It seems that where Linux has succeeded is where Linux is completely hidden behind the scenes, as far as the consumer is concerned. Even in the case of Android, with a stock device, it would be utterly impossible to know it was running Linux.
Isn't that just what an operating system should do?
Linux wins everywhere except where Windows started with a huge head start. Not being able to break into a monopolized market, the desktop operating system, is not what I consider a "loss" or a "failure." Linux is vastly superior for most productive use of desktop computer hardware. That it hasn't broken into the market, despite being free of charge, only means that enforcing anti-trust laws would be a good thing. Microsoft is, and has always been, abusive.
I think it's much simpler than that. Windows began with a huge installed base advantage, lock-in to a lot of proprietary "important" software like their own MS Office, Adobe shit, etc., and familiarity. They've just been riding that, and the perception of being SOOOOO much less expensive than Apple and SOOOOO much more convenient than Linux, for many years. Games are a deal-breaker for some, as you said, but not for many. Same for other particulars that alarm lusers. I think the one thing Gates & co. ever got right is the business of making their platform (seem) indispensable, mainly to technically illiterate decision-makers^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B deciders.
I think Mint Debian would be that distribution. I use plain vanilla Debian, but from what I have read, the Debian-based Mint comes closest to the balance you're describing.
No, but they are barren of people claiming there is no way you could possibly be having that issue, because mine works just fine - then ridiculing you for even bringing it up.
So is the Ubuntu forum. Please notice, this is not forum.ubuntu.org or ubuntuforums.org or whatever. It's slashdot.org. Everybody ridicules everybody else here, remember? And I'm newer here than you are, sheesh!
a "mature market" that "is in maintenance mode?" Time? The extent of poor and neglected, overdue maintenance?
Of course, planes operating successfully still outnumber those which disintegrate in normal use. But it's not just planes. Consider that collapsing bridge in Minnesota recently. Consider also the Tacoma Narrows fiasco, now some decades ago, which in my opinion is not a mistake that competent engineers make, but one due to social promotion at the highest levels of our education system, which is also symptomatic of an empire in decline. Consider how much of our electrical grid depends on nuclear plants that are at, near or even past their originally estimated lifetimes but not being decommissioned in short because of lack of competence and political will to replace them with better alternatives, and consider how desperately we still depend on 19th century fuels, coal and petroleum, despite what we know about their effect on climate. I think gp AC makes a valid point, using one plane to illustrate a far more widespread, and very real systemic problem.
Let's also not forget just how often local politicians, lawyers, and claims adjusters have asked for this information on the spot with little regard to the claimants privacy.
That is not something I have ever read about. Please cite a reliable source, if possible.
If the data was being managed via internal systems over vpn, that would be better... but that assumes that's reliably possible where these people are working.
Where there is a will, there is a way. BP lacked the will, which is to say, they don't give a fuck.
Understatement! At Symantec we didn't even let executives just download all the end-of-quarter high-value orders, and that information was vital to timely earnings estimates! We built them a reporting rdbms with "some canned queries" just like you said, which they could access via VPN or from their offices around the world. But the Finance Department did not offer the whole f'ing database to anybody to take from The Company's offices. That shit just isn't done with valuable data -- data that The Company values, that is. (any company, not picking on SYMC)
This alone proves systemic indifference to and contempt of the claimants, BP's victims. An ethical judge who does even minimal due diligence to learn about industry standard Finance IT practices would at least double the settlement against BP just for letting the entire claimant database be stored on anything mobile. The industry is NEVER as careless with property or financial value as BP is with human life and their victims' identities.
And they're "cleaning it up" with PR just like they "cleaned up" their oil spill with a toxic chemical called Corexit. They're very consistent, in a horrible way.
Does it seem odd to you that TFA does NOT say that the lost laptop HAS been disabled? It looks a bit queer to me that BP wouldn't want to say THAT, if that was true. And so they did not say that, I assume it is not true. That could mean the laptop is out of range or destroyed, or it could have stolen by somebody smart enough to open it up and remove the hard drive rather than just punch the power button.
And the total for every year is in the ballpark of a billion dollars. I can't find where I've seen it totalled up before, so it's a lot of digging to find all the individual pieces for you and I don't care to spend the time to do it.
No. Being taken on faith is not one of your options.
Krugman's predictions (many others said the same thing) about the insufficient amount of spending in the Recovery Act have proven true, for example. Roubini and Taleb are also worth following, particularly Roubini in my opinion. Robert Reich is sensible. But you seem to be talking about, well obviously actual "headline" writers, but I'm inferring you also mean the CNN etc purveyors of common "wisdom" and announcers of recently released facts such as unemployment, stock market or housing starts data. Absolutely, those airheads are worthless. Expecting useful, accurate information from the corporate media is reasonable in the sense that that is what they owe us, but they're just not competent to deliver a quality news product. And I can't resist saying, the facts of economics are not conservative.
Stop lying. Page 5 does not say what you claimed it says.
“Firm capacity” is the fraction of installed wind capacity that is online at the same probability as that of a coal-fired power plant. On average, coal plants are free from unscheduled or scheduled maintenance for 79%–92% of the year, averaging 87.5% in the United States from 2000 to 2004 (Giebel 2000; North American Electric Reliability Council 2005).
Not 92%, which was your lie.
Figure 3 shows that, while the guaranteed power generated by a single wind farm for 92% of the hours of the year was 0 kW, the power guaranteed by 7 and 19 interconnected farms was 60 and 171 kW, giving firm capacities of 0.04 and
0.11, respectively.
So that's at least 11% for 19+ wind farms, not 4%-11%. You have both exaggerated coal's firm capacity and understated that of large numbers of interconnected wind farms. Maybe you just enjoy coal pollution, but the more likely motivation of your behavior is that you are a paid coal / petroleum shill.
Furthermore, 19 interconnected wind farms guaranteed 222 kW of power (firm capacity of 0.15) for 87.5% of the year, the same percent of the year that an average coal plant in the United States guarantees power. Last, 19 farms guaranteed 312 kW of power for 79% of the year, 4 times the guaranteed power generated by one farm for 79% of the year.
Finally, nobody believes we will decommission all coal plants any time soon. But wind is capable of adding to baseload instead of adding more coal plants or more nuclear plants. That is the relevant fact for the present situation. All new capacity should be clean, which means only wind and solar, and that is quite feasible using wind and solar thermal for baseload and pv solar for peak.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems that where Linux has succeeded is where Linux is completely hidden behind the scenes, as far as the consumer is concerned. Even in the case of Android, with a stock device, it would be utterly impossible to know it was running Linux.
Isn't that just what an operating system should do?
Linux wins everywhere except where Windows started with a huge head start. Not being able to break into a monopolized market, the desktop operating system, is not what I consider a "loss" or a "failure." Linux is vastly superior for most productive use of desktop computer hardware. That it hasn't broken into the market, despite being free of charge, only means that enforcing anti-trust laws would be a good thing. Microsoft is, and has always been, abusive.
216.61 Billion. Those are US dollars. Market share revenue.
Want to count exploits? Dollars lost to exploits? Or have I made my point?
I think it's much simpler than that. Windows began with a huge installed base advantage, lock-in to a lot of proprietary "important" software like their own MS Office, Adobe shit, etc., and familiarity. They've just been riding that, and the perception of being SOOOOO much less expensive than Apple and SOOOOO much more convenient than Linux, for many years. Games are a deal-breaker for some, as you said, but not for many. Same for other particulars that alarm lusers. I think the one thing Gates & co. ever got right is the business of making their platform (seem) indispensable, mainly to technically illiterate decision-makers^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B^B deciders.
I think Mint Debian would be that distribution. I use plain vanilla Debian, but from what I have read, the Debian-based Mint comes closest to the balance you're describing.
No, but they are barren of people claiming there is no way you could possibly be having that issue, because mine works just fine - then ridiculing you for even bringing it up.
So is the Ubuntu forum. Please notice, this is not forum.ubuntu.org or ubuntuforums.org or whatever. It's slashdot.org. Everybody ridicules everybody else here, remember? And I'm newer here than you are, sheesh!
a "mature market" that "is in maintenance mode?" Time? The extent of poor and neglected, overdue maintenance?
Of course, planes operating successfully still outnumber those which disintegrate in normal use. But it's not just planes. Consider that collapsing bridge in Minnesota recently. Consider also the Tacoma Narrows fiasco, now some decades ago, which in my opinion is not a mistake that competent engineers make, but one due to social promotion at the highest levels of our education system, which is also symptomatic of an empire in decline. Consider how much of our electrical grid depends on nuclear plants that are at, near or even past their originally estimated lifetimes but not being decommissioned in short because of lack of competence and political will to replace them with better alternatives, and consider how desperately we still depend on 19th century fuels, coal and petroleum, despite what we know about their effect on climate. I think gp AC makes a valid point, using one plane to illustrate a far more widespread, and very real systemic problem.
What multinational company? And what are their policies regarding financial data?
No, no! Steal those books!
~Abby Hoffman
I am a hench man, you insensitive clod!
Let's also not forget just how often local politicians, lawyers, and claims adjusters have asked for this information on the spot with little regard to the claimants privacy.
That is not something I have ever read about. Please cite a reliable source, if possible.
If the data was being managed via internal systems over vpn, that would be better... but that assumes that's reliably possible where these people are working.
Where there is a will, there is a way. BP lacked the will, which is to say, they don't give a fuck.
What multinational company? And what are their policies regarding financial data? A bit stricter than their policies on Firefox v. IE, I'll wager.
Understatement! At Symantec we didn't even let executives just download all the end-of-quarter high-value orders, and that information was vital to timely earnings estimates! We built them a reporting rdbms with "some canned queries" just like you said, which they could access via VPN or from their offices around the world. But the Finance Department did not offer the whole f'ing database to anybody to take from The Company's offices. That shit just isn't done with valuable data -- data that The Company values, that is. (any company, not picking on SYMC)
This alone proves systemic indifference to and contempt of the claimants, BP's victims. An ethical judge who does even minimal due diligence to learn about industry standard Finance IT practices would at least double the settlement against BP just for letting the entire claimant database be stored on anything mobile. The industry is NEVER as careless with property or financial value as BP is with human life and their victims' identities.
Everyone makes mistakes
Some more than others.
there's been a data spill!
i bet they find the laptop in the Gulf of Mexico.
And they're "cleaning it up" with PR just like they "cleaned up" their oil spill with a toxic chemical called Corexit. They're very consistent, in a horrible way.
Thank you. Bad news, but good to know.
Does it seem odd to you that TFA does NOT say that the lost laptop HAS been disabled? It looks a bit queer to me that BP wouldn't want to say THAT, if that was true. And so they did not say that, I assume it is not true. That could mean the laptop is out of range or destroyed, or it could have stolen by somebody smart enough to open it up and remove the hard drive rather than just punch the power button.
Carelessness seems to be part of BP culture throughout the organization, not just in IT matters.
In what previous political upheavals have these technologies been so instrumental? Iran, maybe, but I would say not even then.
TFA also points out that the cars' computer proves that the test was staged.
My computer proves you're gullible and jump to conclusions, and computers don't lie, right?.
No, but TapeCutters do.
And the total for every year is in the ballpark of a billion dollars. I can't find where I've seen it totalled up before, so it's a lot of digging to find all the individual pieces for you and I don't care to spend the time to do it.
No. Being taken on faith is not one of your options.
Krugman's predictions (many others said the same thing) about the insufficient amount of spending in the Recovery Act have proven true, for example. Roubini and Taleb are also worth following, particularly Roubini in my opinion. Robert Reich is sensible. But you seem to be talking about, well obviously actual "headline" writers, but I'm inferring you also mean the CNN etc purveyors of common "wisdom" and announcers of recently released facts such as unemployment, stock market or housing starts data. Absolutely, those airheads are worthless. Expecting useful, accurate information from the corporate media is reasonable in the sense that that is what they owe us, but they're just not competent to deliver a quality news product. And I can't resist saying, the facts of economics are not conservative.
“Firm capacity” is the fraction of installed wind capacity that is online at the same probability as that of a coal-fired power plant. On average, coal plants are free from unscheduled or scheduled maintenance for 79%–92% of the year, averaging 87.5% in the United States from 2000 to 2004 (Giebel 2000; North American Electric Reliability Council 2005).
Not 92%, which was your lie.
Figure 3 shows that, while the guaranteed power generated by a single wind farm for 92% of the hours of the year was 0 kW, the power guaranteed by 7 and 19 interconnected farms was 60 and 171 kW, giving firm capacities of 0.04 and 0.11, respectively.
So that's at least 11% for 19+ wind farms, not 4%-11%. You have both exaggerated coal's firm capacity and understated that of large numbers of interconnected wind farms. Maybe you just enjoy coal pollution, but the more likely motivation of your behavior is that you are a paid coal / petroleum shill.
Furthermore, 19 interconnected wind farms guaranteed 222 kW of power (firm capacity of 0.15) for 87.5% of the year, the same percent of the year that an average coal plant in the United States guarantees power. Last, 19 farms guaranteed 312 kW of power for 79% of the year, 4 times the guaranteed power generated by one farm for 79% of the year.
Finally, nobody believes we will decommission all coal plants any time soon. But wind is capable of adding to baseload instead of adding more coal plants or more nuclear plants. That is the relevant fact for the present situation. All new capacity should be clean, which means only wind and solar, and that is quite feasible using wind and solar thermal for baseload and pv solar for peak.
No, that's admitting it, while spewing the old Bart Simpson "nobody saw me do it so you can't prove anything" at the same time.