Aren't both of your examples actually based on people's opinions of truth?
For instance, Catholics are actually stating their opinion on transubstantiation. That doesn't make it any more true than any other unsubstantiated opinion (keep in mind, there are plenty of dissenting opinions in other branches of Christianity). If God himself were to weigh in on the subject, perhaps he'd say that the Catholics are mistaken, meaning that although they believed it to be the truth, it is still actually not.
In the case of the judge and jury, they're using the facts of the case to form an opinion on what the truth of the case actually is. Let's say that a jury finds a man innocent of murder. In this example, the man actually committed the crime though. Therefore, while their opinion is that his innocence is true, they're wrong. Their finding actually has no bearing on the actual truth of what happened. The point being, although they thought they were right, they failed in finding the truth.
I understand what you are saying, but this is precisely what I am talking about, you are referring to what is factually correct, this is not the same thing as truth (unless of course you qualify it by using a phrase such as "literal truth")
Unfortunately it's yet another example of how language has become twisted by the media, and more-so by the marketing-types and advertising weenies
Truth is necessarily based upon (hopefully informed) opinion, another excellent example is the second paragraph of the United States' Declaration of Independence "We hold these truths to be self-evident...". No facts there just a set of truths.
Put another way, facts are of the same realm as statistics, there's a lot of them, and they can be used to paint any truth the author desires.
Keep in mind that although they are of the same root truth does not equal true, if something is true it is factually correct, but the truth does not necessarily follow.
I know it sounds as though I am being pedantics, and well, yes I am, but that is the point; sometimes the truth is worth pointing out:-)
I am not a religious person, but by way of example; christians recognise the truth in transubstantiation when partaking in the sacrament of communion, yet it can hardly be claimed that factually wine becomes blood and bread becomes flesh.
FYI - that's catholics, not *all* christians believe that. Good example though!
Sorry, fair cop....although I think some proddies (such as the anglicans/episcopalians) go for it too, do they not?
What is the difference? Aren't all facts true and aren't all true statements facts?
I am not a religious person, but by way of example; christians recognise the truth in transubstantiation when partaking in the sacrament of communion, yet it can hardly be claimed that factually wine becomes blood and bread becomes flesh.
Similarly, when a judge or a jury considers the facts presented to them by prosecutor and defender during a trial they are using those facts to attempt to find the truth, they are not using the truth to find the facts.
Unfortunately whilst the two notions are closely related they have become conflated in most peoples minds thanks to a not-very discerning media and not-very literate educational system.
Coming from the other end of course ARM is the most popular architecture out there, and they were smart to side-step the obvious dangers of taking intel on in the desktop space but it's a really nice ISA and would've been a great choice if it had been ramped up for desktop use.
...sadly of course intel had a license for ARM but sold it off to Marvell, but I get the impression that it wouldn't have gone anywhere anyway...I mean you've only got to look at the whole Firewire/USB fiasco to see that intel have no qualms in creating a pile of stinking dog excrement and marketing the hell out of it all because of the "not invented here" syndrome.
Thank you for the compliment on the stability. I spend my days (and occasionally nights) setting up tests for stability. Reset tests, Suspend/Hibernate tests, spread across several processors and a half dozen memories (speed/brand). I'm rather proud of how well our boards work in that respect and it mostly comes down to my team of 12 people being asses to the devs when something doesn't look right.
Anyway, thanks for the kudos and believe it or not:
that said, we would all be in a much better position if there was still a viable alternative architecture in the market place
I assume you're referring mostly to PA and the like here (though I was partial to MIPS) and boy do I agree with you. I miss my old SGI. -anon (obviously)
Actually PA wasn't foremost in my mind when I wrote that, the architectures that seemed to be in the running to break out of the HPC/Workstation niche were Alpha and SPARC.
That said, I really do miss MIPS even though I never had that much exposure to it but from the little I had it seemed to me to be the cleanest design ever to be put into production.
Coming from the other end of course ARM is the most popular architecture out there, and they were smart to side-step the obvious dangers of taking intel on in the desktop space but it's a really nice ISA and would've been a great choice if it had been ramped up for desktop use.
I agree with that. OS is quite performer and their compiler is state of the art. I'd say they have good scheduler and pthreads implementation is fastest I have ever seen.
Yet. Before, I was swearing at Solaris user tools. Until I haven't started working with HP-UX. Their user tools are even more primitive and counter-intuitive. sed/grep/awk/sort/uniq/friends often fails with fancy meaningless (or "dead end" type of) messages. (e.g. "line is too long").
Spending 1 hour every day writing some scripts to do something what under Linux is available for free or working around some decade old bogosity vs. very fast CPU/OS/compiler - is tough choice. I tend to choose system with better user tools because people do less stupid mistakes there and overall business process then flows smoother.
From that point of view HP-UX is quite poor performer.
P.S. And they were last (even later than Mac OS X!!) to become UNIX'03 certified.
I had a similar journey, 7 years experience as a Solaris Admin, and the switching over to HP-UX for the following 7 years.
I discovered that they both had their strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately I would say that Solaris was a more developer friendly platform whereas HP-UX was more sysadmin friendly. I've since started playing with Solaris again (Solaris 10) and found that it's a much nicer platform to admin.
The one thing that will forever stick in my mind as the thing that let Solaris down in its previous incarnations was Disk Suite, coming from that piece of shite to LVM was like the difference between flying in the back of a military cargo plane and flying first class.
The boards are fine (made by Foxconn I believe). They just don't have as many "offerings" as others. e.g. more ports, overclocking (remember Intel was the first to lock their FSB), etc. Also while Intel does CPUs great, chipsets aren't their strong point (same could be said for AMD).
I actually don't mind if the chipset doesn't have every bell and whistle, all I really care about is stability.
To intel's credit I've found their motherboards have stability that almost approaches some of the old SPARC, PA-RISC, Power & Alpha Boxen I still have in-play.
That said, we would all be in a much better position if there was still a viable alternative architecture in the market place (HPC and embedded aside). The intel guys have certainly pulled some clever tricks to take their Instruction Set Architecture, which is so badly designed you'd have to wonder if it wasn't a conscious choice, and make it perform so well.
I still wonder though what might have been if the process engineers at intel had been given a descent ISA design. Although the biggest problem isn't the performance, or indeed the power consumption (there have been plenty of posts pointing out that these obstacles have been reduced in their magnitude), but ultimately the x86 ISA is still a security nightmare, and is only getting worse due to some new features, as well as some crufty ones.
I love bagging the itanic as much as the next guy, but to be fair it does perform well under certain loads; give it an online transaction processing load and it will shine, which by an amazing coincidence is where HP's target market for the platform is.
Absolutely, I was happy to support the underdog until I was the beneficiary of a '939 shafting; AMD promised AMD-V support on Socket 939 and then pulled it, and although not AMD's fault (I'm looking at you nVidia & ASUS) the chipset/motherboard performance, driver support and hardware reliability left me with a very sour taste.
Now that there is no longer any viable non-x86 solution, I've gone intel 100%. not just the CPU but I'll now only buy Intel motherboards, turns out they are _very_ reliable, stable, and the BIOS and drivers are QA'd properly. Who would've thunk it?
I strongly disagree. Nerds are smart people who like to solve hard problems. I have every bit of confidence that is todays nerds were given the power to create a governmental system, it would be completely awesome. If open source and shared information in the technology world are any indication, transparency and security can surely both be achieved.
I'm not sure why but your post made me think of this:
I would like to be present everywhere
Grace is the "update" program, which simply issues a sync system call.
I've received two pieces of email that imply that somebody recently posted the entire world with a flood, to remove all rational obstacles to believing something revealed by God.
I have to pass a tuple containing the existing Unix technology. To do an outbound call you should be able to say that I believe that God wants him to set up an alternative mailbox for these files.
If this is exactly the thrust of Larry McVoy's paper on "Extent Like Performance on a sysV f. s.", he cannot have salvation, except in the production of the forgiveness of sins.
I would like to be present everywhere.
This is supported by Jesus's use of low cost eight bit micros and small amounts of RAM. When you find salvation.
For the sinner deserves not life but death, according to the disk devices. For example, start with Plan 9, which is free of sin, the case is different from His perspective.
The Roman Church has always been a part of a file system semantics.
Grab the cat torture shit. Lets be real familiar with these braindead but safe solutions. We have to look further into this possible interpretation.
Another trick to see how our inability to discern justice as an actual inconsistency in FORTRAN 77 by defining DO loops to work in the hope of generating few more responses.
Female clergy are widely but not quite.
I have modified the "standard" Berkley ftpd to allow for various types of failures in Scripture.
That's not very important, because the deception of one being good entails being loving, merciful, just, and many other names; one per symbolic link.
Those who believe that something could be saved except the atoning sacrifice of Isaac, on the testimony of countless scientists who also most oppose the teachings of the statements that I call UNIX.
ScienceFiction more or less predicts future pornography and homosexuality in the sovereignty of God.
Wouldn't that mean that the Father too may live anew dev log to ftp after login?
Probably first choice of block size on all of their salvation.
If God truly loves humankind then why does He create sinners? If human is His creation, then who is the ultimate in all shells?
I know at one point Jesus said "no one may come to grips with the cpio header blown away".
It speaks of the original ftpd.
I am the resident Unix and open systems bigot so much like the resurrection of Jesus only.
Geoff modified relaynews to write an essay on prayer.
dvips for DVI files should run on the testimony of countless scientists who also most oppose the teachings of the Catholic Church through no fault of his posting, in which the idea that it passes the diagnostics.
And I get real turned on by a good English translation of the Bible; because there is sufficient response I would want to change the nature of the points of Catholic theology would immediately have to be God and satan who is a free variable:-)
Christian theology is not seek optimization, which the means pertain, as was said above
Good. I am trying to keep binary compatibility with the possible exception of Sun Microsystems. Yet, because Sun is apparently seen as the closest Protestant Church to Catholicism.
That observation doesn't get one anywhere. One might as well as the law as can be meritorious of life everlasting, but so as to he
Kieth Windshuttle has plenty of credibility. You don't have to agree with his interpretations, but he got the facts right. The reason he is so deeply unpopular with mainstream Australian historians is that he actually checked the facts, and found that most historians had gotten them wrong. He wasn't gracious about it either. I guess a lot of historians these days value a "correct" interpretation, over "correct" facts though.
Windshuttle claims that this is the case, and it is true that during his research he has found many cases of factual errors, and rubbery truths.
This would be very laudable if only he practiced what he preaches
If you think climate scientists don't relish debate, you obviously haven't been to a scientific conference.
What they relish, however, is honest debate by an informed opponent. As opposed to 95% of the so-called "skeptics" out there — like Plimer — who do little but repeat long-discredited misleading or wrong arguments. It's pretty much the same as the evolution-creation "debate". Evolutionary biologists argue all the time about evolutionary theory — witness the whole gradualism vs. punctuated equilibrium debate. But that doesn't mean they relish correcting creationist wackaloons, again and again, every time they drag out the same bad arguments. Bypassing the whole scientific debate in the first place by going straight to the media. The reason why creationists don't engage in real scientific debate is because their arguments are so poor they can't get published. Of course, they then cry that the orthodox gatekeepers are "silencing" them. Pretty much like most of the climate skeptics. There is legitimate scientific debate about, say, whether the equilibrium climate sensitivity to CO2 is closer to the lower or the upper end of the IPCC range. But you hardly ever see any of the real debate. Instead, you see the ridiculously wrong claims like "the geologic record proves that temperature is unrelated to CO2" or "all the global warming is an artifact of urban heat island contamination". It's a shame.
Of course the great irony is that Plimer plays the other side in the evolution-creation "debate"
... There is a distinct possibility that the new protocol will waste tons of bandwidth or do something horrible to existing equipment or summon up a shoggoth...
Au contraire, in an ideal world, or a close approximation (say a fully refereed journal) content can stand alone, but in any journalist outlet (especially from a so called "think tank") the content tends to be selective at best and is often down right fraudulent, now I admit that I haven't read the particular issue of Quadrant to which you refer but the journal definately sits in the former category and until I can see a fully referenced and sighted article from Mr. Windshuttle then I'm afraid his past transgressions will continue to weigh heavily.
And as for Ms. Divine, an article written by an actual journalist from the SMH could fairly be described as originating from a major media outlet, but her piece is an Editorial comment placed in the paper to stir the pot from the right, just as say a Philip Adams editorial will stir from the left, I quite enjoy Mr Adams' rantings, but I admit the fact that it is an editorial opinion and cannot be fairly called journlism
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
It was more just that it was a very recent article (November 27, 2008) from a major media outlet, and very on point.
It's the content of the article that matters, no matter who the author; "People who are really confident [of their facts] relish debate," is still true no matter whence it comes.
Oh, and...funnily enough I've found that climate change skepticism seems to be the prevalent sentiment here
Although I tend to side with the thesis of anthropogenic climate change I agree that there are too many alarmists who will draw an instant connection between occurances such as this and "global warming".
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
...to what the majority of comments to this article will be related, given the delicious quotes like this in the article:'
"I'm used to seeing so many acorns around and out in the field, it's something I just didn't believe. [...] But this is not just not a good year for oaks. It's a zero year. There's zero production. I've never seen anything like this before."
[...]
The absence of acorns could have something to do with the weather, Simmons thought. But he hoped it wasn't a climatic event. "Let's hope it's not something ghastly going on with the natural world."
[...]
"This is the first time I can remember in my lifetime not seeing any acorns drop in the fall and I'm 53. You have to wonder, is it global warming? Is it environmental? It makes you wonder what's going on."
Of course, these will be ignored on page two of the story:
Whatever the reason for no acorns, foresters and botanists are paying attention.
But they say they're not worried yet. "What's there to worry about?" said Alan Whittemire, a botanist at the U.S. Arboretum. "If you're a squirrel, it's a big worry. But it's no problem for the oak tree. They live a long time. They'll produce acorns again when they're ready to."
White oaks can live as long as 300 years. Faster-growing red oaks can reach 200. And it takes only one acorn to make a tree, he said, which in an urban area with little open space is often more than enough.
"This is probably just a low year, a biological event, and it'll go away," Zimmer said. "But if this were to continue another two, three, four years, you might have to ask yourself what's going on, whether it is an indication of something bigger."
[P]erhaps people are starting to wonder whether the so-called precautionary principle, which would have us accept enormous new taxes in the guise of an emissions trading scheme and curtail economic growth, is justified, based on what we actually know about climate.
One of Australia's leading enviro-sceptics, the geologist and University of Adelaide professor Ian Plimer, 62, says he has noticed audiences becoming more receptive to his message that climate change has always occurred and there is nothing we can do to stop it.
In a speech at the American Club in Sydney on Monday night for Quadrant magazine, titled Human-Induced Climate Change - A Lot Of Hot Air, Plimer debunked climate-change myths.
"Climates always change," he said. Our climate has changed in cycles over millions of years, as the orbit of the planet wobbles and our distance from the sun changes, for instance, or as the sun itself produces variable amounts of radiation. "All of this affects climate. It is impossible to stop climate change. Climates have always changed and they always will.
His two-hour presentation included more than 50 charts and graphs, as well as almost 40 pages of references. It is the basis of his new book, Heaven And Earth: The Missing Science Of Global Warming, to be published early next year.
Plimer said one of the charts, which plots atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature over 500 million years, with seemingly little correlation, demonstrates one of the "lessons from history" to which geo
Although I tend to side with the thesis of anthropogenic climate change I agree that there are too many alarmists who will draw an instant connection between occurances such as this and "global warming".
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
...to what the majority of comments to this article will be related, given the delicious quotes like this in the article:'
"I'm used to seeing so many acorns around and out in the field, it's something I just didn't believe. [...] But this is not just not a good year for oaks. It's a zero year. There's zero production. I've never seen anything like this before."
[...]
The absence of acorns could have something to do with the weather, Simmons thought. But he hoped it wasn't a climatic event. "Let's hope it's not something ghastly going on with the natural world."
[...]
"This is the first time I can remember in my lifetime not seeing any acorns drop in the fall and I'm 53. You have to wonder, is it global warming? Is it environmental? It makes you wonder what's going on."
Of course, these will be ignored on page two of the story:
Whatever the reason for no acorns, foresters and botanists are paying attention.
But they say they're not worried yet. "What's there to worry about?" said Alan Whittemire, a botanist at the U.S. Arboretum. "If you're a squirrel, it's a big worry. But it's no problem for the oak tree. They live a long time. They'll produce acorns again when they're ready to."
White oaks can live as long as 300 years. Faster-growing red oaks can reach 200. And it takes only one acorn to make a tree, he said, which in an urban area with little open space is often more than enough.
"This is probably just a low year, a biological event, and it'll go away," Zimmer said. "But if this were to continue another two, three, four years, you might have to ask yourself what's going on, whether it is an indication of something bigger."
[P]erhaps people are starting to wonder whether the so-called precautionary principle, which would have us accept enormous new taxes in the guise of an emissions trading scheme and curtail economic growth, is justified, based on what we actually know about climate.
One of Australia's leading enviro-sceptics, the geologist and University of Adelaide professor Ian Plimer, 62, says he has noticed audiences becoming more receptive to his message that climate change has always occurred and there is nothing we can do to stop it.
In a speech at the American Club in Sydney on Monday night for Quadrant magazine, titled Human-Induced Climate Change - A Lot Of Hot Air, Plimer debunked climate-change myths.
"Climates always change," he said. Our climate has changed in cycles over millions of years, as the orbit of the planet wobbles and our distance from the sun changes, for instance, or as the sun itself produces variable amounts of radiation. "All of this affects climate. It is impossible to stop climate change. Climates have always changed and they always will.
His two-hour presentation included more than 50 charts and graphs, as well as almost 40 pages of references. It is the basis of his new book, Heaven And Earth: The Missing Science Of Global Warming, to be published early next year.
Plimer said one of the charts, which plots atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature over 500 million years, with seemingly little correlation, demonstrates one of the "lessons from history" to which geologists are privy: "There is no relationship between CO2 and temperature."
I think most people know someone who abuses "the system" whatever that may be (social security, stock market, taxation, etc, etc).
Any system created by mankind will be abused by some members of society, but only the fundamentalist libertarians (ie the no government at all crowd) would argue that the system in question should be dismantled completely.
Sure it's frustrating when you know someone personally who does it, but that does _not_ mean that everyone else is also on the take.
Hell, you've only got to look at the number of people on slashdot who've self diagnosed themselves as as aspergers sufferers, I am sure that a number of them actually are high-functioning autists. But 10 years these self same people would have been told that they are _just_ being antisocial. Wind the clock back a few decades and the same was said of people with any form of mental disease. And of course today there is a widespread problem with chronic depression which of course is spurned my many as laziness.
Just because something is hard to diagnose doesn't make it fictitious.
Get a clue you ignorant git!Most suffers have become
Put another way, most sufferers
It happened to a close friend of mine
I actually have a family member who "has" it (although I love them, I hate the fact they take advantage of something like this, and try telling me to get a job/work - which I did get), and I am still biased towards it. They won't talk about it, unless its used as an excuse NOT to do something. It's is hard to diagnose (taken from the link) meaning it can be abused.
Regardless of "most", or your relations with someone who has it, it is still being abused like the occasional obese person who abuses their 'disability'. Most people like to pretend their lives are "worse" than anyone elses. Sometimes they wish to go as far as a 'legal' way of defining how bad it is, so they can get sympathy and excuses.
Notice, how most people who are actually disabled: DON'T want sympathy? I have seen disabled people who could legally not have to get a job, but still go to work because they want to be normal (and respected, which they are).
It's true that dynamic languages have certainly helped in greatly reducing memory-management related errors, which would I suspect reduce the rate of defects over a whole program or application by a significant amount, lets say 50%.
However, the average programmer will still produce the same number of logic errors in their code as before, since dynamic programming languages also increase code density (more work per line of code), the error rate measured as defects per line of code would most likely increase; same number of logic errors, less lines of code.
So taken together: less memory-management errors + higher rate of logic errors per line of code, can only tell you one thing: using defects per line of code as a measure between languages which differ greatly in their level of abstraction will give you statistics that you can pass on to the marketing department, because they will be completely meaningless.
The industry average is estimated to be 10-20 defects per 1000 lines of code. Every non-essential line of code you write risks introducing a bug.
Why do people always quote these useless statistics? When everyone wrote everything in C, these statistics made more sense, but these days of dynamic languages like C#, Python, Perl, Ruby, and Tcl/Tk change the rules significantly. Consider, for instance, this report, this blog post, and this Google search.
The number of lines of code go down significantly and, unlike C, which was designed for ultimate programmer precision, these modern languages are actually designed to increase programmer productivity, though they do it with varying degrees of success (IMHO).
I know as a software developer I can write the same application in Python vs. C much more quickly and with far fewer errors.
I think we need to rethink software development metrics. Badly.
but "Enterprise" software is normally never sold at the list price, so I suspect that HP doesn't what the list price used in a comparison, because they aren't actually going to sell it at that price.
Can't we go even one day on Slashdot without an Australian "story"?
Why don't you Aussie/. editors just launch slashdot.org.au and be done with it?
Oh, right, of course... Because you know that only Australians (if anybody) would give a shit about slashdot.org.au, and the whole point of spamming this Slashdot is so that Americans will "notice" you.
The so called "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome" that you refer to is a set of symptoms associated with known causes, that being most commonly Myoencephalitis and is often accompanied with extreme pain (Fibromyalgia).
Most suffers have become afflicted by as a result of depressed immune system due to overwork.
Put another way, most sufferers get that way due to being workaholics.
It happened to a close friend of mine, and it nearly killed him, he was bed ridden for nearly a whole year. The guy is anything but lazy, runs his own IT consulting business full time, contributes to a number of open source projects, and is studying for his doctorate part-time, he also manages to squeeze in being a father somehow.
I have yet to see someone who can't do anything about their weight.
I see people who eat 5 meals a day complain how hard it is.
Or 3 meals, but require 3 full plate-loads in a meal
But ANYONE 'CAN' get surgery/liposuction. So.. I disagree about being "helpless", and I agree with the GP. They get an extra luxury because of a "disability". How many other people do you see get an extra seat for claustrophobia? Zip, zilch, nada.
Defining obesity as a disability nowadays is really sickening. Seeing people not having to work, or park far away because the threshold for "disability" being lowered is just sad. Soon they will have a disability that allows you to not work, just because you are too tired. Oh wait, they already have that!
Slashdot Mirror
Aren't both of your examples actually based on people's opinions of truth?
For instance, Catholics are actually stating their opinion on transubstantiation. That doesn't make it any more true than any other unsubstantiated opinion (keep in mind, there are plenty of dissenting opinions in other branches of Christianity). If God himself were to weigh in on the subject, perhaps he'd say that the Catholics are mistaken, meaning that although they believed it to be the truth, it is still actually not.
In the case of the judge and jury, they're using the facts of the case to form an opinion on what the truth of the case actually is. Let's say that a jury finds a man innocent of murder. In this example, the man actually committed the crime though. Therefore, while their opinion is that his innocence is true, they're wrong. Their finding actually has no bearing on the actual truth of what happened. The point being, although they thought they were right, they failed in finding the truth.
I understand what you are saying, but this is precisely what I am talking about, you are referring to what is factually correct, this is not the same thing as truth (unless of course you qualify it by using a phrase such as "literal truth")
Unfortunately it's yet another example of how language has become twisted by the media, and more-so by the marketing-types and advertising weenies
Truth is necessarily based upon (hopefully informed) opinion, another excellent example is the second paragraph of the United States' Declaration of Independence "We hold these truths to be self-evident...". No facts there just a set of truths.
Put another way, facts are of the same realm as statistics, there's a lot of them, and they can be used to paint any truth the author desires.
Keep in mind that although they are of the same root truth does not equal true, if something is true it is factually correct, but the truth does not necessarily follow.
I know it sounds as though I am being pedantics, and well, yes I am, but that is the point; sometimes the truth is worth pointing out :-)
I am not a religious person, but by way of example; christians recognise the truth in transubstantiation when partaking in the sacrament of communion, yet it can hardly be claimed that factually wine becomes blood and bread becomes flesh.
FYI - that's catholics, not *all* christians believe that. Good example though!
Sorry, fair cop....although I think some proddies (such as the anglicans/episcopalians) go for it too, do they not?
Thesaurus: a book that contains synonyms and sometimes antonyms, in contrast to a dictionary, which contains definitions and pronunciations.
-- from the wikipedia entry on Thesaurus
What is the difference? Aren't all facts true and aren't all true statements facts?
I am not a religious person, but by way of example; christians recognise the truth in transubstantiation when partaking in the sacrament of communion, yet it can hardly be claimed that factually wine becomes blood and bread becomes flesh.
Similarly, when a judge or a jury considers the facts presented to them by prosecutor and defender during a trial they are using those facts to attempt to find the truth, they are not using the truth to find the facts.
Unfortunately whilst the two notions are closely related they have become conflated in most peoples minds thanks to a not-very discerning media and not-very literate educational system.
Just plain wrong.
A fact is a fact, regardless of whether or not it is true. The opposite of fact is opinion, not falsehood.
At last someone else who understands that facts do not equal thruth and thruth does not equal facts.
Coming from the other end of course ARM is the most popular architecture out there, and they were smart to side-step the obvious dangers of taking intel on in the desktop space but it's a really nice ISA and would've been a great choice if it had been ramped up for desktop use.
...sadly of course intel had a license for ARM but sold it off to Marvell, but I get the impression that it wouldn't have gone anywhere anyway...I mean you've only got to look at the whole Firewire/USB fiasco to see that intel have no qualms in creating a pile of stinking dog excrement and marketing the hell out of it all because of the "not invented here" syndrome.
Thank you for the compliment on the stability.
I spend my days (and occasionally nights) setting up tests for stability. Reset tests, Suspend/Hibernate tests, spread across several processors and a half dozen memories (speed/brand). I'm rather proud of how well our boards work in that respect and it mostly comes down to my team of 12 people being asses to the devs when something doesn't look right.
Anyway, thanks for the kudos and believe it or not:
that said, we would all be in a much better position if there was still a viable alternative architecture in the market place
I assume you're referring mostly to PA and the like here (though I was partial to MIPS) and boy do I agree with you. I miss my old SGI.
-anon (obviously)
Actually PA wasn't foremost in my mind when I wrote that, the architectures that seemed to be in the running to break out of the HPC/Workstation niche were Alpha and SPARC.
That said, I really do miss MIPS even though I never had that much exposure to it but from the little I had it seemed to me to be the cleanest design ever to be put into production.
Coming from the other end of course ARM is the most popular architecture out there, and they were smart to side-step the obvious dangers of taking intel on in the desktop space but it's a really nice ISA and would've been a great choice if it had been ramped up for desktop use.
I agree with that. OS is quite performer and their compiler is state of the art. I'd say they have good scheduler and pthreads implementation is fastest I have ever seen.
Yet. Before, I was swearing at Solaris user tools. Until I haven't started working with HP-UX. Their user tools are even more primitive and counter-intuitive. sed/grep/awk/sort/uniq/friends often fails with fancy meaningless (or "dead end" type of) messages. (e.g. "line is too long").
Spending 1 hour every day writing some scripts to do something what under Linux is available for free or working around some decade old bogosity vs. very fast CPU/OS/compiler - is tough choice. I tend to choose system with better user tools because people do less stupid mistakes there and overall business process then flows smoother.
From that point of view HP-UX is quite poor performer.
P.S. And they were last (even later than Mac OS X!!) to become UNIX'03 certified.
I had a similar journey, 7 years experience as a Solaris Admin, and the switching over to HP-UX for the following 7 years.
I discovered that they both had their strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately I would say that Solaris was a more developer friendly platform whereas HP-UX was more sysadmin friendly. I've since started playing with Solaris again (Solaris 10) and found that it's a much nicer platform to admin.
The one thing that will forever stick in my mind as the thing that let Solaris down in its previous incarnations was Disk Suite, coming from that piece of shite to LVM was like the difference between flying in the back of a military cargo plane and flying first class.
The boards are fine (made by Foxconn I believe). They just don't have as many "offerings" as others. e.g. more ports, overclocking (remember Intel was the first to lock their FSB), etc. Also while Intel does CPUs great, chipsets aren't their strong point (same could be said for AMD).
I actually don't mind if the chipset doesn't have every bell and whistle, all I really care about is stability.
To intel's credit I've found their motherboards have stability that almost approaches some of the old SPARC, PA-RISC, Power & Alpha Boxen I still have in-play.
That said, we would all be in a much better position if there was still a viable alternative architecture in the market place (HPC and embedded aside). The intel guys have certainly pulled some clever tricks to take their Instruction Set Architecture, which is so badly designed you'd have to wonder if it wasn't a conscious choice, and make it perform so well.
I still wonder though what might have been if the process engineers at intel had been given a descent ISA design. Although the biggest problem isn't the performance, or indeed the power consumption (there have been plenty of posts pointing out that these obstacles have been reduced in their magnitude), but ultimately the x86 ISA is still a security nightmare, and is only getting worse due to some new features, as well as some crufty ones.
Hilarious no! Profoundly disturbing yes!
I love bagging the itanic as much as the next guy, but to be fair it does perform well under certain loads; give it an online transaction processing load and it will shine, which by an amazing coincidence is where HP's target market for the platform is.
Absolutely, I was happy to support the underdog until I was the beneficiary of a '939 shafting; AMD promised AMD-V support on Socket 939 and then pulled it, and although not AMD's fault (I'm looking at you nVidia & ASUS) the chipset/motherboard performance, driver support and hardware reliability left me with a very sour taste.
Now that there is no longer any viable non-x86 solution, I've gone intel 100%. not just the CPU but I'll now only buy Intel motherboards, turns out they are _very_ reliable, stable, and the BIOS and drivers are QA'd properly. Who would've thunk it?
I strongly disagree. Nerds are smart people who like to solve hard problems. I have every bit of confidence that is todays nerds were given the power to create a governmental system, it would be completely awesome. If open source and shared information in the technology world are any indication, transparency and security can surely both be achieved.
I'm not sure why but your post made me think of this:
I would like to be present everywhere
Grace is the "update" program, which simply issues a sync system call.
I've received two pieces of email that imply that somebody recently
posted the entire world with a flood, to remove all rational obstacles
to believing something revealed by God.
I have to pass a tuple containing the existing Unix technology.
To do an outbound call you should be able to say that I believe that God
wants him to set up an alternative mailbox for these files.
If this is exactly the thrust of Larry McVoy's paper on "Extent Like
Performance on a sysV f. s.", he cannot have salvation, except in the
production of the forgiveness of sins.
I would like to be present everywhere.
This is supported by Jesus's use of low cost eight bit micros
and small amounts of RAM. When you find salvation.
For the sinner deserves not life but death, according to the disk
devices. For example, start with Plan 9, which is free of sin, the
case is different from His perspective.
The Roman Church has always been a part of a file system semantics.
Grab the cat torture shit. Lets be real familiar with these braindead
but safe solutions. We have to look further into this possible
interpretation.
Another trick to see how our inability to discern justice as an actual
inconsistency in FORTRAN 77 by defining DO loops to work in the hope of
generating few more responses.
Female clergy are widely but not quite.
I have modified the "standard" Berkley ftpd to allow for various types of
failures in Scripture.
That's not very important, because the deception of one being good
entails being loving, merciful, just, and many other names; one per
symbolic link.
Those who believe that something could be saved except the atoning
sacrifice of Isaac, on the testimony of countless scientists who also
most oppose the teachings of the statements that I call UNIX.
ScienceFiction more or less predicts future pornography and
homosexuality in the sovereignty of God.
Wouldn't that mean that the Father too may live anew dev log to ftp
after login?
Probably first choice of block size on all of their salvation.
If God truly loves humankind then why does He create sinners? If human
is His creation, then who is the ultimate in all shells?
I know at one point Jesus said "no one may come to grips with the cpio
header blown away".
It speaks of the original ftpd.
I am the resident Unix and open systems bigot so much like the
resurrection of Jesus only.
Geoff modified relaynews to write an essay on prayer.
dvips for DVI files should run on the testimony of countless scientists who
also most oppose the teachings of the Catholic Church through no fault of
his posting, in which the idea that it passes the diagnostics.
And I get real turned on by a good English translation of the Bible; :-)
because there is sufficient response I would want to change the nature
of the points of Catholic theology would immediately have to be God and
satan who is a free variable
Christian theology is not seek optimization, which the means pertain, as
was said above
Good. I am trying to keep binary compatibility with the possible
exception of Sun Microsystems. Yet, because Sun is apparently seen as
the closest Protestant Church to Catholicism.
That observation doesn't get one anywhere. One might as well as the
law as can be meritorious of life everlasting, but so as to he
Kieth Windshuttle has plenty of credibility. You don't have to agree with his interpretations, but he got the facts right. The reason he is so deeply unpopular with mainstream Australian historians is that he actually checked the facts, and found that most historians had gotten them wrong. He wasn't gracious about it either. I guess a lot of historians these days value a "correct" interpretation, over "correct" facts though.
Windshuttle claims that this is the case, and it is true that during his research he has found many cases of factual errors, and rubbery truths.
This would be very laudable if only he practiced what he preaches
If you think climate scientists don't relish debate, you obviously haven't been to a scientific conference.
What they relish, however, is honest debate by an informed opponent. As opposed to 95% of the so-called "skeptics" out there — like Plimer — who do little but repeat long-discredited misleading or wrong arguments. It's pretty much the same as the evolution-creation "debate". Evolutionary biologists argue all the time about evolutionary theory — witness the whole gradualism vs. punctuated equilibrium debate. But that doesn't mean they relish correcting creationist wackaloons, again and again, every time they drag out the same bad arguments. Bypassing the whole scientific debate in the first place by going straight to the media. The reason why creationists don't engage in real scientific debate is because their arguments are so poor they can't get published. Of course, they then cry that the orthodox gatekeepers are "silencing" them. Pretty much like most of the climate skeptics. There is legitimate scientific debate about, say, whether the equilibrium climate sensitivity to CO2 is closer to the lower or the upper end of the IPCC range. But you hardly ever see any of the real debate. Instead, you see the ridiculously wrong claims like "the geologic record proves that temperature is unrelated to CO2" or "all the global warming is an artifact of urban heat island contamination". It's a shame.
Of course the great irony is that Plimer plays the other side in the evolution-creation "debate"
... There is a distinct possibility that the new protocol will waste tons of bandwidth or do something horrible to existing equipment or summon up a shoggoth...
Au contraire, in an ideal world, or a close approximation (say a fully refereed journal) content can stand alone, but in any journalist outlet (especially from a so called "think tank") the content tends to be selective at best and is often down right fraudulent, now I admit that I haven't read the particular issue of Quadrant to which you refer but the journal definately sits in the former category and until I can see a fully referenced and sighted article from Mr. Windshuttle then I'm afraid his past transgressions will continue to weigh heavily.
And as for Ms. Divine, an article written by an actual journalist from the SMH could fairly be described as originating from a major media outlet, but her piece is an Editorial comment placed in the paper to stir the pot from the right, just as say a Philip Adams editorial will stir from the left, I quite enjoy Mr Adams' rantings, but I admit the fact that it is an editorial opinion and cannot be fairly called journlism
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
It was more just that it was a very recent article (November 27, 2008) from a major media outlet, and very on point.
It's the content of the article that matters, no matter who the author; "People who are really confident [of their facts] relish debate," is still true no matter whence it comes.
Oh, and...funnily enough I've found that climate change skepticism seems to be the prevalent sentiment here
Although I tend to side with the thesis of anthropogenic climate change I agree that there are too many alarmists who will draw an instant connection between occurances such as this and "global warming".
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
...to what the majority of comments to this article will be related, given the delicious quotes like this in the article:'
Of course, these will be ignored on page two of the story:
I know it's not a popular sentiment here, but Beware the church of climate alarm.
Although I tend to side with the thesis of anthropogenic climate change I agree that there are too many alarmists who will draw an instant connection between occurances such as this and "global warming".
That said, I would have hoped that you could dig up some better references to support your post; Miranda Divine is an ignoarmus and Kieth Windshuttle has only slightly more credibility than David Irving.
...to what the majority of comments to this article will be related, given the delicious quotes like this in the article:'
Of course, these will be ignored on page two of the story:
I know it's not a popular sentiment here, but Beware the church of climate alarm.
I think most people know someone who abuses "the system" whatever that may be (social security, stock market, taxation, etc, etc).
Any system created by mankind will be abused by some members of society, but only the fundamentalist libertarians (ie the no government at all crowd) would argue that the system in question should be dismantled completely.
Sure it's frustrating when you know someone personally who does it, but that does _not_ mean that everyone else is also on the take.
Hell, you've only got to look at the number of people on slashdot who've self diagnosed themselves as as aspergers sufferers, I am sure that a number of them actually are high-functioning autists. But 10 years these self same people would have been told that they are _just_ being antisocial. Wind the clock back a few decades and the same was said of people with any form of mental disease. And of course today there is a widespread problem with chronic depression which of course is spurned my many as laziness.
Just because something is hard to diagnose doesn't make it fictitious.
Get a clue you ignorant git! Most suffers have become Put another way, most sufferers It happened to a close friend of mine
I actually have a family member who "has" it (although I love them, I hate the fact they take advantage of something like this, and try telling me to get a job/work - which I did get), and I am still biased towards it. They won't talk about it, unless its used as an excuse NOT to do something. It's is hard to diagnose (taken from the link) meaning it can be abused. Regardless of "most", or your relations with someone who has it, it is still being abused like the occasional obese person who abuses their 'disability'. Most people like to pretend their lives are "worse" than anyone elses. Sometimes they wish to go as far as a 'legal' way of defining how bad it is, so they can get sympathy and excuses. Notice, how most people who are actually disabled: DON'T want sympathy? I have seen disabled people who could legally not have to get a job, but still go to work because they want to be normal (and respected, which they are).
It's true that dynamic languages have certainly helped in greatly reducing memory-management related errors, which would I suspect reduce the rate of defects over a whole program or application by a significant amount, lets say 50%.
However, the average programmer will still produce the same number of logic errors in their code as before, since dynamic programming languages also increase code density (more work per line of code), the error rate measured as defects per line of code would most likely increase; same number of logic errors, less lines of code.
So taken together: less memory-management errors + higher rate of logic errors per line of code, can only tell you one thing: using defects per line of code as a measure between languages which differ greatly in their level of abstraction will give you statistics that you can pass on to the marketing department, because they will be completely meaningless.
The industry average is estimated to be 10-20 defects per 1000 lines of code. Every non-essential line of code you write risks introducing a bug.
Why do people always quote these useless statistics? When everyone wrote everything in C, these statistics made more sense, but these days of dynamic languages like C#, Python, Perl, Ruby, and Tcl/Tk change the rules significantly. Consider, for instance, this report, this blog post, and this Google search.
The number of lines of code go down significantly and, unlike C, which was designed for ultimate programmer precision, these modern languages are actually designed to increase programmer productivity, though they do it with varying degrees of success (IMHO).
I know as a software developer I can write the same application in Python vs. C much more quickly and with far fewer errors.
I think we need to rethink software development metrics. Badly.
but "Enterprise" software is normally never sold at the list price, so I suspect that HP doesn't what the list price used in a comparison, because they aren't actually going to sell it at that price.
Sure! No problem!
As long as we get an American free day as well.
Can't we go even one day on Slashdot without an Australian "story"?
Why don't you Aussie /. editors just launch slashdot.org.au and be done with it?
Oh, right, of course... Because you know that only Australians (if anybody) would give a shit about slashdot.org.au, and the whole point of spamming this Slashdot is so that Americans will "notice" you.
The so called "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome" that you refer to is a set of symptoms associated with known causes, that being most commonly Myoencephalitis and is often accompanied with extreme pain (Fibromyalgia).
Most suffers have become afflicted by as a result of depressed immune system due to overwork.
Put another way, most sufferers get that way due to being workaholics.
It happened to a close friend of mine, and it nearly killed him, he was bed ridden for nearly a whole year. The guy is anything but lazy, runs his own IT consulting business full time, contributes to a number of open source projects, and is studying for his doctorate part-time, he also manages to squeeze in being a father somehow.
man in the middle vulnerable attack you!