the good thing about gnome3/unity is that it provides an excellent oportunity to realize you don't need it. nor gnome. nor kde.

get yourself a pure window manager (dozens to choose from, most of them totally customizable) and be done with the "desktop" mentality once and for all. it will work with any linux.

you'll have to learn a few basic things: how to split windows and switch between them, how to launch programs, errr ... not much more. oh, and forget about leaving your crap on any "desktop". get used to keep it organized, already. after 30-60 minutes of exploration you should look back at windows, macos, kde or gnome as bizarre aberrations from a infantile and baroque past. so much for user experience.

compared to awesome or i3, the whole

good for me that i don't give a shit about what OS the average user chooses.

the average consumer eats processed shit, wears slave produced shit, regularly buys useless crap, uses closed software from locked gardens, gives away his privacy with a smile, votes every 4 years to maintain a soft fascist status quo, swallows shitloads of propaganda daily and in general has no fucking idea about how the world he lives in works. nor does he give a shit.

feel identified? ok, you might as well use Microsoft Apple (c) products, let's not make a drama out of this. move on.

Whatever takes slashdot "editors" to enhance the dullest stories to flamefests: loaded questions, misrepresentations, blatant errors, typos, dupes, general trolling, etc.
You know you like it.

right except the part where you call someone a lameass just for working on a different use case.

you wouldn't use the same approach and investment for a social website and a satellite control system, would you?

this. agile was the experience of a group of highly skilled and motivated professionals in a very specific setting. they had intuitively adopted some practices that were already known, and then called their whole experience "agile" and produced a recipe for it.

what few understand is that this recipe is simply not universally transferable. talent and motivation are the real drive. given those, everything else can be figured out in many ways: probably any combination will work in such a team, they just chose what suited them best.

but none of them will work in a zoo. no matter how many evangelists and bananas you throw at the monkeys.

opening that email in a plain text editor would have been enough, and more informative too. even outlook, i vaguely remember, had a "view source" or equivalent option.

allowing html or media to be embedded in email seemed a cool idea but we have never been prepared for it.

otoh, allowing private software to be used in public affairs is just idiotic.

layman here, but it surprises me that something is considered cryptographically secure when a mere 10x bruteforce cost factor makes a difference. even 300x sounds small. how difficult is it then to bruteforce with 1000 iterations? it should be unfeasible with foreseeable technology. the need to make anything unfeasible 10 times more unfeasible is counterintuitive to me.

ok, but this is just our cultural karma. say, any musician that seeks fame and fortune must go for canned commercial tunes and videoclips in the fashion of the moment. there's still a lot of musicians that won't get fame or fortune, but produce honest, original and good quality music.

the issue here was cost as in "time is money and if you have to produce 5-6 stories a day, it's just impossible to do them professionaly". a reporter might be sensationalist and even a bit biased and still take the time to do some investigation or fact checking, if he just isn't asked to do so for 5-6 stories a day.

in the end what happens is that there is not enough demand for professional journalism in the market. that's us. we have been trained into to gossip and bias, we want it, it sells, it pacifies ... so why should it change? i guess the last thing that media corporations want is informed and critical reading, so much for informed, critical writing.

at some point it will be even machine generated!

i'd say newspapers are struggling to maintain an outdated business model, as customers are not wlling to pay to support the overweight accumulated on it for decades, just for gossip which can be found for free elsewhere. if newspapers actually did invest in delivering investigation journalism instead of printing gossip this could change. maybe! there's a risk. i would gladly pay for it, but i don't know if there really exists a big enough market for that. but for sure it also would require strong work ethics and real passion for the subject, and those are not characteristics you'll find in nowadays direction boards. to these it's irrelevant if they are selling news, footballs, napkins or burgers. they rather just keep publishing the gossip that works and go for advertising, or grab funding from interest groups. if they are not already owned by such groups. for that you don't need first class professionals. underpaid copywriters are just fine.

of course it's not black or white, but i do not think there is a direct and relevant relationship between what customers pay and the quality of work / remuneration of professionals doing actual work. that isn't true in any big business nowadays.

you are not listening.
http://www.businessinsider.com...

the reporters' salary is but an anecdotical tiny fraction of any news suscription you pay. this renders your entire argument pointless because your measures are meaningless.

also inaccurate. how many stories has a reporter to produce to cover the salary of an executive in the media industry?

fire the executive, hire 50-70 reporters. voilà: professional journalism in every story.

Flash IDE ?
Is that a parallel ATA solid-state drive ?

so you can read. great!

keep practicing and someday this will become a very useful skill. :-)

stances on things like abortion and gay marriage are just attitudes to herd popular support into opposing factions. works pretty well given there's enough uneducated population to create the illusion of a tension, an actual clash of ideologies where there is none, really.

politics is about power, and has always been extreme right wing. abortion? gays? death penalty? environment? religion? wellfare? education? power doesn't give a flying fuck about these issues.

now you just wait for my hitman, smartass!