Origins normally make good story plots, at least in theory. Because it makes it easier to give the main character a reason to grow, and that is why many sequels fail, as we know the character and they rarely grow further in the sequel. Lets use the New Star Trek movie, Kirk is known to be the good guy who is rather noble, and addicted to command. So we use an Origin Story of Kirk to show him from being a flawed and rather unheroic character to the one we better recognize, which gave the Star Trek Movie a moderate success. Compared to Star Wars where they messed up the Origin Story of Darth Vader, where they failed to allow the character to grow into someone we like then when he turned to the Dark Side we would feel some pity for him. However vs. trying to make sequels where the character has been established as a hero's.
Programming tools are one of the areas that hasn't gone to the cloud. And that open source tools are free as in money and are of good quality makes it an easy choice.
If there is a problem with any point of the network it is IT problem. If your server is the problem they will need to know that and possible fix it or at least pinpoint the problem and stop it. If you system did anything to violate Security IT Will get blamed, you might too but IT WILL. Head of the Department is fine and you could be more tech savvy then the IT Department combined. But IT is their responsibility (not yours) so yes they will need access.
This isn't Open Source but Open Specification. Open Source Hardware would be giving the actually hardware to them and making sure that the hardware is easily accessible so it could be reversed engineered Open Specification is more powerful as it give them the instructions to make such an item, however it fails to actually give them a working original.
Closed Source is giving a Fish to a man. Open Source is giving a Fish and a Pole, with the hope that he will know how to use it. Open Specification is showing how to make a pole and how to use it to collect fish.
Exactly when a new product come out do you really expect a full set of standards. Gestures on a touch screen are fairly new. some of them are common others not so much. If they were the standard wouldn't be very good. We are still learning what things we can do with gestures vs. just clicking a button. Pinch Zoom, and page flip/move and tap are normally easy. Others get more complicated and not everyone will agree that that way is natural. http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/04/17/1456226/Ask-Slashdot-Where-Is-the-Universal-Gesture-Navigation-Set#
There are numerous issues. 1. Geek/Nerd Culture - where the people who were excited about learning and technology were placed in an outcast environment. Stereotyped as tall lanky with thick glasses with taped glasses and socially inept. This idea came ingrained in the Late Baby Boomers and Gen X. This made interests in Science, Technology, Engineering an outcast job. Media liked this image as it made the "Normals" feel better about themselves.
2. Rise of religious fundamentalism + Rise of intolerant atheism - I am a religious person myself, I can see why others may not believe in god. But what is happening the Religious Fundamentals cannot/refuse to integrate science into their faith as they cannot get past the first chapter without creating a conflict with sciences current most logical theories, refusing to take these ideas as metaphoric thus creating a growing group of openly hostile to science. As well there is a growing number of Intolerant Atheists who try to shove the science down these people head to prove their entire religion is wrong. Creating an aggressive opposing group, were both sides can use to pull more people into their side, where were once more moderate. So there is a rising group of people preventing the acceptant and funding of science.
3. USA #1 - We are the largest Military and largest economy and have a very good standard of living. When things are good you innovate less. With USSR gone we are safe from a full war against the US.
4. Environment - A trade off for a better environment is slower growth in overall technology. We are focusing on making what we already have run better without making much that is new.
5. Bubble Economics - Tech, Housing, Medical... These areas of rapid growth followed by a pop prevents serious long term development in these area. Just a rush then stagnation.
6. Globalization - US had a strangle hold for a long time. We are now having to compete globally.
7. Education - Policy has Math and Science as the Red Headed step child of education. Every High School Grad should have at least Pre-Calc and taken Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Geology. Anyone with a B.A. or B.S. Degree should have up to Calc II (and non of that lets call it Calc but teach algebra class), and 2 additional Natural Science classes.
8. Education/Government/Industry Gap - Neither side trusts or respects the other. Creating difficulty of getting smart cheap labor from Education, Long Term funding from government, and innovation and implementation from industry.
9. Aging population - Many old farts out there without young whippersnappers to replace them all and put new approaches on problems. Leaving a population who is happy to do it like in the good old days.
10. Aging infrastructure - US became #1 because it had the top modern infrastructure. It has gotten old and now it is a problem. And they all have gotten old at the same time.
Money isn't really a physical thing. It is a unit of measurement. When you need a goods, and services you subtract your net value and give it to someone else. When you work you agree that your work a particular value and you add that amount to your net value. The problem is the goods and services to make one go faster have a higher aggregated agreed value, then the value the other party wants to provide. So the party will not request or give its net value to the other service.
Even if Money is gold base. Gold is only valuable because we as humans say it is so. If it wasn't a pretty metal its value would be less even if it kept is rarity and chemical properties.
We are not really choosing to be more efficient then fast. Because energy isn't dirt cheap we have to make the trade off for it. Today it takes more energy (Man Power, Brain Power, resources...) to get energy thus making it expensive. Once we figure out the energy problems (Cost, Environmental Impact, Safety) we can go back to getting faster again.
If it was government controlled do you think you really would be paying less for it, or expect to see major speed upgrades every few years?
Governments are a failure based organizations meaning if you are an employee it isn't what you do right that will get you promoted but what you do wrong that will get you fired. Vs. Most corporations are success based who reward people for doing thing right and if they did enough right things they will overlook a mistake.
Now the what needs to be considered which type of organization should control what area. Roads, Public Water are good use to government control. There are measurable factors to success and failure, and the idea of failure could have a large impact on the community. The people working in these areas are focusing on preventing failures. Other areas such as PC or tablet maker. Are better off by private enterprise. As if the PC or Tablet fails it will effect a small portion of people and not a overall community. And the drive towards success helps in lead inovation to make their product better faster and cheaper compared to the others, so they can obtain the most success, if they product a bum product they may refund the money or give them a replacement but overall not a big deal.
The idea if we need it, then the government should provide it to us, is a dangerous idea, just as dangerous as privatizing particular government services. Even tough we may need it, it doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to choose, and decide if we really do need it or not.
Having Internet Access may be a human right, but it isn't a human right to have it forced on us. I have the right to bare arms, it doesn't mean that I must buy a gun, or have the government issue one to me.
Well Blockbuster (I am not under a NDA) when they chose to use Alpha and VMS probably made a good decision at the time. At the time the choices were Dec, Sun, IBM, SCO, and Microsoft, Linux wasn't known to fully Enterprise ready at the time. (Blockbuster and RedHat went IPO on the same day) Sun, and IBM were quite expensive Dec and SCO were the Middle ground and MS was conidered the low end. Alphas performed better then PC's so all in all it was a good choice. Even after Digital -> Compaq -> HP There stuff seemed to work quite well. Saving the viruses and issues that plagued Microsoft in the Early 2000's
Well the goal of your teachers is to make sure that you have learned the material. You bosses don't care if you have learned it but if you can apply it. But in order for you to apply the material you should have a good understanding about it. That is why if you take a test you will get partial credit if you don't get it right. As (often in my case) the the fact you know the concept is proven in the test but you have made a more basic mistake if without calculators did you arithmetic wrong. Or with calculators you messed up on some basic algebra then when you see where your error was you smack yourself in the head, feel a little dumb but go on. In a business environment it is more important to get the correct answer, so use Google, write a program to calculate it the hard brute force way, ask other people for help. But you really can't do much of this until you have learned the material first. In school, if allowed to cheat it is a different situation where the answer is a known value and the trick is to find the answer without knowing what questions to ask, other then "What are the answers to the test?"
True. The key problem was when a student brought up Creationism the teachers were drawn into a conversation where they couldn't debate either side. If they stated that the creationist "theory" has any substance then they will be screwed. If they state that the creationist "theory" is not based on scientific evidence they are screwed too. Now at least they can bring up the discussion and work on facts Sure the people would believed in creationist will still believe in it. But at least they may not end up hating and disbelieving in all of science just because a small subset of theories in one area of study is in conflict with their religions.
Religion doesn't need to conflict with science, good scientists can be religious too. But what happens a small aspect of a religion (usually a piece that has little to do with the core faith of the religion) will conflict with the current best theory. Then you get bad scientist atheists shoving data into the religious face at the same time the bad religious is shoving their interpretation of the old religious texts into the atheists face. Causing the religious to see science as the enemy to progress and the atheists seeing religion as the enemy to progress.
The part the baffles me is why either side gets so supprised when the other side tries so hard to discredit the other.
As for the angel, no. No matter how much education, equipment, or experiments I cannot reproduce an angel sighting. This is the critical difference between religion and science.
Not really. You Analogy is wrong. The removal of slavery doesn't stop the sale of cotton, or the way that people sell cotton. It only changes the process that cotton was made. Open Source is more like you must give away your cotton for free however you may charge for shipping and other value add services, however anyone can go to your farm and pick up their own bails of cotton for free.
So if your business was based on just picking cotton and storing where someone else bought it from you and picked it up themselfs you are screwed. The abolishment of slavery could possible added an additional cost to production, but that will just cause the cost of the product to rise.
I agree. As well the schools often exasperated the problem with their marketing to new undergrads (College will give you the skills you need for a good career). Then when they get you in it is This is Education not a Job Training facility. And will only give you training for a career path of becoming a professor. While a lot of the work should be on the student to choose their major and take classes that will direct them where they want to go in life, colleges environment makes often makes their students path very unclear.
Majors such as Education, Computer Science, Engineering, and Business do help get people ready for work outside school. But many of the other major fail in their course material to help guide people to further careers.
So if you disagree with an idea then you are Malevolent? I work for a company that writes closed source software. It it was Open Source I wouldn't have this job. We copyright and patent our work primarily so a competing company who is bigger then us wont steel our work. The fact that it is preventing Open Source software is not a consideration, it is just a side effect. However our company does actively respect Open Source. We use their tools, and give back to their community for the tools we find useful. As well we are quite careful not to mix licences that are incompatible with ours. We respect Open Source however we will not let it get in away of our business model. And as someone with a family to feed I am glad of that. the OSS model reduces the number of ways you can profit off of your work.
For a muti-tasking I have seen 3 approaches. 1. Full Screen and switch to active session (like hitting alt-ctrl F1, F2... in Linux, or multi-tasking in iOS) 2. Frames where the applications are split across multiple frames (Desqview, Plan 9) 3. The movable window. (Windows, Mac OS X, XWindows)
Computer data has always been represented in terms of rectangular shapes. So the rectangle subset of UI data makes for the most Useful representation of data, and the Movable Window can be setup to emulate Frames or Full screen. So that is why it had stayed for so long.
It wasn't that the developers didn't know how to make a multi-tasking environment, it was getting the horse power to do it. At the time to get a dumb (non-multi-tasking) terminal b&w cost over a thousand dollars in 1980 money. The 1983 Lisa cost almost 10k and apple engineers were scramming to get all the parts to fit and be as affordable as possible. Getting Windows on a PC in the late 80's was a big thing, because for a $2k you can get a full computer. That could use the advanced features too.
It isn't as much that the Suburbs are cheaper then cities. It is more that Suburbs are a better value. Population Density = Noise, People getting in the way to with others, conflict of personality, and crime. Why do people move to the burbs it is to get away from all the people and have space for themselfs without pissing off everyone else, and getting pissed off from everyone else. Cheaper will bring in more Slums. Economics 101 will not allow for Cheap and Quality in a high population area. City Schools are not really any better or worse then the school in the burbs. It is just that Cities schools tend to have more kids growing up with less and ideal parents, thus lowering the average. Gangs and Drugs and Kids who were taught that they will not amount to anything so don't try exists. Parks, to get people out to the country? People really don't like country that much they like the balance that the Burbs have. Close to stores and enough services to make them happy but fare enough for everyone else to live the way you want.
The United States is not like Other Countries... Low population Density. Back to Econ 101 Supply and Demand, We have a lot of land so people will get larger amounts for it less then in Europe.
Just keep on saying to your self "The United States is not like Other Countries" It is not that other countries are doing it wrong. But it just won't work in the United States. Our Culture (which is unique), Are resource availability and other factors gives us advantages as well as disadvantages.
I think I am the few who remembers it being an EGA Shareware platform Game. I remember first seeing it in a ShareWare purchase pamphlet. Its screenshot of it was in one of it worst photo. And thinking this game looks quite lame. Then I went to my friends place who was playing it I then realized they just gave a crappy screenshot, because the game was actually quite good. Duke Nukem 2 was in VGA as well as DN3D. I actually disliked the game as the Duke Nukems ego became more apparent.
Stallman got his priories wrong. It isn't about Open Source. It is about Open Specifications.
Do you really care that x = ((y==2)?1,0); or if (y==2) { x =1; } else { x=0; } or x=(y==2);
or do you care more that The result of x is 1 when y is 2 otherwise it is 0 no offence to the all the hard work you put into development. But the real brains behind applications are in the specifications not the lines of code.
If we had a bigger push to Open Specification vs. Open Source I think we would be a lot better off now. A lot of companies will be far more willing to open their specifications to the public then their source.
If the company can make money off of it. They will support it. This works great for companies like IBM who does mostly consulting now and less hardware and software (and there is that nice loophole for it to be OK for IBM but not for TiVo rule).
For other companies who make their money off of making and selling software and hardware GPL becomes more restrictive as it reduces their ability to keep a business model that they are good at.
At work I avoid integrating GPL modules like the plague, if it is GPL we check to see if it is cross licences to a more compatible one. The last thing we dont want is people to say hey your product is cool, we would love to build it but we can't... But wait you used a GPL something in it, and according to this rule it forces it to be GPL so give us the Code. If they are in the right we loose. If they are in the wrong we loose as we need to go threw legal and other stuff.
The GPL has became very Business unfriendly. Because of this Business will not use it.
How will that change their beliefs? The concept of gods being the cause of lightning and volcanoes have been in religion since pre-history. So the lightning is from God and that volcanic gas reminds people of volcanic eruptions that creates Lava which when breaks down makes a good soil/dust/mixed with water (mud) Heck the sludge could be considered mud by some people.
I wonder if I can come up with an odd claim. Write a Paper about it. Attach 3 or 4 randomly generated formulas. And completely pass Peer review. As my peers would be scam artists it just might pass.
Slashdot Mirror
Origins normally make good story plots, at least in theory. Because it makes it easier to give the main character a reason to grow, and that is why many sequels fail, as we know the character and they rarely grow further in the sequel. Lets use the New Star Trek movie, Kirk is known to be the good guy who is rather noble, and addicted to command. So we use an Origin Story of Kirk to show him from being a flawed and rather unheroic character to the one we better recognize, which gave the Star Trek Movie a moderate success. Compared to Star Wars where they messed up the Origin Story of Darth Vader, where they failed to allow the character to grow into someone we like then when he turned to the Dark Side we would feel some pity for him.
However vs. trying to make sequels where the character has been established as a hero's.
Programming tools are one of the areas that hasn't gone to the cloud. And that open source tools are free as in money and are of good quality makes it an easy choice.
If there is a problem with any point of the network it is IT problem. If your server is the problem they will need to know that and possible fix it or at least pinpoint the problem and stop it. If you system did anything to violate Security IT Will get blamed, you might too but IT WILL. Head of the Department is fine and you could be more tech savvy then the IT Department combined. But IT is their responsibility (not yours) so yes they will need access.
This isn't Open Source but Open Specification. Open Source Hardware would be giving the actually hardware to them and making sure that the hardware is easily accessible so it could be reversed engineered Open Specification is more powerful as it give them the instructions to make such an item, however it fails to actually give them a working original.
Closed Source is giving a Fish to a man.
Open Source is giving a Fish and a Pole, with the hope that he will know how to use it.
Open Specification is showing how to make a pole and how to use it to collect fish.
Exactly when a new product come out do you really expect a full set of standards. Gestures on a touch screen are fairly new. some of them are common others not so much. If they were the standard wouldn't be very good. We are still learning what things we can do with gestures vs. just clicking a button. Pinch Zoom, and page flip/move and tap are normally easy. Others get more complicated and not everyone will agree that that way is natural. http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/04/17/1456226/Ask-Slashdot-Where-Is-the-Universal-Gesture-Navigation-Set#
In other word the best way to be a good criminal is to avoid features that would make you one in the first place.
There are numerous issues.
1. Geek/Nerd Culture - where the people who were excited about learning and technology were placed in an outcast environment. Stereotyped as tall lanky with thick glasses with taped glasses and socially inept. This idea came ingrained in the Late Baby Boomers and Gen X. This made interests in Science, Technology, Engineering an outcast job. Media liked this image as it made the "Normals" feel better about themselves.
2. Rise of religious fundamentalism + Rise of intolerant atheism - I am a religious person myself, I can see why others may not believe in god. But what is happening the Religious Fundamentals cannot/refuse to integrate science into their faith as they cannot get past the first chapter without creating a conflict with sciences current most logical theories, refusing to take these ideas as metaphoric thus creating a growing group of openly hostile to science. As well there is a growing number of Intolerant Atheists who try to shove the science down these people head to prove their entire religion is wrong. Creating an aggressive opposing group, were both sides can use to pull more people into their side, where were once more moderate. So there is a rising group of people preventing the acceptant and funding of science.
3. USA #1 - We are the largest Military and largest economy and have a very good standard of living. When things are good you innovate less. With USSR gone we are safe from a full war against the US.
4. Environment - A trade off for a better environment is slower growth in overall technology. We are focusing on making what we already have run better without making much that is new.
5. Bubble Economics - Tech, Housing, Medical... These areas of rapid growth followed by a pop prevents serious long term development in these area. Just a rush then stagnation.
6. Globalization - US had a strangle hold for a long time. We are now having to compete globally.
7. Education - Policy has Math and Science as the Red Headed step child of education. Every High School Grad should have at least Pre-Calc and taken Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Geology. Anyone with a B.A. or B.S. Degree should have up to Calc II (and non of that lets call it Calc but teach algebra class), and 2 additional Natural Science classes.
8. Education/Government/Industry Gap - Neither side trusts or respects the other. Creating difficulty of getting smart cheap labor from Education, Long Term funding from government, and innovation and implementation from industry.
9. Aging population - Many old farts out there without young whippersnappers to replace them all and put new approaches on problems. Leaving a population who is happy to do it like in the good old days.
10. Aging infrastructure - US became #1 because it had the top modern infrastructure. It has gotten old and now it is a problem. And they all have gotten old at the same time.
Money isn't really a physical thing. It is a unit of measurement. When you need a goods, and services you subtract your net value and give it to someone else. When you work you agree that your work a particular value and you add that amount to your net value. The problem is the goods and services to make one go faster have a higher aggregated agreed value, then the value the other party wants to provide. So the party will not request or give its net value to the other service.
Even if Money is gold base. Gold is only valuable because we as humans say it is so. If it wasn't a pretty metal its value would be less even if it kept is rarity and chemical properties.
We are not really choosing to be more efficient then fast. Because energy isn't dirt cheap we have to make the trade off for it. Today it takes more energy (Man Power, Brain Power, resources...) to get energy thus making it expensive. Once we figure out the energy problems (Cost, Environmental Impact, Safety) we can go back to getting faster again.
If it was government controlled do you think you really would be paying less for it, or expect to see major speed upgrades every few years?
Governments are a failure based organizations meaning if you are an employee it isn't what you do right that will get you promoted but what you do wrong that will get you fired. Vs. Most corporations are success based who reward people for doing thing right and if they did enough right things they will overlook a mistake.
Now the what needs to be considered which type of organization should control what area. Roads, Public Water are good use to government control. There are measurable factors to success and failure, and the idea of failure could have a large impact on the community. The people working in these areas are focusing on preventing failures.
Other areas such as PC or tablet maker. Are better off by private enterprise. As if the PC or Tablet fails it will effect a small portion of people and not a overall community. And the drive towards success helps in lead inovation to make their product better faster and cheaper compared to the others, so they can obtain the most success, if they product a bum product they may refund the money or give them a replacement but overall not a big deal.
The idea if we need it, then the government should provide it to us, is a dangerous idea, just as dangerous as privatizing particular government services. Even tough we may need it, it doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to choose, and decide if we really do need it or not.
Having Internet Access may be a human right, but it isn't a human right to have it forced on us. I have the right to bare arms, it doesn't mean that I must buy a gun, or have the government issue one to me.
Well Blockbuster (I am not under a NDA) when they chose to use Alpha and VMS probably made a good decision at the time. At the time the choices were Dec, Sun, IBM, SCO, and Microsoft, Linux wasn't known to fully Enterprise ready at the time. (Blockbuster and RedHat went IPO on the same day) Sun, and IBM were quite expensive Dec and SCO were the Middle ground and MS was conidered the low end. Alphas performed better then PC's so all in all it was a good choice. Even after Digital -> Compaq -> HP There stuff seemed to work quite well. Saving the viruses and issues that plagued Microsoft in the Early 2000's
Well the goal of your teachers is to make sure that you have learned the material. You bosses don't care if you have learned it but if you can apply it. But in order for you to apply the material you should have a good understanding about it. That is why if you take a test you will get partial credit if you don't get it right. As (often in my case) the the fact you know the concept is proven in the test but you have made a more basic mistake if without calculators did you arithmetic wrong. Or with calculators you messed up on some basic algebra then when you see where your error was you smack yourself in the head, feel a little dumb but go on. In a business environment it is more important to get the correct answer, so use Google, write a program to calculate it the hard brute force way, ask other people for help. But you really can't do much of this until you have learned the material first. In school, if allowed to cheat it is a different situation where the answer is a known value and the trick is to find the answer without knowing what questions to ask, other then "What are the answers to the test?"
True. The key problem was when a student brought up Creationism the teachers were drawn into a conversation where they couldn't debate either side. If they stated that the creationist "theory" has any substance then they will be screwed. If they state that the creationist "theory" is not based on scientific evidence they are screwed too. Now at least they can bring up the discussion and work on facts Sure the people would believed in creationist will still believe in it. But at least they may not end up hating and disbelieving in all of science just because a small subset of theories in one area of study is in conflict with their religions.
Religion doesn't need to conflict with science, good scientists can be religious too. But what happens a small aspect of a religion (usually a piece that has little to do with the core faith of the religion) will conflict with the current best theory. Then you get bad scientist atheists shoving data into the religious face at the same time the bad religious is shoving their interpretation of the old religious texts into the atheists face. Causing the religious to see science as the enemy to progress and the atheists seeing religion as the enemy to progress.
The part the baffles me is why either side gets so supprised when the other side tries so hard to discredit the other.
As for the angel, no. No matter how much education, equipment, or experiments I cannot reproduce an angel sighting. This is the critical difference between religion and science.
The experiment needs LSD.
Not really. You Analogy is wrong.
The removal of slavery doesn't stop the sale of cotton, or the way that people sell cotton. It only changes the process that cotton was made. Open Source is more like you must give away your cotton for free however you may charge for shipping and other value add services, however anyone can go to your farm and pick up their own bails of cotton for free.
So if your business was based on just picking cotton and storing where someone else bought it from you and picked it up themselfs you are screwed. The abolishment of slavery could possible added an additional cost to production, but that will just cause the cost of the product to rise.
I agree. As well the schools often exasperated the problem with their marketing to new undergrads (College will give you the skills you need for a good career). Then when they get you in it is This is Education not a Job Training facility. And will only give you training for a career path of becoming a professor.
While a lot of the work should be on the student to choose their major and take classes that will direct them where they want to go in life, colleges environment makes often makes their students path very unclear.
Majors such as Education, Computer Science, Engineering, and Business do help get people ready for work outside school. But many of the other major fail in their course material to help guide people to further careers.
So if you disagree with an idea then you are Malevolent?
I work for a company that writes closed source software. It it was Open Source I wouldn't have this job. We copyright and patent our work primarily so a competing company who is bigger then us wont steel our work. The fact that it is preventing Open Source software is not a consideration, it is just a side effect. However our company does actively respect Open Source. We use their tools, and give back to their community for the tools we find useful. As well we are quite careful not to mix licences that are incompatible with ours.
We respect Open Source however we will not let it get in away of our business model. And as someone with a family to feed I am glad of that. the OSS model reduces the number of ways you can profit off of your work.
For a muti-tasking I have seen 3 approaches.
1. Full Screen and switch to active session (like hitting alt-ctrl F1, F2... in Linux, or multi-tasking in iOS)
2. Frames where the applications are split across multiple frames (Desqview, Plan 9)
3. The movable window. (Windows, Mac OS X, XWindows)
Computer data has always been represented in terms of rectangular shapes. So the rectangle subset of UI data makes for the most Useful representation of data, and the Movable Window can be setup to emulate Frames or Full screen. So that is why it had stayed for so long.
It wasn't that the developers didn't know how to make a multi-tasking environment, it was getting the horse power to do it. At the time to get a dumb (non-multi-tasking) terminal b&w cost over a thousand dollars in 1980 money. The 1983 Lisa cost almost 10k and apple engineers were scramming to get all the parts to fit and be as affordable as possible. Getting Windows on a PC in the late 80's was a big thing, because for a $2k you can get a full computer. That could use the advanced features too.
It isn't as much that the Suburbs are cheaper then cities. It is more that Suburbs are a better value.
Population Density = Noise, People getting in the way to with others, conflict of personality, and crime. Why do people move to the burbs it is to get away from all the people and have space for themselfs without pissing off everyone else, and getting pissed off from everyone else.
Cheaper will bring in more Slums. Economics 101 will not allow for Cheap and Quality in a high population area.
City Schools are not really any better or worse then the school in the burbs. It is just that Cities schools tend to have more kids growing up with less and ideal parents, thus lowering the average. Gangs and Drugs and Kids who were taught that they will not amount to anything so don't try exists.
Parks, to get people out to the country? People really don't like country that much they like the balance that the Burbs have. Close to stores and enough services to make them happy but fare enough for everyone else to live the way you want.
The United States is not like Other Countries... Low population Density. Back to Econ 101 Supply and Demand, We have a lot of land so people will get larger amounts for it less then in Europe.
Just keep on saying to your self "The United States is not like Other Countries" It is not that other countries are doing it wrong. But it just won't work in the United States. Our Culture (which is unique), Are resource availability and other factors gives us advantages as well as disadvantages.
I think I am the few who remembers it being an EGA Shareware platform Game. I remember first seeing it in a ShareWare purchase pamphlet. Its screenshot of it was in one of it worst photo. And thinking this game looks quite lame. Then I went to my friends place who was playing it I then realized they just gave a crappy screenshot, because the game was actually quite good. Duke Nukem 2 was in VGA as well as DN3D. I actually disliked the game as the Duke Nukems ego became more apparent.
Stallman got his priories wrong. It isn't about Open Source. It is about Open Specifications.
Do you really care that
x = ((y==2)?1,0);
or
if (y==2) {
x =1;
} else {
x=0;
}
or
x=(y==2);
or do you care more that The result of x is 1 when y is 2 otherwise it is 0
no offence to the all the hard work you put into development. But the real brains behind applications are in the specifications not the lines of code.
If we had a bigger push to Open Specification vs. Open Source I think we would be a lot better off now. A lot of companies will be far more willing to open their specifications to the public then their source.
The simple fact about Business and GPL.
If the company can make money off of it. They will support it. This works great for companies like IBM who does mostly consulting now and less hardware and software (and there is that nice loophole for it to be OK for IBM but not for TiVo rule).
For other companies who make their money off of making and selling software and hardware GPL becomes more restrictive as it reduces their ability to keep a business model that they are good at.
At work I avoid integrating GPL modules like the plague, if it is GPL we check to see if it is cross licences to a more compatible one. The last thing we dont want is people to say hey your product is cool, we would love to build it but we can't ... But wait you used a GPL something in it, and according to this rule it forces it to be GPL so give us the Code. If they are in the right we loose. If they are in the wrong we loose as we need to go threw legal and other stuff.
The GPL has became very Business unfriendly. Because of this Business will not use it.
How will that change their beliefs?
The concept of gods being the cause of lightning and volcanoes have been in religion since pre-history.
So the lightning is from God and that volcanic gas reminds people of volcanic eruptions that creates Lava which when breaks down makes a good soil/dust/mixed with water (mud) Heck the sludge could be considered mud by some people.
You just put more fuel to their beliefs.
I wonder if I can come up with an odd claim. Write a Paper about it. Attach 3 or 4 randomly generated formulas. And completely pass Peer review. As my peers would be scam artists it just might pass.