one compiler is the standard for Windows
That sounds like the source of the portability issues right there.
Perhaps that OS vendor could encourage more complier writers to support compliers for that platform.
why get excited for having a button for ctrl-v? do you also have a button for ctrl-c and ctrl-x? you make no sense.
At least here, "copy" (I assume that's what you mean by ctrl-c) happens automatically when you select a region of text by clicking and dragging the mouse. In that sense, the left button *is* the button you're looking for.
And "delete whatever is selected" (is that what you mean by ctrl-x) can be done by pressing 'delete' -- or if you're goint to replace it with something else, just typing that something else -- so it doesn't need a button or keyboard shortcut.
Just because one compiler for one platform fails to support a popular C extension doesn't mean the library isn't portable.
You can always choose to complie on that platform using one of the compliers that *does* support the extension.
Seriously - I like the form-factor of the device - and the price. The only thing that stopped me from buying one when they came out was the OS.
Request for Microsoft --- now that you're abandoning it --- please unlock the boot loader.
that is prohibited by law
This proposed law changes that.
Most VPNs are corporate.
I imagine corporations will fight back legally if/when their employees start getting hacked by the FBI.
I think the best thing in the world for internet privacy/security would be if the laws were changed to state: "You have no expectation of privacy in any plain text email (other other communication) on the internet. Any such content can be freely used by your ISP, email hosting service, governments, ad-agencies, spammers, etc. If you want your email private, encrypt it.".
With such laws, it would be a billion dollar opportunity overnight, and the internet would be much safer for it.
But instead, corporations trust policies and laws to keep email private - even though those policies can and do change on a whim (or a Patriot act).
Instead of relying on policies/laws to keep email confidential, I wonder if the internet would be a much safer place if the laws said that any unencrypted email has no expectation of privacy.
Unencrypted email should be thought of as more like a post-card -- where governments routinely scan them all for law enforcement.
If you want anything private in email, encrypt it.
And if it were widely thought of that way, corporations would insist on encrypted emails, so the email client vendors would make encryption easy instead of the pain in the neck it is today.
Because that would mostly hurt poor innocent people, and make more people hate the US.
If instead they could provide those people with reliable water, food, etc, it would become harder to radicalize them.
Is a gullible idiot
So wonder how many of the GuantÃnamo confessions worked this way.
Often I wish the E stood for English, usually that thought occurs when I am reading status reports and documentation from Engineers.
If you're having difficulty communicating with Engineers and part of your job is reading their status reports and documentation, I'd argue that the problem is on your side.
Their job is to do engineering well. Your job sounds like translating between their attempt to translate technical nuances into stuff that upper management can understand. Perhaps you need to spend more time learning more about what they do.
I half agree....
Agree that systemd's pretty much going to make Linux into more of a small niche product than it ever way.
But this seems to go far beyond RedHat --- with systemd advocates pressuring to Extend/Embrace/you-know-the-rest Linux from many sides.
And just because something's launched often doesn't mean it has to be sucked into systemd. Angry Birds is launched on Linux more often than most stuff the systemd guys play with -- but that doesn't mean all games need insane dependancies on an init system.
Your container example seems to be taking the wrong approach too.
Lightweight containers like Docker seem to suggest it's best to run a single service within a container --- so the last thing such a system needs an init system -- let alone the most bloated init system in the world. A it turns out, it's quite a pain in the neck to run systemd in a docker container.
Why would LibreOffice
You do realize OpenOffice does run in a server-mode.
It's useful for doing thtings like batch-processing word documents.
...ever be dependent on systemd?
I don't understand why 90% of the crap systemd's trying to suck in (like networking). Yet the systemd guys continue to glom everything in there.