I wasn't surprised about the lawsuit against IBM because there were longstanding issues we weren't able to resolve with IBM.
This was interesting - it's the first I've heard of a long-standing disagreement with IBM. The SCO press I've seen so far has presented it as a "We've just discovered this" rather than a "We've been trying for years to rationalise this". I'm surprised they're not taking the latter path, it would look better from a PR perspective. Must be legal reasons, I suppose.
[satire] "In general, I don't have much sympathy for cancer sufferers." [/satire]
You have me wrong sir.
I have zero, none, nada, zilch sympathy for cancer sufferers who cause their own cancer by smoking. It's simple. You smoke, you die early, and usually painfully. Tough - you knew about it before you started and you did it anyway. With any luck you didn't contribute to the gene pool. Good riddance, say I.
On the other hand, if you contract cancer through no fault of your own, my heart goes out to you and your loved ones. I sincerely hope it goes into remission, and you live a long, happy, and fulfilled life.
I am yet to be convinced that RSI is anything but a self-inflicted attitude-related and significantly psychosomatic symptom of someone not being sensible in how they treat themselves. I think it's come out of a litigous (sp?) US society, and I think it's a bandwagon on which people have jumped - in other words, it's a pile of.
As for "studies showing genetic issues with RSI" (another post), you can find "studies" to prove anything if you deliver a "research" budget. The bigger the bandwagon, the bigger the budget in an ever-increasing orgy of papers, hype, and litigation.
Oh, and if you disagree, then you are of course a baby-murderer, or perhaps you have no sympathy for those with terminal illnesses through no fault of their own.
Satirise to your hearts content, but the subject of good satire bears at least a passing resemblance to its focus, and last I noticed, RSI is not a fatal "disease".
You know, that puts a whole new spin on things. We haven't had a bloody uprising in Europe in ages. Madame la guillotine stands gaunt from lack of sustenance.
Oh all right, but I think viruses would be somewhat more prevalent if something got chopped off for every 1 million infections:-))) Choice of "bit" to chop done to be decided by (non-electronic) vote of thos infected:-))
Well, given that the EU are taking viruses seriously, perhaps MS will start to get some less-than-wonderful press over here.
Perhaps the EU can hold seminars, teaching MS employees what's good and bad about virus protection. Hint: the 'execute' bit has a fair old say in the matter:-)
"Oh, sorry, we don't have any sympathy for those people, 'cause they injure themselves out of a lack of common sense. No need to publish medical recommendations to guide businesses in their purchasing, for example. Morons. Let 'em "suffer."
Note. These are not quotes.
I said I didn't have much sympathy. I didn't say I ridiculed them.
was that the local officials saw a way to keep their skin intact. Defer the decision and allow a (new! in-depth!) study to recommend something else because the time-frame allows it.
Err, dunno what planet you're from. Welcome to Earth. Have you ever heard of dambusters ? WW2 ? Bunch of Lancaster bombers, the bouncing bomb, etc. etc.
The explosion caused by the bombs wasn't that great, but because it blew up right next to the dam, and because water is relatively incompressible, they broke (two of the three, I think) the dams.
You certainly don't need a nuclear weapon to blow up a dam!
as for "natural disaster", that depends on the flow-rate when it hits civilisation. I'd argue "natural" as well:-)
If the dam bottles all the water up, and someone's built a city in the shadow of the dam walls, then yes, lots will die. If on the other hand, the dam is relatively far away from the nearest civilian population, the water has time to order its flow again, the immediate damage to civilians can be minimal.
The long-term effects can be enormous, however, but doing something like this is no different to bombing any other infrastructure within a warzone (eg: the Gulf war, where most of the comms, power, water etc. were all utterly destroyed). Funny thing - no war crimes were mentioned...
I'm not sure (I've only driven over it a few times) but the Hoover dam might be a good target - the cities are miles away, the kinetic energy can greatly dissipate, and the cities are completely dependent on the water. Excellent choice for a target, if I'm right about those premises, and if I was a terrorist/enemy agent in the US.
It'll look a lot less impressive if the truck just slowly comes to a halt rather than have the entire bridge blow up.
On a more serious note, what about tactical bombing - you blow up bridges to deny the enemy choice within the battlezone. You attack dams to deny the enemy water, etc.
Somehow I think there'll still be big explosions in any up-and-coming war... Of course, it could be an E-bomb, targetted at a nuclear reactor...
You have a point, but it is 'repetitive' strain injury... When you see people saying they have RSI after using a computer for a week, and yet I've been using them far harder (say a factor of 4) for 52x15(x4) times as long, you could argue I have a sample of ~3100:-)
I'm not generally callous. I just think most of it is self-inflicted. I don't have much sympathy for people who stab themselves, either... "Soft git" would be a typical response...
I've never been much of a fan of mouse gestures. Whenever you see someone using them, there's a rapid flick of the wrist in some angled direction... that can't be good for you if repeated often...
In general I don't have much sympathy for RSI sufferers. (I was going to put sufferers in quotes, but thought better of it:-).
I use a keyboard something like 8 hours a day, and have done for the last 15 years, programming computers. If anyone is a prime candidate, it's me, and no RSI as yet. On the other hand, I'm reasonably careful - I don't hammer the keyboard, and I try to rest all my forearms on the desk in front of the keyboard. Sensible things to minimise the effect... unlike "gestures", which are just a disaster waiting to happen, IMHO.
One of the sites using hostip.info has a smily/ok/sad face at the top of the page. Imagine a photo of your loved one which reacted to how they felt at the time:-)
Real-time feeds of "I'm happy", "I'm sad" could come from SMS, email, web, irc, whatever, and update the picture.
Look, it's my idea, and there's no copyright or patents on it, ok, feel free to do whatever you want:-)
Well, I tried to read the FA before making a comment, but it was futile, there was some enormous flashing strobe-y advert to it that was just painful to have on the screen.
So, I gave up. I have no clue what the advert was for, it had a sort of minimalist man icon in it, and lots of flashing colours - that's all I know. I do however know a lot more about advertising than the idiots who thought that one up.
... complete with handbrake squeals. Is it just me, or does Gartner appear to just write what they think will go down well, rather than really analyse things.
Of course, we like it when it agrees with what we think (and I think they're right to say what they're saying now, but that just makes me no different from (m)any of you reading this:-)
You don't need a framebuffer to run X. I regularly run 'nedit' on my co-lo machines with the display served to the office or home via an ssh tunnel.
Ok, I guess it could be really really old, but even then, I would have expected any "supported" system to have had X ported to it by the manufacturer. It's not that hard to write the ddx part of an X server (and this mythical old system will almost certainly have a manufacturer-specific framebuffer); and the dix part isn't too hard to compile...
I just think it's a really odd thing to say. You might as well say, "A unix machine with a 100-baseT port"...
Microsoft is now focussing on security, so there's no need to worry any more:-)
Since we're 110% confident that all those dedicated knowledgeable MS administrators will be keeping up-to-date with all the patches, and that with the new focus, MS software will soon be completely immune to viruses, who cares about any of this stuff ?
Slashdot Mirror
This was interesting - it's the first I've heard of a long-standing disagreement with IBM. The SCO press I've seen so far has presented it as a "We've just discovered this" rather than a "We've been trying for years to rationalise this". I'm surprised they're not taking the latter path, it would look better from a PR perspective. Must be legal reasons, I suppose.
Simon
[satire]
"In general, I don't have much sympathy for cancer sufferers."
[/satire]
You have me wrong sir.
I have zero, none, nada, zilch sympathy for cancer sufferers who cause their own cancer by smoking. It's simple. You smoke, you die early, and usually painfully. Tough - you knew about it before you started and you did it anyway. With any luck you didn't contribute to the gene pool. Good riddance, say I.
On the other hand, if you contract cancer through no fault of your own, my heart goes out to you and your loved ones. I sincerely hope it goes into remission, and you live a long, happy, and fulfilled life.
I am yet to be convinced that RSI is anything but a self-inflicted attitude-related and significantly psychosomatic symptom of someone not being sensible in how they treat themselves. I think it's come out of a litigous (sp?) US society, and I think it's a bandwagon on which people have jumped - in other words, it's a pile of.
As for "studies showing genetic issues with RSI" (another post), you can find "studies" to prove anything if you deliver a "research" budget. The bigger the bandwagon, the bigger the budget in an ever-increasing orgy of papers, hype, and litigation.
Oh, and if you disagree, then you are of course a baby-murderer, or perhaps you have no sympathy for those with terminal illnesses through no fault of their own.
Satirise to your hearts content, but the subject of good satire bears at least a passing resemblance to its focus, and last I noticed, RSI is not a fatal "disease".
Simon.
"Nothing. Three critical events occured during 1997-2000 ... These were matters of when and not if."
:-)
That's a powerful statement from any company exec. Hope it all pans out for them as they think it will
Simon
Doh! That should be 'less prevalent'...
Simon.
You know, that puts a whole new spin on things. We haven't had a bloody uprising in Europe in ages. Madame la guillotine stands gaunt from lack of sustenance.
:-))) Choice of "bit" to chop done to be decided by (non-electronic) vote of thos infected :-))
Oh all right, but I think viruses would be somewhat more prevalent if something got chopped off for every 1 million infections
Simon
Well, given that the EU are taking viruses seriously, perhaps MS will start to get some less-than-wonderful press over here.
:-)
Perhaps the EU can hold seminars, teaching MS employees what's good and bad about virus protection. Hint: the 'execute' bit has a fair old say in the matter
Simon
"Oh, sorry, we don't have any sympathy for those people, 'cause they injure themselves out of a lack of common sense. No need to publish medical recommendations to guide businesses in their purchasing, for example. Morons. Let 'em "suffer."
Note. These are not quotes.
I said I didn't have much sympathy. I didn't say I ridiculed them.
Simon.
[Grin.]
I'm not in the US until next April. I guess I'll find out then whether the FBI (or whoever) are as paranoid as they're made out to be.
In my defence, I've driven over it a number of times in the past 10 years, and never blown it up once. Honest.
Simon
was that the local officials saw a way to keep their skin intact. Defer the decision and allow a (new! in-depth!) study to recommend something else because the time-frame allows it.
Simon the cynic.
Err, dunno what planet you're from. Welcome to Earth. Have you ever heard of dambusters ? WW2 ? Bunch of Lancaster bombers, the bouncing bomb, etc. etc.
:-)
The explosion caused by the bombs wasn't that great, but because it blew up right next to the dam, and because water is relatively incompressible, they broke (two of the three, I think) the dams.
You certainly don't need a nuclear weapon to blow up a dam!
as for "natural disaster", that depends on the flow-rate when it hits civilisation. I'd argue "natural" as well
If the dam bottles all the water up, and someone's built a city in the shadow of the dam walls, then yes, lots will die. If on the other hand, the dam is relatively far away from the nearest civilian population, the water has time to order its flow again, the immediate damage to civilians can be minimal.
The long-term effects can be enormous, however, but doing something like this is no different to bombing any other infrastructure within a warzone (eg: the Gulf war, where most of the comms, power, water etc. were all utterly destroyed). Funny thing - no war crimes were mentioned...
I'm not sure (I've only driven over it a few times) but the Hoover dam might be a good target - the cities are miles away, the kinetic energy can greatly dissipate, and the cities are completely dependent on the water. Excellent choice for a target, if I'm right about those premises, and if I was a terrorist/enemy agent in the US.
Simon
It'll look a lot less impressive if the truck just slowly comes to a halt rather than have the entire bridge blow up.
On a more serious note, what about tactical bombing - you blow up bridges to deny the enemy choice within the battlezone. You attack dams to deny the enemy water, etc.
Somehow I think there'll still be big explosions in any up-and-coming war... Of course, it could be an E-bomb, targetted at a nuclear reactor...
Simon
You have a point, but it is 'repetitive' strain injury... When you see people saying they have RSI after using a computer for a week, and yet I've been using them far harder (say a factor of 4) for 52x15(x4) times as long, you could argue I have a sample of ~3100 :-)
I'm not generally callous. I just think most of it is self-inflicted. I don't have much sympathy for people who stab themselves, either... "Soft git" would be a typical response...
Simon.
I've never been much of a fan of mouse gestures. Whenever you see someone using them, there's a rapid flick of the wrist in some angled direction... that can't be good for you if repeated often...
:-).
In general I don't have much sympathy for RSI sufferers. (I was going to put sufferers in quotes, but thought better of it
I use a keyboard something like 8 hours a day, and have done for the last 15 years, programming computers. If anyone is a prime candidate, it's me, and no RSI as yet. On the other hand, I'm reasonably careful - I don't hammer the keyboard, and I try to rest all my forearms on the desk in front of the keyboard. Sensible things to minimise the effect... unlike "gestures", which are just a disaster waiting to happen, IMHO.
Simon
Tell you what, you get to keep him, if you win on Saturday... can't say fairer than that, now, can I. I'm cuttin' me own throat here guv'nor!
:-)
Simon
"The judge ruled prison was not called for."
We could do with more of them over here in the UK....
Simon.
Ah dammit.
:-)
:-)
One of the sites using hostip.info has a smily/ok/sad face at the top of the page. Imagine a photo of your loved one which reacted to how they felt at the time
Real-time feeds of "I'm happy", "I'm sad" could come from SMS, email, web, irc, whatever, and update the picture.
Look, it's my idea, and there's no copyright or patents on it, ok, feel free to do whatever you want
One of the sites using has a smily/ok/sad face at the top of the page. Imagine a photo of your loved one which reacted to how they felt at the time :-)
:-)
Real-time feeds of "I'm happy", "I'm sad" could come from SMS, email, web, irc, whatever, and update the picture.
Look, it's my idea, and there's no copyright or patents on it, ok, feel free to do whatever you want
Simon
Well, I tried to read the FA before making a comment, but it was futile, there was some enormous flashing strobe-y advert to it that was just painful to have on the screen.
So, I gave up. I have no clue what the advert was for, it had a sort of minimalist man icon in it, and lots of flashing colours - that's all I know. I do however know a lot more about advertising than the idiots who thought that one up.
Simon.
... complete with handbrake squeals. Is it just me, or does Gartner appear to just write what they think will go down well, rather than really analyse things.
:-)
Of course, we like it when it agrees with what we think (and I think they're right to say what they're saying now, but that just makes me no different from (m)any of you reading this
Simon
You don't need a framebuffer to run X. I regularly run 'nedit' on my co-lo machines with the display served to the office or home via an ssh tunnel.
Ok, I guess it could be really really old, but even then, I would have expected any "supported" system to have had X ported to it by the manufacturer. It's not that hard to write the ddx part of an X server (and this mythical old system will almost certainly have a manufacturer-specific framebuffer); and the dix part isn't too hard to compile...
I just think it's a really odd thing to say. You might as well say, "A unix machine with a 100-baseT port"...
Simon
Can anyone tell me any unix system that can't run X-windows ? I've used a few in my time, and they've all been capable of running X ....
Simon.
... but I wonder how long it'll take before any system like this will have to have 2 channels, one for the security "people", and one for you...
Simon
... is that the servers in the co-lo don't have a hissy fit and die. That'd be a 1000-mile round-trip to see what's wrong :-(
:-)))
Pressies are always good though
Simon.
Microsoft is now focussing on security, so there's no need to worry any more :-)
Since we're 110% confident that all those dedicated knowledgeable MS administrators will be keeping up-to-date with all the patches, and that with the new focus, MS software will soon be completely immune to viruses, who cares about any of this stuff ?
Simon.
[removes tongue from cheek]
Simple :-)
Simon.