And what would be the real benefit anyway? What could the combined company do that the two companies couldn't? All the crap about "synergies" notwithstanding?
Though I agree that a snapshot of stable hi-quality Wikipedia articles is a good idea, the mentioned "fixing up all the flaws" and "version that cannot be edited" ideas seem about as misguided as can be. Here's what people who complain about the validity of Wikipedia don't get:
There is no such thing as the perfect version.
End of story. That doesn't mean that the pursuit of perfection is bad, but that's the point: it's a pursuit, and by definition a locked down version is stagnant and is no longer pursuing anything. For some articles that may be okay, but for many (most?) what makes Wikipedia's articles work is that they are editable. The benefits of adaptability outweigh the benefits of correctness, for many domains and uses.
It just weirds me out that so many people still don't get it. Oh well.
An alternate view is that he's for states managing their social services rather than the federal government.
And that may not be such a bad idea. I think if there were more differentiation between state programs, we'd see what worked and what didn't. Right now, it's all theoretical talk and then we're stuck with a nationwide system that is never compared to anything. Is welfare good? It seems so to me, but what do we have to compare it to (domestically)?
If some states had it and some didn't, people could choose where to live, and the best ideas would be discovered.
Of course, my assuming that would all work out is fairly naive, too:)
Not really -- see, Slashdot is a group, not a single person. So maybe one half would have cheered the hacking of Microsoft, and then the other half is the one condemning this act. No need for hypocrisy required.
I know, it is complicated facing the diversity of the world and talking to large groups of faceless people, but that's what we have to do these days.
I don't see how a few examples of crime negates the author's point. Which wasn't that Japan has no crime, but that it is a technologically advanced state (it is) and that it has lower crime than many low-tech states (it does).
Sure, if you want to focus on the crimes, Japan is a festering mess. Just slightly less of a festering mess than much of the rest of the world.
Hey, there's a story on the front page that claims "modern humans" only evolved between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, which would throw off the "total humans who ever lived" estimate by quite a bit. I'm not nearly good enough at algebra to redo his numbers, but a fair portion of the total number he gives must have lived in the first 900,000 years that he includes, but which we probably shouldn't. So I still don't know how many people total have lived.
You bring up some valid criticisms of the visualization. But I guess I would wonder what the right way to show 1mm people in North America is if they're spread thinly across the whole area, or 1bn people in India, if you can't fit 1000 dots in there. I think there is a small reduction in dots around the time of the black plague too, but you're right: overall it's a bit sloppy.
Still, the general trend is right, I think. Here's a simple chart.
What does it mean? I don't know exactly. There is likely some upper limit on how many souls the planet can support.
I'd be surprised if the main motivation was for rich white people to get more... most people I've heard harp on population growth are primarily concerned about developing nations being unable to support their numbers. There surely are some people who are just afraid of the masses, but I don't think that sums up the whole movement.
In any case, we don't seem to have direct control over it. Nature will work it out however it sees fit.
Both are Romance languages (derived from Latin) so it is still correct to refer to it as part of Latin America.
So Quebec is part of Latin America? I'm confused. And I'm not just being a pedant. Brazilians may have a different idea than you about what it means to be part of Latin America, and I'd say their view on the matter is fairly significant.
You cannot judge a country by how many wars or how many kills
I think you said it best when you said "that is an opinion, not a fact".
Oh man... are we looking for absolute originality?
All art is theme and variation. Again: all art is theme and variation.
Artists don't exist in a vacuum, they always borrow from those that came before them. If they didn't it could hardly be communication; it needs some cultural connection to be comprehensible. If you want true originality you can try some hardcore Schoenberg or John Cage, and even then, there's traces of influence if you look hard enough.
I'll say I don't know the details of Led Zeppelin's borrowing well enough to know if they actually plagiarized someone directly. That would have to be ripping off the rhythm, chords, melodies, and lyrics. If they did, then you've got a valid point. But it still stands that people get to worked up about musical similarities when everyone does it. Because frankly, that's how it's done.
Amen to that. I love the market. I believe in the market. But the maket does not solve all problems. So let's elevate the conversation away from finger pointings of "socialist" and "fascist" and start discussing when it is appropriate to regulate and when it isn't. And we can even revisit it from time to time. Right now, my sense is that the broadband market is a mess, there is no real competition, and regulation is needed to push things in a better direction. If you disagree, fine, but you should have a better argument than "the market is teh best!".
Just want to say thanks for holding out and keeping Slashdot great. It's my one must check site, even after all this time. I open my email, and I open Slashdot. "S" autocompletes to "Slashdot" in my Safari address bar.
I apologize if this is too warm and fuzzy, but Slashdot is definitely one of the greatest online communities. We still love to complain about the idiocy of Slashdot discussions, but I think this was just because we didn't know what 1000+ people discussions looked like. Now, thanks to so many other sites showing just how bad it can be, I feel I can safely say that Slashdot (when you read +3 and above) is a beacon of reason, penetrating insight, and great wit. I've learned a lot on Slashdot over the years, not as much as on Wikipedia, but probably more than any other single site. And though it is a narrow segment of the population, I still have my ideas intelligently challenged regularly by what I read here. And I think that is a great thing.
I agree that different people like different ways of doing things, and so I'm glad that there's diversity out there with GUI and text based configs. Personally I vastly prefer text configs if the format is sane (like Apache) and GUI configs if its not (like sendmail). But I did want to say this about deleting options:
And if they are off in either case, who cares?
In Apache, with so many options, it makes a big difference. If you have a complex server with tons of features enabled, you can have a complex config. However on some of my servers I am using a config file of only a 10's of lines, and it's great to not have to scan through every possible option when I only need 20 or so. So I think there is a chance that the more complex a system becomes text files (with sane defaults) makes for a more scalable solution.
I cant even _imagine_ trying to build a GUI around Apache's config. I mean, to even show every option would be insane!
Government mandates, and government in general, are not all sinister, nor are they all roses. But we should look at them on balance.
I would argue that there is a causal relationship: more power we give the government, the more sinister they become. See history for reasonably good data supporting this hypothesis.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't buyout/mergers just about always suck?
And what would be the real benefit anyway? What could the combined company do that the two companies couldn't? All the crap about "synergies" notwithstanding?
I certainly hope that Apple doesn't buy Adobe.
Cheers.
Though I agree that a snapshot of stable hi-quality Wikipedia articles is a good idea, the mentioned "fixing up all the flaws" and "version that cannot be edited" ideas seem about as misguided as can be. Here's what people who complain about the validity of Wikipedia don't get:
There is no such thing as the perfect version.
End of story. That doesn't mean that the pursuit of perfection is bad, but that's the point: it's a pursuit, and by definition a locked down version is stagnant and is no longer pursuing anything. For some articles that may be okay, but for many (most?) what makes Wikipedia's articles work is that they are editable. The benefits of adaptability outweigh the benefits of correctness, for many domains and uses.
It just weirds me out that so many people still don't get it. Oh well.
Cheers.
An alternate view is that he's for states managing their social services rather than the federal government.
:)
And that may not be such a bad idea. I think if there were more differentiation between state programs, we'd see what worked and what didn't. Right now, it's all theoretical talk and then we're stuck with a nationwide system that is never compared to anything. Is welfare good? It seems so to me, but what do we have to compare it to (domestically)?
If some states had it and some didn't, people could choose where to live, and the best ideas would be discovered.
Of course, my assuming that would all work out is fairly naive, too
Cheers.
Not really -- see, Slashdot is a group, not a single person. So maybe one half would have cheered the hacking of Microsoft, and then the other half is the one condemning this act. No need for hypocrisy required.
I know, it is complicated facing the diversity of the world and talking to large groups of faceless people, but that's what we have to do these days.
Cheers.
I don't see how a few examples of crime negates the author's point. Which wasn't that Japan has no crime, but that it is a technologically advanced state (it is) and that it has lower crime than many low-tech states (it does).
Sure, if you want to focus on the crimes, Japan is a festering mess. Just slightly less of a festering mess than much of the rest of the world.
Cheers.
You nailed it.
Now who's going to do the much harder task of figuring out how to emulate low-crime/high-tech states, instead of just blaming evil on technology?
Cheers.
Hey, there's a story on the front page that claims "modern humans" only evolved between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, which would throw off the "total humans who ever lived" estimate by quite a bit. I'm not nearly good enough at algebra to redo his numbers, but a fair portion of the total number he gives must have lived in the first 900,000 years that he includes, but which we probably shouldn't. So I still don't know how many people total have lived.
Cheers
I once heard that if you predict the weather tomorrow will be the same as today, you'll be right more often than most meteorologists.
;)
So lets start now on my free blowjob. How many chances do I get?
You bring up some valid criticisms of the visualization. But I guess I would wonder what the right way to show 1mm people in North America is if they're spread thinly across the whole area, or 1bn people in India, if you can't fit 1000 dots in there. I think there is a small reduction in dots around the time of the black plague too, but you're right: overall it's a bit sloppy.
Still, the general trend is right, I think. Here's a simple chart.
What does it mean? I don't know exactly. There is likely some upper limit on how many souls the planet can support.
I'd be surprised if the main motivation was for rich white people to get more... most people I've heard harp on population growth are primarily concerned about developing nations being unable to support their numbers. There surely are some people who are just afraid of the masses, but I don't think that sums up the whole movement.
In any case, we don't seem to have direct control over it. Nature will work it out however it sees fit.
Cheers.
That 96 billion number is bogus! Everyone knows people came into existence 6000 years ago!
;)
(Actually, thanks -- interesting link
Both are Romance languages (derived from Latin) so it is still correct to refer to it as part of Latin America.
So Quebec is part of Latin America? I'm confused. And I'm not just being a pedant. Brazilians may have a different idea than you about what it means to be part of Latin America, and I'd say their view on the matter is fairly significant.
You cannot judge a country by how many wars or how many kills
I think you said it best when you said "that is an opinion, not a fact".
Cheers.
That was funny. But only the most hardcore slashdot-aware folks will get it :)
Related to that, this video is pretty interesting (specifically the bit after the talking head in the first 40 seconds):
Population Explosion
Without getting into the political implications, it is an amazing thing. It reminds me of bacterial growth in the exponential phase.
Cheers.
Statistically, less than half the humans who have been born have died. So chances are you'll live forever.
This message brought to you by the Society for the Brutal Abuse of Misleading Statistics.
Looks like they corrected it... that had to be some kind of joke text that they forgot to replace :)
Oh man... are we looking for absolute originality?
All art is theme and variation. Again: all art is theme and variation.
Artists don't exist in a vacuum, they always borrow from those that came before them. If they didn't it could hardly be communication; it needs some cultural connection to be comprehensible. If you want true originality you can try some hardcore Schoenberg or John Cage, and even then, there's traces of influence if you look hard enough.
I'll say I don't know the details of Led Zeppelin's borrowing well enough to know if they actually plagiarized someone directly. That would have to be ripping off the rhythm, chords, melodies, and lyrics. If they did, then you've got a valid point. But it still stands that people get to worked up about musical similarities when everyone does it. Because frankly, that's how it's done.
I mean, there's only 12 tones, right?
Cheers.
I read the exact same thing. I guess my mind has grown some pretty gnarly auto-complete kruft :)
[blade runner] is pointless
;)
All movies are pointless! Life is pointless!
I'm sorry, I just hate that particular criticism of anything. It's so... pointless
Amen to that. I love the market. I believe in the market. But the maket does not solve all problems. So let's elevate the conversation away from finger pointings of "socialist" and "fascist" and start discussing when it is appropriate to regulate and when it isn't. And we can even revisit it from time to time. Right now, my sense is that the broadband market is a mess, there is no real competition, and regulation is needed to push things in a better direction. If you disagree, fine, but you should have a better argument than "the market is teh best!".
Cheers.
Thanks for reminding me why I love this place. I wanted to finish off with a sarcastic switchback like that, but I lack the wit.
And fuck you too.
Just want to say thanks for holding out and keeping Slashdot great. It's my one must check site, even after all this time. I open my email, and I open Slashdot. "S" autocompletes to "Slashdot" in my Safari address bar.
:)
I apologize if this is too warm and fuzzy, but Slashdot is definitely one of the greatest online communities. We still love to complain about the idiocy of Slashdot discussions, but I think this was just because we didn't know what 1000+ people discussions looked like. Now, thanks to so many other sites showing just how bad it can be, I feel I can safely say that Slashdot (when you read +3 and above) is a beacon of reason, penetrating insight, and great wit. I've learned a lot on Slashdot over the years, not as much as on Wikipedia, but probably more than any other single site. And though it is a narrow segment of the population, I still have my ideas intelligently challenged regularly by what I read here. And I think that is a great thing.
Okay, enough
fork the apache process for each web request
Wait... under apache mod_php you don't reuse the forked child to handle mutliple requests? I assumed you did because that's what mod_perl does.
Crazy, if I'm understanding correctly!
I agree that different people like different ways of doing things, and so I'm glad that there's diversity out there with GUI and text based configs. Personally I vastly prefer text configs if the format is sane (like Apache) and GUI configs if its not (like sendmail). But I did want to say this about deleting options:
And if they are off in either case, who cares?
In Apache, with so many options, it makes a big difference. If you have a complex server with tons of features enabled, you can have a complex config. However on some of my servers I am using a config file of only a 10's of lines, and it's great to not have to scan through every possible option when I only need 20 or so. So I think there is a chance that the more complex a system becomes text files (with sane defaults) makes for a more scalable solution.
I cant even _imagine_ trying to build a GUI around Apache's config. I mean, to even show every option would be insane!
Cheers
What is IE7 to Firefox?
Government mandates, and government in general, are not all sinister, nor are they all roses. But we should look at them on balance.
I would argue that there is a causal relationship: more power we give the government, the more sinister they become. See history for reasonably good data supporting this hypothesis.
Cheers.