rwl

19 ms·

121.
by rwl 15y ago
I use StumpWM: http://www.nongnu.org/stumpwm/ I personally think the whole "Linux Desktop" issue is a bit of a red herring. GNU/Linux (and, I assume, other libre Unixes) is the only widely-available OS I know of where it is even possible
122.
FreedomBox(freedomboxfoundation.org)
7 points by rwl 15y ago|0 comments
123.
by rwl 15y ago
Full transcript here: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/events/2011/fosdem/moglen-fos...
124.
Why Political Liberty Depends on Software Freedom More than Ever(softwarefreedom.org)
6 points by rwl 15y ago|1 comments
125.
by rwl 15y ago
"What Ubuntu "main" means is those packages are actually built by Ubuntu with their own patches and quality control." I guess this is where I was confused. My understanding is that the packages in main still originate as .debs from Debian
126.
by rwl 15y ago
By that line of thinking, why call it "Linux" (or anything else) either? I agree that "GNU/Linux" sounds kind of dumb, if that's what you're driving at -- but I'd be happy to call the operating system "GNU".
127.
by rwl 15y ago
I'm not the OP, but one way would be to look at the dependency graph for packages. My guess is that a whole heck of a lot of them depend either directly or transitively on GNU code -- for example, GLibC.
128.
by rwl 15y ago
I don't know how you measure "impact," but this doesn't sound right to me. If you took away all the GNU code from a GNU/Linux system, my guess is that you would no longer have a working Unix system. I don't think that can be said of the o
129.
by rwl 15y ago
"I picked Ubuntu natty (released in April) as a reference, ... and am considering only the “main” repository, supposedly the core of the distribution, actually packaged by Ubuntu and not repackaged from Debian." I'm not sure I understand Ub
130.
by rwl 15y ago
I think you're right that people simply don't know how to share, and that they probably would share if they did know how. But isn't it troubling that sharing requires some kind of special knowledge? that sharing is a "feature" to be added
131.
by rwl 15y ago
I much prefer this approach: http://www.structuredprocrastination.com/
132.
MFTL: My favorite toy language(catb.org)
2 points by rwl 15y ago|0 comments
133.
Structured Procrastination(structuredprocrastination.com)
3 points by rwl 15y ago|2 comments
134.
by rwl 15y ago
This sounds like a great idea, but won't it immediately run into a problem with journal publishers? Why would journals allow papers they publish to be indexed and included in a giant "open" database, from which they derive no revenue? In o
135.
by rwl 15y ago
I am also more familiar with Racket and Scheme, but was considering working through Land of Lisp. Do the code and problems in the book lend themselves to translation into other languages? That is, do you think one could learn both CL and
136.
by rwl 15y ago
Disclaimer: I don't know a ton about this. But one of the often-cited reasons for learning a Lisp is the power of Lisp macros for creating domain-specific languages. My understanding is that one unique feature of Racket is how it takes th
137.
by rwl 16y ago
> Did you read the linked article? It measures the ratio (% of taxes paid) / (% of income earned). In this US, this ratio is 1.35%. In Norway, it's 0.95. Inequality would increase the denominator, not the numerator. Right, sorry, I shou
138.
by rwl 16y ago
Sorry, I still don't get it. Let's put the empirical question aside, and suppose that in fact, if you lined up every American in order of income, the difference between any given person's income and that of the person on his left or right
139.
by rwl 16y ago
> There will be people who game the system re: "handouts" but that's the price you pay. Exactly. Even if it's true (and I'm not sure that it is, despite much ado to the contrary) that redistribution will create a class of people that "
140.
by rwl 16y ago
> ETA (after playing with Excel for a few minutes): If each person in the USA makes just 0.000003% more than the next, the resulting "20%s" wealth distribution graph looks exactly like the "Actual" part of the Percent Wealth Owned graph
141.
by rwl 16y ago
I don't think this is a good measure of how "progessive" a tax system is, at least when a progressive tax structure means that those in higher income brackets pay a higher percentage of their individual incomes in taxes. A higher ratio do
142.
by rwl 16y ago
> Does this mean that if I distribute one of my applications through the Appstore, I'm legally required to distribute all of my applications that way? That's not (quite) what it looks like to me: I think clause (iii) is just saying that
143.
by rwl 16y ago
> I mean, c'mon, Google is building SIP support directly into their phone OS. They aren't against you. Be patient. According to this [1], SIP support already exists in Android 2.3. I don't know how far this "support" goes (I suppose it
144.
by rwl 16y ago
Well, as long as we're nitpicking... Python's reduce function has an optional starting value argument: http://docs.python.org/library/functions.html#reduce
145.
by rwl 16y ago
The upshot of this piece is much more significant than the comments here have been willing to admit. Yes, you can write the author off as having a whiny, blame-others attitude. Yes, you can say that if he would just take matters into his
146.
by rwl 16y ago
I don't think anyone disputes that the GPL places more restrictions on a recipient of the code than a BSD license does. And you're right that, in one (extremely narrow) sense, this grants recipients of BSD-licensed code more "freedom" than
147.
by rwl 16y ago
This argument doesn't work. Promoting "freedom," with respect to software or anything else, is always about promoting some specific freedoms at the expense of others. Copyleft licenses make a different set of tradeoffs than BSD-style li
148.
by rwl 16y ago
> Then again. Does Joe Sixpack benefit from being more productive? After all, usually they aren't paid more when they do more work, so there isn't that much incentive... My initial reaction to this was: of course! Doesn't everyone bene
149.
by rwl 16y ago
> Well the utter and complete non-existence of any commercial software on Linux... Linux (I'm thinking of just the kernel itself here, but it's true of the whole GNU platform as well) has plenty of "commercial" software running on it.
150.
by rwl 16y ago
For those unfamiliar: these are awesome, but pretty basic, features of Org. In addition to a plain-text syntax for outlining and making lists (for tasks or otherwise), Org syntax offers: - tags - properties (key/value pairs that can affect

More ›