I probably should have mentioned this before...
I became a Mac user about four months ago.
$700 on eBay got me a 15-inch widescreen 400Mhz G4 PowerBook with an 80GB harddrive. I've since swapped out the include 256MB RAM for 512MB from my 2GHz P4 laptop.
* It has trouble playing high definition Divx and XviD videos without some trickery. I figured out that they play a lot better if I watch the video from an external firewire drive rather than the internal drive so it sounds like the fault is in the laptop harddrive.
* Not all Gentoo packages compile on it.
* Firefox is a memory hog I don't want to deal with so I don't. Safari is a great replacement though I haven't been able to get ad-blocking programs to work.
* Many Gentoo packages compile on it. Gentoo on OSX is decent. There's also Fink and DarwinPorts, but I'm a Gentooer.
* It came with my bitch language, Python, as well as Java and GCC.
* Civilization 3 plays twice as fast on this machine as it did on my 2GHz P4 when I had Windows installed a few years ago.
* iTunes is way better than gtkpod.
* I can run Quicktime, WMP, RealPlayer, Cisco VPN client, Remote Desktop Connection, Maya PLE, and Macromedia Studio. And I do.
* Apple provides X11 for OSX so I can run GIMP and Inkscape.
* NeoOffice == OpenOffice for OSX, which is nice.
Oh, another downside: With all this stuff simply working (Have you seen how installation works on a Mac? It's almost disgusting!) I feel like I'm getting stupider every day. At the same time I can still pull up my Bash prompt and geek out whenever I want, which is pretty often. It's basically all the functionality I got out of Linux and still being leaps and bounds better than Windows.
I don't know if many are familiar with it, but I could never use Windows for long without replacing the shell with Litestep. I nearly require a clean interface to get anything done. OSX is where that action is at.
Like so few others on this site...
Economic Left/Right: 1.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.85
GMontag, you silly child.
What happens when a friend turns pitiful? I added GMontag as a friend a while back because he said a lot of stuff I generally agreed with and browsing through his posts didn't show any stupidity.
Today he made me his foe. To be fair, I posted this in response to one of his rather uneducated journal entries.
At the same time though, no discourse? No questioning the validity of my statements? What exactly is he disagreeing with? Surely it's not that some facts run counter to his point. Is this enough to "foe" someone when before they were a "friend"?
And then I saw his current posting history. GMontag has become an outright loser. I've heard of getting old, but getting stupid?
I posted this comment in the latest women in gaming articles. So far it's gone unmodded and uncommented, likely unnoticed.
I was being a sneaky bastard when I wrote it. Let me repost it here with proper emphasis on certain words and phrases. I've stated these points before in women in gaming articles so by the time this one rolled around I was bored of the topic. I had to have fun with it.
ExEx, but no "Why?"
the real questions that will be answered are how can the industry create a demand for computer games beyond the traditional demographic of males between the age of 14-24,
Ok, so that's the "How?" of it. Where's the "Why?" Did we skip that step?
and what role can women play in this seemingly-epic task.
Oh, I get why now. It's the money. You mean it might be difficult to suck as much money out of women as they've been getting from men?
As a male I'm insulted to think women could possibly waste as much money on gaming as the industry has already managed to suck off from men. As a half-assed feminist I'm also insulted that they're using sexual equality to veil an obvious attempt to lure women into blowing loads on video games. They're just trying tap women in order to produce more releases.
I just spent the afternoon reading through the comments on the London bombing watching N3WBI3 and stinerman bat around some real fuckles. They managed to cover every point I could think of.
N3WBI3 seemed to chase a lot of people down in threads which was fun to watch. I wanted to respond to each of his posts with "Get 'em." Meanwhile stinerman whipped out a handful of interesting posts that soaked up a lot of mod points.
It was a good show, a shame about the context.
Time magazine emails sneak preview
I'm a poor judge of Slashdot article worthiness so I'll just put this up here.
Apparently this guy Matt Cooper was told by a secret informer that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. This information gets from Cooper to Bob Novak who then proceeds to blurt it out on national television. It's treason to reveal stuff like that, and it seems natural that they'd go after Novak as well as the secret informer, but Cooper is so far the only person to see jail time and it's very likely that the secret informer won't.
Because the secret informer was Karl Rove.
I tried to respond to the article about Rio fighting back against apple. I got this message:
You can't see this story because it's scheduled in the future, where only subscribers can see it.
Weird, but I'm pretty sure I *always* see the articles at subscriber times. Bully for me then.
Why are so many Firefly fans libertarian?
jwz is mad.
I found this LiveJournal entry by Jamie Zawinski (wrote xscreensaver, helped start Mozilla, and now owns DNA Lounge) declaring his hatred for Linux and love for OSX.
I found the footnote particularly hilarious. I'm hoping a Slashdot journal isn't quite what he meant.
Dear Slashdot: please don't post about this. Screw you guys. --JWZ
I used that silly little "pictu^H^H^H^H^Hdocuments" meme that's been spread around for what seems like ages. This was a mistake. I received about five responses mostly commenting about why anyone would ever encrypt porn. I don't encrypt porn. I never said I did. I implied that I encrypted pictures.
Bitten in the ass by a meme that doesn't die.
True, the picture of are naked people. Specifically: naked people I have personally taken naked pictures of. But they're tasteful. We would show our friends and they'd say "ooo, pretty". One the less revealing ones was framed in the living room.
But no, got to be porn.
Goemon won me with "Goverments are not good nannies."
Tom and Garcia are two people I've seen bouncing arount this site saying things I generally agree with.
I changed my little "homepage" link because I hadn't been updating my Clemson site for quite a while (new blog thingy is an LJ: st_arbirix).
I saw that my Clemson site was getting upwards of 500 hits a week even though the content was stale, so I decided to channel all that energy into more narcissistic ends. Yes, that is my shower curtain. No, those aren't my pajamas.
something weird is going on
This is the 8th time in five weeks that I've gotten mod points. Anyone else get it so often? I'm really kinda bothered by this.
Tuesday is mod day!
It's Tuesday so guess what that means?
I get mod points again!!
Seriously though, does anyone else get so many so quickly?
I just got mod powers again today. In three weeks this is the fifth time. Am I doing something special? It seems a little freaky to keep getting this, especially since the last time around two of my moderations were counted unfair.
I've just added patniemeyer to my friends list. I always enjoy watching someone who knows his stuff give the relative smack-down to those who don't.
I feel smarter by association. The first three computer science programs we take here are strictly Java. After that it isn't touched.
I feel a little sad today as I was compelled to befoe someone on Slashdot. Just a sad fellow who missed the Depending on Governmental Morality 101 lectures.
I've discovered The Diplomad. So far they've just been a group of "conservative" State Department guys who were in S.E. Asia before the tsunami and have since been complaining to no end about the sickening flounderings of the U.N. in the area while the U.S. and Australia do all the work (by "all the work" I mean stuff like airlifting roads, hospitals, and food to cut-off regions while U.N. reps organize catering).
This person responded to a comment of mine and I, as I occasionally do, looked up some of his comments. Yep, they were all pretty funny. Then I saw their journal and laughed. I too am a Firefly fan. Then I saw the near 30 posts this person has made in the 6 days after December 25th and I new this was someone I could get along with.
It really throws me for a loop when someone makes me their friend and I have no idea why. Was it that historical rant I went on? Was it that joke I made about killing kittens? Was it because my sig talks about Go? I cover such a wide and random path (I've been off Strattera for a year now) that I have no idea why someone thinks I'm worthy of being their friend (Concerta was a sucky medicine for me too).
Once I get a new fan though I immediately look them up and check out what kind of posting history they have. With any luck the record is full and I can peruse their higher marked posts and judge whether or not I like this person. Usually though, they're near ghosts on Slashdot passing silently befriending people like Caspers on the net.
I know it's a bit uncomfortable for some people, but there should really be a "Why?" text entry box next to the "Change Relationship" dialogue just so such feedback is useful. I suppose I'm doing fairly well on /. but I'm not quite sure where. Sometimes I make some extremely stupid and obnoxious remarks that I quickly wish to distance myself from, what if these people are befriending me because of that? It's just disconcerting and I hope people only consider me their friends after reviewing a few of my other comments.
And what's up with my one freak? This ezzzD55J person made me a foe a good while back and even then I had no idea why. My one foe, nathanh, was an ass to me and (I checked just to be sure) still a jerk in general.
I would just like to point out that the only comments of mine that have ever been marked overrated (out of 282 comments) were ones making any serious or implied jabs at a specific religion.
I freely admit that I can be an ass about such things and so I generally abstain from theological challenges, but it tickles me to know end to see a comment that has recieved many +1 ratings get a -1 overrated rating only when a specific religion is involved, and I assure you that I've made many overrated statements on /.
You would think that if the +1's weren't justified they would have been caught by meta-moderation, but /. nevertheless has an overrated rating specifically to battle too popular comments. I have received many redundant ratings in my time and even seen a couple off-topic or a troll but overrated has been restricted purely to discussions of religion that have already been marked highly as informative and interesting (but not funny, worth mentioning because I strive to make only bad and off-colour jokes about religion).
Also fun to see is how often I later get an underrated attached to a comment that's already overrated.
This article severely ticked me off. Is it the author's fault, the editor's, or the system's? It's apparent that someone somewhere in the chain of command that brought this article out decided that it was too risky to go out and say that the Earth was likely to cool off. Someone realized that it didn't matter what kind of evidence you had to back it up (much like the case of Gary Webb), if it's too controversial it really doesn't matter.