Actually that's a blockquote. A citation is when you say where you got your info from.

Here's a citation:

See what I mean? That's not really a citation... I just put quote tags around my own words.

I suspect you actually copied and pasted that from somewhere instead of making it up yourself, but if you don't cite that source, then it is impossible to tell the difference between sock puppet and actual citation. I see you've been modded up which means people on /. don't really care whether there's a citation or not as long as it sounds official.

Replying to myself. XRPA does in fact work with the following caveats:

1. It does appear to use bitmap tossing and probably for this reason is painfully slow over low bandwidth connections - far more sluggish than Windows' RDP.
2. Like "screen" for console apps, you'd have to have started the application in the xrpa session in order to be able to attach it to a remote screen.

No, I mean can start an application running on machine A and displaying on A's display, then access that same instance of the application from machine B's display, then display C if I want etc., all the while never exiting the application running on machine A.

xrpa seems interesting but appears to be VNC for X, not actual X. This is what the GGGGP was referring to as "bitmap tossing" which is pretty useless over slow connections while windows RDP is not.

Which is exactly what I was talking about. Windows has provided this capability for over a decade and linux has not except with VNC which is unacceptable.

The X server that the application will connect to is based on the value of the DISPLAY environment variable at the time it is loaded. Backgrounding and then foregrounding won't result in it sending it's stuff to a new X server. In fact, once it's attached to an X server, it can't be detached and reattached to another X server. This is a limitation of X -- the very limitation that I was talking about.

In addition to this, the screen session inherits and keeps the DISPLAY variable set during the X forwarding session. Therefore anything started in that screen session, regardless of where that screen has been reattached to will actually run through the original X tunnel and back on the original SSH client machine.

I.e. if I SSH -X to a host and start a screen session that you attach to. Even if I detach my screen, as long as my SSH session is open, you could attach to that same screen and use it to start applications on my desktop.

The problem with things like XRDP is exactly the same as the problem I've been explaining. If I start an application against one X server, then network transparency is from there on useless to me. I can't simply move it to another server. With windows, this has always been possible.

Which one of those lets me start an application on one machine and then continue using it on another machine like Windows has been able to do for well over a decade?

With all the praise that X gets for its network transparency, it's mostly unusable except on the highest bandwidth links because its synchronous calls and uber-chattiness make it unusable without adding a wrapper around it, like NX does. That's the irony. Pretty much any protocol can be called "network transparent" as long as that includes writing a suitably complicated wrapper for it. In this regard, X is no more network transparent than any other display technology.

Alright. Now when we can have the same desktop span multiple cards we'll have caught up to windows of 12 years ago.

The Beatles' use of drugs is epic and is regarded by the band members and others as a huge contributing factor to their work.

There seems to be a lot of evidence that the brain's ability to be logical and to be creative are actually competing functions. You can have both, but an expansion of one is often a contraction of the other. That drugs seem to diminish rational thinking and promote creativity is not exactly controversial.

For jobs that require a lot of both creativity and rational thought (e.g. software development) people report getting a bit stoned during the creative aspects, then doing the rational thought parts sober.

By mentioning "Atlas Shrugged" in your post, you have invalidated your invalidation. Original post stands.

You didn't fix "falicy"?

You must also be from the U.S. ;)

What is stopping them from doing that now?

The estimate on Kickstarter is not a promise. You estimate how long it might take. The reason you estimate is because it hasn't been done before. If it had... there wouldn't be a Kickstarter.

I had assumed this was posted from an alternative universe where "fall by 300%" makes sense.

So what was the bad experience you had with a first gen SSD besides not having one?

Why would this be unmentionable? One party wants to make it easier to get these guns. The other party has said over and over that this will make things like school shootings worse and more common. We now have another school shooting. It's the worst we've had. Why are we pretending to not notice the relevancy? What would be the appropriate time to notice that what they said would happen happened?

What about rain? I am not sure I want my new shirt to turn back into slime if it gets wet.

P.S. This post was NOT a joke.