Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:For starters... (Score 3, Insightful) 655

If he can't keep a woman around while being a billionaire I'd say that mental illness is called "ego".

I knew someone who was a "mere millionaire" who had the same problem.

It's not ego. Women don't come labeled with tags that say "sincere" and "gold digger" so you can tell who loves you because you're a wonderful person and who merely loves your wallet.

That's the real ego problem. Most of us would like not to have the "love" leave when the money does. Or, for that matter, when a higher "bidder" comes along.

Comment Re:A free search engine (Score 1) 143

Hmm...no, it's not. A Free Market just means that prices are determined by the forces of supply and demand. That's it, pretty simple.

Not according to what our local tax-is-theft basement dwellers say. They assert that any sort of restriction in trading is "interfering with the market." In other words, according to them, the Free Market includes interference with supply-and-demand by restricting the market. And that includes prohibiting a market althogether.

Comment Re:A free search engine (Score 1) 143

It's interesting that you think President Bill Clinton and Representative Barney Frank "got all Libertarian" when they did that.

So did a lot of Democrats. Of course back then, you were still allowed occasionally to cross ideological boundaries without being labelled a traitor to your party.

Comment Re:A free search engine (Score 1) 143

In the US, banks had been prohibited from selling securities ever since the Great Depression.

But that was against the principles of the Free Market. So Congress got all Libertarian and repealed that prohibition.

Banks started selling securities again and we ended up with the Great Recession.

We obviously didn't return to unrestricted Free Market principles fast enough, if it was only a recession.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 2) 731

For the case where the entire OS becomes one big module.

"Modular" to the rest of us means that if we want binary logging, we install the binary logging package, if we want legacy logging, we install the legacy logging package, if we want some other custom logging, we can install that instead. There may be a default/preferred package, but distros can be built using alernative packages without tearing half the OS apart.

It doesn't mean we go the Windows route: 'Oh, you want to "uninstall IE"? Well, we'll let you turn it off --- IF you INSIST, but we'll keep a bunch of IE crap around littering up the system.'

Comment Re:BSD is looking better all the time (Score 2) 731

I had trouble with init scripts. The systemd init subsystem was a better approach. The problem was, systemd also brought in a lot of stuff that wasn't directly part of the init subsystem that I didn't want, don't want, and don't see any probability of ever wanting.

Because Poettering doesn't understand "modular", I don't get just the good stuff - it's all or nothing. And because systemd isn't even modular as an overgrown bloated monstrosity, the only way to avoid it is to either run old distros or some other OS entirely.

Comment Re:Cryptic command names (Score 1) 731

I knew someone would bring this up.

You could also turn selected Cadillac models into decent automobiles by tossing the factory-installed diesel engine and replacing it with a gas-powered Chevy engine. There was quite a prosperous industry in doing just that.

Did that justify using crappy diesel engines in the first place?

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 2) 731

Apparently, however, Poettering was out having a few beers when the "modular OS" concept was being discussed. So he doesn't know how to create "shit on his machine". Instead, he has to integrate it so tightly into the OS that the shit must be on everyone's machine, whether they like it or not.

Which would be bad enough to begin with. Whoever gave him the right to make his shit the essential system component of the Red Hat OS without consulting anyone has a lot to answer for.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 731

He bring new code, but brings nothing new. That's called re-inventing the wheel, and in Poettering's case, the old wheels worked better and didn't go flat as often, and were easier for average people to fix.

Oh come on, admit it. Unix always had the reputation that the "average person" couldn't do anything with it.

What we're dealing with now is something that neither "average person" nor "master geek" find easy to fix.

Comment Re:Ubuntu _is_ primarily a desktop OS... (Score 1) 167

No I'm not. The world isn't the binary place that the political pundits want us to believe it is.

Ubuntu is quite definitely a desktop OS, just like Fedora. But both Ubuntu and Fedora have connections to enterprise services. Fedora's is more direct, since it's the proving ground for Red Hat, but Ubuntu has its enterprise contributors as well. And some of them are doing more than just porting Red Hat these days - they're doing original work in their own right.

Biology grows on you.

Working...