What wars has Linux stopped? What international dispute has Linux settled? What starving group of people has Linux saved? Nominating Linus because of Linux for the peace prize is really stretching it. Igor Sikorsky never received a Peace Prize, and he was fundamental in the development of the helicopter, which has DIRECTLY saved thousands of peoples lives. Linus might be worthy of some other prize, like the Millennium Technology Prize, but never in a thousand years does his development of Linux or inclusion in the Open Source movement qualify him for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Just report it. The burned hand teaches best. Think how pissed your president would be if he found out the software his company built was being pirated. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
... so who cares if it blocks the signal? The only thing that it would really impair would be a dash mounted GPS unit (which would suck admittedly), but you have to wonder how hard it would be to get an external antenna for them.
It seems very alarmist. I don't see how dropping private computers off the net is an invasion of privacy either. This type of law is created for a "worst case" scenario. While people might not think it very possible, you DO need to plan for it - not unlike disaster recovery in IT. Say we get in a war with China and they attack our power stations in the US via a massive cyber attack - do you want there not to be guidelines at that time? There is a balance between freedom and national security, and the original poster seems to be much more of a sky-is-falling type in regards to this type of law.
Mercedes uses Urea to deal with the NO2 issue - although Honda was supposed to be using a high-temp plasma to do the same (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/05/27/honda-turning-to-plasma-to-beat-diesel-emmisions/) so you would not need to refill urea/ammonia in the car.
The newest diesel engines, because of California, now emit much less particulate than even last years engines (however still more than gas). Also NO2 is much reduced for the same reasons.
That is the #1 reason we don't have more diesels - the old, 1980's legacy of gutless 40hp diesels. New turbo-diesels are NOTHING like those POS cars. Go to a VW dealer and drive either a diesel Jetta or Bug - they have GREAT pickup - way better than a gas engine, especially at highway speed where the torque in a gas engine totally falls off. Because diesels require more compression, the engines are built stronger so last much, much longer than gas. And diesel is about 30% more efficient than gas engines, so until diesel costs 30% more than gas, you are saving money, let alone your car/truck lasts longer so you don't need to buy a new one as often.
I would go with the Remington 11-87. No need to pump and tire out the arm with the 870, and it shoots soft so you can get away with using deer slugs. That should bring down any branch given enough time.
Well, if it stinks as bad as the article says, I'm sure the people living nearby would like to help clean it up rather than smelling it for weeks/months
Yeah, this is definitely not new. I've heard this numerous times over the years. But anyone who needs this to disprove vampires is a bit off kilter anyway.
I agree. SciFi is not really about spaceships and laser guns and death stars and all that. SciFi takes a human theme (as in Forever War, the bond between separated lovers) and illustrates it in some way by using a future setting. The Forever War uses the time dilation of the jumps as a way to illustrate how a soldier feels when they have to leave home to do fight and the strains that doing so puts on his family, society and lover(s). If you remove that human part of the story, it will just be crap. You will end up with 300 in space suits, just war porn.
I read the first time this years ago in high school. It is an absolutely fantastic story. I'm hoping Ridley Scott repeats his Aliens and Blade Runner magic on this.
Humans are already animals, so would this mean that human to human mixing would be illegal? Jesting aside, this might be hard to legislate, as it would require a scientific description of exactly what genes are required to be human. While at first pass this might seem to be a no-brainer, it actually opens up some serious ethical concerns. If you get a child that has a genetic mutation that either has extra genetic material (or less) than the definition, that person could LEGALLY be considered not human. This is an enormous can of worms. What rights would a sentient non-human, who looks human, expect to have in society?
After multi-year stints at IBM and at other companies, I have come to learn that those who write HTML are called Enterprise Architects. I have seen management time and time again put these people in charge of site development. At IBM I actually had an "Enterprise Architect" tell me that they build Java right into their web page. I thought he meant a older Type 1 JSP page. Nope, turns out he meant Javascript, and we all know that Java is to JavaScript like Car is to Carpet.
Personally, I don't think these people should even have jobs, if writing HTML is their only skill. This is such a low brainpower job that writing HTML can be wrapped into another low brainpower job, like mid-level management
I agree. This experiment is like stabbing someone with a big knife to see if they bleed. I am for sure no PETA freak - I love to hunt and 100% realize that killing animals causes them pain. But I ALREADY KNOW that shooting them with an arrow or bullet will kill them - I don't need an experiment to prove something I already know. The only thing I can think of that came out of this experiment was a dolphins threshold for hearing loss, but I have to think there are other ways to gain that knowledge.
Here is a specific example from Martin Luther, "Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and... know nothing but the word of God." It is part of their liturgy. You cannot use science to argue against faith, or vice versa, unfortunately.
I agree. Apple is very good at innovative consumer products, but it is not a R&D superstar. They are very much more of a consumer electronic company that a tech innovator. You need to look to IBM, Sun, Microsoft and to a lesser extend HP for true tech breakthroughs. Apple is just very good at assembling parts into consumer items and marketing them and are no where near in the ballpark of the other players (if you even want to consider Apple a player at all).
I'm not sure I totally agree that Haskell if the future, although I do think that functional programming right now looks to be the the most promising way to deal with muli-cores. Scala has some very strong points that can see it's adoption beat the other, specifically being able to run in the Java JVM and make use of existing Java libraries. You can use the function aspects of Scala when you need to, but still use Java where you do not need parallelism.
You can read the report at http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos110.htm from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Specifically look at the Training and Outlook sections before you make your decision. It sounds like you would have ALOT of work to do to even make the most basic entry level job.
Agree! IT and programming are worlds apart and require different skills. I made a similar post with the same sentiment. IT is MUCH easier to get into IT than Programming
You will be able to get a job in IT much more easily than in programming. Now, I know this is going to get some wicked replies, but IT is easier than Programming to enter into as the formal education requirement is much lower. I spent 7 years doing very large scale UNIX support (10,000 workstations, 900 servers, at that time one of the largest UNIX installations on the planet), and another 7 doing large scale "enterprise" development (large volume transaction processing),and hands down, the complexity of the issues in programming is much greater than in IT support. You can get a job doing helpdesk support and move into a small scale administration job in a small number of years. Getting into a entry-level programming job without either formal education or a significant amount of other IT experience will be difficult if not impossible in anything other than the smallest shop. The jobs are also very different. IT has you up at all hours, often fighting small campfires and blazing infernos. Shit roles downhill much faster in IT than any other job on the planet, and the stress can be considerable. However, the technical knowledge barrier for entry is not as high in the field as in programming. Programming on the other hand does not have as much of the firefighting, and is indeed lower stress, but some of the problems to be solved are very difficult, and doing something wrong can have very large penalties. Contrary to popular belief, most of the time spent by developers is not actually coding, be aware of that. And you are more than likely to not develop new applications, rather you will be supporting or enhancing a existing application. The two areas are very different, so make sure you want to get into programming and not IT. Either way, it will be a rough road without formal training or significant amounts of experience and the areas involve different skill sets. Spend some time determining which area is the most interesting for you. To get a helpdesk job, you could get some MCSE certs in a fairly short time which would help get you on a Windows support desk fairly quickly. Programming is a different beast. In that case I suggest getting a formal education, as going back to school will get you a entry level programming job faster than "working your way" through the ranks. Be aware that just knowing a language syntax is not enough to program anything other than the smallest applications. Programmers who just know syntax are the worst of all breeds and are thoroughly reviled - don't become one of those.
Slashdot Mirror
Linus for the Nobel Peace Prize? No way. Look at the Millennium Technology Prize instead.
What wars has Linux stopped? What international dispute has Linux settled? What starving group of people has Linux saved? Nominating Linus because of Linux for the peace prize is really stretching it. Igor Sikorsky never received a Peace Prize, and he was fundamental in the development of the helicopter, which has DIRECTLY saved thousands of peoples lives. Linus might be worthy of some other prize, like the Millennium Technology Prize, but never in a thousand years does his development of Linux or inclusion in the Open Source movement qualify him for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Just report it. The burned hand teaches best. Think how pissed your president would be if he found out the software his company built was being pirated. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
... so who cares if it blocks the signal? The only thing that it would really impair would be a dash mounted GPS unit (which would suck admittedly), but you have to wonder how hard it would be to get an external antenna for them.
It seems very alarmist. I don't see how dropping private computers off the net is an invasion of privacy either. This type of law is created for a "worst case" scenario. While people might not think it very possible, you DO need to plan for it - not unlike disaster recovery in IT. Say we get in a war with China and they attack our power stations in the US via a massive cyber attack - do you want there not to be guidelines at that time? There is a balance between freedom and national security, and the original poster seems to be much more of a sky-is-falling type in regards to this type of law.
Mercedes uses Urea to deal with the NO2 issue - although Honda was supposed to be using a high-temp plasma to do the same (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/05/27/honda-turning-to-plasma-to-beat-diesel-emmisions/) so you would not need to refill urea/ammonia in the car.
The newest diesel engines, because of California, now emit much less particulate than even last years engines (however still more than gas). Also NO2 is much reduced for the same reasons.
That is the #1 reason we don't have more diesels - the old, 1980's legacy of gutless 40hp diesels. New turbo-diesels are NOTHING like those POS cars. Go to a VW dealer and drive either a diesel Jetta or Bug - they have GREAT pickup - way better than a gas engine, especially at highway speed where the torque in a gas engine totally falls off. Because diesels require more compression, the engines are built stronger so last much, much longer than gas. And diesel is about 30% more efficient than gas engines, so until diesel costs 30% more than gas, you are saving money, let alone your car/truck lasts longer so you don't need to buy a new one as often.
I would go with the Remington 11-87. No need to pump and tire out the arm with the 870, and it shoots soft so you can get away with using deer slugs. That should bring down any branch given enough time.
Well, if it stinks as bad as the article says, I'm sure the people living nearby would like to help clean it up rather than smelling it for weeks/months
I so disagree. Kansas is super fucking mega crazy stupid
... and anti-kick boots ... and anti-bite teeth
Yeah, this is definitely not new. I've heard this numerous times over the years. But anyone who needs this to disprove vampires is a bit off kilter anyway.
and his wealthy uncle, Patron. Salt, limes, and sweet and sour are also welcome to help code.
I agree. SciFi is not really about spaceships and laser guns and death stars and all that. SciFi takes a human theme (as in Forever War, the bond between separated lovers) and illustrates it in some way by using a future setting. The Forever War uses the time dilation of the jumps as a way to illustrate how a soldier feels when they have to leave home to do fight and the strains that doing so puts on his family, society and lover(s). If you remove that human part of the story, it will just be crap. You will end up with 300 in space suits, just war porn.
I read the first time this years ago in high school. It is an absolutely fantastic story. I'm hoping Ridley Scott repeats his Aliens and Blade Runner magic on this.
Humans are already animals, so would this mean that human to human mixing would be illegal? Jesting aside, this might be hard to legislate, as it would require a scientific description of exactly what genes are required to be human. While at first pass this might seem to be a no-brainer, it actually opens up some serious ethical concerns. If you get a child that has a genetic mutation that either has extra genetic material (or less) than the definition, that person could LEGALLY be considered not human. This is an enormous can of worms. What rights would a sentient non-human, who looks human, expect to have in society?
After multi-year stints at IBM and at other companies, I have come to learn that those who write HTML are called Enterprise Architects. I have seen management time and time again put these people in charge of site development. At IBM I actually had an "Enterprise Architect" tell me that they build Java right into their web page. I thought he meant a older Type 1 JSP page. Nope, turns out he meant Javascript, and we all know that Java is to JavaScript like Car is to Carpet.
Personally, I don't think these people should even have jobs, if writing HTML is their only skill. This is such a low brainpower job that writing HTML can be wrapped into another low brainpower job, like mid-level management
I agree. This experiment is like stabbing someone with a big knife to see if they bleed. I am for sure no PETA freak - I love to hunt and 100% realize that killing animals causes them pain. But I ALREADY KNOW that shooting them with an arrow or bullet will kill them - I don't need an experiment to prove something I already know. The only thing I can think of that came out of this experiment was a dolphins threshold for hearing loss, but I have to think there are other ways to gain that knowledge.
Here is a specific example from Martin Luther, "Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." It is part of their liturgy. You cannot use science to argue against faith, or vice versa, unfortunately.
I agree. Apple is very good at innovative consumer products, but it is not a R&D superstar. They are very much more of a consumer electronic company that a tech innovator. You need to look to IBM, Sun, Microsoft and to a lesser extend HP for true tech breakthroughs. Apple is just very good at assembling parts into consumer items and marketing them and are no where near in the ballpark of the other players (if you even want to consider Apple a player at all).
I'm not sure I totally agree that Haskell if the future, although I do think that functional programming right now looks to be the the most promising way to deal with muli-cores. Scala has some very strong points that can see it's adoption beat the other, specifically being able to run in the Java JVM and make use of existing Java libraries. You can use the function aspects of Scala when you need to, but still use Java where you do not need parallelism.
You can read the report at http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos110.htm from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Specifically look at the Training and Outlook sections before you make your decision. It sounds like you would have ALOT of work to do to even make the most basic entry level job.
Agree! IT and programming are worlds apart and require different skills. I made a similar post with the same sentiment. IT is MUCH easier to get into IT than Programming
You will be able to get a job in IT much more easily than in programming. Now, I know this is going to get some wicked replies, but IT is easier than Programming to enter into as the formal education requirement is much lower. I spent 7 years doing very large scale UNIX support (10,000 workstations, 900 servers, at that time one of the largest UNIX installations on the planet), and another 7 doing large scale "enterprise" development (large volume transaction processing),and hands down, the complexity of the issues in programming is much greater than in IT support. You can get a job doing helpdesk support and move into a small scale administration job in a small number of years. Getting into a entry-level programming job without either formal education or a significant amount of other IT experience will be difficult if not impossible in anything other than the smallest shop. The jobs are also very different. IT has you up at all hours, often fighting small campfires and blazing infernos. Shit roles downhill much faster in IT than any other job on the planet, and the stress can be considerable. However, the technical knowledge barrier for entry is not as high in the field as in programming. Programming on the other hand does not have as much of the firefighting, and is indeed lower stress, but some of the problems to be solved are very difficult, and doing something wrong can have very large penalties. Contrary to popular belief, most of the time spent by developers is not actually coding, be aware of that. And you are more than likely to not develop new applications, rather you will be supporting or enhancing a existing application. The two areas are very different, so make sure you want to get into programming and not IT. Either way, it will be a rough road without formal training or significant amounts of experience and the areas involve different skill sets. Spend some time determining which area is the most interesting for you. To get a helpdesk job, you could get some MCSE certs in a fairly short time which would help get you on a Windows support desk fairly quickly. Programming is a different beast. In that case I suggest getting a formal education, as going back to school will get you a entry level programming job faster than "working your way" through the ranks. Be aware that just knowing a language syntax is not enough to program anything other than the smallest applications. Programmers who just know syntax are the worst of all breeds and are thoroughly reviled - don't become one of those.