You can really only swing not having a vehicle in the U.S. if you live in an urban area. The U.S. is much more spread out than European countries, which makes having some form of automotive transportation a necessity. I commute about 55 miles every day to work, something that I am very unwilling to do on a bicycle (getting hot and sweaty in work clothes should be regulated to time spent with the secretary in the janitor's closet)
When I lived in the city, I didn't need my car much at all. I took the bus or the elevated train (woohoo, Chicago!), which effectively took care of my needs.
If they had made class with that nucular (heh) waste as an ingredient, the waste wouldn't have the problem of leaking. I forget what that method is called, but it was a really fantastic idea. It didn't remove the radioactivity, but it at least contained the waste so that it wouldn't get into ground water. The problem is that a bunch of frightened greenie lawyers sued to make that method of storage illegal.
Now, we have to resort to barrels that could become leaky.
Check it out: " I decided to write a UNIX-like system for my students to play with. Since I had already written two books at this point, one on computer architecture and one on computer networks, it seemed reasonable to describe the system in a new book on operating systems, "
There are three links to books that he's written. Dude, if there's any better publicity machine than "Access Bollywood!," it is slashdot. He is totally pimpin his books.
Clever man. I might disagree with him about his whole micro kernel w/ massive messaging view, but I have to admire his pimpin abilities.
If the guy is going to sue over a patent violation, I'm sure that there's some sort of trespassing law that could be used. It would be like if some dude decided to let his dog crap all over my yard, there's got to be a law that governs this.
If he sues me for selling his GM canola, I'll sue his ass for letting his crap get onto my private property. Turnabout is fair play.
That sounds like the 30-45 day return policy, not the warrenty. Considering that it was a new computer, and that it was Best Buy, I'd be willing to bet that the warrenty was void and Best Buy did the exchange.
Hmm. I've read LOTR multiple times, and I have no complaints about the movies. They follow the books as faithfully as a movie can follow a book. The story wasn't changed a whole lot, but I can see where hardcore loyalists would be annoyed.
You can't expect movies to follow a multi-thousand page book, otherwise we'd have ended up with 9 movies of the same length. Different mediums force different methods. I think that Peter did a nice homage to the book.
This of course changes the look of the prequels, which annoys some people, but remains true to the spirit of the franchise. if the trend continues, and the final three eps are made, I fully expect them to be fully CGI.
This would be caused by the mass acceptance by the actor's guild that the SW franchise is a good way to be rediculed. Thus, future iterations of the Star Wars franchise will be CGI for the reason that there are no actors that want to appear in it. The voice-overs for these CG characters will be none other than George Lucas himself, and maybe John Travolta and Kevin Costner. George will inhale helium to voice the parts of Leia.
There are other forms of Logic that have been invented, and each holds it's own set of truths. You cannot say that Logic itself is a natural thing. If it were, you'd be able to show logic to me. It exists in the mind of man, and only in the mind of man. It is expressed through language, which is also an invention of man.
If you've ever read Hume, you'd have to ask yourself "How is anything self-evident?"
And seriously... How can you truly be sure of anything that exists? How do you know that you aren't just the passive receptor for a series of experiences, like the beach is a receptor for the tides? There's no way to truly know anything, so using the term "axiom" is completely dependant on some sort of subjective set of values.
It is a tenet in Judeo-Christian belief that God exists, created the universe, and loves all humans. It cannot be tested, and is therefore an axiom for those religions. The single biggest issue, however, is not if there is a God, but who is God.
The majority of people with a higher education believe in some God. Those with an education in science may follow the tendancy to not believe that there is a higher being, but they are definitely not the majority. The highest form of thought, philosophy, and the majority of philosophers out there have established that there is or was a God. There are the few that pointedly disbelieve, but if you really examine those philosophers, they in themselves are supporting themselves as Gods.
In the end, it comes down to whether or not you believe that someone can affect your destiny and situation in life, what you experience exists or is a delusion, and whether or not it is because you experience it, or because you believe it. On the one hand, you have empiricism, which basically states that man is the measure (and measurer) of all things. On the other, you have Platonism, Kantian belief, Spinozan belief, Christian belief, and a sleiu of others.
Religion is not a matter of logic. You cannot prove that faith is logical or not. You might as well prove to me that the color that you call green is the same exact color that I experience and call green. You can't. If you state it as so, you'd be "begging the question." The point is that with religion, it is an a priori belief, something that has to be accepted as true, even though it cannot be proven true.
Logic is the invention of man, which helps man to become the center of his own universe. If man can look at it and prove it, then man has mastered and understood it. Science and logic are just another religion that someone can subscribe to, with man being God. There really is nothing more to it.
It doesn't matter "how" or "why." What matters is what is. Do you have faith in God? If so, what God do you have faith in?
And then they sue you for some sort of false representation, defamation, or fraud. That, and you really couldn't state that they are the parent in court, lest you purjure yourself. There are too many complexities that would result from doing this sort of thing, and whoever does do it would land themselves a number of years in jail.
The judge would probably throw the case out of court once adequate proof of the true parent is obtained.
He can legally machine his own Chevy. He'd probably have to leave off the Chevy logo, since that's a trademark issue, but he do the rest of the car. Patents cover the sale of protected stuff, not the manufacture of it. Patents exist to give you a short-termed monopoly over the product, but if I want to build my own, I can do so.
Fritz Attaway, executive vice president of the MPAA
This is the idiot in management. We also have plenty of idiots in management of our government, considering the fact that the DMCA exists.
Lastly, if anyone can express something in two lines that resonates true with the rest of the crowd, it should be admired. It's much better than having some incredibly long-winded rant that resolves to the same sentiment.
It is difficult for MS to change protocols for existing products. If they do, then a patch would have to be applied to all existing Outlook versions, so that Outlook can support the change.
The most ubiquitous office version, I imagine, is Office 2000, second to Office XP. Both of these came out before Exchange 2003 came out, so Exchange 2003 has to be backwards compatible.
MS would have to force people to upgrade their Exchange servers, as well as all versions of Office that connect to it. Considering the increasing demand for upgraded MS products (my company still uses Win2k, anyone else?) I doubt that this would happen.
The speedometer, on the other hand, gives you your instantaneous speed - which is the derivative (calculus term) of your position (odometer) with respect to time.
Just to nitpick, but velocity is the result of the integral of position with respect to time, not the derivitive. Here's the basic physics terms:
Acceleration : m/s^2
Velocity: Derivative of acceleration, m/s
Position/Displacement: Derivative of velocity, m
You seem to be knowledgable, but don't ever forget the basics.;-)
Crypto is an optional thing, but where I went to school, Math through DiffEq was required. We didn't get a minor, though we had enough credits in Math to do so, because the school didn't want to appear "easy."
Anyway, we had way more math through the CS department than just plain old Calc + Multi Variant Calculus. We had logic! And when we were done with that, we had machines! Grammars, Automata theory, and last but not least, Algorithms. Those are all math courses, but the majority of Math majors didn't take those (unless they had a special interest). I'm sure that the Math department offered something similar, but not in the context and language of computer science.
Anyway, if you get through school and have no problem writing the same program in a functional language and a procedural language, you'll be on your way. The functional languages are really hard to grasp for those hardcore procedural guys, but they are important, and not just for AI. If you are experienced with the lambda calculus, it shows up in the way that you code. Not only does the amount of work that you do decrease (lines of code go way down), you also find yourself thinking in several branches towards a solution to the problem.
A CS degree from a good reputation school should be invaluable to businesses. If you have a grad from one, then it's more than likely that you'll get good quality inventive stuff out of them, even if they suck for the first couple of months (fresh out of college people are like that.)
And that's all bullshit. Believe me. I'm a computer science major, and I connect web sites to databases. Everything that you do in the business world (business apps, yada) has very little to do with pure computer science.
The closest thing to it is probably doing the DB work itself, and making sure that your tables are normalized, and that you have the keys / indices done correctly. Sorry, but everything in your list is basically just a concept in programming, which you can learn outside of the realm of computer science.
You can't really use that defense though, because Comcast has explicitly said "Thou shalt not connect more than one computer to this cable connection" in their rules and regs. Telling them that your access poing is open and allowing many connections is admitting that you're braking their rules, which will lead to a disconnection.
If you own a different connection from the standard one, which is rare, then there would be less of a problem.
I'm not too sure where you're getting your information on IT managers. When you're a manager in IT, you have to be concerned not only about the latest software, you also have to support every peice of ancestor software that is still in use. In many, many cases, this software was written some time in the 80's. This removes the "shiny things" from the equation, since the managers are looking for "less shiny" things.
If MS marketed an OS that was 100% backwards compatible with every MS OS, and that it is stable, secure, and powerful, then every IT manager would be biting on it. Of course, new features would be bene, but they wouldn't be the selling point. Many IT departments are just now getting into Active Directory, realizing that support for NT Domains has finally dropped off of the end of the world.
An IT manager won't be concerned with a 3-D accelerated desktop, because it just won't be useful to them. Non of the in-house apps that they use require this desktop, nor can they be run more efficiently. Then again, there's also the issue of a considerable investment in hardware. Most machines that are purchased for business have all integrated components, and if it could be found without a sound card, so much the better.
MS hopes the sell the flash, but unfortunately it is you that has bitten on the MS marketing. Normal IT guys are going to look at it and wonder just why it's necessary for them to upgrade, when what they have works just fine. It seems that the only way for MS to push businesses into buying / upgrading is for MS to drop support for the OS completely.
Lastly, even IT managers have to answer to the bean counters. They all have budgets, and those budgets were cut drastically in 2002-2003.
I know that I don't have any love for the big behemoth from Redmond, but I'd work for them. They pay well. You get to work on really cool stuff. They have a good working atmosphere, a bit aggressive in the worker-competition department, but overall I've heard good things. That, and you don't have to work for them forever, and lastly, it looks good on your resume.
MS is good in some ways, bad in others. They are just like any other company (IBM, Sun, Apple, etc). And no, I don't care if Karl Marx says that I'm a slave to money, because I'm one of those really high paid slaves.
The problem is that Linux does have a center of gravity in Linus and his maintainers. Sure, someone can fork the kernel, but the fork would be called "Linux."
Any patches you write need to go to the maintainers if you want it in a release. You can apply your own patch to your own kernel, but this doesn't affect the actual codebase of the kernel itself. These patches are looked over, then accepted or denied. It's not like you have the option of having your code directly injected into the main release's codebase without needing approval... unless you're Linus or one of the main decision makers.
Balmer also has issues with the whole "manageability, compatibility, and security" thing. Since when has MS willingly worked on software that was 100% compatible, and 100% to spec with an outside standard? Shit, even their implementation of HTML is non-standard. Security? That's a laugh. You don't even need to be a hacker or script kiddie to be able to infect everything on your network... you just have to be unwitting enough to preview an email message, or run IIS.
The last is manageability. I have issues with this, because MS has organized the heck out of every administration task, to the point that I don't know where anything is! When MS has things like ifconfig, lsmod/insmod/rmmod/depmod,/proc,/etc, then it'll be manageable. If I want to change a particular setting, all I need to do at home is surf through/etc and find the.conf file that specifies what I need changed. If I want to run multiple kernels, all I need to do is mount/boot and modify grub.conf. If I want to completely remove a browser from the system, and replace it with something else, I can. If I want to completely replace the desktop, I can. Heck, I can do all of that without rebooting too (except for the grub thing.)
Windows is like a bicycle, compared to the Harley that is *nix in the manageability department.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine what the licensing fee on the OS would be... Especially if it's per processor.
No wonder the Cornell cluster was donated.
You can really only swing not having a vehicle in the U.S. if you live in an urban area. The U.S. is much more spread out than European countries, which makes having some form of automotive transportation a necessity. I commute about 55 miles every day to work, something that I am very unwilling to do on a bicycle (getting hot and sweaty in work clothes should be regulated to time spent with the secretary in the janitor's closet)
When I lived in the city, I didn't need my car much at all. I took the bus or the elevated train (woohoo, Chicago!), which effectively took care of my needs.
If they had made class with that nucular (heh) waste as an ingredient, the waste wouldn't have the problem of leaking. I forget what that method is called, but it was a really fantastic idea. It didn't remove the radioactivity, but it at least contained the waste so that it wouldn't get into ground water. The problem is that a bunch of frightened greenie lawyers sued to make that method of storage illegal.
Now, we have to resort to barrels that could become leaky.
More like: Introduce bill for taxing of oils. Watch pockets of various reps and senators get very fat. Watch bill die.
Check it out: " I decided to write a UNIX-like system for my students to play with. Since I had already written two books at this point, one on computer architecture and one on computer networks, it seemed reasonable to describe the system in a new book on operating systems, "
There are three links to books that he's written. Dude, if there's any better publicity machine than "Access Bollywood!," it is slashdot. He is totally pimpin his books.
Clever man. I might disagree with him about his whole micro kernel w/ massive messaging view, but I have to admire his pimpin abilities.
If the guy is going to sue over a patent violation, I'm sure that there's some sort of trespassing law that could be used. It would be like if some dude decided to let his dog crap all over my yard, there's got to be a law that governs this.
If he sues me for selling his GM canola, I'll sue his ass for letting his crap get onto my private property. Turnabout is fair play.
That sounds like the 30-45 day return policy, not the warrenty. Considering that it was a new computer, and that it was Best Buy, I'd be willing to bet that the warrenty was void and Best Buy did the exchange.
Hmm. I've read LOTR multiple times, and I have no complaints about the movies. They follow the books as faithfully as a movie can follow a book. The story wasn't changed a whole lot, but I can see where hardcore loyalists would be annoyed.
You can't expect movies to follow a multi-thousand page book, otherwise we'd have ended up with 9 movies of the same length. Different mediums force different methods. I think that Peter did a nice homage to the book.
This of course changes the look of the prequels, which annoys some people, but remains true to the spirit of the franchise. if the trend continues, and the final three eps are made, I fully expect them to be fully CGI.
This would be caused by the mass acceptance by the actor's guild that the SW franchise is a good way to be rediculed. Thus, future iterations of the Star Wars franchise will be CGI for the reason that there are no actors that want to appear in it. The voice-overs for these CG characters will be none other than George Lucas himself, and maybe John Travolta and Kevin Costner. George will inhale helium to voice the parts of Leia.
Logic is an invention. It was created by someone to try to explain the natural things that they experienced.
Some useful links
There are other forms of Logic that have been invented, and each holds it's own set of truths. You cannot say that Logic itself is a natural thing. If it were, you'd be able to show logic to me. It exists in the mind of man, and only in the mind of man. It is expressed through language, which is also an invention of man.
If you've ever read Hume, you'd have to ask yourself "How is anything self-evident?"
And seriously... How can you truly be sure of anything that exists? How do you know that you aren't just the passive receptor for a series of experiences, like the beach is a receptor for the tides? There's no way to truly know anything, so using the term "axiom" is completely dependant on some sort of subjective set of values.
The problem is that the moment you comment on the newness factor, someone else with a lower UID responds to you. Just watch....
It is a tenet in Judeo-Christian belief that God exists, created the universe, and loves all humans. It cannot be tested, and is therefore an axiom for those religions. The single biggest issue, however, is not if there is a God, but who is God.
The majority of people with a higher education believe in some God. Those with an education in science may follow the tendancy to not believe that there is a higher being, but they are definitely not the majority. The highest form of thought, philosophy, and the majority of philosophers out there have established that there is or was a God. There are the few that pointedly disbelieve, but if you really examine those philosophers, they in themselves are supporting themselves as Gods.
In the end, it comes down to whether or not you believe that someone can affect your destiny and situation in life, what you experience exists or is a delusion, and whether or not it is because you experience it, or because you believe it. On the one hand, you have empiricism, which basically states that man is the measure (and measurer) of all things. On the other, you have Platonism, Kantian belief, Spinozan belief, Christian belief, and a sleiu of others.
Religion is not a matter of logic. You cannot prove that faith is logical or not. You might as well prove to me that the color that you call green is the same exact color that I experience and call green. You can't. If you state it as so, you'd be "begging the question." The point is that with religion, it is an a priori belief, something that has to be accepted as true, even though it cannot be proven true.
Logic is the invention of man, which helps man to become the center of his own universe. If man can look at it and prove it, then man has mastered and understood it. Science and logic are just another religion that someone can subscribe to, with man being God. There really is nothing more to it.
It doesn't matter "how" or "why." What matters is what is . Do you have faith in God? If so, what God do you have faith in?
And then they sue you for some sort of false representation, defamation, or fraud. That, and you really couldn't state that they are the parent in court, lest you purjure yourself. There are too many complexities that would result from doing this sort of thing, and whoever does do it would land themselves a number of years in jail.
The judge would probably throw the case out of court once adequate proof of the true parent is obtained.
Wrong.
He can legally machine his own Chevy. He'd probably have to leave off the Chevy logo, since that's a trademark issue, but he do the rest of the car. Patents cover the sale of protected stuff, not the manufacture of it. Patents exist to give you a short-termed monopoly over the product, but if I want to build my own, I can do so.
Fritz Attaway, executive vice president of the MPAA
This is the idiot in management. We also have plenty of idiots in management of our government, considering the fact that the DMCA exists.
Lastly, if anyone can express something in two lines that resonates true with the rest of the crowd, it should be admired. It's much better than having some incredibly long-winded rant that resolves to the same sentiment.
Copyright law defines what we can't do, not what we can do. If a "right" isn't defined, then it is assumed to be legal. This guy needs a swirly.
In response to 2:
It is difficult for MS to change protocols for existing products. If they do, then a patch would have to be applied to all existing Outlook versions, so that Outlook can support the change.
The most ubiquitous office version, I imagine, is Office 2000, second to Office XP. Both of these came out before Exchange 2003 came out, so Exchange 2003 has to be backwards compatible.
MS would have to force people to upgrade their Exchange servers, as well as all versions of Office that connect to it. Considering the increasing demand for upgraded MS products (my company still uses Win2k, anyone else?) I doubt that this would happen.
The speedometer, on the other hand, gives you your instantaneous speed - which is the derivative (calculus term) of your position (odometer) with respect to time.
Just to nitpick, but velocity is the result of the integral of position with respect to time, not the derivitive. Here's the basic physics terms:
You seem to be knowledgable, but don't ever forget the basics. ;-)
Crypto is an optional thing, but where I went to school, Math through DiffEq was required. We didn't get a minor, though we had enough credits in Math to do so, because the school didn't want to appear "easy."
Anyway, we had way more math through the CS department than just plain old Calc + Multi Variant Calculus. We had logic! And when we were done with that, we had machines! Grammars, Automata theory, and last but not least, Algorithms. Those are all math courses, but the majority of Math majors didn't take those (unless they had a special interest). I'm sure that the Math department offered something similar, but not in the context and language of computer science.
Anyway, if you get through school and have no problem writing the same program in a functional language and a procedural language, you'll be on your way. The functional languages are really hard to grasp for those hardcore procedural guys, but they are important, and not just for AI. If you are experienced with the lambda calculus, it shows up in the way that you code. Not only does the amount of work that you do decrease (lines of code go way down), you also find yourself thinking in several branches towards a solution to the problem.
A CS degree from a good reputation school should be invaluable to businesses. If you have a grad from one, then it's more than likely that you'll get good quality inventive stuff out of them, even if they suck for the first couple of months (fresh out of college people are like that.)
And that's all bullshit. Believe me. I'm a computer science major, and I connect web sites to databases. Everything that you do in the business world (business apps, yada) has very little to do with pure computer science.
The closest thing to it is probably doing the DB work itself, and making sure that your tables are normalized, and that you have the keys / indices done correctly. Sorry, but everything in your list is basically just a concept in programming, which you can learn outside of the realm of computer science.
You can't really use that defense though, because Comcast has explicitly said "Thou shalt not connect more than one computer to this cable connection" in their rules and regs. Telling them that your access poing is open and allowing many connections is admitting that you're braking their rules, which will lead to a disconnection.
If you own a different connection from the standard one, which is rare, then there would be less of a problem.
I'm not too sure where you're getting your information on IT managers. When you're a manager in IT, you have to be concerned not only about the latest software, you also have to support every peice of ancestor software that is still in use. In many, many cases, this software was written some time in the 80's. This removes the "shiny things" from the equation, since the managers are looking for "less shiny" things.
If MS marketed an OS that was 100% backwards compatible with every MS OS, and that it is stable, secure, and powerful, then every IT manager would be biting on it. Of course, new features would be bene, but they wouldn't be the selling point. Many IT departments are just now getting into Active Directory, realizing that support for NT Domains has finally dropped off of the end of the world.
An IT manager won't be concerned with a 3-D accelerated desktop, because it just won't be useful to them. Non of the in-house apps that they use require this desktop, nor can they be run more efficiently. Then again, there's also the issue of a considerable investment in hardware. Most machines that are purchased for business have all integrated components, and if it could be found without a sound card, so much the better.
MS hopes the sell the flash, but unfortunately it is you that has bitten on the MS marketing. Normal IT guys are going to look at it and wonder just why it's necessary for them to upgrade, when what they have works just fine. It seems that the only way for MS to push businesses into buying / upgrading is for MS to drop support for the OS completely.
Lastly, even IT managers have to answer to the bean counters. They all have budgets, and those budgets were cut drastically in 2002-2003.
I know that I don't have any love for the big behemoth from Redmond, but I'd work for them. They pay well. You get to work on really cool stuff. They have a good working atmosphere, a bit aggressive in the worker-competition department, but overall I've heard good things. That, and you don't have to work for them forever, and lastly, it looks good on your resume.
MS is good in some ways, bad in others. They are just like any other company (IBM, Sun, Apple, etc). And no, I don't care if Karl Marx says that I'm a slave to money, because I'm one of those really high paid slaves.
The problem is that Linux does have a center of gravity in Linus and his maintainers. Sure, someone can fork the kernel, but the fork would be called "Linux."
Any patches you write need to go to the maintainers if you want it in a release. You can apply your own patch to your own kernel, but this doesn't affect the actual codebase of the kernel itself. These patches are looked over, then accepted or denied. It's not like you have the option of having your code directly injected into the main release's codebase without needing approval... unless you're Linus or one of the main decision makers.
Balmer also has issues with the whole "manageability, compatibility, and security" thing. Since when has MS willingly worked on software that was 100% compatible, and 100% to spec with an outside standard? Shit, even their implementation of HTML is non-standard. Security? That's a laugh. You don't even need to be a hacker or script kiddie to be able to infect everything on your network... you just have to be unwitting enough to preview an email message, or run IIS.
The last is manageability. I have issues with this, because MS has organized the heck out of every administration task, to the point that I don't know where anything is! When MS has things like ifconfig, lsmod/insmod/rmmod/depmod, /proc, /etc, then it'll be manageable. If I want to change a particular setting, all I need to do at home is surf through /etc and find the .conf file that specifies what I need changed. If I want to run multiple kernels, all I need to do is mount /boot and modify grub.conf. If I want to completely remove a browser from the system, and replace it with something else, I can. If I want to completely replace the desktop, I can. Heck, I can do all of that without rebooting too (except for the grub thing.)
Windows is like a bicycle, compared to the Harley that is *nix in the manageability department.