This article isn't about Firefox, you single minded oaf!
This article isn't about Firefox, you single minded oaf!
Now you've got me wondering if I'm actually thinking of twm. It all started so long ago... over half a lifetime ago... *LOL*
No, I mean trying to figure out how Motif/CDE did menus so I could customize them. Frustrating as hell before I got that working... no Googling for answers back then -- you had to actually RTFM, and the manuals sucked most horridly.
Because then Encyclopedia Dramatica will create a page for your "Hero"-ness.
Remember, kids: if it was the drugs that made you do it, you get no points.
I use adblock.
My point was I like Slashdot for example to be paid only by ethical ads. To me I am willing to compromise and if a site is an asshole and uses 30 ad networks per page then 100% get blocked and they get no money.
My point of view is it gives sites and ad networks an economic incentive to be ethical by adblock plus allowing only ethical ads with strict criteria with the option to block all.
Not necessarily true.
How adblock plus works is they need to allow acceptable use to be able to display and you can still disable that. This means no full screen ads, sounds, malware, zombie cookies you can't delete in flash, redirects, etc.
Websites still get paid only if they allow ethical ads. I am a fan of this as I do want to pay Slashdot and other sites. It is only fair that I take up their space, time, and bandwidth right?
Sorry, adblock, time to let your product die and we will go on to a product that actually blocks ads
So then. Tell me how it feels to steal from Slashdot? After all that is what you are doing with ublock.
I want to support websites with ethical ads that do not serve malware. Adblock is perfect!
- No annoying video ads
- No sound ads
-No redirects where you have to hit somewhere else to go back to original site
- No malware or sub contracts to any other ad network which usually does not have great security teams to check for malware/viruses
- No zombie cookies in flash that can't be deleted
If Slashdot wanted to be an asshole and use the worst ads with +30 ad networks per click they would get 0 money from me on adblock.
If Slashdot wants to be ethical but raise money. Then they will get money from me on adblock.
What is fair? Hosting Slashdot is certainly not free. Want to pay a subscription instead? I think adblock is perfect and ads a financial motivation for ad networks to be ethical and stop insane tracking and not infecting people with malware for ask toolbars and compromising the security of their systems.
Come on. You can't have it both ways as all you are doing is encouraging HTML 5 ads that can't be blocked or worse HTML 6 mandated DRM ads that can't be turned off where websites on non win32 platforms won't load or something else website owners and ISP's will enforce next to maximize on money. Here is a hint. They do not care about you. Sorry.
Many FOSS projects are all about the fun of programming them, not about having a user base. Such projects get put "out there" in the hopes that someone might someday find them useful, but it doesn't really matter to the people working on them whether they ever have a substantial user base, as long as it continues to be fun to program and work on the project.
If user base was what counted to me, I'd have abandoned MSS Code Factory years ago. To this day I've never had more than 100 or so downloads in a week, and usually more like 10-20. But it's fun. It keeps me entertained. And that is what really "matters" to me; not it's popularity.
"Popularity breeds contempt."
You call it "Stockholm Syndrome"; I call it being "willing to learn".
Fully half of the things I see people complaining about over Gnome 3 have been fixed over the years. But they keep on bringing up bugs and issues that were with the
Being ignorant of something is forgiveable; it can be corrected through education. Remaining willfully ignorant about something by refusing to educate yourself is stupidity.
A "serious try" meant spending more than five minutes playing with it. It only took a day or two to get used to.
Many desktops, like Motif, took weeks to learn in comparison.
*shrug* Gnome 3 is different, but it isn't that bad if you take the time to learn how to work with it. I was frustrated with KDE 5 after many years of being a KDE advocate, so I gave Gnome 3 a serious try a few months ago and am now quite comfortable with it on my desktop. Contrary to the bleating of people who whine about it being "touch-oriented", I don't find it to be so at all.
But I'm not a "normal" desktop user. I've used so many desktop environments since the '80s, starting with the Amiga and Atari, that I really don't have much for specific expectations of "how a desktop should work." OS/2 Warp, Windows, Mac Classic, Motif, Sun's desktop, the environments provided by HP and IBM workstations, KDE, XFce, Gnome 2, Gnome 3... there really isn't much in common amongst them other than that they all had windows of some sort.
How do you "kill off" an open source project if the public is willing to take over the development and maintenance? Sure you may be continuing with a non-open-source branch of the code for your own products, but that doesn't stop anyone from working with the last released code base.
"Evil" is just a lot less subjective than "the right thing." The "right thing" for what reasons? What motives? Whose benefit?
Evil, on the other hand, is a much clearer term in most people's minds.
My passwords are strong but I'd probably give them up if someone started hitting me with a $5 wrench.
I want an update for my old SNES. Just because.
Remember when things were sold "as is" and there was no such thing as an "update"?
In space, no one can hear you fart.