The zipped emoji...
is clearly gimped.
And where, oh where is the steaming pile icon?
202 posts • joined 23 Jan 2008
is clearly gimped.
And where, oh where is the steaming pile icon?
when Lloyds Names could bet the entire family fortune, their house, land, etc. on not having to pay out as shipments set out upon uncertain seas. And if they lost they could actually lose the lot, including the shirt off their back, if that's what it took to pay what they owed.
But we live in softer more enlightened times, where the consequences of greed and foolishness are not allowed to properly touch those who have the means to be greedy and foolish on a grand scale.
A pity really, no doubt those using food banks and sleeping in doorways would appreciate the sight of shirtless bankers and other monumental rogues who think that 'consequences', like taxes, are only for the 'little people'.
I'd just like to stick up for Sony by saying they remain one of the only manufacturers that take putting their leading phablet kit into a compact body seriously, and thus also cater for that very market that appreciates a 'normal' sized phone that slips comfortably into a pocket.
Ummm, I have to say that Firefox's 'Hello' works fine on my Mint setup, no tweaking required, but if it really doesn't work for you you could try TOX, which does require a bit of setting up of a front end (Venom worked for me).
Yes, but that is only adding detail to my basic point. The ultimate interest is the money, i.e. the shareholder's interest's. Everything else bows down to that; the 'customer's interest's' are merely a function of the 'shareholder's interest's.
A charity or not-for-profit can put other interest's front and centre, but a capitalist venture faces enormous challenges and economic cultural pressures to conform to the imperative to serve the interests of those whose capital is at stake. That, after all, is the essence of the game.
in the end it's not about users interests, it's about shareholder's interests. It's as simple as that. Then all you have to factor in is the human/institutional capacity for hubris and fucking up and you have the whole picture.
a niche activity. that is really where it excels (when it's not being a server). I reckon we really don't want Linux/BSDs, etc. to become mainstream, certainly not in the way Windows is, and certainly not in any kind of monopolistic way. We need OS's that are a bit hairy and awkward, but hugely adaptable and open to innovation and customisation. These are always going to be marginal use cases, compared to the locked down appliance type needs of the vast majority of users.
But if that marginal use case also acts as an irritant and reminder that other ways are possible, and that 'freedom' is worth fighting for and upholding, then all the OSs that represent that will be doing a truly worthwhile job, whatever their 'market share' may be.
Have to say my Z1 Compact didn't come with any bloat, apart from Sony's usual 4-5 suspects, which aren't generally that bad. I do keep my phones in a leather cover, so scratching has never been an issue, and Sony, in recent years, have been pretty prompt with the updates and upgrades. So, overall, I'm a happy customer. Experiences obviously vary.
You need to get out more. Try stirring a viscous solution of corn starch---do it fast enough and it will shatter.
RE: 'Funnily enough, your reply reads more like an agreement with the post you are replying to. It's the PREVIOUS poster that was whining about the license being chosen.
I assume English isn't your first language?'
Old wisdom: never assume anything.
There's nothing wrong with my English, thanks. But comprehension could sometimes be better---especially after 48+ hours on the go travelling round the planet. Well, that's my excuse anyway.
I stand rightly corrected.
In reply to: 'Here's a thought: Why not instead wish your system wasn't licensed under such a restrictive environment, rather than have the arrogance to expect others to change their code to fit your narrow-world license?'
Quit your whining. You're free to pick whatever licence suits you philosophically and economically. If someone else doesn't like the licence you have chosen, well they're always free to go away and do the work you have done and give the result a licence that suits them.
The GPLs suit certain purposes, they're not supposed to be a panacea.
I can vouch for updates and upgrades to my Z1 Compact being regular and timely. Not something I would have said two phones further back down the track, but Sony's record over the last 3-4 years has been fine by me.
Point taken, but you have to live with the reality of using a system that is fundamentally screwed.
Windows has always been a security cesspit, but previously at least it was a cesspit anyone who was interested could more or less call their own.
But no longer.
Methinks Windows truly has 'jumped the shark', and the shark are the rapacious corporates, starting with MS itself, but feeding on through to the other parasites, plus agencies of state who make sure they get what they need.
Very sad, at least it's not the whole story; but more sad for the majority of users who haven't got a clue (and why should they, any more than most people want/need to have a clue what goes on under the bonnet of their car), they/we are just fodder, and they have no idea, and don't even care what the implications are.
'Big brother' may turn out to be, not an authoritarian state, but a sleazy oligopoly; or to put it in Biblical terms, we sold our birthright for a mess of pottage.
Have a fucking nice day!
Sorry, I'm normally quite a happy chap.
and this is all about money---shareholder's money, short term money, money as a stream from users to owners. Forget 'computing', don't even dream of 'responsible computing' or 'service to users'.
Windows (10) = EAAS (Extortion As A Service)
Naive, I know this is a horribly delayed reply, but I'm going to have to call bullshit on that as a credible response. There are plenty of women who care passionately about technology and good design (my daughter for a start), just as there are plenty of blokes who really couldn't give a toss.
How that passion gets expressed may possibly vary in gender specific ways across a large population, but disentangling that from cultural influences is probably next to impossible.
So, all you can actually say is that the present CEO, who happens to be female, is not interested in pursuing R&D as a central plank for sustaining IBM's profitability [I have no idea whether that is in fact the case]. Her reasons for that position are her own, and we are certainly not in any kind of position to blame it on her gender.
Making baseless claims derived from prejudiced stereotypes really doesn't help anyone.
Do please tell us what the CEO's gender has to do with the price of fish, or IBM's performance for that matter?
I think it came in last night on my Mint installation.
'Pump and dump'
Well, in truth, given that perfection is an abstract an unattainable concept, Linux Mint is certainly good (in my experience).
And Microsoft appear to have nicked parts of the Cinnamon desktop for Windows 10, but then everyone feeds off everyone else's ideas, so why not---a good idea is a good idea.
There's danger in monocultures---viruses just love them, as do bacteria, and anything else equipped to take advantage a weaknesses in the system.
Better code /= best code.
we take what we're given, and are grateful.
Having said that their fibre service is pretty good, there just isn't very much of it yet.
* the area around Hull served by the Kingston Communications monopoly.
to keep a sense of humour about things like this.
"Business is the game. To think otherwise is, to quote your good self, "stupid"." - Archaon
O, dear me no! Business is PART of the game, it definitely is not THE game, and that is why so many people end up whining, because they think that their particular interest/need defines 'the game'.
<arbitrary OS> has its niggling bugs, some of them are show stoppers for certain people's needs/hardware, and that really ticks us off when it happens to us, but the chances are that the vast majority are sailing on, blissfully unaware of our pain.
Linux, far more so than any of the proprietary OSs, currently encapsulates the ideal and necessity of being free do do what you like with a computer. If that means business, go for it, but it may mean science, arts, whatever.
The moment we expect our computing kit to 'just work' with no responsibility or understanding (note, that is not the same as knowledge) on our part is the moment we want an appliance not a computer. And the moment we want an appliance is the moment when all we can really do is whine when our magic box doesn't behave the way we want or expect, assuming, of course, it doesn't break the terms of that lovely EULA, and local trading standards law.
LTS, or not, If we are paying good money for our computing needs to be supported we're entitled to demand someone fixes our problem, assuming it falls within the contract. If we've got our OS, etc. for free (as in beer) then, I'm sorry, we take what we get, we are grateful, and we don't feel ripped off when it's crap because, after all, we didn't give anything for it---seems like a fair trade to me.
We're always quite free to take our itch/pain and see if another OS/application will do the job properly, we might pay someone to meet the need, or we might even do it ourselves.
When it comes to 'Linux' and Free/Opensource software 'Business' is a 'use case', it isn't 'the game'.
Look, if you want Windows, use it. If you want OSX, use it, etc. (ad nauseum). But, don't come whining about how something doesn't work when the whole philosophy of what you are whining about is that it is a hairy work in progress---if that is a problem to you you are clearly in the wrong game and do not, or will not (maybe even cannot), understand the rules of play.
Linux is not for everyone, nor every use case, but it clearly is also an accessible, usable, and effective solution for a large number of users and their needs. My wife knows nothing about what makes a computer tick, but gets on fine with her Lubuntu laptop (and all I have ever had to do with it is an occasional update).
OTOH my desktop, running Mint (and occasional experiments), needs fettling on and off because I persist in fiddling with it---I'm sorry, but I can't help it, it's why I enjoy using Linux, because I am free to play around breaking things, fixing them, learning stuff, and generally enjoying my non-work (work means Windows) computing experience.
So, by all means wallow in your chosen pit of despair, but please don't kid yourself that because you haven't chosen what someone else has that their choice is fundamentally more stupid than yours. I am quite aware that my choice is the superior one.
the technical word for it is 'boondoggle'. That is all we need to know.
My name is Adiar, and I am a Linuxoholic. My last fix was yesterday.
Kaltern, what's it like back there in 1998?
Hard day at the office wrangling Windows, eh?
Mint, Windows, OS-X---come on, apart from the fanbois who just can't handle the truth, everyone who cares knows that all OS's and their various GUIs suck. I mean we're talking about trying to make a fiendishly complex system reasonably simple for your average non-techy human being to use. Result: modest success, with plenty of hairy bits around the edges and under the shiny still lurking around to trip up even highly experienced geeks.
Windows sucks, it's crap, has been for years, and MS are still trying to come up with a glossy cover that doesn't reveal too much or too often the abject crapness behind the scenes.
Linux is crap too, but it's a different kind of crapness.
OS-X---don't get me started; what a steaming pile!
So, pick your poison, learn it, use it; but for pity's sake don't waste your time turning your preference into a religious issue, or crowing about how much better it is, because it isn't---it's just a different kind of crap that you happen to prefer.
You're obviously keen on Windows. I clearly think you are some kind of masochist.
Linus isn't an 'unpleasant person' because he enjoys bullying people, but because he has no patience with bullshitters, or anyone who's more concerned about their ego than about the quality of their code and their willingness to be part of the solution.
Fit for the workplace? Definitely, there's a clear job to be done, and if you can't stand the heat or aren't up to the job then what the hell are you doing in the kitchen?
If Linus is gratuitously rude in order to hurt and/or manipulate people that is different, but I can't say I've ever read a quote where that seems to be the intention; he seems far too pragmatic and focussed for that kind of egotistical bullshit.
to tell me that I needed a smart meter. I asked them if things had moved on since this:
and copied them Chris's letter.
I've heard nothing since (that was six months ago).
Chris, don't worry yourself about what other folks are getting on just fine with (and at very small financial and time cost). You carry on using what suits you - it's that 'freedom' thing. No doubt you've heard of it.
here's my attempt at the logic, and it's advice us meat sacks often struggle to apply, but a bot should have no problems, simply this:
# Speed is a function of available data; always ensure the safe stopping distance is proportional to relevant data.
This means that if approaching a blind bend or a fog bank on a mountain road, where the human driver may well think, 'Got to push on; this is fun, what are the odds of meeting something coming the other way anyway. Yipee! <CRASH>
The bot will 'think': 'Can only see 7m ahead; slow to safe stopping speed within 7m'.
The bot coming the other way thinks the same. They both stop safely. It's what happens next that's interesting.
Boring, maybe. Safe, probably.
'@ "As for the God angle - really, why do non-religious people assume all religious people are narrow-minded, joyless and doctrinaire?"
Because they really are, by and large?'
OTOH, they really aren't, by and large. We could go on like this all day, couldn't we. My experience, which now stretches over several countries and more than 30 years of 'active faith', is that your experience, whilst possibly common, is by no means the norm.
So, 'religious people' are generally, in my experience, pretty much like all people, when it comes to the proportion who are 'narrow-minded, joyless and doctrinaire'---which may be about what we should expect, although I would hope, at least when it comes to Christian faith (which is what I know about) there would be a tendency for a lower frequency of those negative qualities, given what lies at the heart of Christian faith.
Anyhow, roll on the discoveries' out there' as well as 'down here'. It's exciting stuff.
'I'll still prefer to associate with people who don't voluntarily forego the use of their brains.' - well that goes for me too, and I'm a paid up Christian.
Funny how we can find 'brainless' people all over the place; or maybe it would be more accurate to say closed-minded, prejudiced, bigoted, self-righteous, etc. You know the type, they can only accept their own point of view, get all defensive if anybody suggests anything different, and are quick to pour scorn and mockery on the 'brain dead people who refuse to see things my way'.
You find them everywhere: in the blogosphere, on the TV, in the office, down the pub, in our own living rooms, and members of churches too. They sit alongside the ones who are interested in all sorts of possibilities, finding out what other folk think and believe, and seeing what we can do to make the most of the limited time we have to explore and make choices about what matters and how to put it into practice.
In my experience I have found those generous spirited, interested, curious, and thoughtful kinds of people everywhere as well. Regardless of the label pinned on them they are usually by far the more interesting and entertaining.
I no longer use Windows, but in my dying years with it I gave up using AV, for exactly the reasons BOFH so engagingly cites. For about two years a small group of machines went commando, relying simply on common sense (and threat of an unpleasant death for wayward users). There were no problems. Perhaps we were just lucky. Perhaps the whole thing is just a massive exercise in inflating a real, but relatively minor and manageable, risk into a massive source of fear and paranoia that has as its sole purpose the repeated emptying of wallets for all eternity. Rather like the whole Windows ecosystem upgrade cycle actually.
Now there's the rub, actually they are.
In the same way that no one is forced to buy electricity off the national grid, and no one is forced to be borged by Google if they use Android.
Ease of use != freedom.
not whether it is technically better than what has gone before, or whether the boot process could do with a good overhaul, but whether it philosophically fits with the GNU-Linux/*nix mentality and ethos, and where systemd is going?
Systemd may be everything its fans say it is, but if that means a 'my way or the highway' approach, where previously people have been able to choose without crippling their overall setup, or severely limiting their access to downstream software through dependency issues, that is a 'bad thing'.
Most of us like things that make life easier, but when easier means trading in choice, independence, and freedom then there are questions to be asked, decisions to be made, and consequences to be borne.
On the face of it systemd sucks, but if the majority support it for the sake of an easy life, and end up losing freedoms that GNU/Linux tried to stand for, then we'll all bear the consequences of learning to love Big Brother.
The systemd fiasco is just the latest and most high profile indication of a trend. Big money has grasped the value of Linux as a workable alternative to the Windows hegemony, but they cannot allow all and sundry free range over its inner workings.
Have you noticed how over the last four/five years Linux is gradually becoming harder to maintain as core software moves away from UNIX principles? Android is the model, where the only way to get access to the inner workings to to 'jail-break' the device. The word tells you all you need to know. Big money wants devices that are appliances, with a 'No user serviceable parts inside' sticker stuck on the back. Software must be one of those 'parts'.
It's all about power and ownership. The good consumer of product is a powerless consumer. Nothing, or as little as possible, must be allowed to impede the steady flow of money from the consumer to the corporation, preferably by direct debit.
Linux now has enough traction in the commercial world (albeit behind the scenes; as far as most people are concerned it is invisible), that big corporate players are now desperate to take control, to lock it down, and to monetise it according to their whims.
No one need ever know they are using Linux when they pick up their shiny device, and they certainly can't be allowed to go poking around and taking over control. Systemd is merely a symptom of a process of take-over and control. There's no need to see a conspiracy, from the corporate point of view it makes perfect sense. Follow the money.
What is it about this human passion for tyranny? Stifling diversity, stomping on creativity, putting the boot on the throat of others and crowing, "I own you, sucker! Now just be good and give me your wallet, your first-born, and your soul".
For some people all that matters is the letter of the law and their stash, and even then the letter of the law better be serving their stash.
feudal USA. But, in this case the peasants may have won.
A good point, up to a point, but would you take the same view over the quality of drinking water piped to your house, or the consistency of electric current?
'The market', much as politicians like to bow and scrape to it when it suits them (and/or suits their paymasters) is not the be all and end all of human society.
We are grown-ups(!?). We are quite capable of collectively choosing how our society will be run, and what we hold to be essential services that will be delivered to arbitrary standards.
The question really is: are communications/data infrastructure now on a par with drinking water, gas, and electricity as basic universal services?
when you have a quisling government that listens far too much to the interests of big business.
There's nothing to stop the government enacting that X amount of coverage is a statutory obligation, blah blah. If the ISPs don't like it they don't have to play---but they would play, because they would still make their money, just perhaps marginally less. But then laziness and greed are always a potent combination, both in commerce and government.
Man, you're really stuck in the dark ages, aren't you. Plenty of people of faith didn't think much of that literalist analysis when it was first made, let alone today.
Or maybe you're attempting a little troll.
more like a surprisingly restrained response to the seemingly unending catalogue of presumptuousness and arrogance from a large corporation as it seeks to entrench it's monopolistic dreams, and milk its customers, with a piece of software that first and foremost is intended to serve the interests of said corporation.
Word is a functional and ergonomic disaster, barely suitable for writing letters, let alone any serious document. The only reason it continues to thrive (if that is the right word) is because of Microsoft's success in persuading/bullying large institutions and corporate entities into using it as the default standard.
MS can't be blamed for that, it's a corporate entity itself---it's what they do. The problem is we're talking about a tool. And anyone who uses tools knows that the best kind are the ones you hardly notice you are using because their design functionality and aesthetics have been so well honed to performing the intended task that that is all the user is concious of doing---getting the job done, without having to wrestle the tool into submission, or worry whether it is going to let them down.
MS Word is not that kind of tool, it's the other kind---a cynical bit of money grubbing corporate w*nk.
Now some may say that the above is an over-reaction, but considering what Word could be, given the time MS have had to make it into something useful and usable, I would argue my response is proportionate and finely judged. Of course others may beg to differ.
gains resilience through diversity, i.e. monocultural tendencies are dangerous to long-term survivability.
While superficially attractive, the desire for the OS equivalent of a monoculture is wrong-headed. Windows OS is a real world demonstrator---albeit a pretty crap one---of the dangers of wanting everything to 'just work' by being 'the same'---it simply opens the door to large scale attacks and the rapid propagation of faults generally.
A highly diversified system where there is always an alternative way of getting something done is inconvenient and apparently 'inefficient', but only when taking a short term or localised view.
The old fashioned 'Unix' way of small open source tools doing one thing simply and well, that can be strung together in any number of arbitrary combinations is still one well worth hanging on to.
It allows anyone to sit down and craft the tools they need, if what is on offer commercially or in house isn't quite scratching the itch. And it keeps the ecosystem lively and diverse.
If that applies at the local level it applies just as much, and even more importantly on a global scale. We really don't want to make ourselves even more vulnerable to pwnage than we already are.
There are no panaceas, but I would put up with a fair degree of 'inconvenience' for the sake of a robust diverse application/OS ecosystem that actually inconveniences the state/criminal scum and assorted other ratbags by an order of magnitude.
'Something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Microsoft?'
In the corporate cycle MS has reached 'Maturity, heading into Senescence' stage. Too big, too bloated, too arrogant, too late.
You do realise that this may simply be evidence supporting the old proverb about fools and their money being easily parted; or alternatively that there are always those who have more money than sense, etc.?
OTOH, it could just be great kit, and even after eight years they got good value for their money. I wouldn't know.
The logic might pass, but the premise is problematic, to say the least.
'The universe is infinite' - sounds cool, and in an abstract form it is cool, but what does it actually mean? Outside of a mathematical formula we actually have no idea what it means in practice because we still have such a meagre understanding of what is actually going on.
Rather like someone at the bottom of a very deep shaft claiming they know what it's like outside the shaft on the basis of what they can see through the hole way up there at the top. What they will see is a tiny bit of night sky, occasionally occluded by cloud. They may make some remarkably accurate deductions and assumptions, but until they manage to climb out they will never really 'know' what is there and how it all hangs together from a different, and much bigger, point of view.
Extrapolate and fantasize away, but please don't dress either up as 'fact' until you can plausibly demonstrate what is actually true.
Let the explorations and adventure continue...
'Military Grade' <=>'Windows OS': Does not compute!