It seems obvious to me that the whole reason they hired Linus is to port the Linux kernel onto their architecture. They could hardly run Windows on it since Win98 doesn't even run reliably on half of the x86 motherboards out there. However the Linux kernel is small enough and "knowable" enough to make a reliable port feasible (especially in Linus' case since he's supposed to have reviewed every single line of code in there). And ask yourself: How much are they paying Linus? And how mnay people would it have taken (and how much would it cost) to port any other capable OS onto Crusoe?
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
You can't learn philosophy from a movie; to pass the exam you need to be able to quote, dissect and compare the writings of the recognised big names. The Wachowski brothers just don't count in that regard.
However, watching The Matrix *does* provide a concrete example of some epistemiological questions. It would provide a means of grasping the basic concepts and a basis for discussion in future lectures, if nothing else.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Chuck Heston is a *fine* actor. Apart from his role in Ben Hur (awesome) and The Ten Commandments (also totally awesome) I saw him some years ago at the Queen's Theatre in London, playing Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny. He was superb. That man has such charisma and, well, presence.
It's just a pity he's such a rabid gun nut.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
That's a fairly outrageous claim. What evidence do you offer to back it up? I hope you have some because otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely fii
Whoops! I meant to say: otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely to be unjustly offended.
I fell asleep at my keyboard while I was in the middle of writing that post...
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
The scientific method is appallingly taught, at least in the UK (IMHO).
That's a fairly outrageous claim. What evidence do you offer to back it up? I hope you have some because otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely fii
FWIW, in the science programmes offered at the two London University colleges I attended back in the eighties: the first year included a mandatory course module in experimental methods (included basic statistics; identifying, measuring and estimating sources of error; standards of proof; experiment design) and the second and third years included a mandatory course module in advanced statistical analysis. My course tutors gave us seminars on the scientific method (as laid out by Sir Karl Popper).
Apart from the principles of software design, just about the only really useful knowledge I *did* get from university was an appreciation of how to do - and evaluate - Science properly.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
It would be a great service to the world n if those readers blessed with moderator privileges would use their to bump that post up to 5. I want to see it in the top 10.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
What you're really demanding is for people to change their language to suit your own particular ethical/political viewpoints.
I strongly disagree with that. He's actually doing quite the reverse - asking others not to use emotionally-loaded language which manipulates people psychologically without their conscious consent. The terms he and RMS have chosen are devoid of emotionl content. If we use neutral terms to discuss the issues then we are far more likely to get to the heart of the matter and reach an agreement.
As for the so-called "pro-life" people - don't get me started. Who could be "anti-life"? If I ever had any sympathy for their cause, their selfish and narrow-minded attempts to monopolise our preception of the truth have turned me off them forever. But my resistance is not an argument to let them continue, because their manipulation of the less clueful millions endangers even the freedom of the few who can filter out the crap.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
But the article was right! Maybe unintentionally, but right all the same.
The geek readership here have read so much about current cloning practises that many of the non-Biologists among us have wrongly assumed that "cloning"=="nuclear substitution". That assumption is false. In Biology, a "clone" simply means a group of genetically identical siblings. So any viable offspring resulting from a single embryo count as a "clone". This includes natural-born human monozygotic twins, parthenogenetically created batch of greenfly larvae from the same mother, and monkeys grown from the same dissected embryo in a lab experiment.
All the ranting about bad journalism is not in fact justified on this occasion - and you shouldn't be eating your words.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Actually, such philosophical rationalisation is hardly necessary. In Biology, any group of genetically identical organisms is referred to as a clone, no matter how they came about. The term was in use well before nuclear substitution came into practice. Some organisms (those which can reproduce parthenogenetically, such as aphids) will routinely produce a clone - a large number of offspring identical to the mother - when no mate is available.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Re: I don't get it.... some contrasts to this post
on
New CTO at Red Hat
·
· Score: 2
Felt obliged to make a quick reply:
'xuse me? I didn't see anything that says "push out"...
...Bob Young and Marc Ewing are still central to different elements of RH's success.
Admittedly I'm being cynical. Perhaps you're right and they both went, gee that's great, now I can dump the boring business stuff and get back to playing with tech stuff. But I doubt it was as clean as that. Even if they went willingly I'd bet they had reservations, particularly about loss of control. I think the child has outgrown the parents rather too quickly for this to have been completely painless.
Not wiser necessarily...
I agree, that's why I put "wiser" in quotes. That's how the old farts (and the wannabee old farts) of Wall Street will see it even though we might take a more balanced view.
I hope RH actually gets into the patent thing in certain areas that do make sense...
A nice idea. In fact the issue of patents is the biggest remaining threat to the whole Open Source movement.
*IF* Red Hat - or some other sponsor and benefactor with a deep wallet - were to accumulate a portfolio of useful patents to be licensed freely to Open Source developers then we'd have a fighting chance of surviving the coming legal war.
Because there's no doubt at all in my mind that once the dinosaurs who've continued to fight the Open Source trend realise that their days are numbered, they will most certainly use their patent portfolios to ensure that no useful software can developed and distributed without paying royalties to *someone*.
If we don't find such a sponsor then our only hope is for a radical change in US (and global) patent laws. There's no sign of this happening as yet since most people don't even realise that there's a problem.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
If a girl of any age wants to hit it off with guy... most men are suckers for the dumb chick ploy, geeks are no exception. She should join a LUG that has realspace meetings, find a suitably handsome geek and ask him to show her how to "do it". Nothing easier.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Women frequently want men to be "men." My interpretation of the "too nice" line is "too boring." There's a fine line between nice and submissive. She needs to feel that there are things you'll stand your ground on. It's not that women don't appreciate being treated well...
That's not entirely true. There are a goodly proportion of women who just can't stay interested in a male who's good to them and doesn't mistreat them enough. This isn't geek bitterness talking - none of my partners ever left me for that reason. But I do know of several relationships that broke up for that reason: "he was just too...nice". It seems like "nice" is just about the most deadly insult a woman can hand to a guy.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Actually that's a serious question deserving of a serious answer. There was some recent research (done at Edinburgh University I think) which analysed people's preferences for certain types of sexual partner and on the basis of the empirical evidence they found - unsurprisingly, if disappointingly - that in general, women seeking a partner for sexual thrills (such as they are wont to do when they are younger) tend to seek macho, physically superior types. But when looking for a partner with whom to form a long-term relationship they tend to go for more sensitive, thoughtful, intelligent types. The two types are more or less mutually exclusive. You might as well call them Jocks and Nerds.
The researchers concluded that this behaviour stems from biological imperatives honed by evolution. The implication is that the "ideal" outcome for a human woman in a natural setting (i.e. pre-civilisation) is for her to get impregnated by a physically superior male thus passing on the best survival genes to her offspring. But, since this type of male is continually in demand with other nubile females, he is unlikely to stick around for the pregnancy let alone the hassle of providing for those offspring. Consequently, women are programmed to seek a more practical partner to help her rear the children, so... the Nerd type gets leftovers.
Nerd-type males who've been lucky enough to hook an attractive girl into a long-term relationship without her first getting impregnated by a Jock will probably think they've beaten the system. Think again. It's not as if one drive switches off forever and the other one kicks in. Your loving S.O. will still be attracted to Jock types, perhaps even in spite of herself.
Just to rub it in, some genetic studies performed a few years ago showed that in the US and the UK, the rate of "cuckoo" pregnancies (those resulting from extramarital sex) was as high as 1 in 10.
It hardly needs to be said that from the Nerd male point of view, this sucks *badly*.
So, what can you do if you don't fancy leftovers and you don't want someone else...er...eating at your table while you're out?
The answer I've adopted in practise is straightforward enough, even obvious: adopt non-Nerd, quasi-Jock protective coloration, both to win your girl and keep her from straying:
(i) Drink lots of beer.
(ii) Drool over other females.
(iii) Do sports. Especially martial arts, to frighten off those bastard Jocks (some of them *are* bastards, they've even got Nerd dads to prove it...)
(iv) Cultivate loud, obnoxious Jock or quasi-Jock friends with whom you can share in the above activities. But don't leave them alone with your girl, even for a minute.
(v) Occasionally treat your girl badly. But not too often.
(vi) Belch and fart; long, often, and with gusto (the beer helps. You can also try pickled onions).
(viii) Touch your privates regularly (I'm not talking about indecent exposure or masturbation, just scratching or rearranging them through your pants, like because they're so huge that they're uncomfortable being cooped up).
In other words, make a point of demonstrating your maleness frequently.
And all the while, keeping those intrinsically lovable Nerd qualities of kindness, thoughtfulness, consideration etc. so you'll still be the perfect long-term partner.
Anyway, that's how I've got away with it so far: I'm a self-made hybrid Nerd-quasi-Jock. It works for me...
If there are any girls reading this and they don't like it...tough! We guys didn't make the rules, we're just doing what we have to. You girls had it coming!
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
I'm utterly stunned by this thread. I'd thought, as a Briton who has absorbed *way* too much American TV, movies and novels, that I *knew* all I needed to know about mainstream U.S. society. Seems I was wrong.
That's rather scary when I consider that I'm moving out to Silicon Valley myself in a couple of months. Eek! Why didn't anybody mention this before?
Oh well, I'm married anyway, so this particular distinction about dating is only theoretical in my case. Still, if there's anything else that's different but not commonly known I'd be grateful if SOMEONE WOULD LET ME KNOW!
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
You are being just like any number of typical geek guys who bemoan their lack of sexual opportunities - while steadfastly refusing to take care of his basic personal hygiene, dress tidily etc. "they should love me for what I am...appearance shouldn't be important".
Well, bullshit. Appearance IS important, and smell, and the sound of your voice. Because human beings are sensual creatures, not disembodied brains floating around.
If you want guys to take notice of you then you have to dress nicely, get your hair seen to etc. -that's just the way things are.
It doesn't really matter that you're not going to win any beuaty contests. What matters to a guy is that you've made the effort, take some pride in your appearance, and most of all that you SMELL and LOOK like a girl.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
I will add that I have always noticed Indian females, prim or otherwise. It would stand to reason that India has some of the most provocative ladies in the world or they would not have a population as large as it is now.
Damn right. There are a lot of Asians in Britain and in my opinion Indian girls are - on average - much better looking than "white" girls. Plus they're generally better behaved.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Ah, but. Young and Ewing, the idealistic founders are now both pushed aside to make way for more hard-headed commercial types. The character of Red Hat is plainly changing into something other than what it was. They were once thought of as being a force for good but who knows where they'll be in a year's time?
Now that the millennium is upon us, perhaps it would be timely to remind ourselves that the Antichrist is about due to turn up. Perhaps he isn't an individual at all, but a corporation! After all, corporations didn't exist in John the Revelator's day so if he had foreseen this he couldn't have understood it in his own terms. However...didn't he describe the Whore of Babylon as having several heads?
John also said that the Antichrist would be acclaimed as a saviour before his true evil nature was revealed. Hmmm. There's some kind of parallel here...
And Nostradamus warned us that we should recognise the Antichrist by his blue turban. We all know how he used to fudge the details though, eg "Hister" vs. "Hitler". Maybe it wasn't really a blue turban at all.
Maybe it was a Red Hat.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
The reason Red Hat's corporate movements are of interest is because Red Hat was the first open source company to acquire wealth, size and influence. They are in the process of converting from a startup to a fully-fledged corporation. What Red Hat now does will have a major influence on the future of the Open Source movement in more ways than can be counted.
Since Red Hat's IPO was announced, of the two founders Bob Young gave up the CEO's seat to Matthew Szulik, an old-guard and hard headed IT businessman from the pre-open source world; and now Mark Ewing has been pushed out of the CTO's chair in favour of tech-head Michael Tiemann who used to head Cygnus. Tiemann is a famous name in open source, though one with a reputation for commercial success too.
We have a lot to be thankful for in Red Hat's support for the open source movement. But at the same time we need to maintain a healthy level of scepticism with regard to everything they say and do because they are no longer simply motivated by the thrill of making a business model out of new, exciting open source. They are now motivated by profit. That is why the two tech-heads who founded the company have been sidelined. For the company to be taken seriously by the big boys, "wiser" heads must be seen to prevail.
It behooves us to watch these events carefully in case Red Hat should show signs of growing into the type of corporation that we all love to hate. Plenty of people fell out of love with Red Hat long before we got to this stage - just as soon as Red Hat started talking like a business, really.
I on the other hand, naive fool that I am, entertain hopes that Red Hat will stay true to its roots, forever champion the cause of open source and steer clear of nonsensical patents etc.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
You're forgetting that Slashdot is owned by Andover. As a publicly traded company they are subject to hostile takeovers. AOLTW could buy Andover out at any time just by offering enough money to their shareholders. Unless a solid majority of those shareholders just happen to be highly principled libertarians with no particular need to grab a large wad of free cash, Andover are bantha fodder just as soon as AOLTW says so.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is Thought exists only as an abstraction
Slashdot Mirror
It seems obvious to me that the whole reason they hired Linus is to port the Linux kernel onto their architecture. They could hardly run Windows on it since Win98 doesn't even run reliably on half of the x86 motherboards out there. However the Linux kernel is small enough and "knowable" enough to make a reliable port feasible (especially in Linus' case since he's supposed to have reviewed every single line of code in there). And ask yourself: How much are they paying Linus? And how mnay people would it have taken (and how much would it cost) to port any other capable OS onto Crusoe?
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
You can't learn philosophy from a movie; to pass the exam you need to be able to quote, dissect and compare the writings of the recognised big names. The Wachowski brothers just don't count in that regard.
However, watching The Matrix *does* provide a concrete example of some epistemiological questions. It would provide a means of grasping the basic concepts and a basis for discussion in future lectures, if nothing else.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Chuck Heston is a *fine* actor. Apart from his role in Ben Hur (awesome) and The Ten Commandments (also totally awesome) I saw him some years ago at the Queen's Theatre in London, playing Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny. He was superb. That man has such charisma and, well, presence.
It's just a pity he's such a rabid gun nut.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
That's a fairly outrageous claim. What evidence do you offer to back it up? I hope you have some because otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely fii
Whoops! I meant to say: otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely to be unjustly offended.
I fell asleep at my keyboard while I was in the middle of writing that post...
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
The scientific method is appallingly taught, at least in the UK (IMHO).
That's a fairly outrageous claim. What evidence do you offer to back it up? I hope you have some because otherwise, many people with science degrees obtained in the UK are likely fii
FWIW, in the science programmes offered at the two London University colleges I attended back in the eighties: the first year included a mandatory course module in experimental methods (included basic statistics; identifying, measuring and estimating sources of error; standards of proof; experiment design) and the second and third years included a mandatory course module in advanced statistical analysis. My course tutors gave us seminars on the scientific method (as laid out by Sir Karl Popper).
Apart from the principles of software design, just about the only really useful knowledge I *did* get from university was an appreciation of how to do - and evaluate - Science properly.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
I don't know about that. I think he has a point. Perhaps you should examine your motives more closely.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
It would be a great service to the world n if those readers blessed with moderator privileges would use their to bump that post up to 5. I want to see it in the top 10.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Instead of returning the DVD so that someone else could borrow it, you threw it out
If this is such a huge issue then why not complain about the bazillions of AOL and Compuserve CD's that come attached to Computer magazines?
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
What you're really demanding is for people to change their language to suit your own particular ethical/political viewpoints.
I strongly disagree with that. He's actually doing quite the reverse - asking others not to use emotionally-loaded language which manipulates people psychologically without their conscious consent. The terms he and RMS have chosen are devoid of emotionl content. If we use neutral terms to discuss the issues then we are far more likely to get to the heart of the matter and reach an agreement.
As for the so-called "pro-life" people - don't get me started. Who could be "anti-life"? If I ever had any sympathy for their cause, their selfish and narrow-minded attempts to monopolise our preception of the truth have turned me off them forever. But my resistance is not an argument to let them continue, because their manipulation of the less clueful millions endangers even the freedom of the few who can filter out the crap.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
But the article was right! Maybe unintentionally, but right all the same.
The geek readership here have read so much about current cloning practises that many of the non-Biologists among us have wrongly assumed that "cloning"=="nuclear substitution". That assumption is false. In Biology, a "clone" simply means a group of genetically identical siblings. So any viable offspring resulting from a single embryo count as a "clone". This includes natural-born human monozygotic twins, parthenogenetically created batch of greenfly larvae from the same mother, and monkeys grown from the same dissected embryo in a lab experiment.
All the ranting about bad journalism is not in fact justified on this occasion - and you shouldn't be eating your words.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
An assembly line of growing human parts really gives me the willies.
Which is very good news if you just happen to have lost yours...
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Actually, such philosophical rationalisation is hardly necessary. In Biology, any group of genetically identical organisms is referred to as a clone, no matter how they came about. The term was in use well before nuclear substitution came into practice. Some organisms (those which can reproduce parthenogenetically, such as aphids) will routinely produce a clone - a large number of offspring identical to the mother - when no mate is available.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Felt obliged to make a quick reply:
'xuse me? I didn't see anything that says "push out"...
...Bob Young and Marc Ewing are still central to different elements of RH's success.
Admittedly I'm being cynical. Perhaps you're right and they both went, gee that's great, now I can dump the boring business stuff and get back to playing with tech stuff. But I doubt it was as clean as that. Even if they went willingly I'd bet they had reservations, particularly about loss of control. I think the child has outgrown the parents rather too quickly for this to have been completely painless.
Not wiser necessarily...
I agree, that's why I put "wiser" in quotes. That's how the old farts (and the wannabee old farts) of Wall Street will see it even though we might take a more balanced view.
I hope RH actually gets into the patent thing in certain areas that do make sense...
A nice idea. In fact the issue of patents is the biggest remaining threat to the whole Open Source movement.
*IF* Red Hat - or some other sponsor and benefactor with a deep wallet - were to accumulate a portfolio of useful patents to be licensed freely to Open Source developers then we'd have a fighting chance of surviving the coming legal war.
Because there's no doubt at all in my mind that once the dinosaurs who've continued to fight the Open Source trend realise that their days are numbered, they will most certainly use their patent portfolios to ensure that no useful software can developed and distributed without paying royalties to *someone*.
If we don't find such a sponsor then our only hope is for a radical change in US (and global) patent laws. There's no sign of this happening as yet since most people don't even realise that there's a problem.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Only a humourless asshole could moderate that down as offtopic.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
If a girl of any age wants to hit it off with guy... most men are suckers for the dumb chick ploy, geeks are no exception. She should join a LUG that has realspace meetings, find a suitably handsome geek and ask him to show her how to "do it". Nothing easier.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Women frequently want men to be "men." My interpretation of the "too nice" line is "too boring." There's a fine line between nice and submissive. She needs to feel that there are things you'll stand your ground on. It's not that women don't appreciate being treated well...
That's not entirely true. There are a goodly proportion of women who just can't stay interested in a male who's good to them and doesn't mistreat them enough. This isn't geek bitterness talking - none of my partners ever left me for that reason. But I do know of several relationships that broke up for that reason: "he was just too...nice". It seems like "nice" is just about the most deadly insult a woman can hand to a guy.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
That's the most interesting, insightful thing I've heard for quite a while.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Actually that's a serious question deserving of a serious answer. There was some recent research (done at Edinburgh University I think) which analysed people's preferences for certain types of sexual partner and on the basis of the empirical evidence they found - unsurprisingly, if disappointingly - that in general, women seeking a partner for sexual thrills (such as they are wont to do when they are younger) tend to seek macho, physically superior types. But when looking for a partner with whom to form a long-term relationship they tend to go for more sensitive, thoughtful, intelligent types. The two types are more or less mutually exclusive. You might as well call them Jocks and Nerds.
The researchers concluded that this behaviour stems from biological imperatives honed by evolution. The implication is that the "ideal" outcome for a human woman in a natural setting (i.e. pre-civilisation) is for her to get impregnated by a physically superior male thus passing on the best survival genes to her offspring. But, since this type of male is continually in demand with other nubile females, he is unlikely to stick around for the pregnancy let alone the hassle of providing for those offspring. Consequently, women are programmed to seek a more practical partner to help her rear the children, so... the Nerd type gets leftovers.
Nerd-type males who've been lucky enough to hook an attractive girl into a long-term relationship without her first getting impregnated by a Jock will probably think they've beaten the system. Think again. It's not as if one drive switches off forever and the other one kicks in. Your loving S.O. will still be attracted to Jock types, perhaps even in spite of herself.
Just to rub it in, some genetic studies performed a few years ago showed that in the US and the UK, the rate of "cuckoo" pregnancies (those resulting from extramarital sex) was as high as 1 in 10.
It hardly needs to be said that from the Nerd male point of view, this sucks *badly*.
So, what can you do if you don't fancy leftovers and you don't want someone else...er...eating at your table while you're out?
The answer I've adopted in practise is straightforward enough, even obvious: adopt non-Nerd, quasi-Jock protective coloration, both to win your girl and keep her from straying:
(i) Drink lots of beer.
(ii) Drool over other females.
(iii) Do sports. Especially martial arts, to frighten off those bastard Jocks (some of them *are* bastards, they've even got Nerd dads to prove it...)
(iv) Cultivate loud, obnoxious Jock or quasi-Jock friends with whom you can share in the above activities. But don't leave them alone with your girl, even for a minute.
(v) Occasionally treat your girl badly. But not too often.
(vi) Belch and fart; long, often, and with gusto (the beer helps. You can also try pickled onions).
(viii) Touch your privates regularly (I'm not talking about indecent exposure or masturbation, just scratching or rearranging them through your pants, like because they're so huge that they're uncomfortable being cooped up).
In other words, make a point of demonstrating your maleness frequently.
And all the while, keeping those intrinsically lovable Nerd qualities of kindness, thoughtfulness, consideration etc. so you'll still be the perfect long-term partner.
Anyway, that's how I've got away with it so far: I'm a self-made hybrid Nerd-quasi-Jock. It works for me...
If there are any girls reading this and they don't like it...tough! We guys didn't make the rules, we're just doing what we have to. You girls had it coming!
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
I'm utterly stunned by this thread. I'd thought, as a Briton who has absorbed *way* too much American TV, movies and novels, that I *knew* all I needed to know about mainstream U.S. society. Seems I was wrong.
That's rather scary when I consider that I'm moving out to Silicon Valley myself in a couple of months. Eek! Why didn't anybody mention this before?
Oh well, I'm married anyway, so this particular distinction about dating is only theoretical in my case. Still, if there's anything else that's different but not commonly known I'd be grateful if SOMEONE WOULD LET ME KNOW!
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
You are being just like any number of typical geek guys who bemoan their lack of sexual opportunities - while steadfastly refusing to take care of his basic personal hygiene, dress tidily etc. "they should love me for what I am...appearance shouldn't be important".
Well, bullshit. Appearance IS important, and smell, and the sound of your voice. Because human beings are sensual creatures, not disembodied brains floating around.
If you want guys to take notice of you then you have to dress nicely, get your hair seen to etc. -that's just the way things are.
It doesn't really matter that you're not going to win any beuaty contests. What matters to a guy is that you've made the effort, take some pride in your appearance, and most of all that you SMELL and LOOK like a girl.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
I will add that I have always noticed Indian females, prim or otherwise. It would stand to reason that India has some of the most provocative ladies in the world or they would not have a population as large as it is now.
Damn right. There are a lot of Asians in Britain and in my opinion Indian girls are - on average - much better looking than "white" girls. Plus they're generally better behaved.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Ah, but. Young and Ewing, the idealistic founders are now both pushed aside to make way for more hard-headed commercial types. The character of Red Hat is plainly changing into something other than what it was. They were once thought of as being a force for good but who knows where they'll be in a year's time?
Now that the millennium is upon us, perhaps it would be timely to remind ourselves that the Antichrist is about due to turn up. Perhaps he isn't an individual at all, but a corporation! After all, corporations didn't exist in John the Revelator's day so if he had foreseen this he couldn't have understood it in his own terms. However...didn't he describe the Whore of Babylon as having several heads?
John also said that the Antichrist would be acclaimed as a saviour before his true evil nature was revealed. Hmmm. There's some kind of parallel here...
And Nostradamus warned us that we should recognise the Antichrist by his blue turban. We all know how he used to fudge the details though, eg "Hister" vs. "Hitler". Maybe it wasn't really a blue turban at all.
Maybe it was a Red Hat.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
You certainly don't get it.
The reason Red Hat's corporate movements are of interest is because Red Hat was the first open source company to acquire wealth, size and influence. They are in the process of converting from a startup to a fully-fledged corporation. What Red Hat now does will have a major influence on the future of the Open Source movement in more ways than can be counted.
Since Red Hat's IPO was announced, of the two founders Bob Young gave up the CEO's seat to Matthew Szulik, an old-guard and hard headed IT businessman from the pre-open source world; and now Mark Ewing has been pushed out of the CTO's chair in favour of tech-head Michael Tiemann who used to head Cygnus. Tiemann is a famous name in open source, though one with a reputation for commercial success too.
We have a lot to be thankful for in Red Hat's support for the open source movement. But at the same time we need to maintain a healthy level of scepticism with regard to everything they say and do because they are no longer simply motivated by the thrill of making a business model out of new, exciting open source. They are now motivated by profit. That is why the two tech-heads who founded the company have been sidelined. For the company to be taken seriously by the big boys, "wiser" heads must be seen to prevail.
It behooves us to watch these events carefully in case Red Hat should show signs of growing into the type of corporation that we all love to hate. Plenty of people fell out of love with Red Hat long before we got to this stage - just as soon as Red Hat started talking like a business, really.
I on the other hand, naive fool that I am, entertain hopes that Red Hat will stay true to its roots, forever champion the cause of open source and steer clear of nonsensical patents etc.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
On the other hand, you might try Limericks
Haikus are tempting because they're easy, because there's no rhyme. As for Limericks... let's see *you* try to come up with two rhymes for "Xerox".
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
You're forgetting that Slashdot is owned by Andover. As a publicly traded company they are subject to hostile takeovers. AOLTW could buy Andover out at any time just by offering enough money to their shareholders. Unless a solid majority of those shareholders just happen to be highly principled libertarians with no particular need to grab a large wad of free cash, Andover are bantha fodder just as soon as AOLTW says so.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction