Morals aren't a physical property. Good isn't an attribute; it's a perception. And it can change.
And ask a colour-blind person, or one of those people with the extra thingies (technical term) in their eyes that let them see more colours, what colour that stop sign is. Oops, it's subjective.
Manged to convince Imperial Japan that no, they wern't an indistructable master race eradicating gaijin left, right, and center. And led to some incredible scientific achievements, not limited in the least to the computer you used to post, or the Internet that you posted on.
A sword, for example, is clearly a military
tool. Its evolution, and its purpose, is
inherent in its form. It is designed to injure
and kill.
And doesn't that sword, designed to injure and kill, do good when it's existance helps convince people who happen to like the land that I live on that maybe they shouldn't kill me and my family to take it? Is this a contrived example?
Exactly. I can argue that Mother Theresa was a selfish, evil person. I can argue that she devoted her life to helping the less fortunate so that she would secure her place in Paradise; self-advancement. The side effect, of course, would not justify the fact that, in this argument, she only did it to advance herself.
Of course morality and 'good/evil' are personal, subjective concepts. To believe that there is an aboslute good and an absolute evil is limiting and self-defeating, and also very very sad, as it will prevent one from every understanding somebody else's motiviations.
Hmmm. Sounds kinda radical. Are you actually saying that as the size and complexity of a system increases, not only does the relative number of defects increase (even if only in a linear fashion; 10 percent of 100 being more than 10 percent of 10) but the amount of work and effort must also increase with the complexity of said system, resulting, in a capatalist system, with greater compensation?
Hmmm. Don't think so.
Of course complexity increases. People expect their computer to be able to do more out of the box. Five years ago, video playback was a gimmick. Now it's an expectation. Email was an affectation (amoungst the great unwashed, at least.) Now it's a standard communication tool. And so on.
Of course you're paying for the 'features;' all the OS is supposed to do is sit between software and hardware; it's a translation layer.
Of COURSE they don't provide you with everything you need to know. Of COURSE they won't just throw you in the cockpit and you fly off.
But first, lets look at some historical precident. At the beginning of WW2, a pilot needed an extensive education, flight school training, lots of hours on the stick. Oh, and older than a teenager.
By the end of WW2, youngsters were going through eight weeks(!) of flight school, and being sent to the front lines.
Now take an Iowa farmboy who signed up because he never wants to look at wheat again, then take a look at a San Fran boy, who grew up on flight sims and what not. Which one, do you think, is going to take much more readily to the concept of flight physics?
And I'll point out that live training like MILES gear and such is as much to conidition soldiers against combat reluctance than anything else.:-)
Exactly! And through such time-honored methods, a real sysadmin would GET his test boxes!
At the very least, a real sysadmin would put all of the pros and cons into an email to somebody with Authorith, and get a cya email back.:-)
Yes, I know all of these points. I also know that any sys admin worth his salt would never use one. A real sys admin would have a test box, preferably a test lab, and would test each and every patch before ever DREAMING of putting it in a production envrionment. A real sys admin would also, even after doing said testing, never install off of a third party server. Too untrustworthy.
What I was attempting to point out was that if Microsoft did the exact same thing, and I mean EXACTLY,/. would be up in arms.
I'll also point out that I highly doubt that even 95 percent of the Linux User community could competently 'check [the source] out if need be.' There's a big leap between hello world, understanding c/c++ and understanding whatever networking protocol is at hand.
fictional reprint
A peer of mine is a sys admin for a group of Windows 2002 machines. Once a week AutoWindowsUpdate runs to automatically get all the security updates and install them.
This is a check box for him. According to him, it will even download an update to IIS, stop the WebPublishing service, install the update, then restart the service -- all while he twiddles his thumbs and thinks about lunch.
With this kind of automation, who knows what kind of holes and backdoors M$ is automatically installing for him, and who knows what data it's sending back? And how does he know that it's not installing a new worm?
</fictional reprint>
Oh wait, I forgot. It's differnet when Linux does something.
They can please the fifty percent of the people who want it when it was promised, or they can please the other fifty percent who want it 'when it's done.'
Or they can pull an Ion STORM and live off of the hype for four full years, then sink within six months.
That's why Windows 2000 was reportedly shipped with 63,000 action items still unfinished
Just so you know:
"'Windows' should be capatilzed in dialog box #5453234" is an 'action item.'
"Don't like the shade of blue used for the desktop" is an action item.
"resource misspelled on dialog box #5334" is an action item.
"Word 1.0 for DOS 2.0 doesn't load properly" is an action item.
"Variable blah is defined but never used according to mslint" is an action item.
Don't assume they're all horrible bugs or vicious security holes.
In other words, lets say you're doing three frames per second, and you hit your 'turn 180 degrees to look behind yourself, then turn back' button. You'll see three images; straight ahead, straight back, straight ahead.
Now lets say you're doing thirty frames per second. You'll see straight ahead, 18 degrees to the right, 36 degrees to the right, 54 degress to the right, and so on.
Now lets say you're doing three hundred frames per second. You'll see straight ahead, 1.8 degrees to the right, 3.6 degrees to the right, and so on. Much smoother, and you'll be able to pick out details that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Re:what is it good for?
on
2.2 GHz Xeon
·
· Score: 2
Go do a search for "NUMA architecture." You'll be plesantly surprised.
In 20XX, bin Laden was waiting.
bin Laden: What happen?
flunky: We set them up the hijacked planes.
flunky: We get CNN report.
bin Laden: What?
flunkey: Rear projection screen turn on.
bin Laden: It's you!!!
GWB: How are you bastards???
GWB: All your plans are belong to us!!!
bin Laden: What you say???
GWB: You are on the way to destruction.
GWB: You have three days to survive, make your time.
GWB: Ha Ha Ha.
bin Laden: Move denial.
Flunky: You know what you doing?
bin Laden: For great hiding,
bin Laden: Move every denial.
What about giving up essential liberty to obtain a little permanant safety? Didn't y'all give up your Constitutional 'right to bear arms' when licenses became a requirement, for example?
Read the Tom Clancy book 'The Sum Of All Fears,' published circa 1996. The plot revolves around some Mid East terrorists getting their hands on a nuke lost in the Six Day War by Isreal, and managing to rebuild it and use it.
While you're at it, read Debt of Honor, which includes a jumbo jet being used to ram Washington, and Rainbow Six, which deals with the concept that traditional nation versus nation warfare is out, and terrorism/guerrilla warfare is in.
The great thing about Pirates! is that it runs at proper speed on modern machines. All you need to find is one of the versions with the ASM hack so it runs as an executable.
Pirates! Gold, on the other hand, required VESA, which blows blows blows.
Quick tip: Find one relative, then find the lost inca gold. Then, find the next relative. New map, new inca treasure! Repeat for all relatives. Boom, baby!
Have you seen these things? The processors (P3 xeons - 2 megs L2 cache) are literally the size of paperback novels. The fans aren't glued onto the heatsinks; that would be bad. Too difficult to remove/replace.
Windows file protection. And are you so sure that those files aren't supposed to be there? The machine I'm on has them, with last modified dates of May 2001, which, I believe, was Windows 2000 SP2 timeframe.
Hmm. All of my servers scream via SNMP should the fans drop in RPM, increase in RPM, fail, stutter, and almost anything else that can go wrong with the hardware. Hell, if you open the case, I get a 'chassis intrustion detected' trap.
BlackBerries, by the way, are wonderful for recieveing these things.:-)
Uh... where is the proof for these allegations? Sounds to me like another one of those "all-powerful-world-controlling-law-evading-whinin g-parasitic-Jews" theories.
Allegations? Try history. Germany thought the Aryans were the master race. Well, Japan thought that they were the master race. Untermenschen or gaijin; sub-humans or foreign barbarians.
Here.Here. Estimated 30 million chinese killed.
Here.
Slashdot Mirror
Morals aren't a physical property. Good isn't an attribute; it's a perception. And it can change. And ask a colour-blind person, or one of those people with the extra thingies (technical term) in their eyes that let them see more colours, what colour that stop sign is. Oops, it's subjective.
Manged to convince Imperial Japan that no, they wern't an indistructable master race eradicating gaijin left, right, and center. And led to some incredible scientific achievements, not limited in the least to the computer you used to post, or the Internet that you posted on.
Exactly. I can argue that Mother Theresa was a selfish, evil person. I can argue that she devoted her life to helping the less fortunate so that she would secure her place in Paradise; self-advancement. The side effect, of course, would not justify the fact that, in this argument, she only did it to advance herself. Of course morality and 'good/evil' are personal, subjective concepts. To believe that there is an aboslute good and an absolute evil is limiting and self-defeating, and also very very sad, as it will prevent one from every understanding somebody else's motiviations.
That's because you don't live in Canada. Everybody here takes Interac; debit cards. We even have wireless units for taxis and deliverypersons.
Unfortunately for us Canucks, our paper money is colour coded. Oh, and our smallest bill is a fiver. :-)
Only their users. And remember, good and evil are relative. Not everybody thinks like you do.
Hmmm. Sounds kinda radical. Are you actually saying that as the size and complexity of a system increases, not only does the relative number of defects increase (even if only in a linear fashion; 10 percent of 100 being more than 10 percent of 10) but the amount of work and effort must also increase with the complexity of said system, resulting, in a capatalist system, with greater compensation? Hmmm. Don't think so. Of course complexity increases. People expect their computer to be able to do more out of the box. Five years ago, video playback was a gimmick. Now it's an expectation. Email was an affectation (amoungst the great unwashed, at least.) Now it's a standard communication tool. And so on. Of course you're paying for the 'features;' all the OS is supposed to do is sit between software and hardware; it's a translation layer.
Of COURSE they don't provide you with everything you need to know. Of COURSE they won't just throw you in the cockpit and you fly off. But first, lets look at some historical precident. At the beginning of WW2, a pilot needed an extensive education, flight school training, lots of hours on the stick. Oh, and older than a teenager. By the end of WW2, youngsters were going through eight weeks(!) of flight school, and being sent to the front lines. Now take an Iowa farmboy who signed up because he never wants to look at wheat again, then take a look at a San Fran boy, who grew up on flight sims and what not. Which one, do you think, is going to take much more readily to the concept of flight physics? And I'll point out that live training like MILES gear and such is as much to conidition soldiers against combat reluctance than anything else. :-)
Nah, but playing Jane's Longbow/Longbow2, F-15, 688 Hunter/Killer will. And Fleet Action is a wonderful primer on fleet tactics....
Exactly! And through such time-honored methods, a real sysadmin would GET his test boxes! At the very least, a real sysadmin would put all of the pros and cons into an email to somebody with Authorith, and get a cya email back. :-)
Yes, I know all of these points. I also know that any sys admin worth his salt would never use one. A real sys admin would have a test box, preferably a test lab, and would test each and every patch before ever DREAMING of putting it in a production envrionment. A real sys admin would also, even after doing said testing, never install off of a third party server. Too untrustworthy. What I was attempting to point out was that if Microsoft did the exact same thing, and I mean EXACTLY, /. would be up in arms.
I'll also point out that I highly doubt that even 95 percent of the Linux User community could competently 'check [the source] out if need be.' There's a big leap between hello world, understanding c/c++ and understanding whatever networking protocol is at hand.
fictional reprint
A peer of mine is a sys admin for a group of Windows 2002 machines. Once a week AutoWindowsUpdate runs to automatically get all the security updates and install them. This is a check box for him. According to him, it will even download an update to IIS, stop the WebPublishing service, install the update, then restart the service -- all while he twiddles his thumbs and thinks about lunch. With this kind of automation, who knows what kind of holes and backdoors M$ is automatically installing for him, and who knows what data it's sending back? And how does he know that it's not installing a new worm? </fictional reprint> Oh wait, I forgot. It's differnet when Linux does something.
They can please the fifty percent of the people who want it when it was promised, or they can please the other fifty percent who want it 'when it's done.' Or they can pull an Ion STORM and live off of the hype for four full years, then sink within six months.
"'Windows' should be capatilzed in dialog box #5453234" is an 'action item.' "Don't like the shade of blue used for the desktop" is an action item. "resource misspelled on dialog box #5334" is an action item. "Word 1.0 for DOS 2.0 doesn't load properly" is an action item. "Variable blah is defined but never used according to mslint" is an action item. Don't assume they're all horrible bugs or vicious security holes.
In other words, lets say you're doing three frames per second, and you hit your 'turn 180 degrees to look behind yourself, then turn back' button. You'll see three images; straight ahead, straight back, straight ahead. Now lets say you're doing thirty frames per second. You'll see straight ahead, 18 degrees to the right, 36 degrees to the right, 54 degress to the right, and so on. Now lets say you're doing three hundred frames per second. You'll see straight ahead, 1.8 degrees to the right, 3.6 degrees to the right, and so on. Much smoother, and you'll be able to pick out details that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Go do a search for "NUMA architecture." You'll be plesantly surprised.
In 20XX, bin Laden was waiting. bin Laden: What happen?
flunky: We set them up the hijacked planes.
flunky: We get CNN report.
bin Laden: What?
flunkey: Rear projection screen turn on.
bin Laden: It's you!!!
GWB: How are you bastards???
GWB: All your plans are belong to us!!!
bin Laden: What you say???
GWB: You are on the way to destruction.
GWB: You have three days to survive, make your time.
GWB: Ha Ha Ha.
bin Laden: Move denial.
Flunky: You know what you doing?
bin Laden: For great hiding,
bin Laden: Move every denial.
What about giving up essential liberty to obtain a little permanant safety? Didn't y'all give up your Constitutional 'right to bear arms' when licenses became a requirement, for example?
Read the Tom Clancy book 'The Sum Of All Fears,' published circa 1996. The plot revolves around some Mid East terrorists getting their hands on a nuke lost in the Six Day War by Isreal, and managing to rebuild it and use it. While you're at it, read Debt of Honor, which includes a jumbo jet being used to ram Washington, and Rainbow Six, which deals with the concept that traditional nation versus nation warfare is out, and terrorism/guerrilla warfare is in.
The great thing about Pirates! is that it runs at proper speed on modern machines. All you need to find is one of the versions with the ASM hack so it runs as an executable. Pirates! Gold, on the other hand, required VESA, which blows blows blows. Quick tip: Find one relative, then find the lost inca gold. Then, find the next relative. New map, new inca treasure! Repeat for all relatives. Boom, baby!
Have you seen these things? The processors (P3 xeons - 2 megs L2 cache) are literally the size of paperback novels. The fans aren't glued onto the heatsinks; that would be bad. Too difficult to remove/replace.
Windows file protection. And are you so sure that those files aren't supposed to be there? The machine I'm on has them, with last modified dates of May 2001, which, I believe, was Windows 2000 SP2 timeframe.
Hmm. All of my servers scream via SNMP should the fans drop in RPM, increase in RPM, fail, stutter, and almost anything else that can go wrong with the hardware. Hell, if you open the case, I get a 'chassis intrustion detected' trap. BlackBerries, by the way, are wonderful for recieveing these things. :-)