There is no way Bill Gates wrote that email. Im sure that behind the scenes Microsoft uses muscle to affect what goes on with linux and enterprises. Also the jab at Mac OS seems relatively out of place. It seems more like a linux user trying to feel good about himself: "ohhh, we have more market share than Mac OS! blah, blah," Not very constructive. However the critiques of the infighting within linux are interesting. Part of the whole linux problem is that people who chose to use it chose so so that they can find solutions to problems that are more to their individual liking. This makes it pretty hard to maintain standards, create a more seamless experience, and keep the systems compatible. The main users of computers in the desktop market place more empahsis on different values than the the average linux user does. Ease of use and compatibility are the two most important issues not "power" (really control but people here seem to prefer to refer to it a power) and stability (stability is important to end users but they dont need a computer that can be left on for 30+ days in a row just one that will crash only once a few hours). If linux wants to cater more to the average desktop user it will have to sacrifice some of the things that make it so beloved by the people who mostly use it now. Such is life to get something you have to sacrifice something else.
yeah i forgot about that one game. splaterhouse was pretty cool. It scared the hell out of me too. I liked Bonk too. I dont have anything against cutesey games per se i just think that consoles can be pretty limiting in what they will allow to be developed and sega is one of the better ones at allowing riskier games.
Yeah but they will have to play by the rules of the people who they develop for. so if they developed for Nintendo games would have to be approved by nintendo. Sega's console has been more open to change and to things that are more edgy. SO what we are losing is not sega's games so much as a more liberal platform.
This kinda sucks cause sega is ussually the only on of the console companies that pushes the envelope. They were the only ones who allowed Mortal Kombat 1 to have blood in it meanwhile Nintendo and the TurboGraphix16 were too busy making nice cuddly games. The dreamcast has some of the most ambitious games ever. Like seaman, and shenmue. Most Playstation stuff is pretty safe "true and tried" stuff. all in all sega has been the one company for innovation and change while all the other ones were playing it safe. This is a pretty sad moment.
Napster is dead! Long live Napster! The only way to insure that a Napster-like service is available and it is not overwhelmed by corporate american it through the creation of an open source application that is easy to use. By easy to use i mean something that your joe-blow average win-mac user can install and use. It has to be at least as easy to use as Napster though it would be helpful if it was even easier to use. There are a lot of loudmouth members of slashdot that say open sourcing will solve all the problems in the world, and also a lot of people who boast about their skills. If we can find enough people who are members of both groups maybe something productive can come out of this Napster fiasco.
IBM could care less about their "relationship" with Intel. In fact for all they care Intel can go to hell. IBM makes their real money from servers. Real servers not silly-winmpy x86 servers. In fact IBM's personal computer bussiness has been losing money for many quarters. Power4 v.s. Sparq v.s. Alpha v.s. Crapytanium is what is it all about. So IBM honestly could care less about Intel and their relationship with them.
Its all fine and dandy about the flying machine but the really important issue is how long till they can use this technology in cars. Then we will have a clean environment and can forget about the middle east:)
Depends on the issue. it is never as simple as that. Sure Democrats want more restrictions on Guns but they also want less restrictions on the first ammendment (as a general rule). Republicans want less regulations for bussinesses but more for private life. No gay mariages, no abortions, no drugs, no alcohol under 21, etc... (these are all blaket statements but in the end people in parties tend to follow party line)
Im sorry but passing by is simply looking at the URL. What he did is more like picking up the gun looking at the chamber going around the room and trying to figure out the trajectory of the bullet and conducting and entire ballistics study
Not to excuse the deplorable behaviour of the FBI but what kind of a jackass do you have to be to start messing around a site right after it has been hacked? That is a sure way to get them (FBI, NSA, etc...) in your life asap. As for them getting the warrants. There are judges who's only job is to produce warrants for searches and seisures. Literaly they are brought the papers and all tehy do is sign them. Is thisa violation of our rights? Sure it is. If you guys are so worried about this dont vote for bush. he said he would appoint judges like Anthony Scalia. Recently Scalia wrote an opinion which seriously undermines our Miranda rights and provides very ambiguous powers to officers of the law when involved in a search. If we get three (thats how many judges the next president will probably get to appoint) more like Scalia we will be one vote short away from losing the Miranda rights. Im not saying that it would be much better under Gore just that they would at least still have to maintain some sort of legal pretense which can make a difference if you choose to take them to court.
The difference between Bush and Gore is so minimal that it does not make any difference which one wins the election.
That is what the republicans want you to think because they only win elections by alienating the electorate. If all the registered voters voted in every election how they are registered the democrast would win in a landslide everytime (60% of registered voters are democrat).
Both want to privatize parts of Social Security.
This is one of the main issues that Gore has with Bush if you go to the Gore website there is talk about how privatizing the SS would eventually bakrupt it around 2005. So from what i've hear and see from the Gore campaign this just isnt true. Gore does not wna to privatize SS and in fact is actively against it.
For all the talk about abortion, the Democratically controlled Senate approved the 2 most conservative judges on the Supreme Court (Scalia and Thomas) -- and Gore voted for both of them!
The composition of the Supreme Court is actually one of the main reasons TO vote for Gore instead of Nader. Im sure that when Scalia and Thomas were appointed there were some reasons for their approval by the legilastive body. However Bush has gone ass far as saying that the Judges he will appoint will be in the mold of Thomas and Scalia whereas I am sure Gore will appoint much more liberal people. If you want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned go ahead and vote for Bush or Nader because Gore has been adamant about his position on abortion in this election.
Gore says he will protect the environment, but I didn't see Clinton/Gore do anything to stop logging in old-growth forests or closing the loophole that allows SUV's to pollute as much as light trucks.
However he did make Clinton fight for the environment when the Republicans wanted to cut funding for the environment when Gingrich was heading the House. In fact Gore was the one who convinced Cliton that the envirnment was a non-negotiable item on the budget issue. Gore has done more for the environment that Nader ever will.
Here in San Francisco, state Democrats want to pave over 2 square miles of SF Bay to make room for more runways at SFO and they are even trying to re-write state law to exempt the project from environmental review -- that was the last straw for me.
So because State Democrats are doing something you dont like you are not voting for Gore? What kinds of control over state democrats do you want Gore to have? Dont be ridiculous.
better than you if you are asking the question. the electoral college does not have to vote for the candidate that people voted for. so even if every popular vote went for Nader and the delegates decided that they didnt want Nader they could vote for Bush and Gore and elect them instead. The popular vote is really a vote for the delegate appointed by the party and then if that delegate receives the most votes he/she can vote for whichever candidate he/she wants to (ussualy being the candidate of their party but not always). There was one election where the candidate that won received less popular votes.
You are being really shortsighted. what is at stake here is the supreme court which will dictate a very large ammount of the deep legal issues for decades. Voting for Nadar is not voting for Bush but it does make Bush more likely to win therefore he will be able to nominate people more to his likeing (people like Scalia and Thomas).
The importance of this election is much more profound than most people think it to be. Theere are big fdiferences between the candidates. Granted the difference between Gore and Bush is not as big as the difference between Nader and Buchanan but that doesnot mean they are the same candidate.
One of the most important things being decided by this election is who will compose the supreme court. If GWB wins he will appoint judges that are in the mold of Anthony Scalia and Clarence Thomas (Bush said this himself). This means that Roe vs. Wade WILL BE OVERTURNED. Our Miranda rights are also in question since Scalia and Thomas were opposed to overturning a a case because the cops failed to read the person their rights and follow due process.
As it is the supreme court tilts on the side of conservativism on almost all cases but Sandra Day O'connor will vote on the more liberal side of hings when womens issues are involved. Look at most of the decition made by the supreme court in the last few years and you will see this patern.
Justices of the supreme court dont retire very often (in eight years Clinton only nominated 2) but we are at a junction were many of them are advance enough in age that a swing in the balance could happen. Most of the important events in this country are dictated by the Supreme court because they have no repercussions to deal with once they are appointed. No reelection to keep them from doing what they think is right. Most equal rights decisions were made by the supreme court (in a time when it was more liberal than now). This election then indirectly (and maybe directly) will set the agenda for the US for the next thirty years. So all you out there who think voting in this election doesnt matter get off your asses stop being idiots and realize you are dead wrong about this. This election is key.
Jeez. If we only had more people with your entrepreneurial drive IBM would be the only computer manufacturers in the world.
Nah but seriously WTF. All these people got money for stupid bussiness ventures that would never work and VCs would have though the person insane if they had asked for the money for the idea in a brick and mortar setting but somehow cause it was on the internet people were fine with it. I guess it was all greed and the fear to miss out on the next big thing.
Im not too interested in defending MOSR. For the most part the site is wishful thinking by someone who likes macs however getting the detail right a few days before the launch might mean that someone from apple actually talks to them (which for the most part i doubt).
I know MOSR is not the most reliable of all sources (they were right about the cube though) but a few months ago they put up a rumors about Apple and IBM trying to get the Power4 to work in Apple's UMA-2. The rumor also had a pretty good link to some info on the Power4 chip. The link gives you a PDF that cover some of the same material in the article of this story but it is still worth a look.
The rumor is now archived at:
http://macosrumors.com/?view=archive/8-00
If you dont feel like going to MOSR the link in the rumor to the Power4 info is:
I dont want to start a flame war or anythig stupid like that. I am trying to teach myself how to program and I am thinking of going with either python or perl as my first language. I am interested in an honest account of the benefits of python over perl and perl over python and if either would make a good first language. I am serious about this so please please please dont use it as an excuse to troll and flame. Advance thanks go to all who post.
Gore makes no claims about not coming froma polititians family. he is upfront about it. He also is smart enough to get into Harvard on his own merit unlike Bush.
Im just saying he is not a redneck or a man from the people or whatever bullshit populist crap his campaign wants people to believe. It is not bad to have a rich family what is bad is being able to slide by to the presidency on it.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no way Bill Gates wrote that email. Im sure that behind the scenes Microsoft uses muscle to affect what goes on with linux and enterprises. Also the jab at Mac OS seems relatively out of place. It seems more like a linux user trying to feel good about himself: "ohhh, we have more market share than Mac OS! blah, blah," Not very constructive. However the critiques of the infighting within linux are interesting. Part of the whole linux problem is that people who chose to use it chose so so that they can find solutions to problems that are more to their individual liking. This makes it pretty hard to maintain standards, create a more seamless experience, and keep the systems compatible. The main users of computers in the desktop market place more empahsis on different values than the the average linux user does. Ease of use and compatibility are the two most important issues not "power" (really control but people here seem to prefer to refer to it a power) and stability (stability is important to end users but they dont need a computer that can be left on for 30+ days in a row just one that will crash only once a few hours). If linux wants to cater more to the average desktop user it will have to sacrifice some of the things that make it so beloved by the people who mostly use it now. Such is life to get something you have to sacrifice something else.
yeah i forgot about that one game. splaterhouse was pretty cool. It scared the hell out of me too. I liked Bonk too. I dont have anything against cutesey games per se i just think that consoles can be pretty limiting in what they will allow to be developed and sega is one of the better ones at allowing riskier games.
Yeah but they will have to play by the rules of the people who they develop for. so if they developed for Nintendo games would have to be approved by nintendo. Sega's console has been more open to change and to things that are more edgy. SO what we are losing is not sega's games so much as a more liberal platform.
This kinda sucks cause sega is ussually the only on of the console companies that pushes the envelope. They were the only ones who allowed Mortal Kombat 1 to have blood in it meanwhile Nintendo and the TurboGraphix16 were too busy making nice cuddly games. The dreamcast has some of the most ambitious games ever. Like seaman, and shenmue. Most Playstation stuff is pretty safe "true and tried" stuff. all in all sega has been the one company for innovation and change while all the other ones were playing it safe. This is a pretty sad moment.
Napster is dead! Long live Napster! The only way to insure that a Napster-like service is available and it is not overwhelmed by corporate american it through the creation of an open source application that is easy to use. By easy to use i mean something that your joe-blow average win-mac user can install and use. It has to be at least as easy to use as Napster though it would be helpful if it was even easier to use. There are a lot of loudmouth members of slashdot that say open sourcing will solve all the problems in the world, and also a lot of people who boast about their skills. If we can find enough people who are members of both groups maybe something productive can come out of this Napster fiasco.
IBM could care less about their "relationship" with Intel. In fact for all they care Intel can go to hell. IBM makes their real money from servers. Real servers not silly-winmpy x86 servers. In fact IBM's personal computer bussiness has been losing money for many quarters. Power4 v.s. Sparq v.s. Alpha v.s. Crapytanium is what is it all about. So IBM honestly could care less about Intel and their relationship with them.
Its all fine and dandy about the flying machine but the really important issue is how long till they can use this technology in cars. Then we will have a clean environment and can forget about the middle east :)
Depends on the issue. it is never as simple as that. Sure Democrats want more restrictions on Guns but they also want less restrictions on the first ammendment (as a general rule). Republicans want less regulations for bussinesses but more for private life. No gay mariages, no abortions, no drugs, no alcohol under 21, etc... (these are all blaket statements but in the end people in parties tend to follow party line)
Im sorry but passing by is simply looking at the URL. What he did is more like picking up the gun looking at the chamber going around the room and trying to figure out the trajectory of the bullet and conducting and entire ballistics study
Not to excuse the deplorable behaviour of the FBI but what kind of a jackass do you have to be to start messing around a site right after it has been hacked? That is a sure way to get them (FBI, NSA, etc...) in your life asap. As for them getting the warrants. There are judges who's only job is to produce warrants for searches and seisures. Literaly they are brought the papers and all tehy do is sign them. Is thisa violation of our rights? Sure it is. If you guys are so worried about this dont vote for bush. he said he would appoint judges like Anthony Scalia. Recently Scalia wrote an opinion which seriously undermines our Miranda rights and provides very ambiguous powers to officers of the law when involved in a search. If we get three (thats how many judges the next president will probably get to appoint) more like Scalia we will be one vote short away from losing the Miranda rights. Im not saying that it would be much better under Gore just that they would at least still have to maintain some sort of legal pretense which can make a difference if you choose to take them to court.
The difference between Bush and Gore is so minimal that it does not make any difference which one wins the election.
That is what the republicans want you to think because they only win elections by alienating the electorate. If all the registered voters voted in every election how they are registered the democrast would win in a landslide everytime (60% of registered voters are democrat).
Both want to privatize parts of Social Security.
This is one of the main issues that Gore has with Bush if you go to the Gore website there is talk about how privatizing the SS would eventually bakrupt it around 2005. So from what i've hear and see from the Gore campaign this just isnt true. Gore does not wna to privatize SS and in fact is actively against it.
For all the talk about abortion, the Democratically controlled Senate approved the 2 most conservative judges on the Supreme Court (Scalia and Thomas) -- and Gore voted for both of them!
The composition of the Supreme Court is actually one of the main reasons TO vote for Gore instead of Nader. Im sure that when Scalia and Thomas were appointed there were some reasons for their approval by the legilastive body. However Bush has gone ass far as saying that the Judges he will appoint will be in the mold of Thomas and Scalia whereas I am sure Gore will appoint much more liberal people. If you want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned go ahead and vote for Bush or Nader because Gore has been adamant about his position on abortion in this election.
Gore says he will protect the environment, but I didn't see Clinton/Gore do anything to stop logging in old-growth forests or closing the loophole that allows SUV's to pollute as much as light trucks.
However he did make Clinton fight for the environment when the Republicans wanted to cut funding for the environment when Gingrich was heading the House. In fact Gore was the one who convinced Cliton that the envirnment was a non-negotiable item on the budget issue. Gore has done more for the environment that Nader ever will.
Here in San Francisco, state Democrats want to pave over 2 square miles of SF Bay to make room for more runways at SFO and they are even trying to re-write state law to exempt the project from environmental review -- that was the last straw for me.
So because State Democrats are doing something you dont like you are not voting for Gore? What kinds of control over state democrats do you want Gore to have? Dont be ridiculous.
better than you if you are asking the question. the electoral college does not have to vote for the candidate that people voted for. so even if every popular vote went for Nader and the delegates decided that they didnt want Nader they could vote for Bush and Gore and elect them instead. The popular vote is really a vote for the delegate appointed by the party and then if that delegate receives the most votes he/she can vote for whichever candidate he/she wants to (ussualy being the candidate of their party but not always). There was one election where the candidate that won received less popular votes.
You are being really shortsighted. what is at stake here is the supreme court which will dictate a very large ammount of the deep legal issues for decades. Voting for Nadar is not voting for Bush but it does make Bush more likely to win therefore he will be able to nominate people more to his likeing (people like Scalia and Thomas).
25% of citizens 18-24 cannot name both major party presidential candidates and 70% cannot name their running mates
and this is why we have an electoral college...
This is an area where both Windows and Linux lag behing Mac OS.
Now all the record companies are going to sue the poor guy.
The importance of this election is much more profound than most people think it to be. Theere are big fdiferences between the candidates. Granted the difference between Gore and Bush is not as big as the difference between Nader and Buchanan but that doesnot mean they are the same candidate.
One of the most important things being decided by this election is who will compose the supreme court. If GWB wins he will appoint judges that are in the mold of Anthony Scalia and Clarence Thomas (Bush said this himself). This means that Roe vs. Wade WILL BE OVERTURNED. Our Miranda rights are also in question since Scalia and Thomas were opposed to overturning a a case because the cops failed to read the person their rights and follow due process.
As it is the supreme court tilts on the side of conservativism on almost all cases but Sandra Day O'connor will vote on the more liberal side of hings when womens issues are involved. Look at most of the decition made by the supreme court in the last few years and you will see this patern.
Justices of the supreme court dont retire very often (in eight years Clinton only nominated 2) but we are at a junction were many of them are advance enough in age that a swing in the balance could happen. Most of the important events in this country are dictated by the Supreme court because they have no repercussions to deal with once they are appointed. No reelection to keep them from doing what they think is right. Most equal rights decisions were made by the supreme court (in a time when it was more liberal than now). This election then indirectly (and maybe directly) will set the agenda for the US for the next thirty years. So all you out there who think voting in this election doesnt matter get off your asses stop being idiots and realize you are dead wrong about this. This election is key.
Jeez. If we only had more people with your entrepreneurial drive IBM would be the only computer manufacturers in the world.
Nah but seriously WTF. All these people got money for stupid bussiness ventures that would never work and VCs would have though the person insane if they had asked for the money for the idea in a brick and mortar setting but somehow cause it was on the internet people were fine with it. I guess it was all greed and the fear to miss out on the next big thing.
"We hoped we were partners with a company that would concentrate on technology innovation rather than seeking to collect a toll from other companies,"
Is he talking about Rambus or about M$?
Im not too interested in defending MOSR. For the most part the site is wishful thinking by someone who likes macs however getting the detail right a few days before the launch might mean that someone from apple actually talks to them (which for the most part i doubt).
I know MOSR is not the most reliable of all sources (they were right about the cube though) but a few months ago they put up a rumors about Apple and IBM trying to get the Power4 to work in Apple's UMA-2. The rumor also had a pretty good link to some info on the Power4 chip. The link gives you a PDF that cover some of the same material in the article of this story but it is still worth a look.
p ower4.html
The rumor is now archived at:
http://macosrumors.com/?view=archive/8-00
If you dont feel like going to MOSR the link in the rumor to the Power4 info is:
http://www.austin.ibm.com/resource/features/1999/
I dont want to start a flame war or anythig stupid like that. I am trying to teach myself how to program and I am thinking of going with either python or perl as my first language. I am interested in an honest account of the benefits of python over perl and perl over python and if either would make a good first language. I am serious about this so please please please dont use it as an excuse to troll and flame. Advance thanks go to all who post.
sorry about that i was in a hurry when i wrote it.
Gore makes no claims about not coming froma polititians family. he is upfront about it. He also is smart enough to get into Harvard on his own merit unlike Bush.
Im just saying he is not a redneck or a man from the people or whatever bullshit populist crap his campaign wants people to believe. It is not bad to have a rich family what is bad is being able to slide by to the presidency on it.