1. 11

    I’ve had Windows Update make me lose unsaved work.

    This isn’t just “annoying”, it’s completely unacceptable. As a university student my “active hours” are highly variable, and an unexpected reboot could mean throwing away half a paper or corrupting a running VM. Either way, I’d have to spend that much time setting up my workspace again.

    I’ve had it sitting there pending while waiting to rush out the door.

    This could mean losing hours of work and damaging my grade because Windows wouldn’t let me print or upload an assignment for the deadline.

    This guide has allowed me to leave Windows Update enabled with its auto-reboot functionality disabled, so I can choose to reboot when I know I have the time. I think this is the way it should work.

    1. 13

      There’s a joke that’s probably older than you are, but it contains a useful lesson.

      http://hajokes.com/view/Jesus-saves

      1. 1

        Ha. I do compulsively mash Ctrl+S or :w whenever I’m working on something, but still, the OS unilaterally deciding to toss my state just shouldn’t be a thing. And “saved” doesn’t always mean “safe”, for example, if VMware is in the middle of background writes to a virtual disk image. Random reboots put long-running tasks at risk, too, like running a test suite or neural network training overnight.

      2. 6

        No offense but what is keeping you on Windows?

        1. 3

          Adobe haven’t released InDesign for OpenBSD yet.

          1. 2

            But they have released it for macOS.

            1. 2

              Yes. MacOS X is a nice middle ground for people who want commercial support and want a UNIX shell underneath (I know about the new Bash thing - it’s got a long way to go :)

          2. 3

            Compatibility with third-party software. I do most of my development in a Linux VM, but some things just require Windows unfortunately.

            1. 2

              Not the OP, but I’m stuck with having Windows around for

              • Cypress PSoC Creator
              • Atmel AVR Studio
              • the occasional need for Visual Studio
              • video games, especially the stability and performance of Nvidia on Windows relative to Linux
              • Microsoft Office

              And this list is by no means comprehensive, it’s just what comes to mind right now. I’ll also mention that I regularly use machines with Linux and MacOS, and often run VMs on each of them as I find it convenient to do work on one machine versus the others. I had completely cut everything but Linux out of my life for a couple years, but since then I’ve found that using all the systems insulates me from the annoyances of any single OS.

              1. 1

                Steam and games. Visual Studio is good too, but I could live without it.

              2. 6

                There’s an even worse version: you’re about to take a plane, so you turn off your computer and suddenly “installing update 1 of 2435, please do not turn off your computer”. But then you say I deserved this for using Windows.

                1. 1

                  Fun story about ‘active hours’. It claims to not restart if you are using system at the time. Guess if copy process (5tb of backups to new hdd) counts as ‘using system’… Last time I have ‘checked’ it did not.

                  1. 1

                    Download but do not install and when done, confirm their installation. You are obviously a power user who knows that updates are good and you are definitely not scared of clicking the Install button like 80% of common users.

                    For those, do not care. They won’t be running VMs and it teaches them to save their work.

                  1. 3

                    The FBI file makes depressing reading for critics of Gamergate. It is heavily redacted, so we don’t know why prosecutors did not pursue any of the cases.

                    Yes, it is indeed depressing knowing that you can’t get the people you don’t like and who say things to you don’t appreciate to get sucked into the whirling maw of the American penal system. We should certainly fix that bug!

                    Twitter, Google, and Microsoft all cooperated in the investigation, and subpoena warrants were served by a grand jury. This was taken seriously by the FBI, even if nothing ultimately came of it.

                    Good to hear that the private sector surveillance apparatus is doing their part on the war on meanies.

                    ~

                    Can we…not…rehash Gamergate shit here? Like, that’s the very definition of nontechnical content that everybody has strong opinions about and which nobody will convince anybody else of anything about. Both sides are still claiming victory (because if you repeat a lie often enough on the internet, you become the winner), both sides engage in shitty harassment, both sides have questionable ideologies, etc.

                    It’s a tire fire. Stop adding tires, and don’t start one here.

                    EDIT: And flagged troll, by some coward. You do realize that every time you abuse the troll flag it loses its effectiveness right? Users who might otherwise be like “hm, maybe that post was over the line, lemme reconsider” eventually just go “meh well looks like somebody disagreed with me whatever”. If you overuse words, they lose meaning. Have you learned nothing in the last year?

                    1. 24

                      Dude. Don’t play that “both sides are just the same” equivocation bullshit here. The “oh the prison-industrial complex is so awful, anyone who tries to use it to stop people making endless death threats is clearly the bad guy” look isn’t a good one either. (I note in passing that the “appeal to consequences” is in the big list of argumentative fallacies on Wikipedia.)

                      What happened to these particular women was wrong. Full stop. You can make all the arguments you like about other individuals (and I have seen testimony I personally believe that some pro-GG individuals were on the receiving end of some pretty nasty harassment) but none of that will change that basic fact. Either own it, or accept that you’ll get labelled as a troll & a bigot, because if you minimise what happened to these people then that’s what you are.

                      1. 3

                        I at no time have said that what happened to the victims on either side was anything but wrong.

                        I’ve pointed out at some modest length that both sides have done things I find reprehensible (as well as some things I think are admirable), and that neither side should be taking up space on a forum for discussing the practice of technology.

                        I’m sorry I’m not blindly advocating in support of your preferred…whatever it is you believe. Go punch some Nazis and feel better, I guess? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                        1. 9

                          Umm. The tags on this post are “culture” and “law”.

                          Very clearly this article is at the intersection of “culture” and “law” with “technology”.

                          Hit “Filters” at the top of the page, tick “culture” and “law” click and save….. and none of your space will be occupied, and your sock will remain un-angered by the passing debates on the subject.

                          Admittedly that forum mechanism is a little crude in that I believe it would filter (“culture” || “law”), and not (“culture” && “law”).

                          But anyway, “law” is one of those things that tends to tick along unnoticed until it makes you angry.

                          1. -3

                            The “literally full of ants” line in your bio now makes total sense.

                            (And now I’m wondering whether that little ad hominem at the end there was a classic example of projection in action.)

                        2. 15

                          both sides have questionable ideologies, etc

                          Are you saying social justice and feminism are a “questionable ideology”? Or referring to something else here?

                          (I agree that the US prison-industrial complex is horrific and any justice obtained through it is tainted by that)

                          1. 5

                            The people who claim those movements as their own are definitely responsible for immense amounts of narrow-mindedness, bullying, prejudice, and indeed inability to see people who disagree with them on the smallest point as human. It’s the common disease of any -ism, and they’re no less prone to it than any other.

                            1. 7

                              Are you saying social justice and feminism are a “questionable ideology”?

                              At the risk of being motte-and-bailey’d, I’m going to say that, yes, what many people in 2017 self-refer to as “social justice” and “feminism” are extremely questionable, and in fact are actually antithetical to their purported goals of fairness and equality.

                              To preempt any comments to the effect of “Those are just the extremists; most feminist/social justice activists actually only believe <reasonable thing>”; you are incorrect. I am a student at a liberal university in a liberal town, so I interact with these people every day. I get to see them “in the bailey”, so to speak.

                              1. 7

                                Threading the needle very finely here, so please don’t jump to conclusions: are you saying that supportings of honesty in games journalism (hah) and protection of established culture (hah hah) are “questionable ideologies”?

                                Of course not! However, one will invariably then point to the acts of harassment and vile speech used to silence others. And then somebody on the other side can point out the counterdoxxing, social media hate mobbing, organized blacklists (GGautoblocker, etc.) and cultural erasure being done too.

                                Unfortunately we can’t judge both sides by their best actors, and both sides' ideologies clearly support actors doing shitty things when it suits their cause despite having some reasonable or even positive ideas in other areas. We don’t get to cherrypick, and that’s why I call both questionable.

                                (And to answer your original query, since both tents of social justice and feminism are quite large, including calls to do things like eradicate the male sex, yes, I find them questionable. I similarly find most forms of chauvinism, capitalism, communism, socialism, and most other -isms suspect. Such is the lot of the skeptic.)

                                1. 10

                                  We don’t get to cherrypick

                                  […]

                                  including calls to do things like eradicate the male sex

                                  You don’t consider picking a piece of satire authored in 1967 cherry-picking?

                                  “The Manifesto is widely regarded as satirical, but based on legitimate philosophical and social concerns” - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto

                                  1. 8

                                    You’re selectively quoting that source, because of course it’s helpful to distance the movement from the crazies. We can snipe sources and quotes back and forth, but dismissing that document as merely “satire” is revisionist history: at the very least, given the fact that the author shot Andy Warhol because she felt he had too much control over her, it’s unlikely. Satirists typically don’t shoot people.

                                    You don’t consider picking a piece of satire authored in 1967 cherry-picking?

                                    I’d be happy to link to a lot of the good stuff done by feminists and socjus folks, but people somehow never have trouble remembering that.

                                    More generally, it’s marvelously convenient to say “oh no, that was all just satire/a lone actor/a fringe element” and then act offended when the other side does the same thing when questioned about their extremists.

                                    That’s what I mean by not cherrypicking–you don’t get to pick the subset of the ideological practitioners that support things in an agreeable way. We condemn the folks who raised money to stop bullying and have valid concerns about losing a safe space because some of them also made bomb threats.

                                    Why shouldn’t we have the same concern about the side that, while it supports good work on diversity and inclusiveness and social justice stuff also engages in the same shitty terrible behavior they complain about?

                                    I’m not for either side. I support neither organized bullying, nor lying, nor mob justice. I don’t have to be a fascist buzzcut evil MRA goon to see that there is a lot of making fun of awkward nerds by belittling their choice of cultural touchstones. I don’t have to be a trans rainbow-haired SJW ally to see that there is a lot of truly vile harassment and just awful, awful stuff being written by people that should probably just shut up and go back to enjoying their vidya.

                              2. 4

                                Yes, it is indeed depressing knowing that you can’t get the people you don’t like and who say things to you don’t appreciate to get sucked into the whirling maw of the American penal system. We should certainly fix that bug!

                                If you don’t like that it’s a crime to make death threats write to your congressmen. Until then it’s reasonable and yes correct to expect that a good and sane law like this be upheld. It might be a surprise to you but people get murdered every year, many of them after threats!

                                1. 4

                                  Can we…not…rehash Gamergate shit here?

                                  Uh… on this comment thread you were the first person to bring it up…

                                  1. 4

                                    Did you read the title of the story?

                                    1. 3

                                      The submission was GG stuff. My post was an appeal to avoid what will doubtless end as another tiresome dragon.

                                      1. 2

                                        Your post caused this, which is likely why you were marked troll.

                                        1. 1

                                          I’d amassed several troll downvotes before a single reply happened, as a matter of fact.

                                  1. 7

                                    Maybe I’m too cynical, but something about this doesn’t add up.

                                    First of all, the accusations are so vague there’s no way anybody can refute them. I don’t know if this person even exists, and there’s no way to find out. The FSF can’t say anything because it would be a privacy violation for them to publicly discuss the person’s employment. Bringing it up this way makes it look like the FSF is being railroaded.

                                    Second, it would be completely contrary to the FSF’s philosophy to discriminate in that way. That doesn’t mean it’s not true, but there’s 30 years of reputation against a vague accusation from somebody who (apparently) has an axe to grind against the FSF.

                                    Third, it’s incredibly unfair to paint everybody on all of the GNU and FSF teams with the same brush. Even if one or two individuals are homophobic or whatever, there are hundreds of other people on those projects who aren’t and have nothing at all to do with it.

                                    Finally, if it’s true, it should be in court, not on a mailing list. Airing it on the internet will make it worse for everybody involved. The trans person in question (assuming they really exist) is as good as outed once this gets all over the internet.

                                    1. 1

                                      Third, it’s incredibly unfair to paint everybody on all of the GNU and FSF teams with the same brush. Even if one or two individuals are homophobic or whatever, there are hundreds of other people on those projects who aren’t and have nothing at all to do with it.

                                      I want to address this, because this is common objection. Strictly speaking, only FSF is being accused, and GNU is being criticized by association. We know the exact number of FSF staffs: it’s 11, not hundreds. If one FSF staff is homophobic, that translates to ~10% of FSF. At that point, it is reasonable to suspect even if only one staff is homophobic, more staffs are accepting of homophobic viewpoint.

                                      So “hundreds of other people” in this context can only mean GNU. While FSF’s stated philosophy is anti-discrimination, I never got the impression this applies to wide GNU projects. It is well known many GNU projects members are decidedly not politically correct and proudly so. This is not surprising, since about the only thing they have in common is that they support software freedom.

                                      1. 6

                                        We know the exact number of FSF staffs: it’s 11, not hundreds. If one FSF staff is homophobic, that translates to ~10% of FSF. At that point, it is reasonable to suspect even if only one staff is homophobic, more staffs are accepting of homophobic viewpoint.

                                        That is quite a leap. Homophobia is not a contagious disease.

                                        1. 2

                                          Not at all a leap. If you go to work daily with an openly homophobic person, you are implicitly accepting their behaviour as acceptable.

                                          1. 5

                                            Sounds like guilt by association to me…

                                            1. 3

                                              I thought it was called “tolerance”.