Last year they aimed at $300k and got over $400k. This year, they asked for $500k and got $250k thus far...
Except that every year, sponsors hold out until the end of the year. Seeing 50% of goal before the major corporate donations is great. Last year they were far from their goal at this time.
Sorry, but this is a bit of doom saying by a Linux fanboi. There isn't even an article attached, just the donation link (thanks for spreading the word) and a some conjecture about what being only half way implies.
The reality is that even if FreeBSD fails to meet the $500k goal, it simply fails to grow that 66% increase from last year's goal. That's pretty much all it means. All jokes aside, FreeBSD is growing faster than their current infrastructure can keep up with. Hence the request for even more funding.
Sorry, but Firefox devs shouldn't be asking what the public expects. They should have enough sense to know two things: First is that if their market is demanding it. Second, as developers, the benefits over 64-bit native vs 32-bit virtualized.
But honestly, at this point I will only believe a 64-bit native Windows build from them when I see it. They have been promising this for around 5 years now with every major release. Yes, they build 64-bit nightlies, but they always stop at the betas, and have never delivered on their release promise. Not everyone wants to be the guinea pigs, and the same code builds into a fully functional 64-bit product on all of the FOSS platforms.
Disclaimer: I am a sometimes contributor to both Firefox and Chromium, and helped porting these apps to FreeBSD, where both build and run 64-bit native on the appropriate platforms.
Poettering is a zealot for a religious cause. It has nothing to do with truth or facts or even logic. His chief gripe isn't actually that BSD isn't keeping up with Linux, it's that BSD does things different from Linux and he doesn't like it. He tries to spin different as not keeping pace, but that's based on the assumption that the way he wants to do things is the One True Way. Mind you, he says this while simultaneously and purposely trying to keep BSD out of the party by refusing any and all compatibility patches that would make his One True Way usable on BSD.
Amazingly, the BSD people have a way of fixing this crap themselves. It's just more of a pain in the ass when people like Poettering actively work against their efforts.
Your best bet is an AS degree.
That's a great idea.!
Until you realize that and AS or even an AAS has approximately half the gen-ed requirements of a BS, and doesn't address his issue at all. The real answer he is looking for is to attend a trade school. But those degrees are generally seen as worthless, much like an AS.
Labradoodle's are fake? I bet all the Labradoodle owners would be shocked to learn their dogs are not real.
Maybe the author should research before he declares what's real and what isn't. I mean, his bad science isn't actually helping here.
The current leaks are out. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle. Syncing around the world will do no good if the centralized source synced against keeps vanishing and eventually stays vanished.
My point is, that the current damage is done. Yanking WikiLeaks offline is about preventing further damage, and when it finally does go for good, people will be left with a stagnant, yesterday's news version. A million mirrors of previously disclosed documents wont help future leaks get distributed, while the people mirroring the current ones are literally just stepping into harms way.
LibreOffice still depends on Java, which is also Oracle branded. OpenJDK doesn't release binaries, and Oracle still controls OpenJDK anyway. So Oracle seems pretty unavoidable right now.
I was awesome way before that. KEE KEE!
So many goody two-shoes following up on this... except none have you dimwits have been bright enough to suggest another way of actually getting these people to take threats seriously. Half assed wanna-be good samaritans, with no conviction to follow through. Go Slashdotter, go!
Maybe you should RTFA.
This guy took the non-dick approach. He got into their accounts and sent them messages from themselves saying how he did it and how to protect themselves. He even sent a followup after a while saying "I was serious". They still didn't care. I am saying, the warning should not be private/ignorable, after that.
If you want to call it bullying, so be it. But this is the equivalent of a bully saying "I am going to beat you up behind the school after class." and then you actually show up behind the school for him to do it. He may be the bully, but your still the idiot.
I didn't say they would be thankful. I said they would take personal security seriously. They either aren't bright enough or concerned enough to take a direct and courteous warning seriously. Most people DON'T take warnings seriously, until it bites them in the ass.
The problem being, people who really want to bite them in the ass aren't going to deface them. They are going to harvest information from them and use if for their own malicious ends. At worst, they can use the information to physically stalk, maybe even murder these people in real life.
I am saying pull some reversible mischief before someone does something serious. The only people who might lose their jobs over a hacked Facebook account would be those who work in tech security and should have know better. The odds of that are slim though.
What is it, if not "arrogance" that makes a person fail to take appropriate action for themselves? If someone tells you your shoe is untied, do you say thanks or just ignore them because tying your shoe is too much hassle unless you are tripping on it?