These are some things that came up in a discussion I had with a friend/colleague about Linux vs. the rest:
Volume Management a la Veritas or IBM's LVM or Disk Suite
Good Async I/O
Good threading implementation
Advanced Scheduling (see e.g. Sun's scheduling implementation and the ways it can be tweaked)
Good SMP support on the high end
I am not a Linux expert, it's quite possible that some of these have come further than they were when I had the discussion, or that they are more advanced than I realize. Feel free to educate me rather than just attacking my ignorance and fulfilling the stereotype of slashdot linux zealots/bigots/jerks.
If Billy Bob "can't keep my hands off the interns" Clinton was still in office, I do believe we would not be considering war with Iraq, yes. We'd have other problems, but not this one.
You're right, the mob was not created by Prohibition. But you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognize that Prohibition fueled the mob's rise to prominence, obscene (for the time) wealth, and a certain amount of "rebel cool" (hey, this guy I know, he gets me the best canadian liquor....). And once the wealth was there, it was sure to find ways to propagate itself, even after Prohibition ended. They got enough money to really buy a lot of politicians and legal "professionals", and that let them leverage other things that have continued to be illegal but profitable.
As for the idea of treating tobacco and alcohol consistently with the other drugs, I'm with you there. I don't think there'd be hardly any public support for drug prohibition if it was actually consistent.
"Because Saddam Hussein has been proven to be a bad guy in so many ways, we know he's a bad guy in these new unproven ways too, so we have to go kick his ass."
I think there is probably some reasonableness to the argument that if the spam promotes Sears' products, that they are likely the originators. It seems too unlikely that the spammers would take it upon themselves to send junk email for someone else's benefit without that someone else being an initiator.
On the other hand, it should be clear that the law doesn't regard reasonableness very highly.
Re:I have no D&D experience...
on
A 1974 Review of D&D
·
· Score: 3, Informative
A lot depends on the referee / game master.
A lot? Try everything. D&D gives you a framework, and consistent rules for engagement so you don't think you're at the GM's whims, but without someone who
has imagination
is organized
is able to keep a group of unruly nerds in line
the game is still unplayable. This was proven to me time and again in a group of us with rotating gamemasters a long while back. Only one GM was worth playing with....
As far as it goes, I think the motivation of my comment is that I think it reasonably unlikely that Bush would have pulled Ashcroft out of the Senate had Ashcroft won the seat; the senate was pretty closely divided as I recall, and I am doubtful that another conservative (wasn't Kit Bond already in the Senate then?) would have come along that could have beaten Mel. Nonetheless, it was meant to be flippant, sorry to offend you so seriously.
I am upset that people are associating the Patriot Act with conservatism.
I would recommend that you inform those who you politically support that conservatives don't support this any more than liberals. And quite honestly, watching congress go like a bunch of sheep to pass this atrocity, it's clear that it's not just a left/right issue. Nonetheless, the self-proclaimed conservatives have draped themselves in the flag and put this abomination forth to begin with (let's hear it for Johnny Ashcroft, who is getting his revenge for being beaten out of his senate seat by a dead man).
Beyond that, if indeed they can do this for "shared" website, what stops them from doing it from non shared ones? Or is child porn ok as along as we can block it from OUR community?
100% a-right. If we KNOW what DRM is built into the players/media, we can make informed choices and NOT buy the crap that has it. Then the marketplace will make it clear that they will not have their way.
Sorry that the concept is so hard for you to understand. Comparing moving applications around to operating computers underwater just shows that you are the one who isn't making sense. Comparisons to "sudo rm -rf/" are ridiculous as well, given that your average mac user would never begin to think of such a string.
The fact remains, if you make something easy to do, someone will do it; you should either make allowances for the fact that they will, or make it so they can't (or at least make it hard to do).
To elaborate: we're talking about the OS that prides itself on being "user friendly". People who don't like computers like macs (allegedly). Etc. etc.
So, if moving some part of the system folder somewhere else is going to fuck up the computer, or worse, NOT fuck up the computer but fuck up the next update, that folder ought to not be changeable by the user. Doing otherwise is not "friendly", it just allows people to blow their legs off.
After all, my car won't let me start the engine in drive, my microwave won't let me start it with the door open, why the hell should my computer let me do patently stupid things?
Actually I'm one of those who's never used the bloody MacOS before in my life, thanks. The point is, if it shouldn't be done, don't allow it to be done. Duh.
It's not whining to point out that "it's my computer". If the goddamn OS *lets* me move things around, then it bloody well better recognize that I've done so, and honor those changes. If the updates have to have it a particular way to work correctly, then those should not be things that can be changed.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not a Linux expert, it's quite possible that some of these have come further than they were when I had the discussion, or that they are more advanced than I realize. Feel free to educate me rather than just attacking my ignorance and fulfilling the stereotype of slashdot linux zealots/bigots/jerks.
only if you count 5 billion copies of Britney as "many many times more".
Because Billy Bob didn't have a hardon to avenge his daddy's honor.
If Billy Bob "can't keep my hands off the interns" Clinton was still in office, I do believe we would not be considering war with Iraq, yes. We'd have other problems, but not this one.
What, you expect our government to be honest with us? What are you smoking? And does John Ashcroft know about it?
Actually the "Clowns" of which you speak aren't in power any longer. Therefore, no, they aren't the same clowns.
So why exactly aren't the feds out their spending their oh-so-important time on busting cable descramblers, dishTV pirates, etc?
As for the idea of treating tobacco and alcohol consistently with the other drugs, I'm with you there. I don't think there'd be hardly any public support for drug prohibition if it was actually consistent.
"Because Saddam Hussein has been proven to be a bad guy in so many ways, we know he's a bad guy in these new unproven ways too, so we have to go kick his ass."
Software is, after all, in a different class than most the things you buy at sears.
On the other hand, it should be clear that the law doesn't regard reasonableness very highly.
A lot? Try everything. D&D gives you a framework, and consistent rules for engagement so you don't think you're at the GM's whims, but without someone who
- has imagination
- is organized
- is able to keep a group of unruly nerds in line
the game is still unplayable. This was proven to me time and again in a group of us with rotating gamemasters a long while back. Only one GM was worth playing with....I'm not a decent politician either. Got no political sense whatsoever, so the odds of getting elected are nil. Why waste my money that way?
As far as it goes, I think the motivation of my comment is that I think it reasonably unlikely that Bush would have pulled Ashcroft out of the Senate had Ashcroft won the seat; the senate was pretty closely divided as I recall, and I am doubtful that another conservative (wasn't Kit Bond already in the Senate then?) would have come along that could have beaten Mel. Nonetheless, it was meant to be flippant, sorry to offend you so seriously.
Wow, that struck a nerve. Flippant comments really aren't meant to be rational discourse after all.
Like the fraud in florida? shoes & feet.
I would recommend that you inform those who you politically support that conservatives don't support this any more than liberals. And quite honestly, watching congress go like a bunch of sheep to pass this atrocity, it's clear that it's not just a left/right issue. Nonetheless, the self-proclaimed conservatives have draped themselves in the flag and put this abomination forth to begin with (let's hear it for Johnny Ashcroft, who is getting his revenge for being beaten out of his senate seat by a dead man).
The problem is most of us have given up on finding any decent politicians. Quite honestly I can't think of any where I'm from.
Beyond that, if indeed they can do this for "shared" website, what stops them from doing it from non shared ones? Or is child porn ok as along as we can block it from OUR community?
So security (from stupid users) by obscurity is supposed to be good in this context then?
100% a-right. If we KNOW what DRM is built into the players/media, we can make informed choices and NOT buy the crap that has it. Then the marketplace will make it clear that they will not have their way.
The fact remains, if you make something easy to do, someone will do it; you should either make allowances for the fact that they will, or make it so they can't (or at least make it hard to do).
So, if moving some part of the system folder somewhere else is going to fuck up the computer, or worse, NOT fuck up the computer but fuck up the next update, that folder ought to not be changeable by the user. Doing otherwise is not "friendly", it just allows people to blow their legs off.
After all, my car won't let me start the engine in drive, my microwave won't let me start it with the door open, why the hell should my computer let me do patently stupid things?
Actually I'm one of those who's never used the bloody MacOS before in my life, thanks. The point is, if it shouldn't be done, don't allow it to be done. Duh.
It's not whining to point out that "it's my computer". If the goddamn OS *lets* me move things around, then it bloody well better recognize that I've done so, and honor those changes. If the updates have to have it a particular way to work correctly, then those should not be things that can be changed.