The GE Nishika 3D Light Bulb
I wanted to hear that narrated by Vincent Price.
"Sounds technical and complicated, but don't worry. This light bulb is as easy to use as any you've ever owned." ... It's as easy as 1-2-3!
35 posts • joined 17 Jun 2008
The past 15+ years indicate that a revolt won't be happening. The people of China have the same type of oppressive regime, and so does Russia. Even the US with all its crooked congress in DC continues to "regulate" people's behavior/lives (both sides equally). The difference, IMO, is that western countries sell their despicable intent as beneficial to you/children/safety/etc. And in small portions, easy to swallow for the general public. There won't be a revolt. Either it's an astroturf movement, the momentum is short-lived, or it's plain ol' anarchistic behavior.
And bloodshed is certainly not the answer here. It would be if the ruling class actually killed people for their ideology, race, etc. And, so far, they haven't tried that in modern, western society (forget edge cases).
But suppose a revolt does happen. Assuming that everything will get magically better is "romatic" at best.
So, how much for a license? Can it be revoked? Is it like EasyPass? Are at least the political elite exempt as usual?
But then again, why not just tiptoe around common sense and silly documents like the US Consttution and just request the "digital fingerprints" on the "Information Super-Highway" from the Google and Facebook directly? Why not just regulate ISPs to cough up traffic data? It's been done with AT&T on phones, can be done again?
Then I stand corrected.
Actually a much better response than I thought I would get! It still leaves me uneasy that socialism enjoys the fanbase it has, but I can then decouple it from the actual dictatorship Hitler helmed.
I still stand by the analogy that the US is voting for a Prom King/Queen, without considering the advertised platforms.
It is scary that Trump garners so many supporters. Consider this: Many people in the US do not like where things are heading - in a political, financial and social sense. They feel powerless, and latch on to anyone loud enough to voice their angst and anger.
Individualism is still a thing here in the US. That doesn't mean the backwards dummy who y'all think of, gun-clutching and bible-toating. No, it is people who do not think that we have a forced responsibility without accountability. That is diametrically opposed to socialism, communism, progressivism, and other liberal concepts. Good as they may seem in their basic idea, they are always more restrictive and punitive under the guise of doing something really good; usually, for some intangible like "for the children" or "the unfortunate" and curiously, never for the individual benefit. *
Trump is not the answer. I don't see anyone who appeals to me on the conservative side.
But when I look at the liberal side, there is even less. Socialism is not an American value. Neither is Progressivism and certainly not Communism.
Ignoring or circumventing law, for whatever means, is what we would like to avoid. The right will use religious reasons, the left will use social reasons. Moral and social justice if you will.
Don't believe that Trump, as the idiot individual who he is, represents conservatism. He doesn't, and given his recent "conversion", I would like to believe his ambitions being based on some psychological problem - he just ain't right.
But to believe that liberals have all the answers, that they do not have heinous/stupid ideas would be the assumption of a fool. Sadly, that is the hip thing these days. We are all global, we are all community, blablabla.
In my experience and opinion, any liberal stance changes once the individual is directly affected (being at a disadvantage) by those idealistic leanings.
* Political platforms based on religious beliefs aren't much different. I am not talking about those, since most of you are quickly (and rightfully) opposed to a theocracy. Google Sky Cake
Clippy shall return to protect us from ourselves!
I think Trump had a series of mini strokes. Either that, or the nails holding that carpet on his head are too deep.
Sidenote: Nazis were national SOCIALISTS, which we find where on the Murrican spectrum? Ah, yes, the liberal left (Iooking at you, Bernie).
There is no good choice with the Presidential Prom King/Queen. They are all bad, all say stupid things, have shoddy pasts, and most are proven liars.
Got a call from a friend's parents "Our plugin needs updating!" I assumed (correctly) it was Flash, and I showed them where to go and how to upgrade it. This was after we had a fruitless discussion about removing it completely - "Oh no, I need Flash to play my [card and casino] games..."
Most people who just have a computer for plain home use (online games, browsing, email, shopping) have no concept of how to keep their machines secure, or even updated. That's a reality, and certainly/sadly not new.
Would it be apropos to say: You are to dumb for a real computer, get an iPad/Fire/Galaxy/etc.
You should have read the books.
Most people may not be like the horrible that Rand describes, but those some are usually found in key positions (rulers of any flavor). That is annoying to those of us who like to be without the deep-dicking that usually comes from rulemakers - those that claim their doing is best for some group as opposed to siding with the individual.
Given Atlas Shrugged is a dystopian novel, much like Fahrenheit 451 or 1984, you should understand that archetypes dominate the settings - it is fiction, after all. Of course they differ from her almost ridiculously comprehensive papers, but I trust you can spot the difference.
In the US, the target of Atlas Shrugged, individualism reigned supreme. You may call it self-centered, but like it or not, we all are selfish. Not in the idealistic terms - you are right -, but in general we are more selfish than altruistic. You do not sacrifice yourself for some intangible "superior" goal. I give away a secret you certainly don't know about: Read the first pages of The Virtue of Selfishness to get the meaning of the title. Read the rest to understand her argument. You haven't... which is why I suggest it.
Following and discussing your argument is largely meaningless, as you won't change your mind on how horrible and dispassionate those damn objectivists are.
How exactly objectivism raises monsters remains bafflingly absent. If you mean the discouragement of emotion-based actions, there you have it. But monsters are those that use only (blind) feelings and next to no logic - you correctly identify them as SJWs. I extend the horror to anything not featuring logic. You may include any popular, deity-based religion.
Where exactly do you get the bigot part from? Feel free to point out examples, to any of your fun accusations - as you undoubtedly have such great familiarity with Rands texts. Trait, explanation, example/scene - you should be able to come up with three with absolute ease. Pretty please, with cherry on top.
In case you can't, refrain from formulating quick generalizations. You made accusations, back up your claim.
Miss Baker is adorable. I like her point list, which sounds to me like 12 Reasons Why I Want a Divorce. Her stance is a fun read, since she could not commit less to it. Oh, she wants a divorce, but not if she is the only one helming it.
Thunderbird is a good email client. It works on most OSs, even legacy ones, employs encryption like no other, and (mostly) adheres to standards.
The only thing it needs from Firefox is the Gecko rendering engine. The rest should be overhauled and or fixed. Rip out skins and "Personalities" (aka resource-hogs), change a confusing plugin repository, add comprehensive SMTP management (we could blame Google in part for this).
I know that I am overly simplifying this, but I don't see why Thunderbird can't stand on its own feet (Open Email Foundation, Apache Email, etc). I get that Miss Baker was CEO and knows a thing or two about a legal thing or two (and China) - well paid for a non-profit, I think they have ideals in mind and not paychecks. Perhaps Google is doing some strong-arming, who knows. Google just doesn't play well with TB, which sharper tongues find unsurprising.
Mozilla, (perhaps or perhaps not) according to Miss Baker, is not interested in Thunderbird. And I actually tend to agree with her choice to divorce the email client. The company (people get paid, it's a company) makes a second-rate web-browser next to its successful competition (Chrome), which is owned by its biggest bank-roller. You cannot come up with a dumber movie plot. Add to it that the focus is "the web", which is where it's at, according to Miss Baker. Web OS, web APP, web WEB... probably all in the cloud.
Thunderbird, aka Mozilla's red-headed stepchild, has a brighter future elsewhere.
In regards to her list ( https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.governance/kAyVlhfEcXg ) I translated her divorce proposal, thusly:
1. We have actualized, fully, you are a stick in the mud.
2. Same point as (1), and we think it's not worth it. We say "not good for either of us", so it sounds balanced.
3. Using "Competing Demands" a third time should establish the sound byte - we'll do more throughout. I'll fill the rest of this point with manager-speak; essentially, same as (1), and you are too slow.
4. Having varied interests may be good or bad, I take no actual stance. We could work for a common goal, broad standards (which I may or may not support), like we did in the beginning when we used to have an array of apps, but Google is footing my bill, so there we are.
5. I will not name names, but I think a significant yet mysteriously unspecified number of people believe you are unable to fully actualize - no disrespec'.
6. More argument-weighing to imply that I make a considerate point. Essentially, we should have divorced a long time ago, and I blame myself for stringing you along; quite honestly, you had it coming.
7. And I am not saying you are bad, but you are. Cause X is important, and you just aren't.
8. We want to set you free. We'll separate, but you may have to leave the car, and the furniture as well. Since you are dumb, we'll need someone to help you. Yes, you are truly a burdon.
9. My White Knight and I will help dictate what is best for you - we can't just let you go unscathed. I wrote this hastily, and my lack of proofreading will probably confuse you. But that's not important, since you are worthless.
10. We are your best bet for you, probably, because we are awesome. We don't judge anyone of our people to help you in any way... pinky-swear.
11. We could work this out, if we weren't separating. And we separate because I think we just won't work out. It's, like, too hard. Maybe someone can skew some numbers for me? Calling all statisticians!
12. This should be a summary, but 12 Points sounds better than 11. If y'all think separatin' is a bad idea, holler. I am not saying we should, if you're against divorce, and I will be for it if you want it. Grouphugs!
Delightful episode, great visuals. I wonder if the explanations are so damn long for time reasons or so that granny understands the plot? That is the only real thing wrong with it - and that's good. Capaldi delivered, both visually and especially vocally.
So, why again do I care about the Hybrid Thingy? The doctor will win, the Daleks will be decimated... with a clever twist. Missy should be in the mix, River could be in the mix, perhaps a side of UNIT. There'll be a surprise failsafe for an outlandish, yet fully anticipated scenario. It'll be... fun.
"without a human companion by his side, anything can happen" - That never stopped anything from happening. Only difference, he has to talk more to himself than to Miss Explanation/Companion Cube.
I've come to terms with DW: No information about the Doctor will be disclosed (name, actual age, etc), and if so, it may be wrong or a lie or something. His big enemies never really die or get defeated (Daleks, Cybermen, The Master, etc), that won't change anytime soon. It's just a show, not a religion.
Oh: EPISODE, not ep! You are not saving time by calling it "ep", you brit ;)
Ever since it appeared, I have no clue what Google+ actually is. I do get the concept in general, but there is no real definition - with this article failing to elucidate. It is whatever you want it to be! Facebook, Yelp, iCloud, LinkedIn, Skype, etc. Most of those things are established, like it or not.
Getting users from existing platforms requires a dedicated gimmick (enter Google+). Free apps for desktop and mobile with dependencies, er "recommendations" along the way. Mix with marketing hype from Eddie "Director of Streams" Kessler.
I think Google+ is this: Your commitment to Google Über Alles. The exclusivity of all their products, and disavow your sinning ways of straying away from the Alphabet!
That is not the future, it is a fad. MySpace tried a revival, Apple tried Ping, and Google joins that conga-line of hyped up community creation. I can see companies hooking into their offerings, but that's it. I do not see their services as serious competition to Pinterest, Facebook, Twitter, etc with the unwashed masses.
I went to http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/ to read about details (also amiss in this love-letter of an article).
"And watch Google get better" is one of their three selling points. Let that sink in to appreciate the horror. "Mobile" is a feature, now. I could go on with how Orwellian Google is, how mashing everything together to tracking your every move is now a provable goal, wrapped around a big chunk of bovine feces.
But that would be doing the work of the article's author, hence...
Dear Ms Thomson, your article is horribly written. Your headline should reflect the overall tone of the article, not backpedaling at the end.
In that sense, it is baffling how Google+ would fail as you write that Communities "is proving very popular", followed by an almost gushing Google rim job.
I also recommend a crash course in writing, to get you started. Even if this is not the NYT, conform to a style guide. Capitalization (i.e. Director of Streams) has its place. Cut back on contractions - you are writing an article for readers, not a podcast script, not a blog post or op-ed.
With that, stop asking questions that you aren't answering. I have that question already as a reader, and it is your task to present an answer in the flow of an article, with argument for both sides, pretty please with cherry on top! You, Sir, are wasting my time reading mostly dumb padding. Your proposed answer is essentially "we will see", with nothing to go on!
Shaky cam, gimmicky characters, and a thin Who Dunnit story... what's not to like?
The episode isn't bad, aside suffering from Mary Sue Exposition, nee Oswald.
The ending was surprisingly good... creepy good!
It's enough to make the episode watchable. Small things do distract from it, like the sounds-like-GlaDOS modulated computer, unbelievable jerk soldiers (bonus: stupid muscle, instant army), the fingerpointing at the painfully obvious... i forgot count how many times we find the cast of a McDonald's commercial fighting against all odds.
Wasn't Danny supposed to replace Clara? He was yummy, and actually was developed as a character... not like "I won't remember anything traumatic or life changing" Oswald.
Doesn't it then strike you odd that this Dashlane referencing article is a bit Dashlane heavy, mentioning numbers about non-Dashlane-users... Because, they are in the business to sell you a tool to remember passwords? Now, fancy that!
And while I dislike Millenials (aka young whippersnappers), it's an easy target for exactly that negative "feel". "Oh they know everything, don't they?"
What, did the "old people can't handle passwords" argument poll so badly with the DASHLANE focus groups?
Thank you, El Reg, for a thinly disguised advertising fluff piece.
We certainly got answers and a Abrams/Lindelof mystery-box fail was averted. They could have given more of a headnod to Daleclara - had that actually happened, which we can argue until the cows come home. A Lovecraftian storyline in Doctor Who, and it was a mere cameo, sigh.
A major letdown with the Trenzalor event, and wasting episodes on whimsey and nonsense (snakes on a plane!!!) at the expense of properly closing a storyarc.
It's still a good show, but I have no hopes of Moffat pushing it beyond the boundaries of eye-candy, cheap mindf's, and cringeworthy puns.
I shoot you with my laser gun! - No, I have an anti-laser-shield! - Ah, but these are anti-laser-shield-rays, yeah - Uh, I went back in time to replace your laser with plain LEDs, HAHA.
It goes on and on... like damn five year olds playing space-cowboys.
At least Missy is deviously delightful. And the snake thing was clever, and those creepy hands. Compassion with the doctor, in contrast with Missy - who steals the ca... you know what...
Can I please have a Missy show? I rather watch that lunatic go through time and do evil than watch Goody Twoshoes Oswald do her... goody twoshoe things and speeches. I know that we should relate to her, because everyone else is larger or dumber than life, so we have relatable characters like pre-horse-chompers Rose, Asthma UNIT Girl, or The Rory. It's just not working with Clara.
So what happened to Danny, then? Weren't we supposed to get yummy Danny at the cost of Souffle Girl? A male companion for a change? Instead we stay with never-changing Clara, who keeps upbeat and naive, largely unphased by her boyfriend sacrificing himself. Amy was a strong, independent character - with Oswald, we get the dumbass in distress.
I am under no circumstances arguing the damn sunglasses. It's just hate-bait, move along now, nothing to see here... it'll be a screwdriver soon enough. Not like you could reshoot the next episodes anyway.
Moffat is the man who eats your dreams and craps nightmares in your head... he is so good with scares like that. I hope that will show this season.
We pretend that we are busy, and tell you what we "think" when marketing is done shoveling; just to let you know... you forgot about us, we think, so this is a reminder.
- Opera People
Thumbs up first poster, and true. Plus, the days when it was a shareware browser. I faintly remember the choice of nagging they gave the user. Something about a constant banner or something.
It was a neat alternative, but helped fracture development for the web - not to forget it's mobile shenanigans that transcribed pages. My memory gets really fuzzy there, but I think it did frames to tables or something - kinda like WebTV.
To help the bottom-line, they could sell their user's souls to Google... just like Firefox!
@Charles - The _absurdity_ of the original post is evident: "There is absolutely no way to ensure there are not backdoors. Same goes for Mac OsX."
That is the statement of someone wearing a tinfoil hat. Such idiots are not satisfied by rational, because the 100% unequivocal proof lies with the defense. The accuser merely has to judge the effort as futile or erroneous, and arbitrarily widen the burden of proof as necessary. It is an unprovable assertion, by design (perhaps more subconscious malice than overall stupidity).
The negative statement, as per example, is analogous with this: "There is absolutely no way to ensure there are not backdoor probing aliens."
I do not dispute the veracity of the original premise, in Windows' case by stupidity (not malice)... the clumsy assertion warrants anyone's criticism.
I will not get into the vaguery of the initial statement, regarding backdoors, be they system-provided or by third-party tool.
The absence of a guarantee does not give you the logical weight to make ridiculous claims. This is why we have idiotic arguments with Global Warming (I grew up last century, translate as you wish).
I fail to see application of Reductio ad absurdum. Quite simply, the original poster used idiotic phrasing.
The implied stupidity of the original poster is not finite by any means; furthermore, I'd say that he will always try to outweigh any evidence contrary to his original statement – because it would upset the view of government spooks as being lucky instead of capable... to bring it full circle with the actual article.
"There is absolutely no way to ensure there are not backdoors." Errm, you cannot prove a negative.
Your premise, not advice (as it is), sounds like an idea by Dan Brown.
I give you Microsoft, don't use - no discussion.
Mac OS X, install/use GPG, Little Snitch, protect via hosts file, don't install Adobe products. There's a start. Apple's convenient disk images, however, are not recommended - the libraries that provide for that feature are closed source.
Who, claiming a rational mind, would ever suggest the systemd team to touch anything else? I thought my sardonic post was (as Not That Andrew) points out, obvious in nature – maybe not trolling, but obviously not serious.
But to elucidate, I do not care for anyone who threatens to leave a project for what I perceive, kindergarten antics. Regarding the condition of his return, who the hell is he? It is stressful being a project admin, I can see that. But go out in a fiery blaze, or keep your wangsty trap shut, and the doom and gloom to yourself – you are a leader, after all.
Systemd, in my opinion, is a big heaping pile of bullcrap. Like the Euro, users of the end product had no say in its establishment. Greybeards know why it sucks, and hipster nerds have no clue.
I can point out at least 3 equivalents that ruin computing the same way systemd does. My downvotes will exponentially rise, and disagreeable douchbags will focus on those than the real issue.
Niedermayer may be a good and reasonable person who was worn down by his community. Not that the article showed that, and if he wrote those excerpts, I wouldn't want to find out more about him.
Being a developer is usually a thankless occupation, be it paid or not. Most people don't care who helped with Firefox, the linux kernel, or ffmpeg. Notorious people usually leave an everlasting expression (Mr Torvald), but I'll be damned if I remember the name of any systemd developer. And I looked them up a mere 24 hours ago.
So, popping up and posting diva drivel as a team lead does not make me scratch my head in amazement. There is no Charlton Heston moment at the beach coming along, because our ways led to apes running the show, now. They kinda are, but that's not the point.
You deserve ridicule if you are doing a dramatic heel-turn.
I am puzzled by the Ars Technica style downvotes, but I wear them as a badge if you disagree with me. I shan't provide any excremental excretions.
The troll icon exists, yes, but the intent was satanic in nature.
Niedermayer doesn't want to play anymore, fine. At least the ball ain't his, and he can't take it with him.
But ouuhhh, careful, he might retuuuuurn! Unless humanity changes for the better... he mightn't.
Hey, I have an idea! Now that systemd is running perfectly (since introduction, mind'sh), can't that team take over ffmpeg?! It'll be for the greater good.
Why don't I get a warm and fuzzy feeling from the fact that this idea is backed by bigger investment?
They do it solely for our benefits, I understand. Has nothing to do with them offering aaaaany licensing service. Completely out of the goodness of their hearts.
I think a lot of entertainment-industry lawyers splooge their pants about all this.
And let me guess, with fees and fineprint rules, an artist will see pennies on the dollar, if that?
"Telemedien", which covers e-books like movies and tv programmes, are regulated by time (after 2200 hours, german). The 'Murrican, puritan model does not apply (haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy - Mencken). IMHO, this is generic german obsession with rules than with morality.
The reason why Germany seems to have (a usually) balanced harmony of innocent grandma shows (pre 10pm) next to coprophilous rubber men orgies (10pm) is living with exactly those rules of separation. Protect the young, Jugendschutzgesetz. This did not stop me from watching Braindead when I was a teen, but it worked in general. Once you are 18, you are deemed capable to watch things like "Poopoo Platter, Part 8", buy furry handcuffs, and read all the smut until Mr Happy is rubbed raw. This is not to say that the JsG is always good, it has its flaws.
But morality is not the issue, here. Germans just just aren't technically savvy when it comes to the internet. Their obsession with HTML Frames suggests a systemic misunderstanding how it all works. It isn't too farfetched then, that they want to impose a window of time (germany has only one time-zone). A misunderstanding of technology, perhaps.
As to the (supposed) tranny smut, who knows. It may be the next 50 Shades or a Kafkaesque masterpiece. Odds are, it is rather saucy, and thereby verboten for youngens. And why wouldn't it be? Normal, abnormal, and questionable sexual material has an effect on an undercooked mind – so unpredictable, that it's worth protecting the young. Lest it creates a confused sexual deviant who makes problems for everyone else, down the road.
As to judging rules of timely access, let me take the liberty to paraphrase a retort to anyone living outside of Germany, having a problem with those rules: GTFO, we respect your silly rules, and these are ours, move along you tea-bagging whiners.
In other words, those rules may be incomprehensible to you, but germans have quite the history of being sexually aware in general. Kolle and Uhse paved the way in terms of sexual realization (it's just sex), and the fact the Reeperbahn and St Georg (both Hamburg) exist and thrive are testament to common sense morality.
I want to believe that Germany actually tries to precisely measure pornography – when it is, when it isn't. Americans punish you because "we don't know, but it probably is fun". And the Sand People kill you, because "no fun allowed".
Credit to @iSchluff for inspiration, above.
Schlauch is "hose" in that sense. The word "Schlauchgelüste" itself is a compound word – germans have about 100 words, the rest is compounds of those, usually prepending "ge", "ver" and often appending a lot of "heit", "keit", "bar", "en". There is phlegm to add more gravitas in front of a non-german audience, but I digress.
As nonsensical as the word seems to me, it may just be a dumb neologism: let me create a new word for ya, because I can. For example, Weltschmerz (old one, never dying), Fremdschämen (2009, get used to that one), Zeitgeist (not even you know what it *really* means), which have an established meaning, usually (and only) by repetition. If you take a closer look, most of those words have the stench of intellectuals clinging to them; usually, to invoke instantaneous head-nodding at dinner parties.
Wieauchimmer, Schlauchgelüste may just be like Fahrvergnügen (credit Volkswagen ad campaign). A word created for the purpose to be unique.
Just because it's german doesn't mean it has to make sense.
"Schlauch" *could* also refer to penis (think "trunk"), which makes sense with the lusting part, at least.
So, to answer your question: A definite maybe.
Caveat: This is the first time I have come across that word, and I cannot find a reference. Words can also be rather local, where someone in Munich knows a word that is not in use in Hamburg. So, I can be my usual ignorant/dumb self as well.
FaceBook offers no original content, their freetard userbase is egotistical and lacks self-respect. The website itself is mostly incomprehensible, confusing on purpose, privacy is practically non-existant, in short: FaceBook is a mess.
And it runs on PHP? The Tonka toy of programming languages.
So, they want an insider (well, contributor) who they can manipulate into changing Linux code to their liking. A company notorious for scrupulous and invasive information-gathering wants to meddle with the Linux kernel?
How about: Hell No!
Then again, I enjoy Mr Torvalds' rants just like the next guy who isn't the target.
That would be my conclusion... CentOS 6.5 perhaps (as I understand has a hybrid-startup-thingy-who-cares-it-works.) Debian seems to have the same, with the stable v7 introducing SystemD preliminary support (read: inevitably useless.)
Sidenote: have no problem with a better init system. But it cannot be half-baked (and xml, really?) if this goes into production servers. The FireWallD (vs IPTables) is a similar nightmare... all good ideas, with the best intentions, paving towards a very unpleasant place!
It's actually not that difficult to learn those new horrors. They are complex, idealistic nonsense, introduce a lot of pitfalls - things that you really want to avoid on streamlined servers. The pay-off isn't huge (yet)... and THAT's the problem. Ain't nobody got time for that.
@keithpeter, I absolutely agree.
@Trevor_Troll, you barely qualify to be read in Opie's Twitter-Voice.
I get that SystemD and Gnome 3 are the future. I cannot fathom why I'd want either "upgrades" (save yourself the explanations, I did my research better than you can flame me.) I like Coke Classic, and I will find a way to stick with a distro which does not overcomplicate my nearly-headless server needs.
I switched from RH to Fedora, and when I cut myself on the bleeding edge, I switched to CentOS... only to find out that simplicity is traded in for the "new and improved" glitzkrieg in version 7.
Why would I want Gnome 3 if I cannot have the access to the system as in Gnome 2? This is going on my email/http servers, older hardware, with no cycles to waste.
No, I will not learn how to "spin" a distro from CentOS, and I do not need advice in rigging things with Epel or other repos. I want to use my time to code awesome things in Perl (or switch to Python, since people are just bending over for Moose.)
So, party, party... for a linux distro that has lost its value to me.
And zip it. If you feel the unbearable itch to trollspond, let me know a good distro that uses tested, efficient, and proven technology and not some limited-feature/beta nonsense. I shall then quietly sit with the experienced admins and recite Torvald rants.
P.S.: It's annoying enough to have to disable SELinux - I know the implications, but I know what I'm doing... since I am not distracted by splooging over some "pretty" desktop.
Symantec has at upped the ante with the acquisition of PGP. I dare you (1) find it (desktop version,) and (b) download it, and (d) buy a license as a normal private user!
The developers came from the previous owner, which I assume based on the continued lack of fixing severe issues with Mac OS X (months after official OS release from Palo Alto.) Oh yeah, runs on Mavericks now, kinda.
Phase 1: Fix up PGP, put it back on its own domain, make it easy for customers to get/use and buy extra features.
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Profit
OR: Sell it off to someone who cares!
Oh, ya, and do those other things as well.
Alright, people. We need an unconventional advertising strategy... 2.0, ASAP! We will show those billions of possibly-potential customers lots of ads they can relate to. The teenage-boy footlover, let's see, candy, ambien and kleenex. That Dax kid, we'll place Ritalin and Men's Warehouse ads. What about those almost-worthy content providers, hmmm, what-to-do what-to-do. We have to SOMEHOW ride on their coat-tails. I know, self-help ads, especially weight-loss and beauty-tips.
Seriously, what ads can you place on content that is either ripped from TV, or supplied by M Night Shamalama-Ding-Dong wanna-be's? It's not like we have quality content on Youtube worth mentioning.
But that will not stop any of those suits to try and milk it for what it's worth, if they can reach an agreement with the companies that the average user steals the music, video, or the whole content of. And judging by the writer's-strike, you can expect this to get interesting.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019