:-)
> however most studies have found hemp which you post so innocently, often is used as a stepping stone to higher drugs. Not saying everyone is going to become a junkie, but I do say limits should be drawn on most things.
The studies are flawed. They assume that since there's correspondence between former hemp usage and current "higher" drug usage, the hemp drove them to the "higher" drug usage.
Of course people are going to use lighter drugs before they start using the heavier dangerous ones. But if the lighter drug didn't exist, it doesn't seem logical that they wouldn't just skip that step.
And in any case, I think if marijuana were considered legal and acceptable by society, I think the step between marijuana and more dangerous drugs would be much bigger than it is now, where it's bundled in the same category as more dangerous drugs (the "illegal drug" category).
> Ru486 is legal and its a matter of choice unlike the illegal hemp. So whats your thought for the woman who gets raped and uses RU486 is she a murderer or is it ok when its convenient to some? Give me a break.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying it should be illegal or it shouldn't?
Probably the reason why Microsoft didn't sue you is because it didn't cause them any direct harm, and it would make them look like a Big Evil Company trying to squish the little competition.
Which they are, but no sense in encouraging that image unless it's profitable.
So then instead of people driving at 65 mph instead of 55 mph, they're going to be driving at a steady 55 mph but will burst at 85 mph every 10 minutes to try to make up for their lost time.
> If this works as advertised, then I am dumping Win9x from my kid's computers and installing Linux. Since I can use
> permissions to delegate who gets to install and operate games, my task as home sysop becomes much simpler.
You can do this with Windows 2000, which I'd imagine would run DirectX games much faster and less buggier than Linux with WINE would.
OpenOffice is not a complete product yet. For one thing, you can't print from Unixish operating systems yet. It also seemed fairly unstable, the last time I tried it (609).
Oh, and it's not released under GPL. It's released under Sun's own license (I don't know the details) so Sun gets special privelages (like closing up the source again).
The point is that people harass the weird kids because they think they're going to become mass murderers. Harris and Klebold were the weird kids, and as a result of being harassed, went on a rampage, killing people for revenge against society.
While I think Chuck Flynn is extremely blowing it out of porportion that society is trying to cleanse the world of geeks, you seem to have it mixed up.
Harris
and Klebold weren't targeting geeks, or jocks, or preps, or snobs, or dorks, dweebs, goobs, nerds, etc., etc., etc. They
targeted whomever was available. They shot at, or killed, anyone unfortunate enough to be in their way. They may have
bragged to one another about who they were going to kill while they planned the massacre, but when the events actually
transpired, they just shot at anyone they could, with the express purpose of killing. Not to make a social statement, not to
oppress or eliminate geeks, just to kill. All of your analysis and theories about their motives don't change that simple fact.
I think Linus should hand over control to an industry consortium at some time. Maybe now is the time, since 2.4 is finished, and he doesn't seem to be thinking much about 2.5 or 3.0.
2.5 would be a development (unstable) kernel, and I don't think it will be too long before 2.5 is released (but I don't know for sure).
2.6 will likely be a while.
Having competing forks, etc would not be the best way to go, and the surest way to prevent that from happening is for Linus to hand over the official kernel to another organization.
I agree. Forking Linux would be a bad idea, mainly because of incompatibility reasons.
I have no clue what's your logic when you say handing over Linux to an organization will prevent that though.
The way I see it, *some* hackers are crackers. Whether it's for good or bad doesn't make a difference, in my opinion. If you're a hacker, you're a hacker. Saying no crackers are hackers, simply because they're "evil", is just a silly way to discredit them of their ability.
They tried to get DirecTV without paying, but they've been outsmarted. The hackers at DirecTV are more l33t than the hackers with these "H" things.
The only thing that bothers me, is the part where DirecTV was going around intimidating people who discussed it... but the article didn't elaborate on that. Can anyone back this up?
Would you like other people who consider their moral standards to be higher than yours, forcing you to modify your moral standards to suit them, or else locking you up?
I didn't think so.
No, many people are not responsible. "Thought crime" should not be illegal though. Until they actually commit the crime, you don't lock them up.
Sure it would be nice if everyone was a perfect person just like you... but does that mean you should *force* them?
Child pornography is illegal because it was created by exploiting a child, and invades the privacy of that child. "Virtual" child pornography doesn't exploit anyone. They haven't commited the crime yet. Should it be illegal to fantasize about committing a crime? If not, then why should it be illegal to put your fantasies on a paper or a computer screen? Isn't there something in the United States called "Freedom of Speech"?
I'm on a Pentium 291MHz with 64MB RAM, and the EFM test thingy, is incredibly fast, and incredibly beautiful. And I get *very* picky over IE integration in Windows. I'm extremely disappointed that Copy and Rename support is not being implemented in the "test" product.:-(
Well if you're going to use Mac OS X your software is going to run on only one architecture anyway, so how is this any better.
Any why are we forgetting Debian? I'm using Debian for x86, and it has a massive amount of packages. I was under the impression that most of these packages are recompiled for different architectures and included with the distributions.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because you're using Redhat.
If you were using Debian, you would just add the path to your sources.list and do `apt-get update ; apt-get install [package]`, and it'll automatically download any dependencies.
With my 56kbit/s Lucent software modem in Linux, I was able to get a ping to my ISP of 115ms. With my 56kbit/s Cirrus Logic hardware modem, I could get only 125ms, minimum.
/dev/[modem] low_latency` lowers ping about 10ms, from my experience.
I used the Lucent modem on a Pentium 133MHz for about 2 years, and noticed no slowdown at all.
Oh, and the command `setserial
> I do agree with you that raising genetically engineered animals is wrong
... I eat animals. :-)
Are you a vegetarian? If not, what basis do you have to say that raising genetically engineered animals is wrong?
And don't give me the "I eat to survive" excuse. People don't eat meat to surive anymore--they eat it because it tastes good. There are plenty much healthier and cheaper foods that don't involve the slaughter of animals.
Don't misunderstand me though
> however most studies have found hemp which you post so innocently, often is used as a stepping stone to higher drugs. Not saying everyone is going to become a junkie, but I do say limits should be drawn on most things.
The studies are flawed. They assume that since there's correspondence between former hemp usage and current "higher" drug usage, the hemp drove them to the "higher" drug usage.
Of course people are going to use lighter drugs before they start using the heavier dangerous ones. But if the lighter drug didn't exist, it doesn't seem logical that they wouldn't just skip that step.
And in any case, I think if marijuana were considered legal and acceptable by society, I think the step between marijuana and more dangerous drugs would be much bigger than it is now, where it's bundled in the same category as more dangerous drugs (the "illegal drug" category).
> Ru486 is legal and its a matter of choice unlike the illegal hemp. So whats your thought for the woman who gets raped and uses RU486 is she a murderer or is it ok when its convenient to some? Give me a break.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying it should be illegal or it shouldn't?
People can save 14 cents by not using an envelope. It's called a postcard. See http://pe.usps.gov/text/dmm/r100.htm#Xfz79519.
Probably the reason why Microsoft didn't sue you is because it didn't cause them any direct harm, and it would make them look like a Big Evil Company trying to squish the little competition.
Which they are, but no sense in encouraging that image unless it's profitable.
So then instead of people driving at 65 mph instead of 55 mph, they're going to be driving at a steady 55 mph but will burst at 85 mph every 10 minutes to try to make up for their lost time.
:-)
And then every mail server admin blocks ADV:, which would make spamming with ADV: useless.
So the spammers stop using ADV:.
I'm fully aware of that. That's why I said it wasn't a complete product yet. :-)
And I wasn't completely aware of the licensing situation. My mistake.
Who says you need a license? :-)
> If this works as advertised, then I am dumping Win9x from my kid's computers and installing Linux. Since I can use
> permissions to delegate who gets to install and operate games, my task as home sysop becomes much simpler.
You can do this with Windows 2000, which I'd imagine would run DirectX games much faster and less buggier than Linux with WINE would.
Oops, typo.
That should be:
If WINE will be able to run games on Linux as well as it can on Windows, then why do we *need* Linux games?
If WINE will be able to run games on Linux as well as it can on Linux, then why do we *need* Linux games?
OpenOffice is not a complete product yet. For one thing, you can't print from Unixish operating systems yet. It also seemed fairly unstable, the last time I tried it (609).
Oh, and it's not released under GPL. It's released under Sun's own license (I don't know the details) so Sun gets special privelages (like closing up the source again).
While I think Chuck Flynn is extremely blowing it out of porportion that society is trying to cleanse the world of geeks, you seem to have it mixed up.
Harris and Klebold weren't targeting geeks, or jocks, or preps, or snobs, or dorks, dweebs, goobs, nerds, etc., etc., etc. They targeted whomever was available. They shot at, or killed, anyone unfortunate enough to be in their way. They may have bragged to one another about who they were going to kill while they planned the massacre, but when the events actually transpired, they just shot at anyone they could, with the express purpose of killing. Not to make a social statement, not to oppress or eliminate geeks, just to kill. All of your analysis and theories about their motives don't change that simple fact.
2.5 would be a development (unstable) kernel, and I don't think it will be too long before 2.5 is released (but I don't know for sure).
2.6 will likely be a while.
Having competing forks, etc would not be the best way to go, and the surest way to prevent that from happening is for Linus to hand over the official kernel to another organization.
I agree. Forking Linux would be a bad idea, mainly because of incompatibility reasons.
I have no clue what's your logic when you say handing over Linux to an organization will prevent that though.
> Hackers are not Crackers
The way I see it, *some* hackers are crackers. Whether it's for good or bad doesn't make a difference, in my opinion. If you're a hacker, you're a hacker. Saying no crackers are hackers, simply because they're "evil", is just a silly way to discredit them of their ability.
And if they are able to technically outsmart you, then it's your problem you can't get free sattelite TV. :-)
They tried to get DirecTV without paying, but they've been outsmarted. The hackers at DirecTV are more l33t than the hackers with these "H" things.
... but the article didn't elaborate on that. Can anyone back this up?
The only thing that bothers me, is the part where DirecTV was going around intimidating people who discussed it
The above comment is brilliant. I feel like an idiot for saying this, but mod this one up! :P
Would you like other people who consider their moral standards to be higher than yours, forcing you to modify your moral standards to suit them, or else locking you up?
I didn't think so.
No, many people are not responsible. "Thought crime" should not be illegal though. Until they actually commit the crime, you don't lock them up.
Thought crime?
:-)
Sure it would be nice if everyone was a perfect person just like you ... but does that mean you should *force* them?
Child pornography is illegal because it was created by exploiting a child, and invades the privacy of that child. "Virtual" child pornography doesn't exploit anyone. They haven't commited the crime yet. Should it be illegal to fantasize about committing a crime? If not, then why should it be illegal to put your fantasies on a paper or a computer screen? Isn't there something in the United States called "Freedom of Speech"?
I'm on a Pentium 291MHz with 64MB RAM, and the EFM test thingy, is incredibly fast, and incredibly beautiful. And I get *very* picky over IE integration in Windows. I'm extremely disappointed that Copy and Rename support is not being implemented in the "test" product. :-(
'nuff said.
Well if you're going to use Mac OS X your software is going to run on only one architecture anyway, so how is this any better.
Any why are we forgetting Debian? I'm using Debian for x86, and it has a massive amount of packages. I was under the impression that most of these packages are recompiled for different architectures and included with the distributions.