I have to agree that this is the whole point... Jobs himself can pull it off.
It would be really fun to make some sort of study to see how well the various styles work, absent a Jobs-type at the top. So many times it seems that a company's best days are under the founding generation, Apple under Jobs, IBM under Watson, Ford under Ford, etc. The idea behind the US Constitution was to put in place a system that would have a good chance of working no matter what idiots were at the helm. It would be fascinating to see a set of corporate procedures that could enable it to thrive after the founding generation.
I meant the "most major" theatrical release: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087803/ I read the book long before that too, and credit the book for postponing the reality for at least a decade, though not two.
More than any other 2 people, George Orwell and ACC owned years - 1984 and 2001, respectively. 1984 was actually released in 1984, but of course 2001 was released in 1968.
It just kind of annoys me that 2001, such a year-owning film, was not cleaned up and re-released in 2001. I would have payed to see it again on the big screen, and I own the DVD.
> There are mistakes I've made, that I would take back if I could. I'm trying > very hard not to make them this time.
You've just rendered yourself unfit for political office. No true politician admits to a mistake, or says he/she would do something differently. It's much more political to blame the facts.
> but if they can help a democrat steal an election...
And what's your opinion if it's helping a republican steal an election?
Whatever response you give me, the words "a democrat" did not need to be in your post. Stealing an election is WRONG, whether it's a democrat or a republican. You took a very good post and diminished it with a bit of partisanship. I notice that you said "democrat" where usually the party affiliation is capitalized, so maybe you're scooting by on a technicality. But at that point we're parsing to the degree that we criticize politicians for.
Looks like a real boom shaping up in sub-orbital tourism.
Now let's just wait for the ensuing bust.
It may be relevant that there have actually been no sub-orbital tourists yet. So far they're all expecting a "space voyage", and I don't think that the realism has set in yet that this is Alan Shepherd scale, not John Glenn. They're paying a pile of bucks for only a few minutes of real flight and weightlessness - while strapped into a seat.
I'd save any investment until we see how word-of-mouth evaluations look.
Re:Unknown value?
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Don't you just need an irrational number of fingers, or do the fingers themselves have to be irrational, as well?
Many people are known to be irrational, so this shouldn't be impossible.
You misunderstand. IMHO the current government is either terribly incompetent, or horribly EVIL. Either is impeachable, the latter is treasonous. That one political part continues to defend and back such conduct rather than eject the bum for sullying their party's image is most disturbing.
> Then he promised to run the country like a corporation.
He has run the country like a corporation. His own. You gave the prior record. The only surprise is the continued willing blindness in the Party and populace.
Don't you find the idea that they're migrating to LookOut equally scary?
The real issue here is that it isn't the tool, either Notes or Exchange, it's the competence and policies of the administrators, along with delivering that to the users with proper support. Just because it's the White House doesn't make the needs different in kind, only quality.
> If the LGPL were a presidential candidate, it would be Barack Obama -- "Yes we can." > The GPL would be Ron Paul -- "We need the gold standard and protectionist trade."
I think I get it... So the GPL is like a car with clear windows - pretty much anyone can drive one, and anyone can see inside. The LGPL adds the "tinted windows" option so it still can be driven by pretty much anyone, but people outside can't see in.
I know it's a bad analogy, but I had to respond to BadAnalogyGuy with a car analogy, especially a bad car analogy.
Don't forget that as part of the deal, SCO gets rid of its biggest impediment, its heaviest boat-anchor, perhaps one of the most negative factors during the previous trials...
They didn't switch to the CFS to improve raw performance. The driving impetus behind the CFS was interactive performance. For some time schedulers have been "too fair" and treated batch and background tasks by the same rules as interactive tasks. The general way to improve interactive performance has been with shims and jimmies, like "nice -10 X". The real problem has been detecting *what* is an interactive job, and deciding whose priority to boost, especially without problems like priority inversions or boosting waiting threads. Kon Colivas took on the interactivity problem, trying to come up with a wart-free scheduler that would give good interactive response. Somewhere in that time Ingo Molnar got into the game, too. Eventually Ingo's CFS design was chosen, with the decision at least partly based on the responses and noise of Kon's fanbois. Unfortunately Kon left, after this.
It's worth mentioning that 2.6.23 is the entry of CFS into the mainline kernel. *Nothing* hits the kernel perfect, first time. A quick check of LKML saw a flurry of CFS patches shortly after the release of 2.6.23, and I have no doubt that some level of tuning will continue. To look at 2.6.23 and say that CFS *is* deficient may be fair, but to make the judgment to throw it out is not. At the very least, it's worth a revisit on 2.6.24 and a few kernels onward.
OK. I did follow some of the discussion, and based on that and what you've said, merely loading ndiswrapper into a kernel should not taint it. The taint happens as soon as you use ndiswrapper to load a non-GPL (practically all of them) Windows driver.
Of course in practice it shouldn't really matter, because you won't load ndiswrapper without loading a driver, and are there any GPL Windows drivers at all?
So I presume my kernel is not GPLONLY, because I've loaded the nVidia driver.
Is this simply equivalent to saying it's tainted and the developers won't touch it with a 10 foot pole, which I already knew? Or is there something else to GPLONLY?
I think you were talking about "Kang the Conqueror". I was talking about the "Street gang Kangs" that the 7th Doctor Who ran into in "Paradise Towers."
Neither of us was talking about: Kang, the feared Klingon leader. Kang, who makes photoshop filters. Kang the Decapitator from World of Warcraft. KANG the punk band. or even Sing Bing Kang at Microsoft Research. or the other 19,400,000 hits on google.
My knowledge of mythology comes from the standard Greco-Roman stuff in high school plus whatever Norse you can pick up by reading "The Mighty Thor" comic books.
While most of reading "American Gods" was fun, I could see many references going over my head, and it was kind of like low-level overflights by a jet fighter. Whooooooosh!
> I'd also throw in balancing the rights of the majority vs. the rights of the minority. The Bill > of Rights is a restraint on majoritarian power.
Won't argue a bit about that, but we're still talking about balancing rights, not prohibiting a specific act.
> XIII
It's worded as prohibiting the act of owning slaves or indentured servants, but it could also be viewed as granting human rights to those people, which had been previously denied. Perhaps an anti-abortion amendment could be construed the same way, but IMHO it's a less direct link. I was of course thinking about Prohibition.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to agree that this is the whole point... Jobs himself can pull it off.
It would be really fun to make some sort of study to see how well the various styles work, absent a Jobs-type at the top. So many times it seems that a company's best days are under the founding generation, Apple under Jobs, IBM under Watson, Ford under Ford, etc. The idea behind the US Constitution was to put in place a system that would have a good chance of working no matter what idiots were at the helm. It would be fascinating to see a set of corporate procedures that could enable it to thrive after the founding generation.
I didn't think I needed to add a sarcasm emoticon to my post.
Bruce gets my vote later today, since I was out last night.
I meant the "most major" theatrical release: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087803/ I read the book long before that too, and credit the book for postponing the reality for at least a decade, though not two.
Lucky!
More than any other 2 people, George Orwell and ACC owned years - 1984 and 2001, respectively. 1984 was actually released in 1984, but of course 2001 was released in 1968.
It just kind of annoys me that 2001, such a year-owning film, was not cleaned up and re-released in 2001. I would have payed to see it again on the big screen, and I own the DVD.
> There are mistakes I've made, that I would take back if I could. I'm trying
> very hard not to make them this time.
You've just rendered yourself unfit for political office. No true politician admits to a mistake, or says he/she would do something differently. It's much more political to blame the facts.
> but if they can help a democrat steal an election...
And what's your opinion if it's helping a republican steal an election?
Whatever response you give me, the words "a democrat" did not need to be in your post. Stealing an election is WRONG, whether it's a democrat or a republican. You took a very good post and diminished it with a bit of partisanship. I notice that you said "democrat" where usually the party affiliation is capitalized, so maybe you're scooting by on a technicality. But at that point we're parsing to the degree that we criticize politicians for.
There is only one answer to such a statement. Nothing else need be said. No negotiations.
No sale without a purchaser's complete and thorough evaluation.
Looks like a real boom shaping up in sub-orbital tourism.
Now let's just wait for the ensuing bust.
It may be relevant that there have actually been no sub-orbital tourists yet. So far they're all expecting a "space voyage", and I don't think that the realism has set in yet that this is Alan Shepherd scale, not John Glenn. They're paying a pile of bucks for only a few minutes of real flight and weightlessness - while strapped into a seat.
I'd save any investment until we see how word-of-mouth evaluations look.
Don't you just need an irrational number of fingers, or do the fingers themselves have to be irrational, as well?
Many people are known to be irrational, so this shouldn't be impossible.
You misunderstand. IMHO the current government is either terribly incompetent, or horribly EVIL. Either is impeachable, the latter is treasonous. That one political part continues to defend and back such conduct rather than eject the bum for sullying their party's image is most disturbing.
> Then he promised to run the country like a corporation.
He has run the country like a corporation. His own. You gave the prior record. The only surprise is the continued willing blindness in the Party and populace.
Don't you find the idea that they're migrating to LookOut equally scary?
The real issue here is that it isn't the tool, either Notes or Exchange, it's the competence and policies of the administrators, along with delivering that to the users with proper support. Just because it's the White House doesn't make the needs different in kind, only quality.
> operates at all near the level of minimum performance required
We should be so lucky to see such a high standard.
> Anyone still think all this incompetence that always protects Bush and his team is some kind of accident?
I would rather. The alternative explanation is EVIL and probably treasonous.
> If the LGPL were a presidential candidate, it would be Barack Obama -- "Yes we can."
> The GPL would be Ron Paul -- "We need the gold standard and protectionist trade."
I think I get it...
So the GPL is like a car with clear windows - pretty much anyone can drive one, and anyone can see inside.
The LGPL adds the "tinted windows" option so it still can be driven by pretty much anyone, but people outside can't see in.
I know it's a bad analogy, but I had to respond to BadAnalogyGuy with a car analogy, especially a bad car analogy.
Don't forget that as part of the deal, SCO gets rid of its biggest impediment, its heaviest boat-anchor, perhaps one of the most negative factors during the previous trials...
Daryl and his big moouth.
They didn't switch to the CFS to improve raw performance. The driving impetus behind the CFS was interactive performance. For some time schedulers have been "too fair" and treated batch and background tasks by the same rules as interactive tasks. The general way to improve interactive performance has been with shims and jimmies, like "nice -10 X". The real problem has been detecting *what* is an interactive job, and deciding whose priority to boost, especially without problems like priority inversions or boosting waiting threads. Kon Colivas took on the interactivity problem, trying to come up with a wart-free scheduler that would give good interactive response. Somewhere in that time Ingo Molnar got into the game, too. Eventually Ingo's CFS design was chosen, with the decision at least partly based on the responses and noise of Kon's fanbois. Unfortunately Kon left, after this.
It's worth mentioning that 2.6.23 is the entry of CFS into the mainline kernel. *Nothing* hits the kernel perfect, first time. A quick check of LKML saw a flurry of CFS patches shortly after the release of 2.6.23, and I have no doubt that some level of tuning will continue. To look at 2.6.23 and say that CFS *is* deficient may be fair, but to make the judgment to throw it out is not. At the very least, it's worth a revisit on 2.6.24 and a few kernels onward.
OK. I did follow some of the discussion, and based on that and what you've said, merely loading ndiswrapper into a kernel should not taint it. The taint happens as soon as you use ndiswrapper to load a non-GPL (practically all of them) Windows driver.
Of course in practice it shouldn't really matter, because you won't load ndiswrapper without loading a driver, and are there any GPL Windows drivers at all?
So I presume my kernel is not GPLONLY, because I've loaded the nVidia driver.
Is this simply equivalent to saying it's tainted and the developers won't touch it with a 10 foot pole, which I already knew?
Or is there something else to GPLONLY?
Ya know what's really scary about this?
I think you were talking about "Kang the Conqueror".
I was talking about the "Street gang Kangs" that the 7th Doctor Who ran into in "Paradise Towers."
Neither of us was talking about:
Kang, the feared Klingon leader.
Kang, who makes photoshop filters.
Kang the Decapitator from World of Warcraft.
KANG the punk band.
or even Sing Bing Kang at Microsoft Research.
or the other 19,400,000 hits on google.
Too many Kangs!
We're swimming in them!
Red Kang or Blue Kang?
No, YOU'RE missing the point. The ISP is servicing ME, and I want the traffic from Google, and I paid the ISP to get it.
My knowledge of mythology comes from the standard Greco-Roman stuff in high school plus whatever Norse you can pick up by reading "The Mighty Thor" comic books.
While most of reading "American Gods" was fun, I could see many references going over my head, and it was kind of like low-level overflights by a jet fighter. Whooooooosh!
When Duke Nukem Forever goes on sale, of course.
> I'd also throw in balancing the rights of the majority vs. the rights of the minority. The Bill
> of Rights is a restraint on majoritarian power.
Won't argue a bit about that, but we're still talking about balancing rights, not prohibiting a specific act.
> XIII
It's worded as prohibiting the act of owning slaves or indentured servants, but it could also be viewed as granting human rights to those people, which had been previously denied. Perhaps an anti-abortion amendment could be construed the same way, but IMHO it's a less direct link. I was of course thinking about Prohibition.