Posts by Sturm

Maybe this?
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=633403

You probably already stumbled on this but in case you haven't:
http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-HOWTO/Keyboard-and-Console-HOWTO.html

if ! ps -C <yourprocess> >  /dev/null 
then
    #do stuff if the process is not running
else
    #do some other stuff

you can close a process by using the kill or killall commands

It boggles me, how did you manage to get 13 seconds? I got over ~300 and quit due to boredom.

The = is an assignment operator. Use == instead. Your code would still need some fixing, but I'm sure you can figure that out.

I like European chocolate ice cream.

http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/docbook/en/fluxbox-docs.html

Just partition your drive.

How about MUDs? ;-p

The source is here

>Sturm, how is openBSD the most free?

No binary blobs.

You should probably try.9.53, not the ancient version packaged with Ubuntu.

openBSD is perhaps the most "free" of all the *nixes.

Enable JavaScript, problem solved.

err, I don't have access to a Debian system at the moment, so just as root aptitude update; aptitude upgrade; aptitude search wifi . You should find it.

>Wifi. It sees my card, sees my network, tries to connect, then fails. I can connect from my iPod, nit not Ubuntu. Aaaah.

I've experienced similiar problems when installing on my parents/relatives computers. Try using wifi-radar to connect instead of the default network manager ( aptitude install wifi-radar ). If this doesn't work, just use iwconfig , which should definetely work.

>Well, is there a way to put Windows XP at the bottom of the list and still make it the default OS to be booted?

Hypothetically, you could on every shutdown replace /boot/grub/menu.lst with your own menu.lst...

>People like that do exist, and they makes the ones who can throw away their morals when life gets hard look ridiculous.

People like that tend to lead poor and miserable lives.

Just uninstall your old kernels, that should fix menu.lst.

>well, if I paid for something, I will not like others using that same thing for free.

It's called social responsibility.

Artists and hollywood can still make money. Artists can perform live and hollywood can make money off of movie theaters.

>currently, almost everyone who contributes code to such communities, does it on his or her own free FROM ACTUAL PAID WORK time, when they can spare an hour or two.

Do you realize that the *vast* majority of kernel developers are payed to work on the Linux kernel? Andrew Morton, Ingo Molnar, and Linus himself are prominent examples of this.

>Yours, huh? I don't like yours. I like mine. See how quickly this falls apart?

Like I said, "morality" differs from person to person.
The fact that most people don't share my "morality" is no consequence to me.

>Software does not posses the qualities of being either social or antisocial.

You don't think it's antisocial to only take from the world of open and free ideas? You don't think it's antisocial for corporations to accumulate patents and copyrights for the sole purpose of making money off royalties? All knowledge should be contributed back to the community, as it allows for an increased rate of innovation.

>Whose good society?

Mine of course.

>If we didn't get paid for our work then there would be no software for you and others to steal.

How many times do I have to reiterate this? Are people just plain stupid? YOU CAN MAKE MONEY ON OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE.

>Who was it that accused me yestarday of trying to force my version of morality on someone else (see your post #9)?

I use the term "morality" to mean "conducive to a good society"

>Are you advocating that all software should be open source?

Yes, I am.

>would you work for free?

You seem to be incorrectly assuming that you can't make money off open source software.

>And perhaps you can give one reason why you feel entitled to get everything available for free?

I'll assume that you mean "software" when you say "everything." Proprietary software is immoral and antisocial. Their (read: software companies) actions ultimately support a closed society, a society in which sharing is illegal and ideas are controlled by the government, or worse, corporations. If breaking a nominal law is all that stands between me and the empowerment
of myself and the people I know, it's definitely worth it. Information should be unequivocally free and accessible to everyone. The idea that someone can legally "own" information and ideas is ridiculous, wrong, immoral, antisocial, and counter-productive.

It would be possible to fund the construction of all roads with tolls. This would entail having toll booths at all street corners. Such a system would provide a great incentive to improve roads. It would also have the virtue of causing the users of any given road to pay for that road. However, a toll booth is an artificial obstruction to smooth driving—artificial, because it is not a consequence of how roads or cars work.

Comparing free roads and toll roads by their usefulness, we find that (all else being equal) roads without toll booths are cheaper to construct, cheaper to run, safer, and more efficient to use. In a poor country, tolls may make the roads unavailable to many citizens. The roads without toll booths thus offer more benefit to society at less cost; …

Someone give me one reason why I shouldn't "pirate" software? Why should I let corporations control my activities and my life?

I would think you, jtwenting, a staunch Social Darwinist, would support piracy. If companies aren't intelligent or competent enough to secure their software, don't they deserve to go out of business?

> If everyone used your flawed logic, commercial software would stop because nobody would pay for it.

That is because for a company, it's really not worth it the risk.

>When you steal software you are violation federal and international copyright laws.

Am I supposed to care? If there's no penalty, why not?

>Then you are a fool.

I'm a fool for actually formulated my own opinions instead of being baby fed by the government?

>Oh, so now shoplifting isn't theft either.

You're depriving the store of property aren't you? If I "pirate" software that I have no intention of buying, I'm not directly hurting the creator.

>Absolutely -- its a criminal offense.

Do laws dictate your moral outlook on the world? They certainly don't influence mine. Who are you to claim that your morality is superior or "more right" than mine?

>So depriving someone of money by taking something without paying for it isn't theft?

If I wasn't going to buy it in the first place, no it's not.

You can villainize it all you want. That doesn't change what it is.

>You're punished in a way that's representative of the value of the product you've stolen and the value of the product is the listed price.

Software "piracy" is not theft. Theft means to "deprive someone of property by taking it." A"pirate" is not depriving the creator of any property he owns nor deserves.

>But as with any crime, you should risk getting caught and being punished.

It's small enough to be negligible. Would I rather pay $6000 for some software or would I rather "pirate" it with the negligible downside of being caught? I, and most others I hazard to guess, would take the "piracy" route.

Happy New Year! I missed the ball ;-(

Happy New Years!

>Now that's called bad cheating. If you're gunna cheat, don't go for 100%. Aim for 90 at best.

Meh, this teacher had a reputation for idiocy.

I remember this one test I had. The teacher gave us the tests and left the room. Naturally everyone pulled out their books and just copied down the answers. The teacher seemed honestly astounded that everyone in the class got a 100%.

I don't like 1984, Animal Farm is far superior.

Why not? At that time when I did my research, I was under impression that Ubuntu was the most user friendly distro out there.

Though people claim it is user friendly, ubuntu isn't technically sound nor the least bit consistent. It makes things more complicated (and therefore more prone to breakage) by adding bloated features and user interfaces. I think you'll find distros that adhere to the KISS principle a lot more stable and a lot easier to work with.

I use Arch Linux. I just find *nix a lot easier than windows in regards to programming, servers, etc. For example, when I want a new lib it's as easy as pacman -Sy <lib> . I can be *almost* 100% sure that the library is now installed and fully functional, while on windows, I don't have that certainty.

Though some have complained that *nix is hard, it's not, as long as you're willing to learn and like a challenge. Granted, sometimes you just want things to "work" and don't really care about the knowledge you would not accrue if it was easier.

So off I went to Ubuntuforums where I sggested that they made those sort of things easier...I wasn't even rude or anything (is that hard to believe or what? By the way, this thread was started in the testimonials section...). To my blatant surprise I was called a number of things, including "lazy" and "unwilling to learn". I was told to go back to Windows with my "Windows mentality" because Linux wasn't for me.

So that was exactly what I did. Although I still keep Ubuntu on my system and peep in from time to time.

Don't judge Linux solely on your experience with Ubuntu and its respective community. The Gentoo and Arch Linux forums are populated by extremely knowledgeable members who try to avoid posting "RTFM" as much as possible.

>The irony of this is that neither Linux nor BSD are officially POSIX-compliant (although they try to adhere to the standards for the most part).

It should be noted that the reason Linux nor BSD are POSIX compliant is due to their extremely rapid development and release cycle.

>If it really was because they were spanked, wouldn't there have been far more killing and violence back when everyone was spanked?

There was.

Currently I play Team Fortress 2, Half Life 2: Death Match. Sauerbraten, and Nexuiz.

You really can't ignore the fact that there are *zero* currently effective (e.g working) Linux viruses and thousands of windows ones. One Linux and UNIX, you really just have to worry about being attacked, in which you are actually a more diserable target.

Skinny

Ok fine. Reasons why emacs is *the best*:

1. It's extensible and configurable. Emacs Lisp (or Elisp) is extremely powerful. In fact, most of emacs is written in Elisp.
2. It provides a uniform environment. Emacs integrates the entire process of writing, compiling, and debugging into one seamless interface.
3. It's versatile. Emacs can be used as a diary, planner, calender, telnet client, MUD client, bash shell (eshell), irc client, and much much more.

> That's just your personal opinion.

And?

I don't really consider eastern "rpgs" to be "real" rpgs due to their fixed plot line and lack of control.

The best text editor for linux is emacs. I suggest you try it.

>still stick by the Zelda as an rts since, from what I remember, the you still had to battle characters in real time as opposed to something like FF7 where the battles are turn based. Not sure if thats enough to make it an rts, but thats what I'm sticking to.

Um no. Zelda is NOT an rts. It's an adventure game, and, according to some, a rpg.