They might have a good reason for them but I'm yet to hear one with good reason (logic) for me. It in a nut shell usually breaks down to I believe because 1B people can't be wrong. Or I believe because I had a warm feeling when I read a book and I applied the morals in it and it made me a better person. Regardless, my comment was just to state that in a logical debate on the way of the universe it is the person that is making the claims for the supernatural that has to supply the evidence not the guy that is claiming that the sky is blue and bunnies live in the forest. You can't start with the hypothesis that everything exists and then rule them out one by one it would take forever. Instead you add to the stuff you know as things get demonstrated/shown to you to be true. That way you can be reasonably sure that your knowledge is getting closer to the truth over time and that models based on what you know already are more likely to be right. If you go the other way you have to throw everything out because you can't disprove that everything is just because some six armed god decided to make it that way, that some six armed god isn't going to just create a purple sky as soon as you write down it is blue etc.
I'd disagree on that one. We didn't have a choice to be created. God, at least the one I learn from the western religions, gives a long list of rules and says if you screw up once you are condemned. That is unless you decide to grovel at His invisible feet for mercy and are lucky enough to pick the right flavor of christianity/islam/judaism and He chooses to forgive you. We are created to find sin pleasurable and then condemned to hell for doing it once. In order to get our life back we need to become God's slave. No thanks, not happening until you give me empirical evidence you exist.
Not to mention why are you so selfish to need to create a universe so some people will worship you while the vast majority you'll condemn to hell. As for the existence of evil: okay it serves as a learning lesson. Lets take that as the reason. So if your kid doesn't learn do you torture him for eternity (or at least a very long time)? Do you give them (or at least expose them to) hundreds of slightly different sets of rules and just hope they'll find the right one or do you explain to them what the rules are so they know when they've screwed up?
Umm no. If you want me to believe that there is a super natural jewish zombie who raises the dead and walks on water it is you that has to prove it's true. You don't have to disprove every nutty idea out there. If people have a very unusual claim which involves super natural powers or things that you can't see it is them that has to prove their existence not the people that believe in normal demonstratively provable claims.
Administration a McJob? That all depends on how competent you want your admin to be. This might be true of some desktop support types but server/network side? Not in a well run company. It becomes more of a business/technical role if you are any good. What does the company need, what is the best set of software/hardware to make it happen. Managing schedule/contractors/budget to make it happen. Learn how the new stuff works so that you can do anything that the users can't etc. Not a McJob. Also if you have skills coding you usually can find a project to work on in an admin area. Something that is a manual process that can be automated, etc. Lots and lots of bash out there that makes everyone's life easier.
I've done both my first job was as a "programmer analyst", about half development and half admin. I then did straight admin for a while (much larger systems and more responsibility), then off to software only and they liked the fact that I would know the innards of the protocol and software stuff and be able to build my own development lab for any choice of platform. It all depends on what you want to do but I like to know both how to build code but how the systems are used and how businesses run and determine who's stuff to use. You are after all working to build stuff that other people can use and pay you for:-)
I think that love extends to ignoring its flaws. For example people raise kids, even if they have some crappy behaviors they still will spend all day bragging about how good they are at X (football, math etc). 'You're Tommy set the neighbors dog on fire', 'yeah but isn't he so cute'.
Open source I'd say it is they ignore their flaws. It is getting better but Gnome, KDE etc used to be really flaky. The cool features they advertised on each version would be so unstable as to be unusable (at least in the sense of something you'd put infront of your non-technical boss and expect not to here "get this crap off my computer"), and also pretty typically a pretty ugly GUI (Ubuntu Brown anyone?). I can't count how many times I've talked to a open source guy and said this program is a real piece of crap, it is about half way from being useful I don't get why it is released etc. To get the reply 'Oh but it is free, what did you expect you didn't pay for it so don't complain, would you rather give $X to company Y etc'. Free doesn't excuse laziness. If it isn't good enough that someone would pay for it (the bar is pretty low if you look at some of the commercial software out there) it should still be Beta, not in a production distribution system etc.
Lastly what really pisses me off is when something is say 75% good and 25% junk that is often when the developers decide to move on to something else. For commercial software there is an incentive to fix the problems because people come saying 'I'd by it but this needs to work first' not so with free software (I'm equating it with Open Source because the vast majority of Open Source is free). I'm guilty of it too, things I code on for fun I often work on until I prove I can do what my idea was and then stop. Programmed a chess game, programmed Battleship etc, I didn't care to polish it I just wanted to learn a new language/api and do a bit of fun logic. The problem is in the OS community often this crap gets published in the wild and any criticism becomes well if you don't like it you can fix it yourself. I have a life and can't be fixing everyone else's crappy code, my time is worth say $1 a minute to my employer why would I give up that $1 to work on somebodies fun project that might just be a program that would be useful to me but not a program that is interesting (in a development sense) to me?
But they are claiming there is something left when they try to sell it. Also if the court is controlling the bankruptcy sale they should be able to say this can be sold, that can't etc. My understanding is you file Chapter 7 but it is an ongoing process it isn't a one time "oh we are done" it is a long involved process potentially with the attempt to salvage the company, sell of parts, etc.
I think the article mentions a "deceptive business practice" clause that could cover this kind of thing. The fact that the information was supplied to you for a specific purpose should bind you to only use it for that purpose. I know I'm being naive but it does seem a rather unethical thing to do. What if for example the courts decide to license out the info from Borders rather than just sell it to one company (or the buying company does it)? Say they see you bought books about animals and the next thing you know you have door to door gypsies showing up with trained circus monkeys:-)
Information is an asset I'll admit. But the access to the information was clearly bounded by Border's privacy policy. I really don't understand why the courts are even considering the possibility of allowing it to be sold. If the privacy policy said only Borders would access the data then when Borders ceases to exist than so should the data. B&N can just ask you to give them the info if you choose to under their privacy agreement. The fact that the company would even try to purchase information covered under a privacy agreement with another company puts them on my no-buy list.
I think you are exactly right. Most people in my experience that use SUA use it very little just to run that "one little script" occasionally or whatever. For that you can use a VM. Performance isn't that big a deal for something that is occasionally used. If performance is a big deal than you should be running *NIX natively. Most *NIX stuff used in the commercial environment are either very high end workstation apps or server based apps anyways... why would you want to run a oddball compatibility tool in a server environment rather than native is crazy. Spend the extra 10k or so and get a real *NIX server.
So what we need is poorer people to give the wealth too. I know let all of Haiti in and give them say 200k each of Scrooge McDuck's money to spend on happy meals.
Look up something like Condor. It will let you use the spare cycles kicking around in the workstations in your friend's lab and other labs that are willing to install the client. It can be setup to only run when the computer is idle, to run on her labs computers first before using others etc. Also once it is setup any lab in the building/network/world could use it provided that the admin approved it.
Um, continuing to scan books while it is publicly well known that the rights holders are seeking an injunction or whatever it is called I'd say is pretty evil. Might not be illegal but in my mind scanning and publishing a bunch of copyright material in industrial volumes without permission from all the right-holders (actually even after it was publicly known that one of the right-holder groups was pursuing legal means to stop you) is pretty shady. I think books are worse to copy and distribute freely than music. Music even if you download everything a band has you still might go to their concerts, buy tee shirts etc. Books if you got all of them for free what is the author going to sell you to earn a living? I'm not saying access to books is a bad thing but the authors/publishers etc need to get paid. There is already a system to provide access to books for those with little money (libraries) so it wasn't solving a problem.
Re:BSODs are very often hardware related
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Yep I saw a video to that effect on Channel 9 (admittedly a biased source). The problem so they say is that drivers live below the kernel/user land divide. So when things go screwy with the driver it is a kernel level fault and often knocks the whole OS down. It was a poor design, but sadly as with a lot of Windows warts it stuck around because of compatibility reasons. A lot that MS gets blamed and cursed for has reasons. They aren't ignoring that there is a problem, that the product at some levels is poorly designed, it is just that they have hundreds of thousands of software partners, some apps and devices used by millions of people that would break if they changed things. It looks like Win 8 might finally break some of the dependency on Win32 and the current kernel level partitioning. Hopefully stability will be greatly improved because of this.
Nice but it brings you completely back to the Win 7 interface from what the article says. What about the ribbon win explorer? Some of the changes you might still like to keep but just want to have a normal desktop environment. I guess someone will right a little widget that will take a key combination and toggle the registry rather than you having to do it manually each time you want to go back to the metro start menu or win 8 explorer.
So how does this relate to my post? I never mentioned location. I get that the main article is about location but the bottom line is Google has a long history of doing things of questionable legality until they are told not to. Just because they can figure out where you are doesn't mean they should until you opt-in. They are doing it both to make their service better but also because context specific ads pay better. Google will do anything they can to get more info about you so that your conversion rate will be higher and they can charge more for the ads.
Because Google will do what they can get away with until someone sues/complains load enough, ie Google Books, waiting for a DMCA request before not linking to copyrighted content etc.
Yes and that is why there are whole books written on regular expressions. If you try to do anything non-trivial in *nix on the command line that you haven't done before chances are you will spend 30min googling to find an example and someone will have a really cool 15 character way of doing it with sed or something. You'll get there, you'll get better at regex etc and need help less but non-trivial things are just that non-trivial and take a lot of thought an knowledge to do well.
Exactly. I think a "tick/tock" approach similar to Intels would be great. Every ~2 years a new release but alternating so one release adds new/revolutionary/might like it features the next focuses on stability and pulls in the features from the revolutionary distro that the market liked. So if you are a business upgrade every 4 years onto the "mainstream" release, if you really really want the cool new feature then upgrade every 2 years. MS doesn't have to look like they are being left behind, but at the same time gives some stability (in the sense of update refrequency) to the mainstream OS users. If I was them I'd really push for a 4-5year limit on support too so that users can wait a year or so for the kinks to be worked out of the mainstream version but have to upgrade when they buy new hardware after that. Only reasonable as it is crazy to support and continue to sell software that is 10+ years old on new hardware.
I give it a week in the wild before someone makes an app that gives you back your normal start menu. But yeah as is the desktop is just another app you pick from the metro ui and "start" means take me back to metro.
It is also one way. They don't have to use what you say to help you, you can only hurt your self for talking, never do it without a lawyer present even if it is just to discuss something you witnessed.
1) Oversubscription for phone works because people have to be there to use capacity (usually) where as internet things can take hours to download so you go to sleep and get it in the morning. Thus usage will be a lot higher because the speed isn't sufficient to give you what you want in real time (say every episode of the simpsons)
2) True small percentage of users. So... ?
3) So? They at least in Canada often state the speed in terms of movies/mp3s etc that you can download. So they know it is media most people are downloading. Most systems require you to upload ideally as much as you download so as long as the connection is asymetric it is the upload that matters not the download speed. If 50Mbps is truly faster than most people need there won't be all those people in the world "filling the pipe" just people will get the "water" they want faster and the network will be idle more.
5) Yes you are right I don't want to pay thousands of dollars a month for internet. Sorry. Probably a lot cheaper in the US but when I worked in Germany at a large institute we had 155Mbps symmetric and were paying 10k euros a year for it from Deutsche Telekom ~$1100 a month. Consumer grade maxes out at ~50Mbps/2Mbps where I live. Anything faster and you'd need to pay those crazy prices.
Slashdot Mirror
They might have a good reason for them but I'm yet to hear one with good reason (logic) for me. It in a nut shell usually breaks down to I believe because 1B people can't be wrong. Or I believe because I had a warm feeling when I read a book and I applied the morals in it and it made me a better person. Regardless, my comment was just to state that in a logical debate on the way of the universe it is the person that is making the claims for the supernatural that has to supply the evidence not the guy that is claiming that the sky is blue and bunnies live in the forest. You can't start with the hypothesis that everything exists and then rule them out one by one it would take forever. Instead you add to the stuff you know as things get demonstrated/shown to you to be true. That way you can be reasonably sure that your knowledge is getting closer to the truth over time and that models based on what you know already are more likely to be right. If you go the other way you have to throw everything out because you can't disprove that everything is just because some six armed god decided to make it that way, that some six armed god isn't going to just create a purple sky as soon as you write down it is blue etc.
I'd disagree on that one. We didn't have a choice to be created. God, at least the one I learn from the western religions, gives a long list of rules and says if you screw up once you are condemned. That is unless you decide to grovel at His invisible feet for mercy and are lucky enough to pick the right flavor of christianity/islam/judaism and He chooses to forgive you. We are created to find sin pleasurable and then condemned to hell for doing it once. In order to get our life back we need to become God's slave. No thanks, not happening until you give me empirical evidence you exist.
Not to mention why are you so selfish to need to create a universe so some people will worship you while the vast majority you'll condemn to hell. As for the existence of evil: okay it serves as a learning lesson. Lets take that as the reason. So if your kid doesn't learn do you torture him for eternity (or at least a very long time)? Do you give them (or at least expose them to) hundreds of slightly different sets of rules and just hope they'll find the right one or do you explain to them what the rules are so they know when they've screwed up?
Umm no. If you want me to believe that there is a super natural jewish zombie who raises the dead and walks on water it is you that has to prove it's true. You don't have to disprove every nutty idea out there. If people have a very unusual claim which involves super natural powers or things that you can't see it is them that has to prove their existence not the people that believe in normal demonstratively provable claims.
I've done both my first job was as a "programmer analyst", about half development and half admin. I then did straight admin for a while (much larger systems and more responsibility), then off to software only and they liked the fact that I would know the innards of the protocol and software stuff and be able to build my own development lab for any choice of platform. It all depends on what you want to do but I like to know both how to build code but how the systems are used and how businesses run and determine who's stuff to use. You are after all working to build stuff that other people can use and pay you for :-)
Open source I'd say it is they ignore their flaws. It is getting better but Gnome, KDE etc used to be really flaky. The cool features they advertised on each version would be so unstable as to be unusable (at least in the sense of something you'd put infront of your non-technical boss and expect not to here "get this crap off my computer"), and also pretty typically a pretty ugly GUI (Ubuntu Brown anyone?). I can't count how many times I've talked to a open source guy and said this program is a real piece of crap, it is about half way from being useful I don't get why it is released etc. To get the reply 'Oh but it is free, what did you expect you didn't pay for it so don't complain, would you rather give $X to company Y etc'. Free doesn't excuse laziness. If it isn't good enough that someone would pay for it (the bar is pretty low if you look at some of the commercial software out there) it should still be Beta, not in a production distribution system etc.
Lastly what really pisses me off is when something is say 75% good and 25% junk that is often when the developers decide to move on to something else. For commercial software there is an incentive to fix the problems because people come saying 'I'd by it but this needs to work first' not so with free software (I'm equating it with Open Source because the vast majority of Open Source is free). I'm guilty of it too, things I code on for fun I often work on until I prove I can do what my idea was and then stop. Programmed a chess game, programmed Battleship etc, I didn't care to polish it I just wanted to learn a new language/api and do a bit of fun logic. The problem is in the OS community often this crap gets published in the wild and any criticism becomes well if you don't like it you can fix it yourself. I have a life and can't be fixing everyone else's crappy code, my time is worth say $1 a minute to my employer why would I give up that $1 to work on somebodies fun project that might just be a program that would be useful to me but not a program that is interesting (in a development sense) to me?
But they are claiming there is something left when they try to sell it. Also if the court is controlling the bankruptcy sale they should be able to say this can be sold, that can't etc. My understanding is you file Chapter 7 but it is an ongoing process it isn't a one time "oh we are done" it is a long involved process potentially with the attempt to salvage the company, sell of parts, etc.
I think the article mentions a "deceptive business practice" clause that could cover this kind of thing. The fact that the information was supplied to you for a specific purpose should bind you to only use it for that purpose. I know I'm being naive but it does seem a rather unethical thing to do. What if for example the courts decide to license out the info from Borders rather than just sell it to one company (or the buying company does it)? Say they see you bought books about animals and the next thing you know you have door to door gypsies showing up with trained circus monkeys :-)
Information is an asset I'll admit. But the access to the information was clearly bounded by Border's privacy policy. I really don't understand why the courts are even considering the possibility of allowing it to be sold. If the privacy policy said only Borders would access the data then when Borders ceases to exist than so should the data. B&N can just ask you to give them the info if you choose to under their privacy agreement. The fact that the company would even try to purchase information covered under a privacy agreement with another company puts them on my no-buy list.
I think you are exactly right. Most people in my experience that use SUA use it very little just to run that "one little script" occasionally or whatever. For that you can use a VM. Performance isn't that big a deal for something that is occasionally used. If performance is a big deal than you should be running *NIX natively. Most *NIX stuff used in the commercial environment are either very high end workstation apps or server based apps anyways ... why would you want to run a oddball compatibility tool in a server environment rather than native is crazy. Spend the extra 10k or so and get a real *NIX server.
So what we need is poorer people to give the wealth too. I know let all of Haiti in and give them say 200k each of Scrooge McDuck's money to spend on happy meals.
We're ready for less competition AND the competition playing around for 5 years or so trying to get their merger sorted out while we roll out 4G :-)
Look up something like Condor. It will let you use the spare cycles kicking around in the workstations in your friend's lab and other labs that are willing to install the client. It can be setup to only run when the computer is idle, to run on her labs computers first before using others etc. Also once it is setup any lab in the building/network/world could use it provided that the admin approved it.
Um, continuing to scan books while it is publicly well known that the rights holders are seeking an injunction or whatever it is called I'd say is pretty evil. Might not be illegal but in my mind scanning and publishing a bunch of copyright material in industrial volumes without permission from all the right-holders (actually even after it was publicly known that one of the right-holder groups was pursuing legal means to stop you) is pretty shady. I think books are worse to copy and distribute freely than music. Music even if you download everything a band has you still might go to their concerts, buy tee shirts etc. Books if you got all of them for free what is the author going to sell you to earn a living? I'm not saying access to books is a bad thing but the authors/publishers etc need to get paid. There is already a system to provide access to books for those with little money (libraries) so it wasn't solving a problem.
Yep I saw a video to that effect on Channel 9 (admittedly a biased source). The problem so they say is that drivers live below the kernel/user land divide. So when things go screwy with the driver it is a kernel level fault and often knocks the whole OS down. It was a poor design, but sadly as with a lot of Windows warts it stuck around because of compatibility reasons. A lot that MS gets blamed and cursed for has reasons. They aren't ignoring that there is a problem, that the product at some levels is poorly designed, it is just that they have hundreds of thousands of software partners, some apps and devices used by millions of people that would break if they changed things. It looks like Win 8 might finally break some of the dependency on Win32 and the current kernel level partitioning. Hopefully stability will be greatly improved because of this.
Nice but it brings you completely back to the Win 7 interface from what the article says. What about the ribbon win explorer? Some of the changes you might still like to keep but just want to have a normal desktop environment. I guess someone will right a little widget that will take a key combination and toggle the registry rather than you having to do it manually each time you want to go back to the metro start menu or win 8 explorer.
So how does this relate to my post? I never mentioned location. I get that the main article is about location but the bottom line is Google has a long history of doing things of questionable legality until they are told not to. Just because they can figure out where you are doesn't mean they should until you opt-in. They are doing it both to make their service better but also because context specific ads pay better. Google will do anything they can to get more info about you so that your conversion rate will be higher and they can charge more for the ads.
Because Google will do what they can get away with until someone sues/complains load enough, ie Google Books, waiting for a DMCA request before not linking to copyrighted content etc.
Yes and that is why there are whole books written on regular expressions. If you try to do anything non-trivial in *nix on the command line that you haven't done before chances are you will spend 30min googling to find an example and someone will have a really cool 15 character way of doing it with sed or something. You'll get there, you'll get better at regex etc and need help less but non-trivial things are just that non-trivial and take a lot of thought an knowledge to do well.
Exactly. I think a "tick/tock" approach similar to Intels would be great. Every ~2 years a new release but alternating so one release adds new/revolutionary/might like it features the next focuses on stability and pulls in the features from the revolutionary distro that the market liked. So if you are a business upgrade every 4 years onto the "mainstream" release, if you really really want the cool new feature then upgrade every 2 years. MS doesn't have to look like they are being left behind, but at the same time gives some stability (in the sense of update refrequency) to the mainstream OS users. If I was them I'd really push for a 4-5year limit on support too so that users can wait a year or so for the kinks to be worked out of the mainstream version but have to upgrade when they buy new hardware after that. Only reasonable as it is crazy to support and continue to sell software that is 10+ years old on new hardware.
I give it a week in the wild before someone makes an app that gives you back your normal start menu. But yeah as is the desktop is just another app you pick from the metro ui and "start" means take me back to metro.
It is also one way. They don't have to use what you say to help you, you can only hurt your self for talking, never do it without a lawyer present even if it is just to discuss something you witnessed.
Haha. Because you can run faster right? :-)
I'd bring a gun to work.
2) True small percentage of users. So ... ?
3) So? They at least in Canada often state the speed in terms of movies/mp3s etc that you can download. So they know it is media most people are downloading. Most systems require you to upload ideally as much as you download so as long as the connection is asymetric it is the upload that matters not the download speed. If 50Mbps is truly faster than most people need there won't be all those people in the world "filling the pipe" just people will get the "water" they want faster and the network will be idle more.
5) Yes you are right I don't want to pay thousands of dollars a month for internet. Sorry. Probably a lot cheaper in the US but when I worked in Germany at a large institute we had 155Mbps symmetric and were paying 10k euros a year for it from Deutsche Telekom ~$1100 a month. Consumer grade maxes out at ~50Mbps/2Mbps where I live. Anything faster and you'd need to pay those crazy prices.