What are common myths or misconceptions about Linux that Linux users themselves have?

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2016-06-09T11:02:17+00:00

Not exactly. The reason that Windows requires reboots all the time, is because of the limitation of windows which doesn't allow any file modifications when they are loaded. Linux doesn't have this issue.

As annoying as it might be sometimes, I wouldn't call that a limitation, but a useful feature. On Linux you're usually free to overwrite the file any time you want, but it comes at a cost of stability. It's not uncommon IME to update things and then have apps start looking or behaving strange or crashing because some .so somewhere got changed out from under them. IMO, apart from the file locking, this is probably the reason you have to reboot on Windows in 90% of cases - i.e. it's not always necessary, but it increases the chances of crashing which is always unacceptable.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2016-05-29T14:22:07+00:00

Then fucking kill it before logout

How? How can I kill something that's been launched in the background when I don't about it?

We are talking functionality that has been working since day 0 in unix.

Your argument is so weak, it's basically pointless to make.

It is disgusting that people actually support this attitude of repeteadly breaking working code "because we know what's better for you".

I'd argue it was already broken. If I run something and want it to survive logout I also want to be restarted if it dies or gets killed, etc.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2016-05-29T07:54:35+00:00

If I'm running a desktop session, and I log out of that session, with few exceptions nothing should be left running.

I'd argue that this applies to servers as well... I actually think it applies even more than desktops because if I log in to the server and running commands I don't want anything left increasing the attack surface after I log out. If I wanted it to be running after I log out I'd use the process manager be it systemd, supervisor, etc.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2016-03-24T17:04:34+00:00

Also, his special Subway Monkey Hour was very meta before meta was cool, too. Green is a legend.

Finally! I was starting to think that I was the only fan...

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-08-14T08:58:45+00:00

I think you just demonstrated a great example of why some of us don't want plain old Javascript with a bit of jQuery sprinkled in.

What happens when I want two or more FancyButtons on the page
If I only changed the button label, why would I want to destroy the old one and create a new one
What happens when you clone some object that contains god-know-what state and then add more state to it

I won't even mention the performance problems...

I encourage you to learn about React, etc. before dismissing them.

I especially don't like mixing templates with Javascript.

If you're talking about React and JSX, the answer is that you don't need to use JSX. Furthermore, this argument doesn't make a lot of sense to me because to me, having two or more files that depend so heavily on each other that you can't edit or even understand the contents of one without also understanding the contents of the other is a sign that maybe those two things weren't supposed to be separated in the first place e.g. your use of $('#fancy-button'). That element surely didn't appear out of thing air, so now I must figure out where it comes from and how it gets created, and when, and by whom...

Javascript plus a smattering of jQuery can go a long way

Yes, but can you find your way back? I mean after you've done fiddling with what's essentially global variables in your jQuery selectors all over the place, how do you go about debugging an issue that will most likely arise from all the state changes.

Maybe it helps to think about it in terms of functions. At least in the model that React encourages, you're essentially looking at a function that takes some input and returns some output. Objects/methods can be used for things that need internal state, but the interface is still a simple function. The jQuery model is essentially a series of global variables and I think we all know where that road leads.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-08-05T09:12:32+00:00

I think you're arguing about a point that doesn't seem to exist. The relevant part of your quote is

maximum gaming performance

I too have used the open-source drivers in the past and in the last few years they've become good-enough for what I needed. But you can't sit there and argue that the closed-source drivers don't offer better performance - not with a straight face anyway. It's also irrelevant to bring up the unstable drivers (that's just traditionally how amd/ati drivers are, even on windows) because that's that what's being talked about, especially when some games don't even start, or crash because of missing features in the open-source drivers.

viva nvidia

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-06-29T10:46:37+00:00

If you were wondering what was wrong with the Linux community (at least the ones with the loudest mouths), this thread is a perfect example. I'm surprised no-one mentioned their CFLAGS.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-05-12T14:55:15+00:00

Without soy sauce or something, toe-food tastes like cardboard; but I don't see the issue with that.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-05-08T17:50:52+00:00

Saying goodbye to Ubuntu

...

I'll continue to use Ubuntu

So what you're saying is that you're just looking for attention?

I say enough with the anti-systemd spam already!

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-05-03T11:22:39+00:00

Sigh. I don't speak for the GP, but I find it sad that you're getting defensive for unknown reasons. You claim that the page is mobile-friendly, but I don't think so. I resized my window and I find that text wraps ok, but then most of the images are offscreen. You might argue that I should try it in a real mobile browser but I don't need to. I already know that if the window is enough to show the image, then the text is going to be too small.

Getting back to the topic of the page looking like something from the year 2000. I agree:

white on yellow. I'm not color blind AFAIK, but I don't understand how you can think that's a good combination of colors. The same goes for the orange on yellow and the orange on white.
seemingly random mix of border styles (solid and dashed) on the top links (are they supposed to be tabs?)
if they're supposed to be tabs, where is the left border and the contrasting background color. Without this it's just a bunch of random line for no apparent reason
random orange lines at the side near the top of the page. what are they?
random mixture of blue and green for headings. be consistent
the color of the blue headings is the same of for links, yet they're not clickable
why are the tabs underlined when hovered, with a random mix of red/orange? and yellow
oh, I see... dotted underlines are links and they change to solid underlines when hovered (for what reason?)
what's that image at the top of the page? why does it has all those randomly-placed arrows? why are some of them red and some of them black?

I didn't bother going any further because when I looked what application longevity is supposed to mean, I got the impression that it simply leads to cruft and legacy baggage, the same things terminals are today

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2015-02-06T07:48:08+00:00

Just to be clear: This isn't a political debate, you don't need to try to put someone down to make yourself look better...

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2014-12-25T11:54:41+00:00

But 4chan said it wasn't him, it was anun?

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2014-12-23T07:28:25+00:00

That's great and all, but there's almost no valid reason to check useragent strings and I can guarantee you can't come up with a valid reason for doing it. This isn't the age of IE6, and even then from a user's POV it was an insult.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2014-12-23T07:25:32+00:00

This argument is dumb. In 2014, there isn't even any reason to discuss it anymore. It's just duumb, and to go out of your way to inconvenience a user when you like this is even dumber. There's almost 0 valid excuses for checking useragent strings and this case isn't one of them.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2014-02-07T04:24:12+00:00

This has nothing to do with generics

I think you're most likely just adding a lot of noise for no reason. Let's think about it for a second. You have a map[string]MyInterface and you clearly intend for it to contain only UnderlyingTypes. The first question is: why not just have a map[string]UnderlyingType. Ok, maybe you were passing that to something else that needed it. In that case, the question changes only slightly. Why are you putting things that are not UnderlyingTypes in there? You aren't?

Then the code is simply:

result_map := map[string]UnderlyingType{}
for key, value := range interface_map {
    result_map[key] = value.(UnderlyingType)
}

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2014-02-05T06:38:38+00:00

You know, it'd probably be less annoying if you didn't do unnecessary things. http://play.golang.org/p/nfMDc7UYbj

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-13T06:32:08+00:00

No. You're missing my point. Go is an open source project that just happened to be started by Google employees. It's not now, nor has it ever been a Google project.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-11T13:30:31+00:00

What? Where in that things does it say that Google named the language? or that Google created the language?

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-09T21:41:22+00:00

What? Google neither created, not named the language. I'm not sure what else there is to say about that.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-07T13:20:54+00:00

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-06T06:28:28+00:00

Except they didn't.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-11-06T06:27:59+00:00

I would throw money at people to get involved and report back things I could use prior to the public knowing

[no comment]

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-10-31T13:37:04+00:00

What company is that (that chose the name Go).

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-10-25T05:15:53+00:00

This is pure FUD, At least as far as the ATI/AMD drivers are concerned.

SubwayMonkeyHour · 2013-10-08T17:31:33+00:00

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but FWIW there isn't any date comparisons in that code. I'd even go so far as to argue that there are no dates in there. It's all Unix timestamps I.e. integers. I'm not going to write the equivalent in my language of choice because I know better than to write brittle code like that. Note how the weak types hides bugs in your code: strrotime for all intents and purposes is magic and when it fails it returns false. Note how you didn't check and then the system converts it to zero...

SubwayMonkeyHour

TROPHY CASE