avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • September 19, 2019, 05:19 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 13 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Gothi[c] [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 32next
I really wish I could read it but that color makes it almost impossible for me.  I can only make it a few words before needing to look away.

if green on black doesn't make you warm and fuzzy, then the posts probably won't be for you to begin with. :)

That said, you can view it in a text-browser and use any colors in your terminal you want. That's why I made it text-browser friendly :)

Here it is in lynx, with a lower contrast, just by editing the terminal colors:


Honestly, I really dislike browsing the internet. I can't stand looking at white backgrounds, they make my head hurt, and that's what popular on the net for some reason.
In my point of view, web DESIGN is the worst thing that ever happened to the net. Web pages have become similar in design to paper magazines, from typography, images, to even the white paper.
Javascript, flash, web2.0 mirror backgrounds, big banner images, all the commercialism. It all just makes the http:// very unpleasant for me. I know that the rest of the world probably feels the opposite, but oh well... :) That's why I am not a web designer. :D I couldn't stand it. I'd rather die than bowing to my client's wishes.
I can hear them coming already: "I WANT A BLINKING THINGY WITH MUSIC!"...

Now we have to worry about css hacks, browser compatibility, and apparently even colors... I really think we'd be better off with plain text, and let any one use any colors they want in their browser. One size does not fit all. Never-ever.

And that's what web-design has done to us. Forcing a particular design upon us. If I change my browser background to black, for example, half the sites on the internet become unreadable because some sites force black text, and you can't read black on black.

If I force both foreground and background colors in my browser, then things look ugly as all hell, because of websites using images with bright colors in their design, which would directly clash with my settings.
I imagine people with accessibility issues face the same thing every day.

The web should be about content. Leave design to the realm of physical paper magazines. Let users use whatever setting they want in their browser.

Many, if not most things I do are done from my terminal window, making all applications look uniform, with the same colors etc... Every time I fire up a web browser, my choice, my preferences, my settings, they all go out the window because of some bloke that thought it'd be fun to give content a 'design'.

Nothing personal, Veign! You're still a great person :D Rant was against state of the www, not an attack on your profession ;)

All of it is just personal opinion which is subject to error and change, and so out of sync with the world that it's not even funny. Often I think these things and don't rant about them, because ranting about them seems so pointless. All I'm doing is telling people I'm a weirdo :D See first post on the linkerror ramblings site for disclaimer :D

Well he's finally been convinced

More like, pushed nagged, prodded, poked and shoved into compliance by mouser :lol: He gives me too much credit. :)

The theme has had some minor changes since the tarball I uploaded there. I'll just create a section for it on where updates can be grabbed from.
It's a very minimal theme though. I got rid of many if not most wordpress features because they would be too crowding or not needed.

I really can't agree with you're nr 2 and 3, sorry :)

Linux is a kernel not a guideline, nor a standard.
The way distributions lay out their file system however, is pretty much 100% a mix of historical reasons and maintaining compatibility with various applications. And yeah, there ARE standards. POSIX is a standard, not a guideline.

I won't even comment on 2. It's just completely false. I see more amateurism on windows than elsewhere honestly. Do I have to mention all those folks that discover visual basic and think they suddenly are a developer?

Inertia is probably the main reason why anything is the way it is.

Got any workable ideas for how to best accomplish that?
Yeah, get rid of the symlinks and compatibility layers. If developers want to their apps to run on your distro, they had better stick to good coding practices. It's the only way to change the situation. Every time a compatibility layer is added, developers have less incentive to change their ways.

Which is very poor coding practice at best. No. Correction. It's just plain wrong. Developers should (and hopefully do) know better than that. Heck, even Microsoft knows better than that.

True of course, but reality is that they don't. :) 
(oh, and Microsoft has plenty of hard-coded paths in their software btw)

desperately needs to be replaced with something that makes more sense.
I'm all for that, but I'd love to see a cleaner solution than hiding folders and multiple layers of symlinks ..

Ok, I tried gobo.

It seems it makes heavy use of symlinks to force it's own hiearchy, and hides the traditional folders. Example:

gobohide --unhide /lib
gobohide --unhide /bin
gobohide --unhide /dev
ls -ahl /lib /bin /dev
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 24 2008-03-30 03:55 /bin -> System/Links/Executables
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 21 2008-03-30 03:55 /dev -> System/Kernel/Devices
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 21 2008-03-30 03:55 /lib -> System/Links/Libraries
gobohide --unhide /usr
cd /usr
ls -ahl
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 27 2008-03-30 03:55 bin -> ../System/Links/Executables
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 23 2008-03-30 03:55 include -> ../System/Links/Headers
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 25 2008-03-30 03:55 lib -> ../System/Links/Libraries
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 1 2008-03-30 03:55 local -> .
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 23 2008-03-30 03:55 man -> ../System/Links/Manuals
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 23 2008-03-30 03:55 sbin -> ../System/Links/Executables
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 22 2008-03-30 03:55 share -> ../System/Links/Shared
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gobo gobo 1 2008-03-30 03:55 X11R6 -> .

It's an interesting concept but I can't see myself using it because:

  • There is no utility to check installed packages for vulnerabilities such as glsacheck on gentoo or portaudit on bsd.
  • Many applications use hardcoded paths, their compatibility 'solution' of hiding the traditional filesystem with gobohide is a hack at best. Sorry, but no thanks :) And if you're going to use a hack, nullfs+union sounds like a cleaner way to do this than symlinks imo. 
  • Very few packages, and little up-to-date ones. Being able to create your own recipes is nice, but I can make gentoo ebuilds or freebsd ports just as easily, and both do have a decent package collection. In the end it would just be more hassle.

Also, for some reason they put libraries under programs. Personally i would have separated them. A dynamically loadable lib is not a program. Why call pears, apples? As a developer i find it handy to have all libs under the same folder. having them mixed in with all programs present on the system is just a big pain, not to mention a mess.

Living Room / Re: Conficker - The Facts
« on: April 09, 2009, 08:21 PM »
I am getting timeouts / "...cannot display web page".
Could be my security software/settings... trying to determine.
Thought I would confirm the links were valid first.
They work for me.

When you finish reading about Gobo, try downloading and giving it a try. It's an enlightening experience realizing how much better Linux could be if it would just abandon some of its more traditional ways of thinking.

Interesting... I'll give it a go.


Ran across this interesting read, explaining some of the history of the /usr folder :


The article suggests a very nice way to have all binaries into the same folder (ie, unite /bin and /usr/bin) on FreeBSD using nullfs and union.

I found the historical bit about the magnetic tapes for / and a faster disk for /usr was particularly interesting :)

I figured I'd share the link... :)

In fact, I think it's the same amount of clicks, just a different 'error' msg

that way FF would bitch less
Not much less :) The only reason I haven't even bothered is because ff still makes you do 3 or 4 (haven't counted?) clicks just for a self-signed cert.

That sounds plain weird - a crashing usermode program causing a BSOD? Never had that happen O_o
It's weird, I don't know how either, but it happened. And it has happened before with msvc, though I don't remember if it actually went as far as a bsod last time, but this time it did.
The bsod came 2 seconds or so after the regular segfault msgbox, so there is a small chance it's unrelated, who the heck knows...

I'm a *nix user, so I barely ever use Windows. However, my last bsod happens to be the last time i booted windows :D

MSVC compiler somehow crashed, bsod followed. So, no, for me the reputation is still valid ;)

If only DC had a SSL cert that didn't make firefox throw hissy fits...

If only firefox didn't throw hissy fits, extorting money out of people so they would buy ssl certificates :)

I tend to be the first to applaud security measures, but https is just broken.
It is trying to serve 2 purposes, which should be separate things.

1) making sure you're talking to who you think you are talking to
2) provide encryption

#1 is not possible without having certificate authority bodies (which right now, is a bussiness.) and i'm all for FF throwing hissy fits when you may be talking to an attacker.

However, when all you want is encryption, a self-signed cert is more than fine. The fact that anyone that wants to implement encryption without forking out the money for #1, gets harassed by web browsers, is deterring people from using and/or implementing encryption at all, which is a very very bad thing for security.

Living Room / Re: Tech News Weekly: Edition 13-09
« on: March 31, 2009, 01:05 AM »
Do either of you (Goth Man and J Man) block them also?
I block google's cookies, yes.

Living Room / Re: Tech News Weekly: Edition 13-09
« on: March 28, 2009, 07:56 PM »
IMO this headline is a little sensationalist, but I'm not the first on this forum to say that I'm finding Google's results to be less and less relevant as time goes on. Perhaps they've noticed too...

I've actually already had it happen on numerous occasions that I couldn't find ANY relevant information with google at all, but altavista did. Usually when you're looking for more unpopular/obscure stuff. I'm not a fan of google nor altavista. I find the altavista results in general worse, but for some reason every once and a while it does better with obscure searches.

Living Room / Re: Google thinks donationcoder has malware
« on: March 02, 2009, 01:05 AM »
Interestingly enough, mouser's computer completely broke down as he was reading this post, thinking something very nasty had happened to the site. Called me up in panic :)
It turns out that several capacitors on one of his video cards had popped(exploded), thus not only explaining the badly-timed breakdown but also why he's been hearing mystery electrical pop's the past few days.

Is it just me that's dull, or isn't there any screenshots on the silkroad site? O_o


We had a review in 2006 with screenshots :)

It's very bad for your health, and it will eradicate you of any remnant of social life.

Stop making it sound attractive.  :)

Actually, I'd rather play a free+Free mmorpg than a proprietary one with monthly subscription fees etc. Not to mention her computer wouldn't be able to run it atm...

Gnucash sounds like the obvious answer... though I'm not familiar enough with quicken to know what it should do/have.

Unfortunately, that attitude must have had some traction, because the new BSD logo is so highly stylized, you'd be hard pressed to see Beastie in it unless you were familiar with the old logos.

Beastie is still the BSD logo. The stylized ball is the new FreeBSD logo.
It's kind of a recent change.

FreeBSD has the ball with horns, NetBSD has the flag, OpenBSD has the blowfish, and all of them have beastie.

General Software Discussion / Re: Games for Linux
« on: February 09, 2009, 06:32 AM »
I just find games using Gentoo GNU/Linux's eix command which searches the packages in portage.
Here's the complete raw output for everything with description and url's to the game homepages:

Of course, with eix you can easily search specific categories or specific keywords/regexes. But the list should help people that don't use Gentoo.

That's 859 different entries. I think that should keep one occupied. :)

Developer's Corner / Re: Web Page Layout Debate: Tables vs. CSS
« on: February 07, 2009, 06:06 PM »
I don't want to have to create separate styles to applease a specific browser. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Developer's Corner / Re: Web Page Layout Debate: Tables vs. CSS
« on: February 06, 2009, 09:19 PM »
Well, I don't like to do pixel perfect layouts really, I prefer to work with relative sizes such as em or %. (ie, flexible layouts.)

I guess what bothers me most is the boxing limitations (hacks required to center something vertically, or to have a column fill the whole page, while wildly documented, are ugly and redicilous in the fact that they are even required at all) and then mostly, inconsistencies between browsers.

The boxing stuff seems like it would be fixed in css3, if it ever comes out. Though I'm not sure if the proposed solution is the best one. At least it is A solution, nevertheless.

The browser inconsistencies can't be blamed on css, but should really be blamed on the browsers, I guess. What bothers me is that lots of the proposed 'hacks' to 'fix' lots of the issues don't even validate as valid css, because they are browser-specific things implemented next to/on top of the standards (IE does a lot of that).

I simply refuse to implement stuff that doesn't validate, because I feel I shouldn't have to.

Then you've got the overlapping text issues you can have, or floats that don't behave properly when text is sized to extremes (big or small).

An ironic example, is a web page that tried to argue how CSS is superior to tables, since tables 'print better'.
While it is true that you can easily switch css templates to a non-color printer friendly style, irony has it that when i went to the print-preview of the page, i saw this:

Yes, when printing, the text just went all over the place and started overlapping. Needles to say, I was not convinced ;) - If the very same page arguing the better printing, doesn't even print right (yes it was pure css layout), then where are we at?

I feel lots of the css evangelists, like css so much, because it does have good ideas behind it, and a lot of it truly is pure beauty and freedom. However, the actual implementation (in browsers) is very much a horrible mess.

All in all, I really do find that with tables you have more certainty that your layout will stay where it is supposed to, and not wrap around, or start overlapping when things are resized too much or whatever, and you can make a flexible layout that stays in place no matter what, regardless of the complexity of the layout, very easily... But that's probably the only thing they have going for them. All the disadvantages argued against tables are valid. But I do feel that the layout, boxing, placement of things on a website, and having these things stay consistent, is a very important thing. And if this thing is complicated to the level of needing hacks and un-validating code, then I find the solution a mess.

I can't help but conclude that tables are messy, css is implemented messy. The www is messy, and imho, has a lot of maturing to do as far as standards and consistency.

Developer's Corner / Re: Web Page Layout Debate: Tables vs. CSS
« on: February 05, 2009, 06:50 PM »

Pages: prev1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 32next