Well, I am late to this discussion, and perhaps no one will see this, but here goes anyway.
I cannot start to list the put offs of Windows without listing what does keep me on Windows, for the time being.
Voice capability in Yahoo Messenger:
I have friends and family in several continents. Yahoo Messenger voice conferencing is a good and cost effective way to keep in touch with them. Before anyone mentions GnomeMeeting, the people on the other side already have Windows, and cannot use Linux (yet), and are happy with Yahoo. I would not recommend that they install NetMeeting (for voice) and Yahoo (for text, since GnomeMeeting text messaging is not compatible with NetMeeting).
Quicken:
Well, that one is obvious. Don't tell me GnuCash or SQL Ledger, since they do not come close. The only real competitor is MS Money, and I don't want to give Microsoft more money...
Arabic Support in Browser:
Microsoft has cornered that market a while back. They turned a blind eye to piracy, until all the young geeks got addicted to their development tools, and the end users using only Windows. And then, they indocrinated web developers in their technologies so that even open standards for the web, and the separation of back end server and front end browser cannot be done. The result is that there are several high profile sites that are written in ASP, and use ActiveX...etc, and work only well in MS IE. They also drove competitor Arabization companies (Sakhr) out of business since the Windows 3.1 days (IIRC).
Having said that, now we come to the put offs, and there are plenty of those:
Viruses/Worms/Trojans:
That one should be obvious.
Cost:
Windows cost money. And keeping up to date means shelling bucks every other year or so. Not to mention the added cost of anti virus software.
Speed:
My digital camera pictures are dumped on the server, and is shared using both Samba (for Windows) and NFS (for Linux). The pictures just load so much faster in Linux, and the preview of the directory with "Large Icons" in Linux is much faster than "Thumbnails view in Linux".
I am seriously thinking of dumping Windows completely in the near future, except for one PC on Windows for Quicken and Voice chat. Konqueror Arabic capabilities are very very good now. Even better than FireFox on Windows! We are getting there, albeit slowly.
Out of 5 computers at home (one for me, one as a server, one for the wife, and one for each kid), only one is pure Windows, and the rest are all either 100% Linux or dual boot. The kids (early teens) are happy with Open Office for homework, Konqueror for browsing (even works with neopets with flash plugin), and GAIM for chatting (no voice though, but works great!)
By the way: Open Office is a great product, whether on Linux or on Windows. It has saved me buying MS Office for the kids, and a better way to do homework and reports than WordPad (free alternative to Word processing). Kudos to them for such an excellent product.
There are actually several sites on the net that are mirrors of Wikipedia content, only with banner ads and such.
Wikipedia has a page on it, but I can't give you the link right now, since Wikipedia seems to be not responding
Re:NCR, all too familiar. Lots of companies fading
on
The 3Com Saga
·
· Score: 2, Informative
More relevant to the audience here at Slashdot are these facts:
- NCR had UNIX based systems starting about 1982. They were called NCR TOWER. First they were based on Motorola 68010, then 20/30/40. These ran UNIX V.2, then V.3.
- Later (1990) NCR announced that it is moving to all Intel based UNIX systems with the System 3000. This was UNIX SVR4.
- These system were based on Microchannel (MCA), and NCR got the right to use MCA from IBM by a technology swap: NCR gets to use MCA and IBM gets to use SCSI.
Later, NCR decided to end new development of its version of NCR's SVR4, and not make any computers no more.
Internally, NCR's Worldwide Information Network (WIN), used to be run on open source software (before the term was invented). This meant UUCP style routing, smail/rmail, all on UNIX machines. That was before everything was converted to Microsoft Exchange.
In one instance, the CIA did pay $1000 to each family of 12 to 20 Afghan soldiers who were killed when U.S. Special Forces, believing they were striking a Taliban and al Qaeda stronghold, assaulted two compounds containing Afghan troops loyal to Karzai's government. But even in this case, Rumsfeld stubbornly maintained that the U.S. military had committed no error
I don't think this will look fair to the outside world.
Most of the suppositions I've heard about Bush is that he ignored warnings about increased terrorist threats because a) Clinton did the warning, so Bush had a 'fuck you' attitude, b) he, having hired his dad's Cold War era cabinet, was focused on nation-states rather than small groups, or c) just incompetant.
How about d) all the above? Makes sense to me.
And there could be other reasons: e) he had too little self confidence after the election results not giving him the appearance of a majority (and hence a mandate), f) he was distracted by a sinking economy, g) he was being attacked from every part of the political spectrum on various domestic (Education, Health,...etc.) and international issues (e.g. Middle East)
I've not heard it suggested that he orchestrated 9/11
The sad part is, I have heard it said that because of all the above, he planned Sept 11, to mask all the problems he had. The famous quotes from the Project for the New American Century expecting a catalyst event like Pearl Harbor does not help dissuade the critics.
The conspiracy minded people believe any of that crap when they see it.
Not that I believe it.
but I have heard the inevitable comparisons to Roosevelt 'allowing' Pearl Harbour to happen.
Good point here. Don't know much about whether Roosevelt actually allowed it conciously, or by neglect though.
When you get right down to it, though, 9/11 was inevitable; the book on air terrorism (at the time) said that the pilot was to do what the terrorists demanded, as the terrorists wanted to survive the encounter. Guess what; now they don't.
Exactly.
The other thing is, the roots of terrorism are not even acknowledged. Before people become terrorists they are extremists, and before that, they have a grievance or two. These grievances are never acknowledged to be real, and they are dissed as "evil" or "freedom hating" or whatever other sound bits put out.... Alas this does not seem to be changing any time soon.
The fact that Bush (or the Bush gov't; same thing, really) snuck them out of the country on a secret, special flight, during the no-fly period, without letting, say, the FBI so much as ask 'So...know where Osama is these days?' really does raise some eyebrows.
Agreed. Excellent point.
Still, it *does* raise some questions. Questions Bush hasn't answered.
Agreed.
My gripe is the "extrapolation" (stated or implied) that he knew about the September 11 attacks, or worse, that he ordered them! Much of these "family links" thing leaves the door open to the viewer/reader's imagination to fill in whatever, and in many cases, it is a conspiracy theory amounting to either knowledge of the attacks or actual complicity in them.
Now, I loath Bush's character, his tactics and his policies, and what he has turned the world we live in to. But, I do not think that making these type of allegations would help at all, other than discredit those who make them. That was my main point.
Now, as a Moore fan, I'll say that I've never seen his films, but his books, especially Stupid White Men, are well worth reading
Check out "Roger and Me". It is great.
From your email, it looks you are in Ontario. Did you get to watch "The Corporation" on TVO a week or so ago? I taped it, but did not watch it all yet (3 hours!). Michael Moore is featured in the movie, and has a lot to say.
Read the FAQ where it says one of the objectives is just that:
Why is there any need for GALILEO when we already have GPS?
GALILEO will ensure European economies' from independence from other states' systems, which could deny access to civil users at any time, and to enhance safety and reliability. The only systems currently in existence are the United States Global Positioning Service (GPS) and the Russian GLONASS system, both military but made available to civil users without any guarantee for continuity.
Important macro-economic benefits will be derived from GALILEO, in particular through achieving a European share in the equipment market, efficiency savings for industry as well as social benefits e.g. through cheaper transport, reduced congestion and less pollution.
Above that, with it's open service at least offering the same performances as GPS by the time of GALILEO's deployment, GALILEO will offer also value added services with integrity provision and, in some cases, service guarantees, based on a certifiable system.
Regardless of the motives for having different standards in China (whether it is techno-nationalism, freedom from patents, facilitation of snooping by government, or whatever), China indeed can afford to do it.
I personally think that it has to do with not being dependant on "foreign" technology more than anything else, and the other factors (government control,...etc.) come after it.
Think about how many type of electrical outlets are there? If you do some travelling you know how much a pain in the butt it is to connect your laptop in UK, Italy, Dubai,...etc.
The USSR already has differing specs for many engineering things, from electrical theory to railroad width. Even their computer systems used to be totally different from ours up to the 1980s or so. They could afford to, because they had the largest landmass (lots of miles of railroad) and a relatively large population.
The same applies to China, which has far more people than any nation on this planet.
China certainly has the potential to be the next superpower. When will that be? Its anyone's guess...
I think after that Diet, he was summoned to Rome, to appear in presence of the Pope. He did not. And since he found a protector, and supporters, the schism just widened, instead of being killed there as just another heresey.
Of course there are other factors why the Protestant movement was successful and not suppressed. For example, Henry VIII of England adopting a version of it. The alignment of various hostilities in Europe to either pro or anti Reformation. The allure of 'by faith only' and 'not by deeds'....etc.
The Catholic Church was due for a reformation. Why it was a schism and not just a movement within Catholicism is mainly due to Luther's character and style.
True, there were abuses in the Roman Catholic church at the time, mainly by a pope who came from rich and powerful family (Medici), and spent lavishly and wanted to replenish the cash he wasted by selling indulgences.
Luther wanted to reform the church, however, the events that ensued, compounded by Luther's personality and style made the schim irreversible.
The church called him to answer for what he wrote. He did not obey. He found protection with a ruler. The church played the excommunication card. He responded by declaring the pope to be Anti Christ. His abrasive and confrontational character, and his fire and brimstone rhetoric made reconciliation impossible.
Had he been more like Calvin, reconciliation was possible
I can't comment on the Great Barrier Reef nor the Seychelles, but I can tell you from a lot of snorkelling in the 90s in the Red Sea that the reefs and sea life is still very healthy there.
The Red Sea does not have many big cities dumping sewage and industrial waste into it. There are only a few oil refineries and desalination plants.
The depth of the Red Sea does help too. It is up to 2 km deep in many places, and with that much water volume, pollutants do not affect it as much as the much shallower Mediterranean for example.
As some other posters said, it could be the normal cycle rather than anything man made. Seychelles are far enough out of nowhere, and not affect by any major industrialized areas that affect its environment.
I watched Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" about the devastation of Flint, Michigan because of General Motors closure of factories.
It was a good movie, raising very valid points.
However, from what I read in the media about Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore used the wrong tactics.
For example, he emphasizes the Bush Family / Bin Laden Family business connections. So what? Bin Laden's family are big time construction businessmen, with huge projects all over the region. Bin Laden's father established this business a long time before Osama was born.
Bin Laden's family disowned him a long time ago (early 90s). This is not like Bush was a friend of Osama or something.
The throwing of irrelevant but sensational bits of data into the debate never helps, and if the neo-cons and their apologists do it, there is no need for those trying to be objectives to mimic this tactic.
This is very much like the other "quasi facts" that are drummed up against Saudi Arabia for example, and etched into the collective psyche of Americans. For example: the allegations that the royal family or officials or the people knowingly funded Bin Laden. Or that Bin Laden was paid "protection money" by the Saudi government (nice Mafia reference there!). These are presented to the American people as undisputed facts. The fact is: the Saudis stripped him of his citizenship very early in the 90s, before he declared any kind of war on America! As for the alleged "funding", it is never stated that this was mismanagement by some charity officials that lead to some money making its way to Bin Laden, and not that royal family/officials/Saudis intentionally funded him against America. Nor does it mention when this happened. It may have happened in the 80s when he was in a jihad against the USSR, something that America wholeheartedly supported.
I am against Bush's ill conceived policies all the way, but using these tactics will not help confront those stupid policies.
Nevertheless, it raises some good points that Americans need to think about.
P.S. Another good documentary that features Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky and others, is "The Corporation". Really worth a look by all readers of Slashdot.
You raise a very valid point: The Open Source community has a good window of opportunity to wedge itself and get mindshare.
However, you overlook other important points too:
- Inertia: Many businesses are driven by inertia. They do not want a painful migration. The mindset of many is short sight, ignoring the long term benefits. They would rather continue paying monthly or annual instalments, rather than paying less in total as a lump sum. They would would not spend money on migrating existing applications, and would rather continue with what they have, even if it will save them money in the long run. So they prefer to continue paying Microsoft rather than go Open Source.
- FUD: The point you raise about the time window. Yes there is a window, but it is actually shortened by the FUD factor: the promise of this nifty whiz bang, or that glitzy thing. This keeps them waiting and waiting. IBM was notorious for this in the 70s and 80s, before the client/server revolution of the 90s humbled them quite a bit. Businesses are made to wait because of promises of great features and such, and FUD is spread about competitors to prevent them from defecting.
Still, I agree with you that we do have a great opportunity till 2007. We have to make the most out of it.
The branded Google thing is great, but I would doubt that Google would make enemies of Microsoft at this time with such a move, as much as it makes sense to us.
I can't help but compare what Berners-Lee wanted and what the web has evolved into. He wanted a full fledge knowledge and collaboration system. People then just wanted static "pages".
This is analogous to the Fax machine when it was introduced. There was potential for it to have structured data sent instead of just an analog thing. But it did not happen, and the "modem revolution" had to be delayed.
Potential for abuse
Basically, how can semantics be guaranteed for accuracy? Look at what spammers (search engine spamming for example) would do with a technology like that?
Many of the comments here are anti-China, which we can understand, because SPAM is so much hated by all of us.
However, there is differentiator that needs to be made here: how many of these servers are actually run by spammers, vs. how many are hijacked by spammers without the owners' consent?
Isn't this an over generalization that demonizes entire people like: "All Arabs hate us!" or "All terrorists are Muslims!" or "All Jews are evil!"?
Another point is a differentiation between the people and the government. What the government does is not necessarily the same as what the people want or like.
Think about how G. W. Bush is behaving abroad (in your name) and even domestically, and ask yourself do you want everything he does to be actually in your name.
End of Cheap Oil been predicted since 1998
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
I said that in another discussion. but it is worth repeating here in a more appropriate topic.
Several years ago, there was this article in Scientific American that stated conventional wisdom said that oil supplies will be steady and shortage would only happen in half a century or so, and by then there will be alternative sources. They gave several convincing arguments that the shortage would happen within a decade.
Here is a link to the article, The End of Cheap oil by Colin J. Campbell and Jean Laherrere, March 1998.
This web site, Hubbert's Peak seems to be dedicated to the same premise.
Should I say that you sound like the knee jerk crowd who overreact at every turn?
No one psychoanalyzes a mugger, or tries to talk sense in a break and enter thief.
Those are extraordinary situations anyway. The important thing is what to do afterwards to prevent (or minimize the probability of) a repeat of the same thing?
Do you overreact and shut yourself at home and never go on the street again of fear? Or carry a gun and shoot anyone who approaches you physically, even if they are a homeless guy asking for a dime?
If you really think exploring the root cause after the fact and planning for the future is a luxury, then we are all doomed if we think this way in major events, like Sept 11.
Slashdot Mirror
I have been using laptops regularly (almost exclusively) since 1995.
After getting my left thigh burned (good that it was not something else like that other guy), I decided to try the lapdesks.
I have used NCR Globalyst (made by NEC), various Toshibas, and IBM Thinkpads.
The Toshibas heat up like heck. My brother's Compaq is even hotter.
The lapdesks are a piece of wood with a rim, and on the underneath, there is a "bag" filled with styrofoam beans.
Works well. Never had a problem with the heat.
So, this is not very new or anything. Maybe more high tech, but not a break through in functionality.
Well, I am late to this discussion, and perhaps no one will see this, but here goes anyway.
I cannot start to list the put offs of Windows without listing what does keep me on Windows, for the time being.
Voice capability in Yahoo Messenger:
I have friends and family in several continents. Yahoo Messenger voice conferencing is a good and cost effective way to keep in touch with them. Before anyone mentions GnomeMeeting, the people on the other side already have Windows, and cannot use Linux (yet), and are happy with Yahoo. I would not recommend that they install NetMeeting (for voice) and Yahoo (for text, since GnomeMeeting text messaging is not compatible with NetMeeting).
Quicken:
Well, that one is obvious. Don't tell me GnuCash or SQL Ledger, since they do not come close. The only real competitor is MS Money, and I don't want to give Microsoft more money ...
Arabic Support in Browser:
Microsoft has cornered that market a while back. They turned a blind eye to piracy, until all the young geeks got addicted to their development tools, and the end users using only Windows. And then, they indocrinated web developers in their technologies so that even open standards for the web, and the separation of back end server and front end browser cannot be done. The result is that there are several high profile sites that are written in ASP, and use ActiveX ...etc, and work only well in MS IE. They also drove competitor Arabization companies (Sakhr) out of business since the Windows 3.1 days (IIRC).
Having said that, now we come to the put offs, and there are plenty of those:
Viruses/Worms/Trojans:
That one should be obvious.
Cost:
Windows cost money. And keeping up to date means shelling bucks every other year or so. Not to mention the added cost of anti virus software.
Speed:
My digital camera pictures are dumped on the server, and is shared using both Samba (for Windows) and NFS (for Linux). The pictures just load so much faster in Linux, and the preview of the directory with "Large Icons" in Linux is much faster than "Thumbnails view in Linux".
I am seriously thinking of dumping Windows completely in the near future, except for one PC on Windows for Quicken and Voice chat. Konqueror Arabic capabilities are very very good now. Even better than FireFox on Windows! We are getting there, albeit slowly.
Out of 5 computers at home (one for me, one as a server, one for the wife, and one for each kid), only one is pure Windows, and the rest are all either 100% Linux or dual boot. The kids (early teens) are happy with Open Office for homework, Konqueror for browsing (even works with neopets with flash plugin), and GAIM for chatting (no voice though, but works great!)
By the way: Open Office is a great product, whether on Linux or on Windows. It has saved me buying MS Office for the kids, and a better way to do homework and reports than WordPad (free alternative to Word processing). Kudos to them for such an excellent product.
Please mod the parent up.
This is about as specific as we can get at this moment on the nature of the failure.
Well, since it is a mirror, then here you go, from Fact Index itself:
Distibution of Content.
Fact Index is not listed though, the other are (nationmaster, tutorgig, 4reference, ..etc.)
FactIndex is actually a feed from Wikipedia.
There are actually several sites on the net that are mirrors of Wikipedia content, only with banner ads and such.
Wikipedia has a page on it, but I can't give you the link right now, since Wikipedia seems to be not responding
More relevant to the audience here at Slashdot are these facts:
- NCR had UNIX based systems starting about 1982. They were called NCR TOWER. First they were based on Motorola 68010, then 20/30/40. These ran UNIX V.2, then V.3.
- Later (1990) NCR announced that it is moving to all Intel based UNIX systems with the System 3000. This was UNIX SVR4.
- These system were based on Microchannel (MCA), and NCR got the right to use MCA from IBM by a technology swap: NCR gets to use MCA and IBM gets to use SCSI.
Later, NCR decided to end new development of its version of NCR's SVR4, and not make any computers no more.
Internally, NCR's Worldwide Information Network (WIN), used to be run on open source software (before the term was invented). This meant UUCP style routing, smail/rmail, all on UNIX machines. That was before everything was converted to Microsoft Exchange.
Found it. Replying to my own post.
Seems that a non U.S. person is worth $1000 by the Pentagon's accountants.
I don't think this will look fair to the outside world.
Not to nit pick or anything, but the 800 million pieces of SPAM did not all reach human recipients.
...etc. as previous articles on /. has shown (analysis of CDs).
Many of the e-mail addresses are inactive, obsolete, aliases, role accounts,
I would say (from memory, I could be wrong) that only 20% of the addresses they use every end up showing up in a human's inbox.
Not that SPAM is less obnoxious, but the way you calculated it needs to factor in the real fraction that reaches humans.
Even worse.
I seem to recall that the value put on Afghan or Iraqi civilians that are killed "inadverently" is much lower than that (in the thousands of dollars).
Anyone has a dollar figure or link?
Excellent points.
Most of the suppositions I've heard about Bush is that he ignored warnings about increased terrorist threats because a) Clinton did the warning, so Bush had a 'fuck you' attitude, b) he, having hired his dad's Cold War era cabinet, was focused on nation-states rather than small groups, or c) just incompetant.
How about d) all the above? Makes sense to me.
And there could be other reasons: e) he had too little self confidence after the election results not giving him the appearance of a majority (and hence a mandate), f) he was distracted by a sinking economy, g) he was being attacked from every part of the political spectrum on various domestic (Education, Health, ...etc.) and international issues (e.g. Middle East)
I've not heard it suggested that he orchestrated 9/11
The sad part is, I have heard it said that because of all the above, he planned Sept 11, to mask all the problems he had. The famous quotes from the Project for the New American Century expecting a catalyst event like Pearl Harbor does not help dissuade the critics.
The conspiracy minded people believe any of that crap when they see it.
Not that I believe it.
but I have heard the inevitable comparisons to Roosevelt 'allowing' Pearl Harbour to happen.
Good point here. Don't know much about whether Roosevelt actually allowed it conciously, or by neglect though.
When you get right down to it, though, 9/11 was inevitable; the book on air terrorism (at the time) said that the pilot was to do what the terrorists demanded, as the terrorists wanted to survive the encounter. Guess what; now they don't.
Exactly.
The other thing is, the roots of terrorism are not even acknowledged. Before people become terrorists they are extremists, and before that, they have a grievance or two. These grievances are never acknowledged to be real, and they are dissed as "evil" or "freedom hating" or whatever other sound bits put out .... Alas this does not seem to be changing any time soon.
Thanks for an excellent reply.
The fact that Bush (or the Bush gov't; same thing, really) snuck them out of the country on a secret, special flight, during the no-fly period, without letting, say, the FBI so much as ask 'So...know where Osama is these days?' really does raise some eyebrows.
Agreed. Excellent point.
Still, it *does* raise some questions. Questions Bush hasn't answered.
Agreed.
My gripe is the "extrapolation" (stated or implied) that he knew about the September 11 attacks, or worse, that he ordered them! Much of these "family links" thing leaves the door open to the viewer/reader's imagination to fill in whatever, and in many cases, it is a conspiracy theory amounting to either knowledge of the attacks or actual complicity in them.
Now, I loath Bush's character, his tactics and his policies, and what he has turned the world we live in to. But, I do not think that making these type of allegations would help at all, other than discredit those who make them. That was my main point.
Now, as a Moore fan, I'll say that I've never seen his films, but his books, especially Stupid White Men, are well worth reading
Check out "Roger and Me". It is great.
From your email, it looks you are in Ontario. Did you get to watch "The Corporation" on TVO a week or so ago? I taped it, but did not watch it all yet (3 hours!). Michael Moore is featured in the movie, and has a lot to say.
Just like China wanting to be independent technologically, the EU also does not want to be dependant on the USA.
Read the FAQ where it says one of the objectives is just that:
Regardless of the motives for having different standards in China (whether it is techno-nationalism, freedom from patents, facilitation of snooping by government, or whatever), China indeed can afford to do it.
...etc.) come after it.
...etc.
I personally think that it has to do with not being dependant on "foreign" technology more than anything else, and the other factors (government control,
Think about how many type of electrical outlets are there? If you do some travelling you know how much a pain in the butt it is to connect your laptop in UK, Italy, Dubai,
The USSR already has differing specs for many engineering things, from electrical theory to railroad width. Even their computer systems used to be totally different from ours up to the 1980s or so. They could afford to, because they had the largest landmass (lots of miles of railroad) and a relatively large population.
The same applies to China, which has far more people than any nation on this planet.
China certainly has the potential to be the next superpower. When will that be? Its anyone's guess...
Drupal is great of course, but it is not only a weblog.
It is a full fledged CMS application. It is also an extensible framework for web applications as well (someone wrote an e-commerce package for it).
Labelling it as a weblog system is too restrictive, though it handles that part pretty well too.
Take a look at Drupal.
It has two features that could be helpful to you:
It is a very capable CMS system, and I highly recommend it.
Thanks for the details.
...etc.
I think after that Diet, he was summoned to Rome, to appear in presence of the Pope. He did not. And since he found a protector, and supporters, the schism just widened, instead of being killed there as just another heresey.
Of course there are other factors why the Protestant movement was successful and not suppressed. For example, Henry VIII of England adopting a version of it. The alignment of various hostilities in Europe to either pro or anti Reformation. The allure of 'by faith only' and 'not by deeds'.
The Catholic Church was due for a reformation. Why it was a schism and not just a movement within Catholicism is mainly due to Luther's character and style.
True, there were abuses in the Roman Catholic church at the time, mainly by a pope who came from rich and powerful family (Medici), and spent lavishly and wanted to replenish the cash he wasted by selling indulgences.
Luther wanted to reform the church, however, the events that ensued, compounded by Luther's personality and style made the schim irreversible.
The church called him to answer for what he wrote. He did not obey. He found protection with a ruler. The church played the excommunication card. He responded by declaring the pope to be Anti Christ. His abrasive and confrontational character, and his fire and brimstone rhetoric made reconciliation impossible.
Had he been more like Calvin, reconciliation was possible
I can't comment on the Great Barrier Reef nor the Seychelles, but I can tell you from a lot of snorkelling in the 90s in the Red Sea that the reefs and sea life is still very healthy there.
The Red Sea does not have many big cities dumping sewage and industrial waste into it. There are only a few oil refineries and desalination plants.
The depth of the Red Sea does help too. It is up to 2 km deep in many places, and with that much water volume, pollutants do not affect it as much as the much shallower Mediterranean for example.
As some other posters said, it could be the normal cycle rather than anything man made. Seychelles are far enough out of nowhere, and not affect by any major industrialized areas that affect its environment.
I watched Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" about the devastation of Flint, Michigan because of General Motors closure of factories.
It was a good movie, raising very valid points.
However, from what I read in the media about Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore used the wrong tactics.
For example, he emphasizes the Bush Family / Bin Laden Family business connections. So what? Bin Laden's family are big time construction businessmen, with huge projects all over the region. Bin Laden's father established this business a long time before Osama was born.
Bin Laden's family disowned him a long time ago (early 90s). This is not like Bush was a friend of Osama or something.
The throwing of irrelevant but sensational bits of data into the debate never helps, and if the neo-cons and their apologists do it, there is no need for those trying to be objectives to mimic this tactic.
This is very much like the other "quasi facts" that are drummed up against Saudi Arabia for example, and etched into the collective psyche of Americans. For example: the allegations that the royal family or officials or the people knowingly funded Bin Laden. Or that Bin Laden was paid "protection money" by the Saudi government (nice Mafia reference there!). These are presented to the American people as undisputed facts. The fact is: the Saudis stripped him of his citizenship very early in the 90s, before he declared any kind of war on America! As for the alleged "funding", it is never stated that this was mismanagement by some charity officials that lead to some money making its way to Bin Laden, and not that royal family/officials/Saudis intentionally funded him against America. Nor does it mention when this happened. It may have happened in the 80s when he was in a jihad against the USSR, something that America wholeheartedly supported.
I am against Bush's ill conceived policies all the way, but using these tactics will not help confront those stupid policies.
Nevertheless, it raises some good points that Americans need to think about.
P.S. Another good documentary that features Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky and others, is "The Corporation". Really worth a look by all readers of Slashdot.
You raise a very valid point: The Open Source community has a good window of opportunity to wedge itself and get mindshare.
However, you overlook other important points too:
- Inertia: Many businesses are driven by inertia. They do not want a painful migration. The mindset of many is short sight, ignoring the long term benefits. They would rather continue paying monthly or annual instalments, rather than paying less in total as a lump sum. They would would not spend money on migrating existing applications, and would rather continue with what they have, even if it will save them money in the long run. So they prefer to continue paying Microsoft rather than go Open Source.
- FUD: The point you raise about the time window. Yes there is a window, but it is actually shortened by the FUD factor: the promise of this nifty whiz bang, or that glitzy thing. This keeps them waiting and waiting. IBM was notorious for this in the 70s and 80s, before the client/server revolution of the 90s humbled them quite a bit. Businesses are made to wait because of promises of great features and such, and FUD is spread about competitors to prevent them from defecting.
Still, I agree with you that we do have a great opportunity till 2007. We have to make the most out of it.
The branded Google thing is great, but I would doubt that Google would make enemies of Microsoft at this time with such a move, as much as it makes sense to us.
I can't help but compare what Berners-Lee wanted and what the web has evolved into. He wanted a full fledge knowledge and collaboration system. People then just wanted static "pages".
This is analogous to the Fax machine when it was introduced. There was potential for it to have structured data sent instead of just an analog thing. But it did not happen, and the "modem revolution" had to be delayed.
Potential for abuse
Basically, how can semantics be guaranteed for accuracy? Look at what spammers (search engine spamming for example) would do with a technology like that?
Many of the comments here are anti-China, which we can understand, because SPAM is so much hated by all of us.
However, there is differentiator that needs to be made here: how many of these servers are actually run by spammers, vs. how many are hijacked by spammers without the owners' consent?
Isn't this an over generalization that demonizes entire people like: "All Arabs hate us!" or "All terrorists are Muslims!" or "All Jews are evil!"?
Another point is a differentiation between the people and the government. What the government does is not necessarily the same as what the people want or like.
Think about how G. W. Bush is behaving abroad (in your name) and even domestically, and ask yourself do you want everything he does to be actually in your name.
I said that in another discussion. but it is worth repeating here in a more appropriate topic.
Several years ago, there was this article in Scientific American that stated conventional wisdom said that oil supplies will be steady and shortage would only happen in half a century or so, and by then there will be alternative sources. They gave several convincing arguments that the shortage would happen within a decade.
Here is a link to the article, The End of Cheap oil by Colin J. Campbell and Jean Laherrere, March 1998.
This web site, Hubbert's Peak seems to be dedicated to the same premise.
Nice pigeon holding there! Predefined labels too.
Should I say that you sound like the knee jerk crowd who overreact at every turn?
No one psychoanalyzes a mugger, or tries to talk sense in a break and enter thief.
Those are extraordinary situations anyway. The important thing is what to do afterwards to prevent (or minimize the probability of) a repeat of the same thing?
Do you overreact and shut yourself at home and never go on the street again of fear? Or carry a gun and shoot anyone who approaches you physically, even if they are a homeless guy asking for a dime?
If you really think exploring the root cause after the fact and planning for the future is a luxury, then we are all doomed if we think this way in major events, like Sept 11.
Well, how long did it take them to do that?
...etc. ...etc.
And when was that again? Just a few month ago as I recall?
The current state of the code may improve a bit, but that is not the end of the story.
There are certain 'design' issues that no amount of secure programming can circumvent. Things like:
- Requiring Admin privileges to run certain user programs
- HTML and Java script for email
So, do not be too optimistic that this is a cure all.