On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:53:22 +0100, ilf wrote:
> It's reported, that X.Org 1.10.99.902 introduced the possibility to kill
> the top X.org window via keybinding Ctrl+Alt+Multiply. I don't have a
> current X.Org on this box, but it reportedly works for slock 0.9:
>
> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:54:58 +0100, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> mail sucks
>
It may very well be because I'm awake since yesterday, but (taking
into account the message you replied to) that was goddamn hilarious!
Thanks!
Peace
--
Pieter
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:46:53 +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> Dnia 28 października 2011 14:17 hiro
> <23h...@googlemail.com> napisał(a):
>
> > And they discourage compiling
> > your own stuff IIRC.
>
> "Watching shit scroll by for hours makes
> me a Linux expert overnight!"
>
Now you're just bein
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:29:24 -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Pieter Praet wrote:
> > And I absolutely agree that for most FOSS projects, grokking the source
> > is rather unlikely to have a positive ROI re time and effort, so
>
>
> And th
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 08:41:21 -0400, "Michael P. Soulier"
wrote:
> On 28/10/11 Pieter Praet said:
>
> > When acquiring *any* type of technology (in the very broad sense of the
> > word), you should either make an effort to educate yourself regarding
> > availa
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:41:52 +0200, Dieter Plaetinck
wrote:
> [...] I think that if generations of people use windows,
> this acclimatization also slowly grows in their DNA,
So, only a matter of time before this becomes reality:
- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/
> [...]
>
> Dieter
>
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:47:34 +0200, Manolo Martínez
wrote:
> On 10/28/11 at 01:35pm, hiro wrote:
> > > That's because Ubuntu sucks only marginally less than Windows
> > >
> >
> > Huh? Ubuntu sucks a lot more.
>
> I'm just a user of some suckless software, but anyway: if "suck" in this
> thread
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:46:50 -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> > from the purview of the average computer user.
>
> this is the biggest part of why he's an asshole. if you're not
> willing to learn how to use a computer don't buy a computer.
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:18:18 +0200, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> Kurt H Maier writes:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Guilherme Lino wrote:
> >>
> >> yeah but the true is that a linux desktop is almost useless for a normal
> >> person
> >
> > who the fuck cares about normal people?
>
> The
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 08:54:12 +0200, Dieter Plaetinck
wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:33:18 +0100
> Guilherme Lino wrote:
>
> > latex is cool, vim, dwm, but no one out of the professional
> > field of computer sience have the time or patience to learn this unix
> > philosophy..
>
> are you trol
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:15:42 -0700, "Suraj N. Kurapati"
wrote:
> On Thu 27 Oct 2011 05:00:41 PM PDT, Pieter Praet wrote:
> > Don't worry, you're not missing out on anything, besides the guy
> > making a total fool of himself in front of a totally oblivious
&
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:33:18 +0100, Guilherme Lino wrote:
> yeah but the true is that a linux desktop is almost useless for a normal
> person
>
s/normal/uninformed
Also, see Kurt Maier's response [1].
> i remember first time i used ubuntu. i started a openoffice presentation on
> the 4th slide
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:49:15 -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Guilherme Lino wrote:
> >
> > yeah but the true is that a linux desktop is almost useless for a normal
> > person
>
> who the fuck cares about normal people?
+1
>
> --
> # Kurt H Maier
>
Peace
--
P
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:04:21 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> You guys are so stupid if you think ./configure is great
>
Nobody said anything of the like.
Are you projecting or something? ;)
Peace
--
Pieter
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:02:46 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> "this video is not available" sucks
>
Don't worry, you're not missing out on anything, besides the guy
making a total fool of himself in front of a totally oblivious
audience (which is just annoying; no comical value whatso
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 01:04:42 +0100, Guilherme Lino wrote:
> yo
>
> fund this.. it kind of old, but it rise some questions
>
You're absolutely right, it does raise some questions:
So, not only did you take this guy's useless drivel seriously, but you
actually thought the suckless community woul
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:16 -0700, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:00:33PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> > I don't get it, are you calibrating your printer so that it matches
> > the display instead?
> >
> No. The printer and the monitor are not going to match. There is no
> hope for that.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:13:09 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> [...]
> I do seem to have less of a problem when there's a color management
> system in the display, but I can't imagine anything more sucky in a
> display than a system to adjust every already-rendered pixel.
> [...]
Color calibrat
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:55:38 +0200, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Most people getting eye problems in front of the computer are caused
> by the concentrated day-long staring without blinking once.
^ Also rather influential.
Especially for Ethan, who (based on his reference to deviantART to
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 12:20:02 +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200
> pancake wrote:
>
> > Also crt and lcd/tft screens have differet brightness effects. Tft are less
> > damaging to eyes than crt.. So i think discussion about colors on text
> > moved to only st
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:23:03 +0200, pancake wrote:
> Just to add my 5c to the thread..
>
> I remember in the msdos5.0 age where everybody was using a 80x25 text console
> to run programs and graphical mode was just for games..
>
> Many text editors used a blue background. This is:
> wordperfec
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 11:53:32 +0200, Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 07:09 PM, pancake wrote:
> > Its anti natural.
>
> It's not.
>
> Because I asked myself which is the best working environment regarding
> ones eyes some time ago, I looked around for some scientific research on
> the topic
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 12:41:24 +0100, Sir Cyrus wrote:
> What's the most suckless Linux distribution?
>
Perhaps not the *most* suckless, but Arch [1] is a very worthy contender
IMHO. Their manifesto [2] is very similar to suckless.org's.
[1] https://www.archlinux.org/
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.o
On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:58:33 -0500, Hank D wrote:
> [...] but I really want an email client that isn't total ass.
You may find what you're looking for in notmuch [1].
Even if you do somehow come to the conclusion that it's total ass,
the amount of ass would still be notmuch.
Considerable less th
24 matches
Mail list logo
