Re:A major News Source
on
Indecision 2002
·
· Score: 2, Flamebait
The Reagan regime enacted one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history AND increased the scope, size, and debt of the federal government to record levels.
Please repeat after me: CONGRESS IS THE LAWMAKING BODY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Now tell me, oh enlightened one... who was it that controlled Congress during the Reagan presidency? Who was it that was responsible for tying up every trivial bill with enough pork to choke a small horse? Who was it, in fact, that did each and every thing you blame on Reagan?
C'mon. I know, it's hard... you can say it with me, if that helps:
D - E - M - O - C - R - A - T - S
There! See how easy that was? Now, let's try it again: who was in control of the lawmaking body (Congress, remember?) during the Clinton years? You remember - booming economy, low unemployment, everyone happier than a pig in poo? OK, OK, we'll say it together again:
R - E - P - U - B - L - I - C - A - N - S
While I'll admit some might consider a mere 20 years to be too short a time to draw any strong conclusions, the evidence seems to indicate that while a Democratic controlled congress spends money like a compulsive shopper with bad math skills [1], a Republican congress is actually fairly good for the economy in particular and the nation in general.
[1] Actually not a very good analogy. I've seen compulsive shoppers, and even they have trouble flinging money around with the same abandon as a Democrat-controlled Congress.
The proper way to go about this is to analyse what needs to be stored and choose the solution that provides the best match based upon needed functionality, system use, and programming time.
Absolutely. They way the question was worded, though, makes me think that their typical case is probably beyond the scope of doing anything easily with just flat files... otherwise, why the debate? You'd have to be a truly hardcore DB fanatic to argue that a DB is the ideal solution in all circumstances.
Since Bob and Ted are both business students who don't know how to program, they use their venture capital to hire 3 programmers. At the 3 month mark, the project is on schedule and shaping up great. At the 5 month mark, it's slightly ahead of schedule. Bob and Ted have spent 15 months worth of programmer pay, and they've gotten exactly what they were expecting from the spent money. Is this a money pit?
No - it sounds a whole lot more like bloody drug-induced daydream:-)
A version closer to reality:
Since Bob and Ted are both business students who don't know how to program, they waste 2 months trying to put together a prototype using Adobe Acrobat. After that crashes and destroys a hard drive (and their mp3 collection), they use their venture capital to grudgingly hire 2 programmers. At the 3 month mark, the project is already behing schedule and continuing to slip, as they forgot to buy hardware for their developers to use. At the 5 month mark, it's obvious that the schedule was a complete fantasy, and the developers tell Bob and Ted that it will take at least anotehr 6 months to finish the work. They are promptly fired for their insolence, and with the VC's putting pressure on them to deliver, Bob and Ted hire a VP of Sales, reasoning that they can always "clean up" their prototype and sell that until they can get their feet under them. After 3 months, the VP of sales is fired for non-performance, the company goes under, and Bob and Ted go on to be VPs at some poor company that's gullible enough to think that because they've failed, they've somehow gained "value" experience.
The feeling at my current workplace seems to be that very few projects lend themselves to database usage and that a customized one-off data storage solution should be developed for each project.
Huh? Do you create a custom C library for every application as well? How about a custom UI toolkit? Custom preprocessor/compiler?
Sounds kind of silly, doesn't it.
So why do these folks think a "customized one-off data storage solution" sounds any better? It's the same problem - you can either use something that's already been debugged, tested, and tweaked for performance, or you can spend your own time and effort to create it yourself. That's time and effort that could go towards coding and testing the final product, but is instead spent elsewhere (probably because someone thinks that using a dabatbase for storage would make the application "bloated").
I think the problem is probably that when you mention using a "database", most people equate that term with "general purpose database server" (Oracle, SQL Server, Postgress, MySQL, etc.) There are libraries available that were specifically designed to offer programs lightweight database access without the pain of using a full-fledged RDBMS. Search Google for embedded database, xbase library, or open source database library to start... there are any number of toolktis that will allow you to create a very customized storage solution without having to create "one-off" code for each and every project.
Oh, come on. Your suit doesn't get as dirty or smelly as other clothes because it's more expensive? Sorry, I don't believe that. You can wear a good suit - meaning one that isn't 100% polyester - maybe three times before it needs cleaned; and that doesn't account for the inevitable spills, stains, and other gunk that even the most cautious person will eventually face. So maybe you can clean a suit after every 2nd-3rd wearing, but that certainly doesn't equate to a $0/month dry-cleaning cost.
As for three suits being acceptable... again, no, sorry. Unless I'm going to get three identical suits, I want to be able to wear something different every day... because the perception people have when you wear the same clothes multiple days in the week, every week, is that you are (a) cheap or (b) unhygenic.
5 suits, 5 shirts, belt, shoes, and ties, would easily cost ~$6500 if you're buying moderate quality clothing
Good gravy, man, where do you shop? I want to invest in them, because they obviously know how to fleece a... er, um, I mean, how to cater to those with "expendable cash reserves". You can get custom-made suits for under $750... and good quality off-the rack suits for under $400. If you're figuring on $1300 per suit + accesories, you're way, way, way into the "fast-track executive wannabe" look, in which case you've got more problems on your plate then figuring out which suit to wear.
How many people were shot or killed by the police?
Sigh. What am I, a personal reference librarian?
I'm having trouble finding any consolidated statistics... if I can find them after work, I'll follow up. Meanwhile, why don't you talk to me about the difference in police assault (not police shootings) between the US and UK? In looking for info on US police shootings, I've come across a couple of studies that seem to indicate that overall, you're less likely to be shot in the UK... but far, far more likely to be beaten with a baton, tear gassed, or otherwise physically assaulted by the police or military.
Umm.. I don't have the figures,
what % of the US polulation is killed each year by it's own government? I'm sure it's a lot higer than in the UK, and we are as you say in a near civil war.
According to Amnesty International, "In 2001... Sixty-six people were executed in the USA." Also from Anesty International, "A recent research study... found that sectarian hatred had reached unprecedented levels in north Belfast... At least 19 people reportedly died during 2001 as a result of sectarian or paramilitary activity."
Sorry, couldn't find information on the UK as a whole. But given that this is the mortality rate reported for one city, I suspect that overall, the civil war in the UK has a higher toll (in percentage population and raw numbers) than executions carried out by the US government.
Maybe, just maybe there are a lot of countries/people that hate the dictatorship that America is trying to impose on the rest of the world. Should they kill Bush for being evil?
-1 for trying to change the topic via innane segue.
I'd be happy to debate this, but the topic of conversation is whether or not the US has some understanding of the history of violent conflict. I claim that we do, and in fact, we have a better understanding than, say, countries that have lived in a state of "near-constant civil war for years"...
What this teaches you is to be tollerent of others, not to kill the fuckers.
No, it doesn't. If it taught you that, then you wouldn't be in the middle of a friggin' civil war, now, would you?
Here in the US, we have somehow managed to live together for over a century without experiencing large-scale internal violence. Because we have prospered from this, we are reviled by the international community, who needs to come up with increasingly bizzare reasons why the US isn't really any good. I do have to admit that claiming "We're been beat up more often than you have!" is a fairly original one, though.
umm, What major ethnic/territorial disputes have you been involved in ? (The 60s Blacks equality didn't involve any territorial integrity)
Myself? None. I'd wager that you haven't, either. Do I need to be shot in order to understand that taking a bullet is something that I don't want to do? Do we, as a country, need to experience near-constant civil war in order to remind ourselves that killing each other because of religion, or skin color, or ethnic background is a Bad Thing (tm)? That seems to be your assertion - that because some other groups of people in the world have decided to be bloody stupid gits and wage genocidal war against one another, and the US hasn't, we lack some basic "understanding" of how horrible that situation is.
The truth of the matter is we did fight a civil war over a century ago, and came out of it determined not to ever go through that sort of thing again. We're taking a look at Sadam and the Middle East and going "Uh oh... this looks like another world war in the making; let's do something about it before the Middle East gets turned into a killing field." I guess it's just a whole lot easier to bash us for "not understanding" because "we haven't lived though it" then to admit that we are one of the few countries that actually managed to learn something from our experiences.
Yah, I know there are comfortable suits out there... my current suit is lightweight, good quality, and really not a bother to wear at all. I have only that one suit, though, used for weddings and funerals (and other special occaisions). So, if I accept a position where suits are required business attire, I am now in a situation where I can expect to shell out:
~$1500 for clothes (5 good suits, shoes, shirts, etc.)
~$200 a month for dry cleaning
Extra time spent dressing, running back & forth to the dry cleaners, etc.
This comes to ~$4000 in the first year of employment; ~3000/year afterward (presuming I pick up an extra suit or two to replace worn ones, new styles, new ties, etc.)
This is roughly the same as taking a $6000/year pay cut from the offered salary.
So, really, this is no different from a company saying "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to make your own parking arrangements - we don't cover that" or "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to find your own vision care package - we don't cover that." The company is trying to take something that benefits them (not paying for parking, not payiung for vision coverage, presenting a professional image) and shift the cost of that onto the individual employee.
That's why I treat working attire the same way I treat medical coverage, paid parking downtown, and other benefits. Yes, I will consider a job working somewhere where suit and tie is required attire... but working there will cost me money, and I expect my salary to reflect that added expense. Conversely, if I accept a job somewhere else where attire is casual or buisness casual, I can live with a lower salary, because I avoid the bother of having to wear a uniform to work.
In other words... if my wearing professional attire on the job benefits the company, I expect to be compensated for that effort on my part, the same way I am compensated for my other efforts as an employee. If the company is unwilling to pay me for doing something that benefits the company, then they really shouldn't be surprised when I say "No".
America hasn't got enough 'history' and so can't understand these things.
No - we have more than enough history... your history, as a matter of fact. We understand these things very well, thank you, which is why we go to great lengths to keep our homeland from experiencing the sort of things that have happened elsewhere in the world.
So - what next? Are you going to claim that only someone who dies from lung cancer is smart enough to know that smoking is dangerous?
No, no, no, and no. As far as I can tell, that's not how it works. If you want an MP3, you'll have to go to a filesharing program.
As mentioned elsewhere in these comments, the service will burn Redbook audio CDs... so if you want mp3s, or oggs, you'll be able to rip them yourself at whatever bitrate you want, in whatever manner you're accustomed to. Besides... how long would it take someone to put together a "CD" driver that took the audio stream and converted it directly to another format?
If you want to buy music from them, you'll have to (1) run windows, and (2) download their proprietary bloatware player.
Oh, come on. Have you downloaded their player and tried it out? Did you rip it apart to see how well it was put together? Or are you just guessing that it's bloatware? (Well, OK. It would be an eerily accurate guess. But you didn't actually bother to check, did you?) As for it being Windows only... let them know that there's a market for non-Windows systems, and see how they respond before blasting them. Even if they insist on keeping it Windows only, I'd bet that you would be able to run it under Wine before too much time had passed.
For the record: I've taken a look at this (signed up for their free service). The player does look like a custom "browser" written in MFC (kinda like GameSpy). OTOH, their artist list is pretty impressive - they have enough of my favorite artists that paying $10/month to put together a custom playlist is pretty much a pittance. If the service takes off, though, they're going to need some mondo bandwidth just to keep it usable, let alone handle peak demand (new album releases, etc.)
None of your examples show open-source software displacing a preexisting proprietary app that was #1 in its category.
The opposite is true, as well - none of the the examples show a proprietary app displacing a pre-existing open-source that was #1 in its category.
At a guess, inerta has a lot to do with any software package maintaining its #1 position. Once you're in that slot, it take a lot of effort for another application to come along and displace the leader, and people will not be willing to make that effort without an obvious benefit. In this case, open-source software has two advantages that proprietary software can't match: the ability to modify the source code and essentially create a new product, coupled with a reduced cost (and in some cases, a dramatically reduced cost).
Given this, the only way proprietary software can obtain or remain in a #1 slot is to have features and capabilities that cannot be matched by open-source software. Once customers can have an product with identical capabilities for free, the proprietary product has to pull out all the stops and excel in terms of features, usability, etc. in order to obtain or maintain a #1 position. That's a loosing proposition, though, because while open-source software can always (eventually) match a proprietary app, feature for feature, proprietary apps will never be able to effectively match open-source apps on cost. At that point, the only thing keeping a proprietary app in a #1 slot is user inertia - something that is beyond the direct control of a software vendor.
I think MS understands this - their focus is on integration. Buy an MS OS, an MS web server, an MS database, and use MS languages and technologies to connect them all. The goal is to deliver a gestalt package that is worth more than the sum of it's parts, because each part is designed to work well in cooperation with each other. This is the one area where proprietary software still has a minor advantage over open-source, and I expect that MS will push it to the limits - as evidenced by their attempts to leverage a #1 market share desktop OS into a #1 market share web browser, into a #1 market share web server, into a #1 market share database... etc., etc., etc. The fact that a company with pockets as deep as MS still can't displace Apache is, IMHO, a pretty strong argument that even app integration is not anywhere near as strong an incentive as MS might think.
Still, integration is really just another set of technical features that can be matched by open source software. Whether or not it ever will be, though, is still an open question.
No... Four. A nautical mile is 6000 feet; a knot is one nautical mile/hour. A statute mile is ~ 5200 feet. Oh, wait - the wind direction is specified using a 360 degree circle, when it could also be expressed in radians, so really, that's five distinct measuring systems.
I absolutely don't believe how the quality of/. has declined. A story about a massive black hole at the center of the galaxy, and only one person even thinks to mention Beowulf Shaeffer?
Geez! And here I was, rubbing my hands in glee, loooking forward to all the elaborate puns... sigh. Nobody even meantioned a "cluster"! What's wrong? Would it have been not off-topic enough?
Too bad Niven didn't write the sequel: about how Shaeffer went back, only to discover that there are actually three black holes in the center of the galaxy, orbiting one another...
don't get me wrong, i like eclipse. I've used it periodically, but to say that it can handle multiple languages and toolkits is a bid misleading
Ummm... it can handle multiple languages and toolkits. I'm using it for Java, C, and C++ development (multiple languages), and for testing cross-platform development. I've used it to compile a Linux kernel, build a couple of GNU utilities, and compile GUI apps using GTK and QT.
Languages support is better in some instances than in others. C/C++ is more than usable; I haven't used any other language features, but I've seen messages from folks actively developing those features and using those languages.
As for "Python, C#, Aspect, Eiffel, and Ruby are all 3rd-party add-ons and not officially supported"... Eclipse is an open source project under IBM's CPL. The only difference, AFAICT, between "supported" and "unsupported" projects is that "supported" projects have Eclipse consortium members devoting resources to them.
Other than that, everyone has the same code, everyone uses the same APIs, and the Eclipse core team is just as likely to take a patch from a Python feature developer as a CDT or Cobol team developer. Eclipse is usable for developing in multiple languages and toolkits now, and that level of support and usablity is only going to increase as time goes by.
The Java suppor is mature; the C/C++ tools are due for a release by the end of the month; and a Cobol tools project just got underway. "Unofficial" tools projects include Python, C#, AspectJ, Eiffel, Ruby, and others
So, make copyright extend for the lifetime of the human (not corporate) creator; but once it passes from the control of the creator, then they copyright period is N years, period.
With this, if N = 20, then Melville's works would be (C) H. Melville until his death. At that point, they copyright would be inherited by his heirs, and they would hold it for a maximum of 20 years. If at some point in his life Neville decided to sell the copyright for one of his works to some other individual or corporation, then the copyright on the work would last 20 years from the date of the sale.
All in all, far too sensible for a legislator to even think about.
Come to think of it, this could lead to some weird legal loopholes... for example, in many states, a husband and wife are considered to be a single person in some senses; someone doesn't "inherit" from their spouse when s/he dies, because they are considered to own property jointly. So you could see some bizzare marriages of convenience, for example, where an aging Walt Disney marries a much younger woman who coincidentally just happens to be a Disney corporation executive, with a prenuptial agreement that states if she ever remarries, it will be at age 60 to yet another young Disney executive... and so on, and so on, and...
You can probably adapt some of the methodologies and techniques they use to help you map out the location of items, make note about condition, etc. In particular, you may be able to find software specifically geared towards mapping out a dig.
You may even be able to set things up with a local university and get a couple of cultural anthropology students to give you a hand with the initial work in exchange for credit.
Take a look at any Java-aware text editor: InteliJ, Eclipse's integrated text editor, etc. Because they are understand exactly which language they are being used with, and it happens to be a language with some pretty damn good introspecion interfaces, these editors have features - code refactoring, context-sensitive search and replace, inheritance/implementation skeletons, runtime code completion, and more - than emacs and vi can't even come close to matching.
I prefer a language-friendly (not just capable) editor when working on Java or C++.
I prefer a language-neutral editor (vi) when working on multiple types of text files.
How hard is it to understand that?
And, just in case you try to extend this into a steaming pile of GUI editor vs. non-GUI editor garbage: if all I had was a console, and if I were working on Java, you can bet your bootstraps I would be using vi only for the time it took me to find a decent console version of a Java-aware editor.
The point of this legislation is not to solve a problem - it is the there to provide the government a reason to treat someone as a criminal.
In this case, that "someone" happens to be a legal entity (ISP) instead of an actual person.
Note that the important thing about the legislation is not that it is used, but that it simply exists. It is now trivial to set up a situation where any ISP in PA can be charged with criminal activity, and either fined out of existance, or bludgeoned into accepting whatever "arrangements" the government wants to make in order to prevent similar "crimes" in the future... installation of Carnivore systems, for example.
There's an added bonus, too: if you oppose this legislation, well then - you must be some sort of sick, twisted, kiddie porn lover then, right? I mean, there's absolutely no other reason to be against this sort of thing. After all - it's for the children.
Slashdot Mirror
Please repeat after me: CONGRESS IS THE LAWMAKING BODY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Now tell me, oh enlightened one... who was it that controlled Congress during the Reagan presidency? Who was it that was responsible for tying up every trivial bill with enough pork to choke a small horse? Who was it, in fact, that did each and every thing you blame on Reagan?
C'mon. I know, it's hard... you can say it with me, if that helps:
D - E - M - O - C - R - A - T - S
There! See how easy that was? Now, let's try it again: who was in control of the lawmaking body (Congress, remember?) during the Clinton years? You remember - booming economy, low unemployment, everyone happier than a pig in poo? OK, OK, we'll say it together again:
R - E - P - U - B - L - I - C - A - N - SWhile I'll admit some might consider a mere 20 years to be too short a time to draw any strong conclusions, the evidence seems to indicate that while a Democratic controlled congress spends money like a compulsive shopper with bad math skills [1], a Republican congress is actually fairly good for the economy in particular and the nation in general.
[1] Actually not a very good analogy. I've seen compulsive shoppers, and even they have trouble flinging money around with the same abandon as a Democrat-controlled Congress.
Really? I just thought it was redundant.
Absolutely. They way the question was worded, though, makes me think that their typical case is probably beyond the scope of doing anything easily with just flat files... otherwise, why the debate? You'd have to be a truly hardcore DB fanatic to argue that a DB is the ideal solution in all circumstances.
No - it sounds a whole lot more like bloody drug-induced daydream :-)
A version closer to reality:
Huh? Do you create a custom C library for every application as well? How about a custom UI toolkit? Custom preprocessor/compiler?
Sounds kind of silly, doesn't it.
So why do these folks think a "customized one-off data storage solution" sounds any better? It's the same problem - you can either use something that's already been debugged, tested, and tweaked for performance, or you can spend your own time and effort to create it yourself. That's time and effort that could go towards coding and testing the final product, but is instead spent elsewhere (probably because someone thinks that using a dabatbase for storage would make the application "bloated").
I think the problem is probably that when you mention using a "database", most people equate that term with "general purpose database server" (Oracle, SQL Server, Postgress, MySQL, etc.) There are libraries available that were specifically designed to offer programs lightweight database access without the pain of using a full-fledged RDBMS. Search Google for embedded database, xbase library, or open source database library to start... there are any number of toolktis that will allow you to create a very customized storage solution without having to create "one-off" code for each and every project.
Oh, come on. Your suit doesn't get as dirty or smelly as other clothes because it's more expensive? Sorry, I don't believe that. You can wear a good suit - meaning one that isn't 100% polyester - maybe three times before it needs cleaned; and that doesn't account for the inevitable spills, stains, and other gunk that even the most cautious person will eventually face. So maybe you can clean a suit after every 2nd-3rd wearing, but that certainly doesn't equate to a $0/month dry-cleaning cost.
As for three suits being acceptable... again, no, sorry. Unless I'm going to get three identical suits, I want to be able to wear something different every day... because the perception people have when you wear the same clothes multiple days in the week, every week, is that you are (a) cheap or (b) unhygenic.
Good gravy, man, where do you shop? I want to invest in them, because they obviously know how to fleece a... er, um, I mean, how to cater to those with "expendable cash reserves". You can get custom-made suits for under $750... and good quality off-the rack suits for under $400. If you're figuring on $1300 per suit + accesories, you're way, way, way into the "fast-track executive wannabe" look, in which case you've got more problems on your plate then figuring out which suit to wear.
Sigh. What am I, a personal reference librarian?
I'm having trouble finding any consolidated statistics... if I can find them after work, I'll follow up. Meanwhile, why don't you talk to me about the difference in police assault (not police shootings) between the US and UK? In looking for info on US police shootings, I've come across a couple of studies that seem to indicate that overall, you're less likely to be shot in the UK... but far, far more likely to be beaten with a baton, tear gassed, or otherwise physically assaulted by the police or military.
According to Amnesty International, "In 2001... Sixty-six people were executed in the USA." Also from Anesty International, "A recent research study... found that sectarian hatred had reached unprecedented levels in north Belfast... At least 19 people reportedly died during 2001 as a result of sectarian or paramilitary activity."
Sorry, couldn't find information on the UK as a whole. But given that this is the mortality rate reported for one city, I suspect that overall, the civil war in the UK has a higher toll (in percentage population and raw numbers) than executions carried out by the US government.
-1 for trying to change the topic via innane segue.
I'd be happy to debate this, but the topic of conversation is whether or not the US has some understanding of the history of violent conflict. I claim that we do, and in fact, we have a better understanding than, say, countries that have lived in a state of "near-constant civil war for years"...
No, it doesn't. If it taught you that, then you wouldn't be in the middle of a friggin' civil war, now, would you?
Here in the US, we have somehow managed to live together for over a century without experiencing large-scale internal violence. Because we have prospered from this, we are reviled by the international community, who needs to come up with increasingly bizzare reasons why the US isn't really any good. I do have to admit that claiming "We're been beat up more often than you have!" is a fairly original one, though.
Myself? None. I'd wager that you haven't, either. Do I need to be shot in order to understand that taking a bullet is something that I don't want to do? Do we, as a country, need to experience near-constant civil war in order to remind ourselves that killing each other because of religion, or skin color, or ethnic background is a Bad Thing (tm)? That seems to be your assertion - that because some other groups of people in the world have decided to be bloody stupid gits and wage genocidal war against one another, and the US hasn't, we lack some basic "understanding" of how horrible that situation is.
The truth of the matter is we did fight a civil war over a century ago, and came out of it determined not to ever go through that sort of thing again. We're taking a look at Sadam and the Middle East and going "Uh oh... this looks like another world war in the making; let's do something about it before the Middle East gets turned into a killing field." I guess it's just a whole lot easier to bash us for "not understanding" because "we haven't lived though it" then to admit that we are one of the few countries that actually managed to learn something from our experiences.
Yah, I know there are comfortable suits out there... my current suit is lightweight, good quality, and really not a bother to wear at all. I have only that one suit, though, used for weddings and funerals (and other special occaisions). So, if I accept a position where suits are required business attire, I am now in a situation where I can expect to shell out:
This comes to ~$4000 in the first year of employment; ~3000/year afterward (presuming I pick up an extra suit or two to replace worn ones, new styles, new ties, etc.)
This is roughly the same as taking a $6000/year pay cut from the offered salary.
So, really, this is no different from a company saying "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to make your own parking arrangements - we don't cover that" or "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to find your own vision care package - we don't cover that." The company is trying to take something that benefits them (not paying for parking, not payiung for vision coverage, presenting a professional image) and shift the cost of that onto the individual employee.
That's why I treat working attire the same way I treat medical coverage, paid parking downtown, and other benefits. Yes, I will consider a job working somewhere where suit and tie is required attire... but working there will cost me money, and I expect my salary to reflect that added expense. Conversely, if I accept a job somewhere else where attire is casual or buisness casual, I can live with a lower salary, because I avoid the bother of having to wear a uniform to work.
In other words... if my wearing professional attire on the job benefits the company, I expect to be compensated for that effort on my part, the same way I am compensated for my other efforts as an employee. If the company is unwilling to pay me for doing something that benefits the company, then they really shouldn't be surprised when I say "No".
No - we have more than enough history... your history, as a matter of fact. We understand these things very well, thank you, which is why we go to great lengths to keep our homeland from experiencing the sort of things that have happened elsewhere in the world.
So - what next? Are you going to claim that only someone who dies from lung cancer is smart enough to know that smoking is dangerous?
As mentioned elsewhere in these comments, the service will burn Redbook audio CDs... so if you want mp3s, or oggs, you'll be able to rip them yourself at whatever bitrate you want, in whatever manner you're accustomed to. Besides... how long would it take someone to put together a "CD" driver that took the audio stream and converted it directly to another format?
Oh, come on. Have you downloaded their player and tried it out? Did you rip it apart to see how well it was put together? Or are you just guessing that it's bloatware? (Well, OK. It would be an eerily accurate guess. But you didn't actually bother to check, did you?) As for it being Windows only... let them know that there's a market for non-Windows systems, and see how they respond before blasting them. Even if they insist on keeping it Windows only, I'd bet that you would be able to run it under Wine before too much time had passed.
For the record: I've taken a look at this (signed up for their free service). The player does look like a custom "browser" written in MFC (kinda like GameSpy). OTOH, their artist list is pretty impressive - they have enough of my favorite artists that paying $10/month to put together a custom playlist is pretty much a pittance. If the service takes off, though, they're going to need some mondo bandwidth just to keep it usable, let alone handle peak demand (new album releases, etc.)
Absolutely correct. Revolting over this would be as ridiculous as as revolting over some silly little tax on tea!
The opposite is true, as well - none of the the examples show a proprietary app displacing a pre-existing open-source that was #1 in its category.
At a guess, inerta has a lot to do with any software package maintaining its #1 position. Once you're in that slot, it take a lot of effort for another application to come along and displace the leader, and people will not be willing to make that effort without an obvious benefit. In this case, open-source software has two advantages that proprietary software can't match: the ability to modify the source code and essentially create a new product, coupled with a reduced cost (and in some cases, a dramatically reduced cost).
Given this, the only way proprietary software can obtain or remain in a #1 slot is to have features and capabilities that cannot be matched by open-source software. Once customers can have an product with identical capabilities for free, the proprietary product has to pull out all the stops and excel in terms of features, usability, etc. in order to obtain or maintain a #1 position. That's a loosing proposition, though, because while open-source software can always (eventually) match a proprietary app, feature for feature, proprietary apps will never be able to effectively match open-source apps on cost. At that point, the only thing keeping a proprietary app in a #1 slot is user inertia - something that is beyond the direct control of a software vendor.
I think MS understands this - their focus is on integration. Buy an MS OS, an MS web server, an MS database, and use MS languages and technologies to connect them all. The goal is to deliver a gestalt package that is worth more than the sum of it's parts, because each part is designed to work well in cooperation with each other. This is the one area where proprietary software still has a minor advantage over open-source, and I expect that MS will push it to the limits - as evidenced by their attempts to leverage a #1 market share desktop OS into a #1 market share web browser, into a #1 market share web server, into a #1 market share database... etc., etc., etc. The fact that a company with pockets as deep as MS still can't displace Apache is, IMHO, a pretty strong argument that even app integration is not anywhere near as strong an incentive as MS might think.
Still, integration is really just another set of technical features that can be matched by open source software. Whether or not it ever will be, though, is still an open question.
No... Four. A nautical mile is 6000 feet; a knot is one nautical mile/hour. A statute mile is ~ 5200 feet. Oh, wait - the wind direction is specified using a 360 degree circle, when it could also be expressed in radians, so really, that's five distinct measuring systems.
I absolutely don't believe how the quality of /. has declined. A story about a massive black hole at the center of the galaxy, and only one person even thinks to mention Beowulf Shaeffer?
Geez! And here I was, rubbing my hands in glee, loooking forward to all the elaborate puns... sigh. Nobody even meantioned a "cluster"! What's wrong? Would it have been not off-topic enough?
Too bad Niven didn't write the sequel: about how Shaeffer went back, only to discover that there are actually three black holes in the center of the galaxy, orbiting one another...
Oh, what's the use. My heart's just not in it.
Ummm... it can handle multiple languages and toolkits. I'm using it for Java, C, and C++ development (multiple languages), and for testing cross-platform development. I've used it to compile a Linux kernel, build a couple of GNU utilities, and compile GUI apps using GTK and QT.
Languages support is better in some instances than in others. C/C++ is more than usable; I haven't used any other language features, but I've seen messages from folks actively developing those features and using those languages.
As for "Python, C#, Aspect, Eiffel, and Ruby are all 3rd-party add-ons and not officially supported"... Eclipse is an open source project under IBM's CPL. The only difference, AFAICT, between "supported" and "unsupported" projects is that "supported" projects have Eclipse consortium members devoting resources to them.
Other than that, everyone has the same code, everyone uses the same APIs, and the Eclipse core team is just as likely to take a patch from a Python feature developer as a CDT or Cobol team developer. Eclipse is usable for developing in multiple languages and toolkits now, and that level of support and usablity is only going to increase as time goes by.
How about Eclipse?
The Java suppor is mature; the C/C++ tools are due for a release by the end of the month; and a Cobol tools project just got underway. "Unofficial" tools projects include Python, C#, AspectJ, Eiffel, Ruby, and others
So, make copyright extend for the lifetime of the human (not corporate) creator; but once it passes from the control of the creator, then they copyright period is N years, period.
With this, if N = 20, then Melville's works would be (C) H. Melville until his death. At that point, they copyright would be inherited by his heirs, and they would hold it for a maximum of 20 years. If at some point in his life Neville decided to sell the copyright for one of his works to some other individual or corporation, then the copyright on the work would last 20 years from the date of the sale.
All in all, far too sensible for a legislator to even think about.
Come to think of it, this could lead to some weird legal loopholes... for example, in many states, a husband and wife are considered to be a single person in some senses; someone doesn't "inherit" from their spouse when s/he dies, because they are considered to own property jointly. So you could see some bizzare marriages of convenience, for example, where an aging Walt Disney marries a much younger woman who coincidentally just happens to be a Disney corporation executive, with a prenuptial agreement that states if she ever remarries, it will be at age 60 to yet another young Disney executive... and so on, and so on, and...
You can probably adapt some of the methodologies and techniques they use to help you map out the location of items, make note about condition, etc. In particular, you may be able to find software specifically geared towards mapping out a dig.
You may even be able to set things up with a local university and get a couple of cultural anthropology students to give you a hand with the initial work in exchange for credit.
Veggie Tales quote :-)
Augh! Where's that quote from... it's on the tip of my tongue... Monty Python?
I prefer a language-friendly (not just capable) editor when working on Java or C++.
I prefer a language-neutral editor (vi) when working on multiple types of text files.
How hard is it to understand that?
And, just in case you try to extend this into a steaming pile of GUI editor vs. non-GUI editor garbage: if all I had was a console, and if I were working on Java, you can bet your bootstraps I would be using vi only for the time it took me to find a decent console version of a Java-aware editor.
The point of this legislation is not to solve a problem - it is the there to provide the government a reason to treat someone as a criminal.
In this case, that "someone" happens to be a legal entity (ISP) instead of an actual person.Note that the important thing about the legislation is not that it is used, but that it simply exists. It is now trivial to set up a situation where any ISP in PA can be charged with criminal activity, and either fined out of existance, or bludgeoned into accepting whatever "arrangements" the government wants to make in order to prevent similar "crimes" in the future... installation of Carnivore systems, for example.
There's an added bonus, too: if you oppose this legislation, well then - you must be some sort of sick, twisted, kiddie porn lover then, right? I mean, there's absolutely no other reason to be against this sort of thing. After all - it's for the children.