On 2024-05-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 16:09:50 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> Back when I got my Sinclair QL (mid 80s) a big thing was Mandelbrot
>> Sets. I never could figure out why they were so special. I guess they
>> somehow showed off the computer's graphic capabilities.
>
> Lissajous curves. Look at the cool patterns I can make with my $3000
> Textronix scope!

Completely over my head, but I think I get the point.

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine

On 2024-05-28 6:57 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 17:08:49 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> I've since mapped that functionality to the middle button of my mouse
>> because I use it all the time.
>
> What do you use to paste?

CTRL-V. I don't see why I would need a mouse to paste.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-28 7:33 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 07:53:40 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> On 2024-05-27 9:33 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 May 2024 07:53:13 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-05-26 7:18 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 26 May 2024 09:06:43 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I upgraded to Linux from Windows XP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're in the minority no matter how you spin it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where are the Windows XP users? Gone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where are the Linux users? More numerous than ever.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who’s the “minority” now?
>>>>
>>>> Linux, still. The XP users went to 7 once they could and upgraded
>>>> their machines.
>>>
>>> Really? Windows 7? Is that the best the poor things could do?
>>
>> Are you purposefully dense?
>
> Moving from XP to a warmed-over version of Vista is not exactly keeping up
> with current trends, is it?

What are you even talking about?

> And even those Vista/7 users are now essentially extinct, too. So my point
> still stands: the Linux users are no longer in the minority.

So, you're suggesting that the people who were using 7-era machines
magically migrated to Linux rather than upgrade the dusty, crusty
machines whose batteries no longer hold a charge? Are you dense?

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2024-05-28 9:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
>> On 5/27/2024 10:24 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-27 9:25 a.m., DFS wrote:
>>
>>> I'm sure that all Linux companies are in tears at the knowledge that
>>> you won't buy from them.
>>
>> I engage in psychological warfare.  I log to Linux sites like System76,
>> load up a cart with 4 maxed-out systems... then leave.  It kills them!
>
> If you bought a machine which was designed to run Linux, rather than
> install Linux on a machine that originally came with Windows, you might
> actually enjoy it. I know that I was a big fan of Linux on my
> AMD-powered Dell laptop back in 2007-2009. I only stopped using Linux
> because that laptop eventually died, and I replaced it with a Sony Vaio
> which didn't seem to like the operating system at all.

My Lenovo Flex 14 works great with Linux. The first thing I did after
I bought it was slick Windows from it.

I've installed Linux on a single-core Acer (it ran Solidworks in a Windows
VM surprisingly well), a couple of Toshiba laptops, a number of Dell laptops,
a no-name laptop that came with Windows NT (Red Hat wouldn't work, a bug in K6
support, but that gave me the impetus to master Debian), an Asus "gaming"
laptop (it's now my desktop/server, always on), various name-brand and no-name
desktop boxes....

The Linuxen? Red Hat (the original); Debian Sid; Gentoo; Ubuntu; and Arch.

The main issues I encountered early in my Linux career involved needing to
build Intel wireless drivers.

--
You have a strong appeal for members of your own sex.

On 2024-05-28 7:36 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 09:04:39 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 01:55:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:32 this Tuesday
>>>> (GMT):
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 27 May 2024 23:10:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought some people still use XP..
>>>>>
>>>>> But for what? Would you entrust mission-critical business operations
>>>>> to obsolete, unsupported software?
>>>>
>>>> No, because it's a good UI and some stuff still works..from what I
>>>> heard.
>>>
>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>
>> You could switch it to look mostly like Win2000.
>
> You’re admitting that an even older UI out of the 1990s was nicer-looking
> than XP?

Yep, you're dense. You're purposefully jumping from one topic to another
in a vain effort to make Linux look good. For your information, _most_
Linux distributions still look no better than Windows 2000 did. KDE
imitates the 2000 look but adds amateur-looking effects and clunky
widgets, Cinnamon imitates the 2000 look, XFCE poorly imitates the 2000
look, LXDE/LXQT poorly imitate the 2000 look, and Gnome imitated the
2000 look until they decided to switch to 3.

The point here is that if you don't like the Fisher Price look, you
could use a more familiar one. Moreover, the familiar one in 2000
released in 1999 _still_ looks better than what you'll get from a Linux
distribution if aesthetics are that important to you. Lie to yourself as
much as you wish if you insist on disagreeing.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

Relf wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> What are you doing that requires 256 Giga_Bytes
> of ECC memory and extraordinary cooling ?

Killfiling all the idiots on Usenet :-D

--
Alimony and bribes will engage a large share of your wealth.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>
>> In about three clicks, you could change its look so that it looked no
>> different than 2000.
>
>Really?? Going to an even older, 1990s-style UI was an advance on XP?

Well, if it got rid of the dancing dog*, it was an improvement. 8)

*Clearly, the result of "professional" UI designers who know better
than us. We should not be critical of them, or deviate from their
decisions, without "objective studies". According to some blockheads,
anyway.

--
"[The Windows UI is] much cleaner than Gnome's. And not surprising of
course : MS have far bigger pockets for paying progressional [sic]
designers." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

On 2024-05-28 7:37 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 11:32:56 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> On 2024-05-28 2:32 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>
>> In about three clicks, you could change its look so that it looked no
>> different than 2000.
>
> Really?? Going to an even older, 1990s-style UI was an advance on XP?
>
> You’re not exactly making your side look good, you know.

How does Cinnamon's decision to revert to looking like Windows 95 make
Linux desktop environments look good? How does XFCE continuing to poorly
imitate Windows 95 make Linux environments look good? How does almost
every desktop environment in Linux using a start button like Windows 95
demonstrate how innovate Linux developers are?

You've exposed yourself as a barely-functional zealot.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-28 9:17 p.m., DFS wrote:
> On 5/28/2024 2:50 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>> On 2024-05-28 9:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
>
>
>> If you bought a machine which was designed to run Linux,
>
> I didn't know there was such a thing.
>
> Does that mean Windows won't run on them?

I'm referring to machines which have things such as Libreboot and where
the manufacturer ensures that every functionality, such as waking from
sleep and touchscreen recognition, works as intended. Windows would work
fine, but it might end up functioning worse on that machine than Linux
would, much like how Linux doesn't work great on machines designed for
Windows.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-28 10:24 p.m., vallor wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 21:17:06 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
> <66568211$2$8094$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
>> On 5/28/2024 2:50 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-28 9:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you bought a machine which was designed to run Linux,
>>
>> I didn't know there was such a thing.
>>
>> Does that mean Windows won't run on them?
>
> I wouldn't want to try to run Windows on this system, unless it
> was in a virt.

Considering the long history of security issues, this is the right position.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-28 11:49 p.m., vallor wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 23:17:32 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
> <66569e4b$8$1258331$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
>> On 5/28/2024 11:12 PM, vallor wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 22:26:01 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>>> <v363no$viqs$1@dont-email.me>:
>>>
>>>> On 5/28/2024 10:24 PM, vallor wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 21:17:06 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
>>>>> <66568211$2$8094$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/28/2024 2:50 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-05-28 9:34 a.m., DFS wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you bought a machine which was designed to run Linux,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't know there was such a thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that mean Windows won't run on them?
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't want to try to run Windows on this system, unless it was
>>>>> in a virt.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> First, I don't want Microsoft to get its greasy fingers on my EFI.
>>>
>>> Second, it probably doesn't have drivers for the custom daughterboard
>>> that runs the cooling, and I'm not willing to spend the time to chase
>>> down Windows drivers.
>>>
>>> Third...there's no need. The system is perfectly fine with what it
>>> has,
>>> and needs nothing that Windows has to offer. If that changed, maybe
>>> I'd rethink it.
>>
>>
>> What are the exact specs of the hardware?
> This is the 1.0 version, I have the 1.1 version:
>
> https://tech-docs.system76.com/models/thelio-mega-r1.0/README.html
>
> With a AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X. 256G of ECC memory.
>
> NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
>
> If the daughterboard isn't supported on Windows, all the cooling
> fans will run full-speed, which would be annoying.

Wow, that'll run the rotating cube marvelously! :P

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-29 1:38 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 20:19:56 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 09:04:39 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 01:55:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, because it's [WinXP] a good UI and some stuff still works..from
>>>>>> what I heard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>>>
>>>> You could switch it to look mostly like Win2000.
>>>
>>> You’re admitting that an even older UI out of the 1990s was
>>> nicer-looking than XP?
>>
>> 2000's UI was a bit enhanced over 9x, actually ...
>
> Really?? Now you’re resorting to comparing it with even older, DOS-based
> Windows to try to make it look good?

Spoken like someone who's never used Windows 2000. That version of
Windows was spectacular, so Microsoft's decision to base XP on it was a
smart one. It was stable, fast and it looks better than every Windows
95-like Linux desktop environment *to this day*. You're desperately
trying to bury it, but it is only because you're jealous that a bunch of
"untalented" programmers managed in 1999 to do something Linux
developers still can't manage to do twenty-five years later. Not one
person who looks at a Linux desktop environment today is impressed by
how it looks. Grab a random, non-technical person from the street and
show them Linux Mint and Windows 2000 side-by-side, and I promise you
they would choose to use the latter despite its obsolescence. Switch
Cinnamon for GNOME and the result would be the same. Your serious
delusion won't change that fact. None of these people give a flying Snit
if Mint uses the same kernel as is being used on supercomputers.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> Relf wrote:
>>
>> My desktop is 100.000% black; instead, I use folders.
>>
>> No "hot corners", nor anything like that.
>
> Does your desktop commit a lot of crimes?

LOL

--
"What you have been doing for the past 20 years hasn't worked. Time
for a new strategy." - Flathead

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Tue, 28 May 2024 10:07:33 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Must be a Microsoft fan thang. I worked with a .NET/C# guy who was a
>> major asshole. First, one of the top office managers asked him if he'd
>> join our C++
>> project. He refused to use C++.
>
> Good call!

My point was that, unlike myself (for example), he was unwilling to
learn something new even at the behest of his high-level golfing buddy
manager. I did neglect to mention that the lower-level manager handling our
project told me he'd never allow the guy to work on our project, as
he was well away of his reputation of being the direct opposite of
a team player.

> I'll admit my use of C++ goes back to the early days and I
> haven't kept up with the improvements but it wasn't my favorite language.
> At this point I probably will never learn 'Modern C++' anymore than I'll
> bring my fortran knowledge past f77.

Heh, I just went through learning some stuff about C++ constructors (default,
principal, copy, and move) and assignment operators (regular and move).
Also a trick about initialization (built-in types are not initialized in a
constructor called for an local/auto object) that somehow I had overlooked
in all my years of C++... discovered it in the debugger.

--
Your boss is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>> alt-tab?"
>
> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>
> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>
> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
> but still can’t get right?)
>
> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.

The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
because of your zealotry.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On 2024-05-29 1:49 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:00:16 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> On 2024-05-27 9:35 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 27 May 2024 08:42:54 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I already know that Linux is extremely popular with programmers.
>>>> It's just not popular with most of anyone else.
>>>
>>> Funny, most of the dozens of people I do Linux support for are not
>>> programmers/developers.
>>
>> Good for you. Do you understand the meaning of "most?"
>
> Linux is far more popular with non-programmers/developers than with
> programmers/developers.
>
> Does that answer your question?

Prove it.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Tue, 28 May 2024 14:36:37 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> I would use the features of CPP that are not OOP, but otherwise, regular
>> C is all one needs, aside from minor things only assembly can do
>> (largely OS core/device drivers).

I once tried, as an experiment, writing an audio player using straight
C and unions to do "inheritance".

Once was enough.

Sometimes C is enough, though. Or sometimes one is forced to use a C-only
library or wrap C++ code in 'extern "C"' interfaces.

> Other than Esri stuff my C++ looks a lot like C but then so does
> Stroustrup's in the edition I have. Esri's ArcObjects is COM based so they
> make extensive use of smart pointers. It took me a while to get used to

COM... bleh.

> IFeaturePtr pFeature;
> IGeometryPtr pGeometry;
> ICurvePtr pCurve;
> ....
> pFeature->get_Shape(&pGeometry);
> pCurve = pGeometry
>
> The first one makes sense. There is a bunch of variant and BSTR mumbo-
> jumbo that goes with COM but pFeature->get_Value(someField) works like you
> would thing but there is no pFeature->get_Curve), only the magical
> assignment instead of even pGeometry->get_Curve(&pCurve);
>
> The docs weren't that great so it was often 'okay, I've got this, not how
> the hell do I get that?'
>
> The other problem with C++ for me was the awkward way it was hatched that
> let Microsoft fill in the blanks so you have things like String and
> string.

Yeah, Qt jumped into the breech with things like QString. I make sure that
the public interfaces use C++ standard types, and convert to stuff like QString
internally only where necessary... I have a little function named qt() for that.
It's only in the GUI, so the performance hit is insignificant.

--
Q: What's a light-year?
A: One-third less calories than a regular year.

chrisv wrote:

>The key point is the much less aggressive (more gentle slope)
>high-pass filtering used with the Phillips design.

Dammit. Low-pass filtering. As in passing everything below 22 kHz,
while filtering-out whatever is above.

By it's nature, the digital to analog conversion process results in
undesirable "images" at multiples of the sampling frequency. So all
DAC's need to filter-out all frequencies above the desired ones.
Sharp, "brick wall" low-pass filters are often blamed for the poor
sound quality in early CD players.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Tue, 28 May 2024 09:04:39 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 28 May 2024 01:55:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:32 this Tuesday
>>>> (GMT):
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 27 May 2024 23:10:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought some people still use XP..
>>>>>
>>>>> But for what? Would you entrust mission-critical business operations
>>>>> to obsolete, unsupported software?
>>>>
>>>> No, because it's a good UI and some stuff still works..from what I
>>>> heard.
>>>
>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>
>> You could switch it to look mostly like Win2000.
>
> You’re admitting that an even older UI out of the 1990s was nicer-looking
> than XP?

XP... the Teletubby desktop :-D

--
Never reveal your best argument.

Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2024-05-28 8:42 a.m., chrisv wrote:
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>> alt-tab?"
>>
>> Heh. Reminds me of when I bought my Amiga A1000 and was showing it
>> off to friends. Even non-geek friends were forced to endure many
>> minutes of watching "cool" graphics demos.
>>
>> They were probably thinking along the lines of "Am I supposed to find
>> this interesting or useful?"
>
> Before I bought an IBM PS/1 in 1991, I enjoyed passing by the local
> Compucentre where they had an Amiga housed on the outside corner of the
> store showing the bouncy ball and how they could display 4096 colours or
> whatever. It was impressive in 1988 and was still impressive when I
> bought another computer in 1991. I often wonder why I didn't just go
> ahead and buy an Amiga at that point.

I gave OS/2 Warp a spin once when it was cheap. It was pretty interesting.
Unfortunately Bill Gates was able to outfuck IBM.

--
Q: How do you play religious roulette?
A: You stand around in a circle and blaspheme and see who gets
struck by lightning first.

vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote:
>On Tue, 28 May 2024 23:17:32 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
><66569e4b$8$1258331$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
>> What are the exact specs of the hardware?
>
>This is the 1.0 version, I have the 1.1 version:
>
>https://tech-docs.system76.com/models/thelio-mega-r1.0/README.html
>
>With a AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X. 256G of ECC memory.
>
>NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
>
>If the daughterboard isn't supported on Windows, all the cooling
>fans will run full-speed, which would be annoying.

Damn, yo, that is badass as *FUCK*. Congrats.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 28 May 2024 20:19:56 -0400, Joel wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 28 May 2024 09:04:39 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 28 May 2024 01:55:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, because it's [WinXP] a good UI and some stuff still works..from
>>>>>> what I heard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
>>>>
>>>> You could switch it to look mostly like Win2000.
>>>
>>> You’re admitting that an even older UI out of the 1990s was
>>> nicer-looking than XP?
>>
>> 2000's UI was a bit enhanced over 9x, actually ...
>
>Really?? Now you’re resorting to comparing it with even older, DOS-based
>Windows to try to make it look good?

WinNT 4 was the same UI as 95, 98 was about the same, 2000 was
somewhat new, as was Me like it, and XP without the glued on BS too.
It's just a progression.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>>>> If anyone needs it, I could put it on a binary group, probably could
>>>> even put it on Google Drive, I doubt M$ gives a flying fuck.
>>>
>>> Seems like the only way to get through your working day with
>>> proprietary software is to be dishonest.
>>
>> It's just a free trial, dude ...
>
>Sure, keep telling yourself that, even as you violate the EULA.

They don't care. They've always turned a blind eye to sites/torrents
providing ISOs of the OS, because it's not providing a false license,
it's just to install it without a key, a free trial in XP SP3's case,
although with 10 and 11 you can run them unactivated indefinitely.

>> You can download Win10 and Win11 *from M$*, now, in fact.
>
>But they don’t allow others to redistribute it.

They wouldn't do anything about it, I promise you.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 14:36:37 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>
>>> I would use the features of CPP that are not OOP, but otherwise, regular
>>> C is all one needs, aside from minor things only assembly can do
>>> (largely OS core/device drivers).
>
>I once tried, as an experiment, writing an audio player using straight
>C and unions to do "inheritance".
>
>Once was enough.
>
>Sometimes C is enough, though. Or sometimes one is forced to use a C-only
>library or wrap C++ code in 'extern "C"' interfaces.

I just don't like OOP - but one might as well take advantage of the
other extensions, if the compiler supports the C++ stuff, they don't
seem sacrilegious, or something.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2024-05-29 1:42 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 08:10:01 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> Funny enough, the guy I worked with who was a Linux die-hard also used
>>> the rotating cube to "convince" me that Linux was better. My only
>>> response to him was "that's pretty, how is this better than pressing
>>> alt-tab?"
>>
>> Alt-tab is just for switching windows within a desktop.
>>
>> On KDE, I also have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops.
>>
>> (You know about multiple desktops? A feature which the *nix world has had
>> since the days of OSF Motif/CDE, which Microsoft is now trying to emulate
>> but still can’t get right?)
>>
>> The desktop cube, wobbly windows, disintegrating windows ... that’s all
>> just bling for inducing Linux-envy among Windows sufferers.
>
> The point here is that switching desktops is a useless feature for most
> users. Zealots like you swear by them, but most people see nothing wrong
> with just minimizing a window and switching from one application to
> another by using alt-tab. Once again, you completely miss the point
> because of your zealotry.

I'm guessing that most people who don't use multiple desktops are ignorant
about how useful this feature is. This was one of the first things that
attracted me to Linux when moving over from Windows. Separate desktops for
separate jobs. I use this feature constantly.

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine