Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
31
Discussions - Public / The areas where Linux shines compared to Windows
« Last post by The Gorn on February 16, 2018, 08:39:51 AM »
The back end. Linux is shit at the front end UI. It shines in geeky operations that also affect my goodwill toward fellow tech professionals. :P

* File operations.

Copying a few hundred megabytes is *almost* instantaneous on Linux compared to Windows.

A "tar" of a few hundred megabytes without compression is also incredibly fast. (Compression slows it down greatly.)

* Certain online operations

I use Private Internet Access (PIA), the VPN company with their own client. The native Linux client starts quite a bit more slowly than the native Windows client. HOWEVER, connection once the client is running is MUCH faster in Linux - it can take 10 seconds in Windows, and it is like a couple of seconds in Linux to connect.

Bittorrent downloads - MUCH faster with the "Transmission" client in Linux than with the official Bittorrent client in Windows. The download speeds I achieve in Linux with that client are much better - up to 5 mbps. I can download a 500 mb media file in under 5 minutes when there are plenty of seeders.

The network "layer" in Linux is much faster in activating and deactivating the network interface and in making connection locally, than in Windows.
32
Discussions - Public / Linux as a desktop, garbage
« Last post by The Gorn on February 16, 2018, 08:33:21 AM »
Gorn, I wonder if trying the MATE desktop might be useful. Maybe just create a bootable USB memory stick with Mint / MATE and try it for a while and see if it addresses the problems you've experienced with XFCE?

Or, alternatively, install MINT / MATE as a guest in your virtual machine?

The goal would be to get a feel for whether it might prove better for you than XFCE, without having to change your existing system unless MATE really proves better for you.

Anyway, just an idea... one you might well have already thought of.

After all of these issues I've had that contradict what the experts here have stated, anyone says to me about comparative merits of X vs Y on Linux means anything or has any credibility, so I am loathe to waste my time even more.

I run Xfce because I was told by you guys it was the fastest UI. Things can still be slow in launching.  I'm not going to regress from that.

As far as the VM - UHHH no! I want something simple and reliable, not another !@^&( virtual machine I have to boot in order to do certain work.

I already have that (and accept that) with Windows ware.

To lock your XFCE desktop to prevent XFCE from making changes to it --
...
Maybe this can help the stability of your XFCE desktop.

REALLY?

That will be my "work flow" , non flow, Linux interrupting me with error messages.

So if I do ANYTHING at the UI level that would affect these settings, it WILL then error out or crash programs. I'll drag an icon on the desktop and get a big ugly error box when I release.

God damn does that sound lame.   Much more so than the occasional unnecessary but FOSS programmer initiated crash I get now.

Completely unacceptable.   What you are stating is an absolute admission of defeat, that the UI *IS* buggy so I have to patch around it with a lame hack.

The UI should just be stable, period, and not mother-f***ing change things on me or corrupt shit because it's crap software (which it may be.)

I shouldn't have to put the UI in read only mode to get work done.

I still don't think you or Pxsant sit in a Linux desktop session 8+ hours a day and do writing or programming continuously, or that either of you pay very close attention to how the flow of work on the keyboard goes.

Because if  you did you would understand that things launch slowly, that the UI gets messed up randomly, that certain subtle settings that assist your workflow get lost in Linux.

Linux inferior to Windows at the UI, an absolute truism.

PS: NOTHING PERSONAL in the above. You guys take a certain position in these discussions that I completely disagree with based upon direct experience. 

There's sort of a crudeness, for want of a more politic work, with the opinions of some very technical and otherwise extremely knowledgeable IT people when they are confronted with issues in the "softer" areas like UI. IT people who don't live inside content creation tasks tend to fluff off truly irritating issues as though they should be considered insignificant.

Kind of the same idea as a programmer that tells you that assembly language is totally good enough and you need nothing better, because at least you don't have to flip front panel switches to store a boot loader. :P
33
Discussions - Public / Re: So they upgraded from Windows 7 to 10...
« Last post by unix on February 14, 2018, 06:56:05 PM »
This reminds of the days when I ran mwm, then twm and finally fvwm (feeble virtual window manager). 

Now that was some cool stuff. Not yet surpassed by anything today.  I saw modern interfaces, how overly complicated they are.
34
Discussions - Public / Re: So they upgraded from Windows 7 to 10...
« Last post by benali72 on February 14, 2018, 07:54:15 AM »
To lock your XFCE desktop to prevent XFCE from making changes to it --

sudo chattr +i ~/.config/xfce4/desktop/*


For example, this prevents XFCE from automatically re-arranging the position of desktop icons.

If you want to make changes to the desktop, then you have to set the immutable bit (i) back to off --

sudo chattr -i ~/.config/xfce4/desktop/*

To verify status of the immutable bit --

sudo lsattr ~/.config/xfce4/desktop/*

Maybe this can help the stability of your XFCE desktop.
35
Discussions - Public / Re: So they upgraded from Windows 7 to 10...
« Last post by benali72 on February 13, 2018, 10:21:36 PM »
Gorn, I wonder if trying the MATE desktop might be useful. Maybe just create a bootable USB memory stick with Mint / MATE and try it for a while and see if it addresses the problems you've experienced with XFCE?

Or, alternatively, install MINT / MATE as a guest in your virtual machine?

The goal would be to get a feel for whether it might prove better for you than XFCE, without having to change your existing system unless MATE really proves better for you.

Anyway, just an idea... one you might well have already thought of. 
36
Discussions - Public / Re: Bitcoin Going to 0?
« Last post by ArnoldW2 on February 11, 2018, 06:31:18 PM »
Unix wrote:
Quote
I wouldn't mind cryptocurrencies if I could get assurance that a supercomputer running somewhere underground could not devalue the whole thing.

The key factor preventing too much devaluation is that open source crypto-currencies have a "supply limit".  For example, once the supply of BitCoins have been mined, the mining totally ends.  Forever.  And so does any devaluation that continued mining might otherwise have caused.  Once the last BitCoin has been mined its price may still soar or crash, but no longer because of mining.

Here's a list of crypto-currencies and their "supply limits".
 
Crypto-Currency    Supply Limit    Web Site Source
BitCoin21,000,000https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
Bitcoin Cash 21,000,000https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_Cash
Bitcoin Gold 21,000,000https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_Gold
LiteCoin 84,000,000https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litecoin
NameCoin 21,000,000https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin
EthereumUncertainhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum
Ethereum ClassicUncertainhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic
Ripple100 billionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_(payment_protocol)

Here's a site with two lists of crypto-currencies:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies


Gorn wrote:
Quote
The only way a cybercurrency can attain the stability to be used and "trusted" universally as cash like would be central control by a government ... In the "right" context government will flock to trackable crypto currency as a replacement for paper.

In the end, it may come to that.

The compelling feature for governments is the ability to track ALL financial transactions accurately.

Any crypto-currency adopted by governments will NOT have a supply limit -- same as fiat currencies.  This guarantees that, eventually, their crypto-currencies will be inflated to zero value -- same as fiat currencies.  Eventually, can be a long time.  In the case of the U.S., the dollar is still around after more than a century with the Federal Reserve.  And the British Pound has been around for centuries.  Be extremely patient.  Every government currency's time will end someday -- whether fiat or crypto.

One last thing:
Mining is NOT a requirement for crypto-currencies.  All 100 Billion Ripples were declared and issued at the very beginning -- with no mining.  Mining may be useful as a free enterprise incentive system, but I can't think of a good reason for any government to adopt a crypto-currency that has to be "mined", as it would be an unnecessary expense.
37
Discussions - Public / Re: Bitcoin Going to 0?
« Last post by The Gorn on February 11, 2018, 08:13:03 AM »
In my opinion, the only way a cybercurrency can attain the stability to be used and "trusted" universally as cash like would be central control by a government. Just like paper money.

So in the crypto currency world, I'm totally guessing that this could be achieved with a mining process that used a hash or salt as the basis for all valid crypto currency in use. The hash/salt would be a state secret because in order for new minted currency to be valid the crypto currency would have to be based on that hash.

I don't know anything about the mining algorithms but almost all decent cryptographic algorithms have the concept of a hash or a salt which is a random numeric sequence used to initiate the encryption. I would assume the Bitcoin algorithm or other could be adapted to use a hash or salt as a validity check.

I believe that in the "right" context government will flock to trackable crypto currency as a replacement for paper.
38
Discussions - Public / Re: Bitcoin Going to 0?
« Last post by unix on February 11, 2018, 05:13:37 AM »
I wouldn't mind cryptocurrencies if I could get assurance that a supercomputer running somewhere underground could not devalue the whole thing.  the whole "mining" thing is stupid as hell. Why the hell for? It expands the currency base and devalues *everyone's* investment in it. That's what the current central bank is doing. Printing. Instead of one location, you have a million and 1 small investors devaluing the thing. 

I think this devaluation is masked by these huge waves, up and down. But it's going on.  So if you mine a bitcoin, where do you think the value comes from???

at the expensive of everyone else.
39
Discussions - Public / Re: Bitcoin Going to 0?
« Last post by ArnoldW2 on February 07, 2018, 06:17:44 PM »
ilconsiglliere wrote:
Quote
Govmt has realized that its a threat to the $ and the party is over.

Actually, I think the global elitists DON'T want to end the party just yet.

Right now, they are making money from falling cryptocurrency prices via the new futures contracts.  While it's a pretty good bet that crypto-currencies will hit bottom after a crash of 90% to 99%, it won't be a 100% crash.

But after crypto-currency prices hit bottom, the elitists will want to make money from vastly greater price increases, which will make crypto-currencies more expensive than ever.  That's why the current effort to crush crypto-currencies will stop short total annihilation.

Once cryptocurrency prices are bubbly high (again), government central banks will declare the crypto-currencies to be "safe" and will once again allow the general public to buy.  Otherwise, there will be nobody for the global elitists to sell their BitCoins to at the top.

As long as crypto-currencies are used only for speculation, they are NOT a threat to government fiat currencies.  They will become a threat only when they display enough price stability to function as money.

Remember, the elitists missed out on the first three boom and bust cycles.  Then they missed out on the boom part of the fourth cycle.  Finally, they're now making money on the bust part of the fourth cycle, and they want to make money on the future FIFTH boom and bust cycle.

I think there's a good chance that governments will outlaw all non-government crypto-currencies after the 5th cycle busts, but NOT before that.
40
Discussions - Public / Re: Bitcoin Going to 0?
« Last post by unix on February 06, 2018, 07:57:54 PM »
LOL

Technically, before ITYS, I was told so.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10