Yea, I used this in my company to go all linux desktops. None of my employees where even clear on what windows was or what it did, even though they had been exposed only to windows software their entire life and I listed just the ability to be able to type on a computer as a skill.
They came in, I gave them mas o menos 5 mins of training as to what pretty little icons to look for to do certain tasks, and they where all productively working away an hour later. Now new employees come in, and those employees quickly take care of the linux orientation of the new guys. 4 solid years without a problem with either the computers or the employees learning how to use them.
Once about a year ago however I happened to have a copy of windows booted on one computer (happens about once every 5 years with me) to convert a file. The girl who normally used that computer sat down, and immediately freaked out because she thought she had broken the computer.
This is only one small example to why the guys running around randomly plugging in wires will not get AI. There is a whole lot more to it, than simply getting that square plug to fit in the right round hole.
My father was a prosecutor for over 20 years, and defense attorney for 15 years. He told me that in all of his years as a State attorney he never seen a warrant request by the police not granted. The only ones judges declined to sign where the ones he convinced the judge that the he did not believe the police had sufficient reason for a warrant.
So everyone that believes simply having judicial review of a warrant is somehow making you safe from state intrusion is living in constitutional fantasy land.
MS "embracing" open source I believe is the ultimate nuclear option for MS to take open source apart from the inside out. Watch them put on the sheep's clothing, and then try and run it in to the ground.
I have said this before on slash, and get slapped down each time. I will give it another go.
Now, I have never gone back to closed source commercial software for one of these open source project train wrecks, but I can see a major reason a company might. Specifically, open source project management issues. Their decisions can be very erratic and unstable. Projects implode with political infighting, good coders come and go, too many inexperienced newbies in power positions, organization can be good one month and bad the next, and so on. This makes it impossible for companies to do long-term planning around key pieces of software or stacks, if they can not even be sure what is going in to the next piece of software, when it is really going to be released, and if they project is even going to exist down the road.
I have at least a dozen instances of this in my own business, that has cost me thousands of dollars in retooling my shop and it is a fairly small shop. Now, I have stuck to open source, moving to other projects and alternatives, but it has not been pleasant. I can see how other companies might move to a proprietary solution that will be guaranteed for X number of years and clear upgrade paths.
So the problem is not the quality of the code produced by open source. I believe it is still a superior way of producing software. I believe the problem is with easily being able to determine the health of an open source project.
The open source community needs not only quality assurance system for software, but quality assurance system for project organization. Easy quick reference of just how well run any particular project is, and the project that they depend on, all the way up the food chain.
I have lived in Chile for years. As far as I can tell the gringos are getting the bargain. I keep telling Chileans going the other direction it is just not worth $131.
I have been using FF since it was phoenix 0.6 beta or something to that effect. I have put up with its ups and downs, and strange behavior all that time. Regardless, it was still fast. Finally in the last month of 3.5 b.s. I had to give it up. It was crashing none stop on every computer in my office at a rate of about once every 20 mins.
Now I have finally made the switch to opera, and I don't think FF is going to get me back anytime soon. I am switching my entire office because of the lost productivity. Yes, I have test driven the 3.6, and it is no better. FF ruined FF.
I had been thinking about Opera for a while, but there where some strange things they did I could not stand. Now in 10.0 they seem to have cleaned them up a good deal, and it is a super browser.
To do that, we also need a certification program to handle management / sorting of open source projects. Putting a 5 star super program on a new retail computer, when the frigen open source projects is blowing apart from internal political issues can be as damaging to open source adoption as few bugs. This is problem corporations face in adopting open source.
For example, would anyone selling a netbook today with linux on it install a drive with reiserFS format on it? Perhaps, but it might not be my first choice if I was retailer trying to evaluate what to put on my shelfs, or as a netbook maker trying to decide what to load on the next version. There is likely better examples, but you get my point.
I would no more select a open source software package built by an imploding open source project, than I would select closed source from a company going bankrupt. There is much more to open source adoption than the quality of the code. Please spare me the 'but you can fork it yourself' bs. Users and companies often do not have the time or the resources, to take over some project because there is no longer any support. Only in the most desperate situations is that possible. They move to something else. What to move on to, is the issue. Stable open source software is produced by stable open source projects.
Standardization is not an enemy of open source, but many in open source circles seem to like standardization in how code is produced, but reject it as an organizational principle for open source overall. They sound like a bunch of artist, complaining that organizing open source organizations would be the same thing as cramping innovation. Sorry, not the same thing.
If you can give companies clear indications of what is stable open source project, and what is not, I bet we solve 90% of the problems of producing drivers and hardware for Linux. Right now, even the most committed hardware vendors almost have to stand on a stand on a street corner and take a poll to find out if it is even worth building driver.
"Which would be more economical in the long run? Bear in mind that there are 2 kinds of people that need to achieve very high velocities -- astronauts trying to make orbit and intercontinental travelers trying to get to the other side of the world."
I would add, bombers getting to their target and home for dinner.
Totally understand that. So, if we are going to make imaginary money, how about spending it on something fun that might really do something for human species. I really doubt 31 flavors of new derivatives are going to matter much in 1,000 years, but the first base on the Moon or Mars sure might.
I wonder what sort of economic boost a trillion dollars thrown at an international project to move human kind forward like going to the moon and mars by end of the next decade would have done for the U.S. and international economy vs. simply bailing out a bunch of paper tiger banks.
We don't even have a frigen way to get in to space anymore (or at least soon). We are back in the frigen 1950's space wise.
We have lacked good wars. Wars are small, and relatively affordable. Technology investment in war today tends to be with tools designed more than 30 years ago. There is no real reason to innovate as you fight a war. For example, WWII or WWI all had big projects that happened just in the nick of time on all sides. Even the early cold war had some of that, but still mostly on improving on what came before front. For better or worse, piece is bad for innovation.
Not only is obama going after the companies for more tax, he is going after individual Americans oversees. So, it is too expensive to employee Americans no matter where they are at, if you can find someone in a foreign country to do the same job.
I am sorry. Invasive species and diseases have been entering the U.S. since the first pilgrims got off the boat with their pock infested blankets. The U.S. has always turned a blind eye to the poor dying of them, until they spread to the middle class and rich. Now congress thinks this is an emergency?
I think author of this article needs to spend sometime getting to know their American history book. The only thing that has changed is there is now more poor. How about treating that disease?
Try Temuco, Southern Chile. I know lots of people getting their internet via long distance wireless Bridges, 20, 30 miles out of town. Lots of people with Sat systems in the really rural area. The government provides sat systems to schools that are 2 days horseback ride in to the mountains.
Still, knowing the rural United States, our choices and speeds of ISP's here is likly larger. Many of my family in rural parts of the United States just got off of dial up internet about a year ago.
I think they fail to appreciate the free flow of U.S. currency in to and out of Latin America. Cocain is very common, and so is the use of the U.S. currency in most of Latin America.
I use just a good old fashion drill, and run the bit through the platter 3 or 4 times. One time is sufficient to make it likly way to expensive for even the most serious person to recover anything. An extra 3 or 4 holes is just for fun.
Slashdot Mirror
Yea, I used this in my company to go all linux desktops. None of my employees where even clear on what windows was or what it did, even though they had been exposed only to windows software their entire life and I listed just the ability to be able to type on a computer as a skill.
They came in, I gave them mas o menos 5 mins of training as to what pretty little icons to look for to do certain tasks, and they where all productively working away an hour later. Now new employees come in, and those employees quickly take care of the linux orientation of the new guys. 4 solid years without a problem with either the computers or the employees learning how to use them.
Once about a year ago however I happened to have a copy of windows booted on one computer (happens about once every 5 years with me) to convert a file. The girl who normally used that computer sat down, and immediately freaked out because she thought she had broken the computer.
This is only one small example to why the guys running around randomly plugging in wires will not get AI. There is a whole lot more to it, than simply getting that square plug to fit in the right round hole.
Your ass must still be bleeding from shitting that troll out.
My father was a prosecutor for over 20 years, and defense attorney for 15 years. He told me that in all of his years as a State attorney he never seen a warrant request by the police not granted. The only ones judges declined to sign where the ones he convinced the judge that the he did not believe the police had sufficient reason for a warrant.
So everyone that believes simply having judicial review of a warrant is somehow making you safe from state intrusion is living in constitutional fantasy land.
I say we send the Marines to storm the MS campus.
That is why they are developing btrfs file system, which in theory should be superior to ZFS or at least do more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs
If you really want ZFS in linux right now, it can be done through fuse in linux as I understand.
MS "embracing" open source I believe is the ultimate nuclear option for MS to take open source apart from the inside out. Watch them put on the sheep's clothing, and then try and run it in to the ground.
I have said this before on slash, and get slapped down each time. I will give it another go.
Now, I have never gone back to closed source commercial software for one of these open source project train wrecks, but I can see a major reason a company might. Specifically, open source project management issues. Their decisions can be very erratic and unstable. Projects implode with political infighting, good coders come and go, too many inexperienced newbies in power positions, organization can be good one month and bad the next, and so on. This makes it impossible for companies to do long-term planning around key pieces of software or stacks, if they can not even be sure what is going in to the next piece of software, when it is really going to be released, and if they project is even going to exist down the road.
I have at least a dozen instances of this in my own business, that has cost me thousands of dollars in retooling my shop and it is a fairly small shop. Now, I have stuck to open source, moving to other projects and alternatives, but it has not been pleasant. I can see how other companies might move to a proprietary solution that will be guaranteed for X number of years and clear upgrade paths.
So the problem is not the quality of the code produced by open source. I believe it is still a superior way of producing software. I believe the problem is with easily being able to determine the health of an open source project.
The open source community needs not only quality assurance system for software, but quality assurance system for project organization. Easy quick reference of just how well run any particular project is, and the project that they depend on, all the way up the food chain.
I have lived in Chile for years. As far as I can tell the gringos are getting the bargain. I keep telling Chileans going the other direction it is just not worth $131.
I have been using FF since it was phoenix 0.6 beta or something to that effect. I have put up with its ups and downs, and strange behavior all that time. Regardless, it was still fast. Finally in the last month of 3.5 b.s. I had to give it up. It was crashing none stop on every computer in my office at a rate of about once every 20 mins.
Now I have finally made the switch to opera, and I don't think FF is going to get me back anytime soon. I am switching my entire office because of the lost productivity. Yes, I have test driven the 3.6, and it is no better. FF ruined FF.
I had been thinking about Opera for a while, but there where some strange things they did I could not stand. Now in 10.0 they seem to have cleaned them up a good deal, and it is a super browser.
To do that, we also need a certification program to handle management / sorting of open source projects. Putting a 5 star super program on a new retail computer, when the frigen open source projects is blowing apart from internal political issues can be as damaging to open source adoption as few bugs. This is problem corporations face in adopting open source.
For example, would anyone selling a netbook today with linux on it install a drive with reiserFS format on it? Perhaps, but it might not be my first choice if I was retailer trying to evaluate what to put on my shelfs, or as a netbook maker trying to decide what to load on the next version. There is likely better examples, but you get my point.
I would no more select a open source software package built by an imploding open source project, than I would select closed source from a company going bankrupt. There is much more to open source adoption than the quality of the code. Please spare me the 'but you can fork it yourself' bs. Users and companies often do not have the time or the resources, to take over some project because there is no longer any support. Only in the most desperate situations is that possible. They move to something else. What to move on to, is the issue. Stable open source software is produced by stable open source projects.
Standardization is not an enemy of open source, but many in open source circles seem to like standardization in how code is produced, but reject it as an organizational principle for open source overall. They sound like a bunch of artist, complaining that organizing open source organizations would be the same thing as cramping innovation. Sorry, not the same thing.
If you can give companies clear indications of what is stable open source project, and what is not, I bet we solve 90% of the problems of producing drivers and hardware for Linux. Right now, even the most committed hardware vendors almost have to stand on a stand on a street corner and take a poll to find out if it is even worth building driver.
"Which would be more economical in the long run? Bear in mind that there are 2 kinds of people that need to achieve very high velocities -- astronauts trying to make orbit and intercontinental travelers trying to get to the other side of the world."
I would add, bombers getting to their target and home for dinner.
Totally understand that. So, if we are going to make imaginary money, how about spending it on something fun that might really do something for human species. I really doubt 31 flavors of new derivatives are going to matter much in 1,000 years, but the first base on the Moon or Mars sure might.
I wonder what sort of economic boost a trillion dollars thrown at an international project to move human kind forward like going to the moon and mars by end of the next decade would have done for the U.S. and international economy vs. simply bailing out a bunch of paper tiger banks.
We don't even have a frigen way to get in to space anymore (or at least soon). We are back in the frigen 1950's space wise.
Or we could have just let the bank executives on wall street rot in hell, and all of us could have went to Mars on vacation (round trip included).
What is the difference? Lack of wars!!!
We have lacked good wars. Wars are small, and relatively affordable. Technology investment in war today tends to be with tools designed more than 30 years ago. There is no real reason to innovate as you fight a war. For example, WWII or WWI all had big projects that happened just in the nick of time on all sides. Even the early cold war had some of that, but still mostly on improving on what came before front. For better or worse, piece is bad for innovation.
There is more to that then simply how deep you dig your hole.
Things like pV = K
No shit?
It was not completely accurate I will admit, but I thought it unfair to blame the U.S. government for something that happened before it was formed.
Not only is obama going after the companies for more tax, he is going after individual Americans oversees. So, it is too expensive to employee Americans no matter where they are at, if you can find someone in a foreign country to do the same job.
I am sorry. Invasive species and diseases have been entering the U.S. since the first pilgrims got off the boat with their pock infested blankets. The U.S. has always turned a blind eye to the poor dying of them, until they spread to the middle class and rich. Now congress thinks this is an emergency?
I think author of this article needs to spend sometime getting to know their American history book. The only thing that has changed is there is now more poor. How about treating that disease?
As long as they are free and open source hookers as in Free beer.
Try Temuco, Southern Chile. I know lots of people getting their internet via long distance wireless Bridges, 20, 30 miles out of town. Lots of people with Sat systems in the really rural area. The government provides sat systems to schools that are 2 days horseback ride in to the mountains.
Still, knowing the rural United States, our choices and speeds of ISP's here is likly larger. Many of my family in rural parts of the United States just got off of dial up internet about a year ago.
I think they fail to appreciate the free flow of U.S. currency in to and out of Latin America. Cocain is very common, and so is the use of the U.S. currency in most of Latin America.
I use just a good old fashion drill, and run the bit through the platter 3 or 4 times. One time is sufficient to make it likly way to expensive for even the most serious person to recover anything. An extra 3 or 4 holes is just for fun.