The common carrier status of AT&T had nothing to do with it's level of "innovation". It's monopoly status did. Competitive providers are more than capable of operating in a non-monopoly environment. The example of phone services AFTER the AT&T breakup is a glaringly obvious example of this.
We already have a working model for breaking up the cable monopolies.
EXACTLY. I don't want to deal with crappy straightjacked Apple hardware. I would much rather run an OS (ANY OS) on the hardware of my choosing. It doesn't matter if it's bare metal or a VM.
It would be nice to run MacOS on a VM. That would make it much easer to suss out all of this persistent propaganda that fanboys like to spew so much.
It would make it much easier and much cheaper to fully demo MacOS. I am sure that this is why it is not done. It's much easier to maintain the Apple mystique if it's harder and more expensive to try.
Most non-geeks won't blow $500 just to try a new bit of tech.
I cut out all of your rhetorical garbage because it was just that rhetorical garbage.
You tried to equate random garbage with things that are actually relavent to judging a PC. You don't want anyone to consider obvious things that would cast your precious corporate brand in a bad light.
Although now that I think on it some more, PCs can do process control. There are specialized industrial PCs. Those PCs can run something like QNX which has been a trusted name in process control for decades.
It doesn't need to be "off the shelf". This is 2014. You can search the web for any kind of PC you want. Some of those PC vendors even specialize in industrial applications.
The PC market allows PCs to be all things to all people.
So your attempt at red herrings is a failure on two levels.
...the point being is that I can optimize my PC to my exact requirements.
Apple kit is always optimized to make Apple the most money and there is ZERO competition for compatible kit. So Apple can pretty much say "screw you" any time it likes (like with the Mac Pro).
As a Linux user, I just buy hardware. I don't care about the consumerist brand fixations. I don't care about impressing anyone else. Cost might be an issue but ultimately it's about getting something done.
A Linux user that buys a Mac has to actually like that hardware for it's own merits (whatever those may be).
The shift to accuracy and secular subjects in art is a useful milestone in terms of anthropology or history certainly. However, it's not anthropology that's really under discussion in this "Age of Man" thread. That would be more of a goeologic metric than an anthropologic one.
+...and yes it is true that a lot of the Italian Renaissance was the re-discovery of principles that had been known to the ancients.
I'm not so sure this is a "tech industry" thing as much as it is a "media narrative" thing. The media has found themselves a great nerd bashing technique and some of the nerds are attempting damage control.
It's all marketing. That's the beauty of it. Companies can announce things that any numerate person should be skeptical of because journalists are likely not nerdy enough to understand what they're being told.
Rants like this forget that there is a SUPPLY problem. You can't magically increase female participation in your IT departments because there aren't 20% there. If Amazon and Intel are all hot and bothered about "diversity" they could very well consume all of the available "talent".
They might consume all of the available suitable talent and still come up short.
At least Intel is bright enough to try addressing the supply side of this.
Yes. it's nice to use a system that "just works". It's too bad that Windows isn't that. It may be fine for ultra-light use but if you push it a little around the edges it starts to fall apart.
These alternate init daemons have that same problem.
Their level of complexity and their assumptions make it far too easy to render your system unbootable. They create something that's no longer transparent or maintainable.
...as if "being old and conservative and not wanting to change" is a bad thing.
If something works, then don't break it. If a vanishingly small number of people need a different alternative, then don't shove it down everyone else's throats.
That's the whole point of modularity. If I suddenly decide I like WindowMaker better, I don't have to piss in everyone else's cheerios.
> You may have written linux kernel drivers before, but apparently you have never encountered this thing called Google?
Yes. Google. With all kinds of things tossed together both good and bad. Just because something is on Google, it doesn't mean you can trust it. The Internet is a great conduit for spreading nonsense.
The whole "turning the other cheek" thing isn't even a general directive. It is intended to specifically address insults to your religion. The "turn the other cheek" bit is meant EXACTLY FOR THIS SITUATION. So the Jesuit commits one count of dogma fail right there.
Plus there's the whole "eye for an eye" thing, which is not as some people like to claim some sort of call to vendetta. It's an old testament thing along the lines of modern Tort law. To repair a harm the "damages" must be equivalent. If an eye is lost, then an eye must be given back.
It's not like Sean Connery's revenge speech in The Untouchables.
On the other hand, I have sat in court and heard the judge declare that "but he insulted my mother" is not a legally justifiable excuse for violence. This isn't just some theoretical idea I might have heard from the Internet. It's personal first hand experience with an actual court and an actual judge.
You will get thrown in jail for "defending your mother". That's no more an excuse for assault and battery and murder than blasphemy is.
I think with the former, there is more the acknowledgement that the perp is willing to bear the full legal consequences of their actions. There are no excuses made. They do what needs to be done and accept the resulting punishment.
This is the same guy that would be fueling the Xian version of ISIS if certain acts of heresy did not castrate the power of his little cabal a few centuries ago.
On the surface it all sounds nice and sweet but the underlying problem is that you can't criticize if you can't offend. If you can't criticize then power becomes corrupt and runs amok. Progress comes to a halt because those in power don't want anything that could interfere with their racket.
A modern civilized society depends and thrives on the ability to commit heresy and offend people.
This also fails as a "free market" because the labor that's being undercut isn't able to move where costs are lower. It's not a "free market" if corporations can import talent but individuals can't move out of the resulting disaster area.
If Republicans destroy Ohio, I can move to Pennsylvania.
I don't have that option with this particular "free market".
That's funny because I have personally managed to out earn an H1B with a PhD (if not several) simply because of my status as a full citizen. I am free to bargain with an employer. I don't have to worry about deportation if I am too demanding.
Now that's the "good side" of H1Bs (abused talent).
The bad side is mediocre no talent sleazebags that are just used to lower labor costs. I've seen that variation on the H1B system as well.
Your "situation" could be much better. You could have an actual green card.
Also, cut out this "team of lawyers" crap. This makes you sound like such an obvious shill. I'm familiar with that end of things too. You're so full of it.
Opposition to the creation of an underclass is not "protectionism". If we really need them then fine, bring them over. Just bring them over as full EQUALS.
Given them green cards the moment they land or forget about it.
They won't do that of course because it doesn't get them what they want. They want indentured quasi-slave labor. They don't want real professionals.
The only reason this situation seems "ugly" is because something is being forced down our throats Microsoft monopoly style. One of the great things about Unix modular design is that you can easily accomodate everyone even if they have mutually exclusive requirements.
SystemD fails at playing nice with the rest of Unix and the vast majority of end users that view it as useless at best.
Your choices should not require you to piss on my fileserver.
Windows 8.1 is a result of the backlash against Win8. Subject the average user to Win8 and they will still manifest the same "abject fear" they always had. Microsoft just backtracked a little.
Enough apparently to make Win 8.1 much less despised than it's predecessors.
It's almost like they rediscovered the idea that you shouldn't treat your customer like sh*t.
The problems with GMOs don't end with "scientific truth". Not that ephemeral faith in a technology ever amounted to much. Our own recent history is littered with disasters of that kind.
"Arguing the science" is just a crass way of ignoring any of the other problems.
it also makes Tyson look like a cheap corporate tool.
It also exposes the obvious hubris and myopia of scientists.
Slashdot Mirror
Utter nonsense.
The common carrier status of AT&T had nothing to do with it's level of "innovation". It's monopoly status did. Competitive providers are more than capable of operating in a non-monopoly environment. The example of phone services AFTER the AT&T breakup is a glaringly obvious example of this.
We already have a working model for breaking up the cable monopolies.
EXACTLY. I don't want to deal with crappy straightjacked Apple hardware. I would much rather run an OS (ANY OS) on the hardware of my choosing. It doesn't matter if it's bare metal or a VM.
It would be nice to run MacOS on a VM. That would make it much easer to suss out all of this persistent propaganda that fanboys like to spew so much.
It would make it much easier and much cheaper to fully demo MacOS. I am sure that this is why it is not done. It's much easier to maintain the Apple mystique if it's harder and more expensive to try.
Most non-geeks won't blow $500 just to try a new bit of tech.
I cut out all of your rhetorical garbage because it was just that rhetorical garbage.
You tried to equate random garbage with things that are actually relavent to judging a PC. You don't want anyone to consider obvious things that would cast your precious corporate brand in a bad light.
Although now that I think on it some more, PCs can do process control. There are specialized industrial PCs. Those PCs can run something like QNX which has been a trusted name in process control for decades.
It doesn't need to be "off the shelf". This is 2014. You can search the web for any kind of PC you want. Some of those PC vendors even specialize in industrial applications.
The PC market allows PCs to be all things to all people.
So your attempt at red herrings is a failure on two levels.
No. Idiots like you always spew such marketing nonsense.
Not a word you've said has any real objective meaning. It's all just marketing speak that means nothing really.
You're just like a Lemming droning on about msoffice.
...the point being is that I can optimize my PC to my exact requirements.
Apple kit is always optimized to make Apple the most money and there is ZERO competition for compatible kit. So Apple can pretty much say "screw you" any time it likes (like with the Mac Pro).
As a Linux user, I just buy hardware. I don't care about the consumerist brand fixations. I don't care about impressing anyone else. Cost might be an issue but ultimately it's about getting something done.
A Linux user that buys a Mac has to actually like that hardware for it's own merits (whatever those may be).
> There are a lot of things Mac hardware can't do,
Exactly.
Macs are overpriced and inflexible compared to PCs. End of story. Lame excuses won't impress anyone outside the cult.
For a brief moment in time Mac hardware managed to do well in a particular niche (HTPC). Once cheaper suitable PCs came along I immediately moved on.
Macs are great for people who love to make excuses for paying more to do less. That demographic doesn't seem to overlap with Linux users much.
The shift to accuracy and secular subjects in art is a useful milestone in terms of anthropology or history certainly. However, it's not anthropology that's really under discussion in this "Age of Man" thread. That would be more of a goeologic metric than an anthropologic one.
+...and yes it is true that a lot of the Italian Renaissance was the re-discovery of principles that had been known to the ancients.
A number of my colleagues would dump Windows in a heartbeat if they could run their PC games on some other OS.
I'm not so sure this is a "tech industry" thing as much as it is a "media narrative" thing. The media has found themselves a great nerd bashing technique and some of the nerds are attempting damage control.
It's all marketing. That's the beauty of it. Companies can announce things that any numerate person should be skeptical of because journalists are likely not nerdy enough to understand what they're being told.
...at the expense of every other company.
Rants like this forget that there is a SUPPLY problem. You can't magically increase female participation in your IT departments because there aren't 20% there. If Amazon and Intel are all hot and bothered about "diversity" they could very well consume all of the available "talent".
They might consume all of the available suitable talent and still come up short.
At least Intel is bright enough to try addressing the supply side of this.
Yes. it's nice to use a system that "just works". It's too bad that Windows isn't that. It may be fine for ultra-light use but if you push it a little around the edges it starts to fall apart.
These alternate init daemons have that same problem.
Their level of complexity and their assumptions make it far too easy to render your system unbootable. They create something that's no longer transparent or maintainable.
...as if "being old and conservative and not wanting to change" is a bad thing.
If something works, then don't break it. If a vanishingly small number of people need a different alternative, then don't shove it down everyone else's throats.
That's the whole point of modularity. If I suddenly decide I like WindowMaker better, I don't have to piss in everyone else's cheerios.
Change control is not a bad thing.
> You may have written linux kernel drivers before, but apparently you have never encountered this thing called Google?
Yes. Google. With all kinds of things tossed together both good and bad. Just because something is on Google, it doesn't mean you can trust it. The Internet is a great conduit for spreading nonsense.
Yes, that struck me as well.
The whole "turning the other cheek" thing isn't even a general directive. It is intended to specifically address insults to your religion. The "turn the other cheek" bit is meant EXACTLY FOR THIS SITUATION. So the Jesuit commits one count of dogma fail right there.
Plus there's the whole "eye for an eye" thing, which is not as some people like to claim some sort of call to vendetta. It's an old testament thing along the lines of modern Tort law. To repair a harm the "damages" must be equivalent. If an eye is lost, then an eye must be given back.
It's not like Sean Connery's revenge speech in The Untouchables.
Again, another dogma fail.
On the other hand, I have sat in court and heard the judge declare that "but he insulted my mother" is not a legally justifiable excuse for violence. This isn't just some theoretical idea I might have heard from the Internet. It's personal first hand experience with an actual court and an actual judge.
You will get thrown in jail for "defending your mother". That's no more an excuse for assault and battery and murder than blasphemy is.
I think with the former, there is more the acknowledgement that the perp is willing to bear the full legal consequences of their actions. There are no excuses made. They do what needs to be done and accept the resulting punishment.
Sometimes an expletive is called for.
This is the same guy that would be fueling the Xian version of ISIS if certain acts of heresy did not castrate the power of his little cabal a few centuries ago.
On the surface it all sounds nice and sweet but the underlying problem is that you can't criticize if you can't offend. If you can't criticize then power becomes corrupt and runs amok. Progress comes to a halt because those in power don't want anything that could interfere with their racket.
A modern civilized society depends and thrives on the ability to commit heresy and offend people.
This also fails as a "free market" because the labor that's being undercut isn't able to move where costs are lower. It's not a "free market" if corporations can import talent but individuals can't move out of the resulting disaster area.
If Republicans destroy Ohio, I can move to Pennsylvania.
I don't have that option with this particular "free market".
That's funny because I have personally managed to out earn an H1B with a PhD (if not several) simply because of my status as a full citizen. I am free to bargain with an employer. I don't have to worry about deportation if I am too demanding.
Now that's the "good side" of H1Bs (abused talent).
The bad side is mediocre no talent sleazebags that are just used to lower labor costs. I've seen that variation on the H1B system as well.
Your "situation" could be much better. You could have an actual green card.
Also, cut out this "team of lawyers" crap. This makes you sound like such an obvious shill. I'm familiar with that end of things too. You're so full of it.
No it isn't. HIB is a slave status. Being against a slave status is not protectionism. It's classic American patriotism (Common Sense).
You are trying to conflate immigration in general with the HIB underclass status and they simply aren't the same thing.
If they're worth importing, they're worth treating right.
Opposition to the creation of an underclass is not "protectionism". If we really need them then fine, bring them over. Just bring them over as full EQUALS.
Given them green cards the moment they land or forget about it.
They won't do that of course because it doesn't get them what they want. They want indentured quasi-slave labor. They don't want real professionals.
The only reason this situation seems "ugly" is because something is being forced down our throats Microsoft monopoly style. One of the great things about Unix modular design is that you can easily accomodate everyone even if they have mutually exclusive requirements.
SystemD fails at playing nice with the rest of Unix and the vast majority of end users that view it as useless at best.
Your choices should not require you to piss on my fileserver.
My heavy tablet user still finds the form factor unsuitable for a lot of web browsing and that's pretty lightweight stuff by PC standards.
The form factor just isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Media hype and wishful thinking won't change that.
A $200 PC with useful inputs can still run circles around tablets.
Windows 8.1 is a result of the backlash against Win8. Subject the average user to Win8 and they will still manifest the same "abject fear" they always had. Microsoft just backtracked a little.
Enough apparently to make Win 8.1 much less despised than it's predecessors.
It's almost like they rediscovered the idea that you shouldn't treat your customer like sh*t.
The problems with GMOs don't end with "scientific truth". Not that ephemeral faith in a technology ever amounted to much. Our own recent history is littered with disasters of that kind.
"Arguing the science" is just a crass way of ignoring any of the other problems.
it also makes Tyson look like a cheap corporate tool.
It also exposes the obvious hubris and myopia of scientists.