Hardware running android? Isn't that a rather broad category? I mean Apple and RIM make their own hardware so comparing them makes sense. But comparing two hardware companies to a dozen or more companies that all use the same software? That seems like a rather useless statistic. Name brands vs generic brands, was there ever any doubt?
The US is the worlds largest arms exporter because it has so many wealthy allies. When you're trading arms with places like: Japan, Germany, UK, Canada, Australia, South Korea, etc. (you know places with real economies and money) it's not hard to see why they are the biggest. You don't need to (but they probably do anyways) violate arms embargoes when you can sign NATO friends up for multi-decade, multi-billion dollar tanks/fighters/ships/rockets.
I seriously doubt the handful of weapons Yemen buys is in anyway comparable to places like South Korea. There is a big difference between Canada dropping $35B on fighter jets from the US, and Gaddafi buying $(small number) small arms from China.
I agree with you 100%. Everyone else is an imitator, but Linux is also a Unix imitator. The issue is not who has the better product, it is who offers better value. Sometime recently opensource solutions reached/are reaching/will reach the level of stability and features needed by different users. The better free (as in beer) alternatives get, the small the market place for paid for visualization will become.
I'm not predicting the death of VMWare. But I would not be surprised to see them go the way of Unix or mainframes, small but highly profitable niche markets.
Because Europe is far away which means we won't get many jobs (shipping costs) out of joint ventures with Europe, no jobs means no votes means no money. If that sounds retarded, it's because it is. With the US we can usually get some kind of make work project to keep the politicians happy.
As a Canadian, I wish our government would partner with the US to fund super awesome science mega-projects like this. Seriously guys, would it be so hard to scrap one aircraft carrier in exchange for something useful?
You certainly provide some good reasons why you use it, sounds a lot like how I use my netbook. Have you considered Asus Transformer? It would provide stylus, keyboard, better touch, better battery, and probably lower price. I've never used the Transformer, and obviously I don't know how well it would fit your needs, but you sound like it's target audience.
Windows tablets suck, period. I don't know anyone who wants one, and I can think of a reason anyone should buy one. Windows is not a low power OS, it doesn't work on low power CPU's, and it's interface was not designed for touch.
Most people want an iPad, the poor and geeks go for Android. There is no room in the market for Windows based tablets.
One of the hardest fights I've had in IT is explaining why I spend $300 a drive from HP and not $70 for the same capacity from Newegg.
More likely the Newegg drive is a 5400rpm/intellispeed (ala WD Caviar Green) with shitty random seek time, low random read/write, and terrible IOPs. It probably has 1/4 the mean time between failure rate before you factor in the fact that it is not rated for the kinds of temperatures you see in server rooms. You can't hot swap it, crappy warranty, inferior diagnostics, no NCQ, etc.
Enterprise grade drive are over priced, no doubt about that. But sometimes (sometimes, most times not) the cost is justified.
someone who shares new child pornography images is someone who can reasonably be suspected of being a child molester
If they accidentally take a picture of a child molester in action, sure I can understand that.
But if they intentionally ie. they knew what was going to happen and wanted to take a photo/video to post on the internet, then I consider that a minor difference. Being an accessory to child molestation is still a pittyless crime.
I can see a strong defence for people viewing the material, but the viewers are not the ones under attack here. And besides, I like said in OP: I'm not saying anonymous is right going vigilante, but I don't feel bad for the victims. When the internet police make up their todo list of crime fighting, I hope this is near the bottom.
Child porn people are one of those groups I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for. If Anonymous wants to lay the beat down on their ass I hope the cops let it slide. I know it's not just or legal, and it only encourages them, but this time I just don't care.
If someone told me a child molester died in a tragic car accident, you can bet I would dispute the word 'tragic'.
I've never killed a man, but I've read many an obituary with a great deal of satisfaction.
~Mark Twain
I don't know why most people assume that this will be attached to a truck, or moved my hand. If I were the military first thing I would want to use it for is helicopter surveillance. You would have to make it more powerful to work at reasonable elevation, and would probably want to widen the field of view. Not easy tasks I'm sure.
But suppose that you could fly around in a helicopter higher and faster than "likely to get shot down by rifle fire" speed/range or at night. You could scan large swaths of houses and watch for movement inside them. It could provide a good estimate of troop numbers and concentrations.
I could also see it used to hostage rescue. Dress the helicopter up like a TV crew and scan the building. You could figure out (with some guess work) the number of bad guys, number of hostages, and where everything is located.
I'm pretty confident that this technology is a CIA/DIA wet dream.
While there are some academic software projects that make it big, that vast majority don't. This is because PhD's are trying to do research, publish, and get their doctorate, not write quality code. I know I would never release any of the code I have written so far, not because I'm anti-FOSS, but because the code is crap and I know it.
The software is written to see if something was possible, or to scratch some very specific itch. The result is that there is no documentation, very little abstraction, and a lot of cowboy coding. The problem is you write code to follow the results, so you cannot plan ahead. You can write beautiful code for a week, then get the results and discover the whole approach needs to be changed. You also tend to code very specific to the task because you don't want your results to be messed up by coding shortcuts or needless abstractions. But most important, for me at least, is time. Most PhD just don't have enough of it to spare starting and maintaing a project. Sometimes Profs do (Zeus bless them) but the students rarely.
What you do see happen is for research to prove something novel, then get rewritten to become a proper project sometimes FOSS, sometimes as the poduct of a new company. I have seen a few Profs. start open source projects and have their students work on it in partnership with other researchers, and that maybe more common in the future. But right now, most code never gets out and you wouldn't use it even if it did.
1) : /
2) : w
2a) Everything is grey!
3) d $
4).vimrc
5) Good question.
6) Good point.
7) What is this "click" you speak of?
You make a good point about FOSS. The lack of standardization is a headache and led me to just write everything I can in Vim.
However I think the issue has more to do with the users than the programers. Geeks tend to learn everything about the programs they use, and this can be a serious time investment. It would take a very long to become as proficient in program B after having used program A for years, so many people just don't bother.
I think this is why Vim and Emacs still have such a big following despite being so old. Once you have learned all the neat little tricks, going to any other system is painful because you don't know how to do stuff anymore. I know I will never switch from Vim to Emacs, not because one is better than the other, but because I have spent so much time mastering Vim that switching to Emacs would be to painful.
I always thought opensource meant the user gets access to the code , not just the binary. IMHO there is nothing wrong with google keeping the code under wraps while its under development. As long as the user can get the code when the device is released I dont see the problem. What is going on with honeycomb where they release the device but not the code I am unimpressed with.
That's because communism has never been tried. A communist regime in the model that Marx was pushing hasn't ever been implemented. Marx wanted a state like the US, except where the people owned all of the shares of the companies they worked for rather than random investors. And where there was only one class.
The problem is that what you have stated is about all Marx had to say about communism. He never went into significant detail. The Communist Manifesto has lots of feel good theory, but little practical details about elections, government structure, defense, taxation, separation of powers, legal structure, etc.
Marx was above all else a critic of capitalism. He correctly pointed out many of the problems of capitalism, and many of these problems still exist today. This is why he is still talked about in economics. If you look at his major publications, he had three massive volumes titled Das Capital while the Communist Manifesto is rather light.
On the other hand he also ignored facts that were inconvenient. For example he claimed that the rich would get richer and the poor would get poorer, despite the fact that between the Manifesto and Das Capital conditions and wages for the working class had improved greatly thanks to the formation of government workplace safety laws, unions, limits on employing children, and shortages in labour.
Sometimes figuring out what the problems are is as difficult then finding the solutions. Marx did a good job identifying the problems and hinted at, but never really delivered, a solution.
No matter how things work out, let me say thinks for your work on Firefox. It has been my browser of choice for years now and I plan to stick with it. Bug patching can be a rather thankless job that never gets the lime light. But rest assured, us end users do appreciate it.
I am getting so tired of this argument that Harper got majority without 50% of the vote. Take a look at Chrétien's election history:
Year % popular vote Result
2000 40.85% Majority
1997 38.46% Majority
1993 41.24% Majority
Chrétien had 10 years of government without getting 50% of the vote!
I agree 100% with the vote splitting argument. The same things happened during the Chrétien years but in reverse. Remember the Reform Party, the Progressive Conservatives, the Alliance Party, etc? Then Harper showed up, united the right wings parties, and got a minority government. You can see this same thing over and over in other countries (but not the USA, their 2 party system is.....unfortunate). That is just how elections work.
I like to look at it this way: The goal is not to make the largest number of people happy, it is to make the least number of people unhappy. I don't vote for the best candidate, I vote for the least bad (because lets be honest 90% of them are scum to begin with). A lot of left wing people don't like Harper (for his social policies). But a fair number of left wing people would also never vote for Layton (his economic policies). Uniting the left may work but the devil is in the details.
Finally the idea behind our current system is that because each MP is elected individually, they are accountable individually. That is to say is some MP screws up big time, the community they are from can elect someone else....in theory. With proportional representation you get closer to what people want, it is more accurate without question. The issue is that because you vote for a party and not a person, you can (and often do) end up with a parliament full of party hacks, and old boy networks. Some MP may be a total screw up, but keeps getting a position because of internal political connections.
Now from what we have seen in the last election vis a vis Quebeckers electing someone who doesn't even speak French is that people tend to vote for parties rather then people regardless of which system we use. So the theory of our current system may not hold water, but don't think that the issue is black and white. Getting more accurate representation would be good, but are you willing to give up a little of your corruption fighting powers to get it?
The short answer is no. E-Voting is a stupid idea. All electronic forms of voting are more open to error than traditional methods, not to mention manipulation. When it comes to elections I don't care how long it takes to count the votes. Even if it took a week, who cares? It's not like the new government will step in any faster.
When it comes to my elections what I care about is accuracy, reliability, verifiability. The paper method works because everything is done by hand, so there a no/few glitches. It reliable because, well paper is ancient. And finally it is verifiable because there exists a paper trail, which allows recount if there is a dispute.
The system we have right now has worked for a very long time, and it has worked quite well. We don't need anything new or fancy. I like new fancy stuff for somethings, that why I use Debian Testing on my desktop. But when I depend on something to work reliably I use Debian Stable, it may be outdated, but it has been thoroughly tested and has proven its trustworthiness.
This high frequency trading is stupid. Everyone knows that it is a scam that is just making the markets more unstable. Yet no one does anything about it. IMHO the markets should have a clock speed like a CPU. All of the trades enter a queue and the queue gets executed once a second. This would limit each trading day to X number of ticks per day. This would go a long way to removing high frequency crap from the system. Of course people will then try to improve short term predictions rather than long term like they should. But it would be a step in the right direction.
A few months ago the western world wailed loudly when some arab countries terminated internet and mobile phone connections because it was thought to be assisting their local rioters.
No the western world wailed because they were shutting down networks to suppress freedom of speech. Much of the Arab spring started out as peaceful protests demanding democratic reform. The governments responded with massive censorship which included shutting down social networks. Most of this censorship was in place well before the violence started.
What is happening in London has nothing to do with free speech or political/social reform. It's just mass vandalism.
It's the difference between shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater and suppressing criticism of the government. Both are preventing people from saying things, but only one is a freedom of expression issue.
I will be going to the Dundas Rally tomorrow. Hopefully there will be a good turn out and the government will get the message that consumers know that they are getting ripped off.
Disclaimer: I am not a sysadmin
It seems to me that your best bet would be to distribute authority. Does the guy in charge of email need admin for the webserver? etc.
Look at it from the perspective of a hacker compromising an admin account, pitch it this way and the admins will likely be able to help you. Limiting an admin in the range of damage they can do before they become disgruntled is the key. Obviously you can only take this so far, and it will likely make thing more difficult for some of the admins, but if you are really concerned about rogue admins the head ache may be worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
Hardware running android? Isn't that a rather broad category? I mean Apple and RIM make their own hardware so comparing them makes sense. But comparing two hardware companies to a dozen or more companies that all use the same software? That seems like a rather useless statistic. Name brands vs generic brands, was there ever any doubt?
The US is the worlds largest arms exporter because it has so many wealthy allies. When you're trading arms with places like: Japan, Germany, UK, Canada, Australia, South Korea, etc. (you know places with real economies and money) it's not hard to see why they are the biggest. You don't need to (but they probably do anyways) violate arms embargoes when you can sign NATO friends up for multi-decade, multi-billion dollar tanks/fighters/ships/rockets.
I seriously doubt the handful of weapons Yemen buys is in anyway comparable to places like South Korea. There is a big difference between Canada dropping $35B on fighter jets from the US, and Gaddafi buying $(small number) small arms from China.
I agree with you 100%. Everyone else is an imitator, but Linux is also a Unix imitator. The issue is not who has the better product, it is who offers better value. Sometime recently opensource solutions reached/are reaching/will reach the level of stability and features needed by different users. The better free (as in beer) alternatives get, the small the market place for paid for visualization will become.
I'm not predicting the death of VMWare. But I would not be surprised to see them go the way of Unix or mainframes, small but highly profitable niche markets.
Because Europe is far away which means we won't get many jobs (shipping costs) out of joint ventures with Europe, no jobs means no votes means no money. If that sounds retarded, it's because it is. With the US we can usually get some kind of make work project to keep the politicians happy.
As a Canadian, I wish our government would partner with the US to fund super awesome science mega-projects like this. Seriously guys, would it be so hard to scrap one aircraft carrier in exchange for something useful?
You certainly provide some good reasons why you use it, sounds a lot like how I use my netbook. Have you considered Asus Transformer? It would provide stylus, keyboard, better touch, better battery, and probably lower price. I've never used the Transformer, and obviously I don't know how well it would fit your needs, but you sound like it's target audience.
Windows tablets suck, period. I don't know anyone who wants one, and I can think of a reason anyone should buy one. Windows is not a low power OS, it doesn't work on low power CPU's, and it's interface was not designed for touch.
Most people want an iPad, the poor and geeks go for Android. There is no room in the market for Windows based tablets.
I wish I had mod points for you.
As a theologian how do you publish? After 2,000 years how can you possibly come up with new ideas? Or is most of it applying things to current times?
One of the hardest fights I've had in IT is explaining why I spend $300 a drive from HP and not $70 for the same capacity from Newegg.
More likely the Newegg drive is a 5400rpm/intellispeed (ala WD Caviar Green) with shitty random seek time, low random read/write, and terrible IOPs. It probably has 1/4 the mean time between failure rate before you factor in the fact that it is not rated for the kinds of temperatures you see in server rooms. You can't hot swap it, crappy warranty, inferior diagnostics, no NCQ, etc.
Enterprise grade drive are over priced, no doubt about that. But sometimes (sometimes, most times not) the cost is justified.
someone who shares new child pornography images is someone who can reasonably be suspected of being a child molester
If they accidentally take a picture of a child molester in action, sure I can understand that.
But if they intentionally ie. they knew what was going to happen and wanted to take a photo/video to post on the internet, then I consider that a minor difference. Being an accessory to child molestation is still a pittyless crime.
I can see a strong defence for people viewing the material, but the viewers are not the ones under attack here. And besides, I like said in OP: I'm not saying anonymous is right going vigilante, but I don't feel bad for the victims. When the internet police make up their todo list of crime fighting, I hope this is near the bottom.
Child porn people are one of those groups I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for. If Anonymous wants to lay the beat down on their ass I hope the cops let it slide. I know it's not just or legal, and it only encourages them, but this time I just don't care.
If someone told me a child molester died in a tragic car accident, you can bet I would dispute the word 'tragic'.
I've never killed a man, but I've read many an obituary with a great deal of satisfaction.
~Mark Twain
I don't know why most people assume that this will be attached to a truck, or moved my hand. If I were the military first thing I would want to use it for is helicopter surveillance. You would have to make it more powerful to work at reasonable elevation, and would probably want to widen the field of view. Not easy tasks I'm sure.
But suppose that you could fly around in a helicopter higher and faster than "likely to get shot down by rifle fire" speed/range or at night. You could scan large swaths of houses and watch for movement inside them. It could provide a good estimate of troop numbers and concentrations.
I could also see it used to hostage rescue. Dress the helicopter up like a TV crew and scan the building. You could figure out (with some guess work) the number of bad guys, number of hostages, and where everything is located.
I'm pretty confident that this technology is a CIA/DIA wet dream.
Mod parent up! Can anyone post a link to an article detailing this approach? It seems to me like a complicated, but possibly workable system.
While there are some academic software projects that make it big, that vast majority don't. This is because PhD's are trying to do research, publish, and get their doctorate, not write quality code. I know I would never release any of the code I have written so far, not because I'm anti-FOSS, but because the code is crap and I know it.
The software is written to see if something was possible, or to scratch some very specific itch. The result is that there is no documentation, very little abstraction, and a lot of cowboy coding. The problem is you write code to follow the results, so you cannot plan ahead. You can write beautiful code for a week, then get the results and discover the whole approach needs to be changed. You also tend to code very specific to the task because you don't want your results to be messed up by coding shortcuts or needless abstractions. But most important, for me at least, is time. Most PhD just don't have enough of it to spare starting and maintaing a project. Sometimes Profs do (Zeus bless them) but the students rarely.
What you do see happen is for research to prove something novel, then get rewritten to become a proper project sometimes FOSS, sometimes as the poduct of a new company. I have seen a few Profs. start open source projects and have their students work on it in partnership with other researchers, and that maybe more common in the future. But right now, most code never gets out and you wouldn't use it even if it did.
VIM!
1) : / .vimrc
2) : w
2a) Everything is grey!
3) d $
4)
5) Good question.
6) Good point.
7) What is this "click" you speak of?
You make a good point about FOSS. The lack of standardization is a headache and led me to just write everything I can in Vim.
However I think the issue has more to do with the users than the programers. Geeks tend to learn everything about the programs they use, and this can be a serious time investment. It would take a very long to become as proficient in program B after having used program A for years, so many people just don't bother.
I think this is why Vim and Emacs still have such a big following despite being so old. Once you have learned all the neat little tricks, going to any other system is painful because you don't know how to do stuff anymore. I know I will never switch from Vim to Emacs, not because one is better than the other, but because I have spent so much time mastering Vim that switching to Emacs would be to painful.
I always thought opensource meant the user gets access to the code , not just the binary. IMHO there is nothing wrong with google keeping the code under wraps while its under development. As long as the user can get the code when the device is released I dont see the problem. What is going on with honeycomb where they release the device but not the code I am unimpressed with.
That's because communism has never been tried. A communist regime in the model that Marx was pushing hasn't ever been implemented. Marx wanted a state like the US, except where the people owned all of the shares of the companies they worked for rather than random investors. And where there was only one class.
The problem is that what you have stated is about all Marx had to say about communism. He never went into significant detail. The Communist Manifesto has lots of feel good theory, but little practical details about elections, government structure, defense, taxation, separation of powers, legal structure, etc.
Marx was above all else a critic of capitalism. He correctly pointed out many of the problems of capitalism, and many of these problems still exist today. This is why he is still talked about in economics. If you look at his major publications, he had three massive volumes titled Das Capital while the Communist Manifesto is rather light.
On the other hand he also ignored facts that were inconvenient. For example he claimed that the rich would get richer and the poor would get poorer, despite the fact that between the Manifesto and Das Capital conditions and wages for the working class had improved greatly thanks to the formation of government workplace safety laws, unions, limits on employing children, and shortages in labour.
Sometimes figuring out what the problems are is as difficult then finding the solutions. Marx did a good job identifying the problems and hinted at, but never really delivered, a solution.
No matter how things work out, let me say thinks for your work on Firefox. It has been my browser of choice for years now and I plan to stick with it. Bug patching can be a rather thankless job that never gets the lime light. But rest assured, us end users do appreciate it.
I am getting so tired of this argument that Harper got majority without 50% of the vote. Take a look at Chrétien's election history:
Year % popular vote Result
2000 40.85% Majority
1997 38.46% Majority
1993 41.24% Majority
Chrétien had 10 years of government without getting 50% of the vote!
I agree 100% with the vote splitting argument. The same things happened during the Chrétien years but in reverse. Remember the Reform Party, the Progressive Conservatives, the Alliance Party, etc? Then Harper showed up, united the right wings parties, and got a minority government. You can see this same thing over and over in other countries (but not the USA, their 2 party system is.....unfortunate). That is just how elections work.
I like to look at it this way: The goal is not to make the largest number of people happy, it is to make the least number of people unhappy. I don't vote for the best candidate, I vote for the least bad (because lets be honest 90% of them are scum to begin with). A lot of left wing people don't like Harper (for his social policies). But a fair number of left wing people would also never vote for Layton (his economic policies). Uniting the left may work but the devil is in the details.
Finally the idea behind our current system is that because each MP is elected individually, they are accountable individually. That is to say is some MP screws up big time, the community they are from can elect someone else....in theory. With proportional representation you get closer to what people want, it is more accurate without question. The issue is that because you vote for a party and not a person, you can (and often do) end up with a parliament full of party hacks, and old boy networks. Some MP may be a total screw up, but keeps getting a position because of internal political connections.
Now from what we have seen in the last election vis a vis Quebeckers electing someone who doesn't even speak French is that people tend to vote for parties rather then people regardless of which system we use. So the theory of our current system may not hold water, but don't think that the issue is black and white. Getting more accurate representation would be good, but are you willing to give up a little of your corruption fighting powers to get it?
The short answer is no. E-Voting is a stupid idea. All electronic forms of voting are more open to error than traditional methods, not to mention manipulation. When it comes to elections I don't care how long it takes to count the votes. Even if it took a week, who cares? It's not like the new government will step in any faster.
When it comes to my elections what I care about is accuracy, reliability, verifiability. The paper method works because everything is done by hand, so there a no/few glitches. It reliable because, well paper is ancient. And finally it is verifiable because there exists a paper trail, which allows recount if there is a dispute.
The system we have right now has worked for a very long time, and it has worked quite well. We don't need anything new or fancy. I like new fancy stuff for somethings, that why I use Debian Testing on my desktop. But when I depend on something to work reliably I use Debian Stable, it may be outdated, but it has been thoroughly tested and has proven its trustworthiness.
This high frequency trading is stupid. Everyone knows that it is a scam that is just making the markets more unstable. Yet no one does anything about it. IMHO the markets should have a clock speed like a CPU. All of the trades enter a queue and the queue gets executed once a second. This would limit each trading day to X number of ticks per day. This would go a long way to removing high frequency crap from the system. Of course people will then try to improve short term predictions rather than long term like they should. But it would be a step in the right direction.
A few months ago the western world wailed loudly when some arab countries terminated internet and mobile phone connections because it was thought to be assisting their local rioters.
No the western world wailed because they were shutting down networks to suppress freedom of speech. Much of the Arab spring started out as peaceful protests demanding democratic reform. The governments responded with massive censorship which included shutting down social networks. Most of this censorship was in place well before the violence started.
What is happening in London has nothing to do with free speech or political/social reform. It's just mass vandalism.
It's the difference between shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater and suppressing criticism of the government. Both are preventing people from saying things, but only one is a freedom of expression issue.
Mod parent up!
I will be going to the Dundas Rally tomorrow. Hopefully there will be a good turn out and the government will get the message that consumers know that they are getting ripped off.
Disclaimer: I am not a sysadmin It seems to me that your best bet would be to distribute authority. Does the guy in charge of email need admin for the webserver? etc. Look at it from the perspective of a hacker compromising an admin account, pitch it this way and the admins will likely be able to help you. Limiting an admin in the range of damage they can do before they become disgruntled is the key. Obviously you can only take this so far, and it will likely make thing more difficult for some of the admins, but if you are really concerned about rogue admins the head ache may be worth it.