Actually it does not. Euro or CHF or Yen are more important. I believe most of the world trade is done in Euro since decades.
Since the Euro hasn't been around for decades, that's unlikely.
> No, he's not an idiot. He's a normal person. Normal people click uninstall and expect their game to be uninstalled, not their OS's GUI
No he's not an idiot, a fucking liar is what he is. There is no way that in any package management system XFCE would have a dependency on a Sudoku app, if anything the dependency would be the other way around. So no, removing Sudoku would never result in XFCE being deleted. Not even Ubuntu would be that stupid.
Actually, it could. Imagine you have a virtual package, say xfce-environment, which depends on sudoku and everything else XFCE. This package is the only package that is explicitly installed, and through it you got your DE. The system is configured to automatically remove packages that are not explicitly requested (mine works that way - when I remove a package, any package that is installed solely because it's a dependency of that package is also removed). So, luser uninstalls sudoku, which forces removal of virtual packagee xfce-environment (since this virtual package has a dependency on everything, including sudoku), now every single other package that xfce-environment depended on, which has no other reasons to exist on the system, will also be uninstalled. I can see this happening, and have seen similar situations myself.
Now, I don't think the system is in the wrong here - the user should probably have paid a bit more attention, but I do not think his story is necessarily false.
Maybe they don't like the concept of thoughtcrime.
$DEITY, this is Poe's Law in effect, right here.
Look, Mr. Buzzword, this is a compatibility layer. It's for people who desperately want to run some specific piece of software on a platform it otherwise would not run. They really don't care if it's a "100% native user xperience" (I really can't believe you typed that with a straight face). They care that the shit is running. At all. Maybe you and your friends are freaked out by everything that doesn't look exactly like iTunes, but for those of us who care more about the fact that our fucking software runs at all, the shit you're whining about is so low on the priority list it doesn't even register.
I think that those who still run 14.04 are running servers. And I hardly think a lot will update and reboot.
That's an very strange assumtion. Of course server vulnerabilities are patched, and the machines rebooted if they need be. What did you expect? "Oh noes, my uptimes! I can't rebootz!"
My client is currently in the process of rolling out a new line of products based on Ubuntu 14.04 (the choice of distribution was not mine). Of course we'll be using patched kernels for new machines we build. Simply upgrading to whatever happens to be the latest version of Ubuntu this week is not an option. This has been a year in testing. The next major update is likely two to four years down the line. The previous one (which is still being shipped) is based on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy Heron).
Meanwhile, every single major revision of the kernel has been announced on Slashdot for at least as far back as I can remember (2.2 something).
So how you can't "expect" it to happen is a mystery indeed.
Do you understand what free software means?
He probably does. It suspect that you don't, though.
It means the buyer pays $0 to the seller of the software.
Indeed, you didn't, because it doesn't. Free, in the context of free software, means that they get the source code, can make modifications to it, and can redistribute it, with or without modifications. The very point of that whole idea is that the user should not be depending on the original author for bugfixes. The entire premise of your ignorant whining is destroyed by the very concept free software, which you (deliberately?) refuse to understand. Everybody else cought on twenty years ago.
Still, are they also a necessary evil?
Seeing how Internet worked just fine before ads came along, no.
I think you missed the major point of T.E.D.'s post, which is in the last sentence. Stallman does indeed tend to be right. Therefore, it is a bit unfortunate that his predictions are presented in a way that makes many (particularly among the influential) ignore them. Because, no matter if he's right or not (which he is), many have a hard time looking past his peculiar looks, behavior and way of carrying a discussion.
(Also, you don't need to provide a link to the parent post. There's one right there beneath yours by magic:)
I may be wrong, but I don't think GP is asking you why you think the device in question isn't secure. I think GP is asking you why you think other devices are.
You are quite right. His remaining $2.43B are not nearly enough to cover living expenses now that he wasted almost 3% on a house.
Isnt that the point of FOSS that users dont need to give back?
No, the point is that the users should have the source, so they can fix it if it's broken. Everything else is optional.
Do people really have enemies? I mean real people, not people in TV shows, politicians or religious nutheads. There's a few people I dislike, I guess... my solution to that is to avoid their company. Problem solved.
Who really dislikes someone so much that they'd actually spend time making them miserable?
The next person to mention spaghetti stacks to me is going to have his head knocked off. -- Bill Conrad