The GIMP is brought up because it's the flagship application of the Linux/free software/open source crowd.

GTK+ is (basically) the GIMP Toolkit. GNOME is built on GTK+ and was at one time the only totally free desktop environment because KDE was built on Qt, which wasn't free-libre.

In fact, what would be really weird is if there were a Photoshop thread in which the GIMP wasn't mentioned.

An alternative question would be: why is Photoshop compulsively mentioned whenever there's a new GIMP release?

actually, it is paste. the paste function is named after paste.

the most interesting theory i've heard regarding this is that you'll have a portal gun in episode 3.

the possibilities, they would be endless.

Well, we can hack a game without dedicated servers, if we manage to successfully reverse engineer it. On a possibly not-good-enough example, look at OpenTTD, based on the disassembly of TTD. Sure, figuring out a protocol between server and client isn't the same thing, but there will always be a way to do it -- we just lack the right people.

Do you really mean this one:
http://www.google.com/patents?printsec=abstract&zoom=4&id=Ts5KAAAAEBAJ&output=text&pg=PA2
filed in 1919 and granted in 1928?

(That was simply the first one that had the word transistor in it in my search.)

If not, could you give a link to which one you mean? Thanks.

I am a citizen of the United States of America, and as such I will gladly lay down my life if necessary to defend my right life, liberty, and the freedom to pursue happiness. I will also gladly end the life of any tyrant that tries to rob me or my family of these rights.

Your move.

I think you're missing the point. They threatened rejection because they didn't want users to hear the name "Android." But dropping the banhammer on the word "Android" in the appstore only prevents people who already own an iPhone from finding out android exists.

What are they afraid is going to happen? Are they afraid iPhone users will drop their contract (pay an enormous cancellation fee) and switch to an android-based phone?

Your point was that "people by (sic) an iPhone because it is Apple and cool..." If that's the case, are you suggesting that "Android" will be cool (and thus a threat) because of the usage of its name in the appstore?

When I start seeing developments like this, I wonder if we as a species are developing faster technologically than we are maturing as a civilisation.

Are we wise enough to use such a technology, if it were developed to it's full potential ?

I'm sick of the dumbasses still playing Chess 2009. When will they upgrade their crappy hardware? HDTV has been available for years now. There's no excuse for playing old games on SDTV.

Hang on. Those bits of matter we're using to determine potential changes to physical constants are governed by physical constants. If every 1-meter rod in the world suddenly became a 1.0001-meter rod while we weren't looking, how would we know?

On short/medium-haul flights, it's a matter of naming. It's called First in the US, and Business in Europe (and everywhere else).

On Long-Haul/Intercontinetal flights on the other hand, there is usually 3 distinctly different travel-classes, and the differences between First and Business is about as big as the difference between Business and Economy. (With total seat-space at least doubling for each class you go up.)

I know that the copyright laws here in Australia have changed recently, but it used to be that we didn't have any "fair use" rights at all. The way the law stood, even local cache of a website for example, was an infringement. Thankfully that at least has been fixed.

I'm not too sure what the limits are now, but we don't have anywhere near the rights available in the US. Although we did get their extended length of copyright protection thanks to the Free Trade act. That's free as in free to get screwed over not in free as in beer... :/

http://www.copyright.org.au/pdf/acc/infosheets_pdf/g091.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_copyright_law#List_of_some_possibly_non-violating_actions_in_Australia

If it's an "insecure link" (which is the whole reason SSH was developed ANYWAY), then ANY connection is technically compromised. You can't just assume one that was established "sometime before" is more secure than a new one now. If you carry your assumptions through consistently, they're both compromised and you should just disconnect.

If you're worried that the possibility someone is going to perform an MITM attack on you is greater than infinitesimal, then there are far more important things for you to worry about than whether or not to leave your SSH sessions connected.

I'd be more concerned about security on the end points, particularly on the Windows XP machine. Not hard, but far more pressing than someone finding you interesting enough to insert themselves into your communication.

Unless you -are-, in which case you should manually perform the key exchange and never actually send the passwords in the first place.

Depending on how much stuff you need to bring, the ideal for me is to bring a small messenger bag on board (which you can fit under the seat in front of you, not taking up overhead space) for your laptop and other gadgets, and checking a small bag with your clothes and whatever else you need. That's pretty much the purpose of a carry-on... not to bring all your stuff, but to bring the stuff you need or don't want to potentially lose.

I usually fly with a small enough volume of stuff that I could do it all carry-on, but it's so much easier to just carry a small bag around than a huge carry-on. If you're going cross-country (I fly LA-NY several times a year) or international, not having to lug around a huge carry-on through the connecting airports is an incredible relief.

I'm a grad student with no money, so believe me, I am all about not paying for things if possible. I used to carry all my stuff on-board because they charge money for checked bags. It's such a pain in the ass that one time I decided to pay the $15 and check a bag. It was great, and now that's all I do.

I think what the parent's point actually was is that by having fees for checked bags, the airlines are making the flying experience worse in multiple ways.

First, the price... having to take out your wallet when you're checking in is insulting and psychologically offensive, after you paid $300+ for the ticket beforehand. If you pay for a checked bag when buying the ticket earlier, it's the same - "ok, my fare is $500... is it really going to hurt you to give me a checked bag? Do you *really* need that $15?"

Second, as the parent noted, because no one wants to pay everyone brings the largest piece of luggage possible as a carry-on. "Personal item" means another full-size carry-on bag to most people. I've never been on a flight within the US in recent years where the overhead space *wasn't* packed to the gills, even after some people are forced to have their bags checked. I can only imagine what the cargo holds look like - they must be practically empty.

That's probably a safety hazard, too - there's a lot of stuff in the cabin to potentially get in your way while you're trying to reach the exit.

To summarize, by charging for checked bags, the airlines have made the flying experience a lot more miserable for everybody and are creating a safety hazard.

Here's a hint to the airlines - if the checked baggage charge is really necessary to cover costs, raise ticket prices $15 across the board and give everyone one checked bag. No one will notice, and things will be a lot more pleasant for everyone.

I know this because most Asian airlines give you free checked bags, and it's very, very pleasant to fly on these airlines. There's never a shortage of overhead room, there aren't many people lugging around huge amounts of carry-on items through the airport, and you're not insulted by extra fees.