This would necessarily occur when discussing the traveling time of light.
But you're forgetting the fundie's favorite special pleading: God created the universe old as part of his mysterious divine plan. The universe can be only ~4000 years old but still have objects billions of light years away because God made it that way.
That's pretty mild as far as fundie double-think goes... if you really want to hear some convolouted logic, ask them how come "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" are not mutually contridictory.
Therefore, it is likely the drive, not the software or the OS.
Nice theory, but probably not the case here, considering that I powered it on right before I booted into linux, then rebooted to windows. I'm pretty confidant it's not a hardware problem.
The difference is that if you have a such huge investment in Perl 4 code that it would not be economical to update to run under Perl 5, you HAVE THE OPTION of hiring a couple of programmers to back-port bugfixes from the Perl 5 codebase to Perl 4, or hack Perl 5 so that it will run your Perl 4 code without barfing. Sure, it won't be cheap, but if it's cheaper than re-writing all your Perl 4 code, then it is the smart route to take.
Hell, you could probably even turn a profit on the deal by selling your version of Perl to companies who are in the same boat as you are.
If I were trying to create software for a major financial gain or for something I wanted the WHOLE WORLD to use, I'd prefer my own hand coded installer.
If I were writing software I wanted to see widely adopted, and make a pile of cash in the process, I sure as hell would *NOT* waste my time and effort writing an installer when there are standard, well-tested installers already out there.
Reinventing the wheel is seldom a profitable activity. Let's say that a senior programmer's time costs you $125/hr. A copy of Installshield Premier is $2,499. That equates to 20 hours of your programmer's time. Do you really believe that ANYONE can produce a complete, fully-tested installer in less than 20 hours? Good luck selling *that* idea to your investors.
As a software customer, if I installed a windows program and it saw that DIDN'T use installshield or one of the other major installers, I'd be HIGHLY suspicious about the company and the product.
when was the last time this happened using native linux tools?
How about yesterday? I wanted to make a copy of a CD for a friend... put the disks in the appropriate drives, fired up K3B under FC3, and hit copy. Pretty straightforward, right? Well, the burner turned on for about 3 seconds and then barfed, leaving me with a coaster. Tried again, same results. Since I was under time pressure I fired up windows and copied it using Nero. No problems at all.
Last week I used cdparanoia to recover one of my son's CDs that got mangled (toddlers and CDs - not a good mix). CDParanoia did a great job of getting the data off the mangled disk, but K3B refused to properly finalize the disk when I burned it. It still plays OK, but after the last track plays the CD player shows an error message. Annoying because it keeps random play from working, but that's not fatal.
I am not too sharp, but, wouldn't Fifth Amendment apply ONLY to U.S. citizens, and no one else in the world?
Wrong. It says "NO PERSON [...] SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW". Not "no citizen" or "no person inside the borders of the USA". It's "no person", ever, anywhere, under any circumstances.
I could be wrong
You are, but don't sweat it. Ignorance can be remedied with education if you're willing to learn.
Granted, I've been out of the Air Force for 10 years, but when I was in we worked almost exclusively with Solaris + Oracle. Considering how many billions of dollars they spent on mission-critical code, and how long it takes to write and verify, I'd be AMAZED if all that code has been replaced.
Besides, if my time in the Air Force taught me one thing, it was that you can get a waiver for ANYTHING.
The problem with this testing approach is that it ONLY works for errors that result in a crash. While these bugs are important, they aren't necessarily the most important ones. There are lots of important bugs which will never be detected by crash analysis.
That's a pretty subjective evaluation. What makes a movie "good" or "bad"? Artistic merit? Technical merit? Commercial success? Whether or not it's entertaining?
In the case of Pulp Fiction, I can accept an opinion which says it lacks artistic merit, because it's just that -- opinion, and I'm sure you know the old saying about opinions. You can debate this back and forth, because there are many different schools of thought.
However, if you judge it on a more objective basis, you get different results. Commercial success is easy to measure: did the movie bring in more money than it cost to make? If so, it's a good movie, at least for a given value of "good". Entertainment value, while personal, is still quantifiable: watch an audience's reactions. What percentage of the audience is distracted or not involved in the story? How often do they look away from the screen? How much of the movie do they remember a week later? Etc...
Just because there's no KNOWN method of factoring large numbers does not mean that it is impossible, because there is NOT a mathmatical proof which demonstrates that (for example) a O(n*log(n)) time factoring algorithm is impossible.
Crypto, particuarly public key crypto, is based on the fact that there is no KNOWN fast factoring method, and the UNPROVEN ASSUMPTION that such an algorithm is impossible to derive. It's entirely possible that some mathematical genius might come along and come up with a proof saying that it is impossible, or demonstating that it IS possible. The point is that right now, it's an unknown, and as a plot point, isn't outrageously bad.
Unfortunately, Sneakers was written a few years before people heard about Quantum computing. A quantum computer WOULD for all intents and purposes BE a "magic box" in the true sense of Clarke's Law.
The point is that the entire concept of holding people without charges and torturing them is antithetical to the concepts on which the Constitution is based. It is, explicitly and implicitly, an unconstitutional abuse of power by the government.
The military/wartime exception ONLY applies to the requirement for a grand jury indictment, it does NOT remove the due process requirement or permit double jepordy.
Guantanamo is outside of the US, so it's not officially under US juridiction. So it's not illegal to detain these people there
Guantanimo is a United States military base, operated by the United States Government. The Constitution applies to the GOVERNMENT, not the people -- it's a list of what the GOVERNMENT can do and can't do.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
It says ANY PERSON. That means anyone, anywhere, at any time. It's not limited to apply only within the US borders nor only to US citizens. It's an injuction prohibiting the US GOVERNMENT from depriving ANY person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
[$1200 rent vs $1800 mortgage] sounds like either rental rates or housing prices are way out of wack in your area
Rents and property values around DC *are* out of whack, but that's a different story. My house and apartment are in different areas. My apartment was much closer to the city, my house is way out in the country. Even still, houses in the area where my apartment was were MORE expensive. I moved out to the 'burbs because I got a 4BR single-family house for what a decent 3BR townhouse would have cost in my old neighborhood.
Or else every renter in your area is crazy
Yep, you have to be crazy to rent anywhere within 25 miles of DC.
Bullshit. It's called "mental filtering". I'm sure the paper I read this morning had ads in it, but I didn't notice any of them. You can skim over anything that looks like an ad without any concious effort.
Speaking of reading the paper on the train, I just got off the train, where I had been reading a free hardcopy newspaper.
If giving away words printed on paper is a viable business model, there's no way you can argue that giving away words on a computer screen isn't. Walking through Union Station in the morning, I see no fewer than three different free daily newspapers. Obviously someone is making money doing this, otherwise they wouldn't keep doing it.
if I kick an american tourist in the @$$, I could be extradited to the US
That depends on how much money said tourist has donated to the Republican party. If it's just an ordinary citizen, no way. If it's someone rich and powerful, count on a trip to Club Fed.
Well, I'm only at 30% equity, not 50%, but I'm still living WELL within my means. Show me someplace where I can house a family of 4 in a comperable school district for less than I'm paying now, and I'll move.
"I'll give you 2 dollars if you give my friend 10".
Hello, dumbass, your friend Uncle Sam is robbing you of $10 every month. Wouldn't you rather have him only steal $8 instead?
Let's see: I have the choice of paying Mr Landlord $10/mo and Uncle Sam $10/mo, or paying Mr. Banker $12/mo and Uncle Sam $8/mo. Which is a better deal? Either way, I'm out $20 each month; the difference is that if I pay Mr Banker $12/mo for 30 years, I get a house that I own free in clear that I can live in until I die and then leave it to my kids in my will. If I pay Mr Landlord $10/mo for 30 years, I get to keep on paying him for the rest of my life or I get to live in a cardboard box, and my kids get nothing. Which sounds like a better deal to you?
When you rent, you are paying someone else's mortgage for them. If you pay rent, you're paying interest -- you just don't know it, and you're not getting any of the benefits.
If you think your landlord doesn't have a mortgage against the property you're renting, guess again. The tax benefits are too good, and mortgage rates are too low for him to do otherwise. If you own a $1,000,000 apartment complex outright, you're better off getting an $800,000 mortgage and letting your tenants pay back the loan for you while you invest the $800,000 cash you borrowed in something else. Paying someone else's mortgage is STUPID. Pay your own and reap the benefits.
How stupid is it to pay 10,000 in interest so you can deduct 28% of that amount from your taxes?
How stupid is it to pay $10,000 in rent so you can deduct NONE of that amount from your taxes?
If you pay rent, you're making someone else's mortgage payment for them. They get all the equity you're paying for, and when you move you get nothing. Unless you're living in your mother's basement rent free, owning is the way to go.
I've owned my house for 3 years. When I was renting I was paying about $1,200 a month, now I pay about $1,800 in mortgage payments. After taxes I'm only paying about $100 more a month out-of-pocket, which gets me more than double the living space (2100 ft^2, 4 bedrooms vs 900 ft^2 2 bedrooms). That alone is worth it.
If I had rented for the last 3 years and invested the difference I'd have saved $3,600. Even if I sold my house at the exact same price I bought it for, I'd have well over three times that amount in equity. Even if 99% of your house payment is interest, that's still 1% that comes back to you. With rent, you get NOTHING back.
Of course, my house is worth a lot more now then when I bought it -- at it's current value I have over $100,000 in equity. I defy you to name any other investment that could yield a $100K return in 3 years for $100 per month.
Even if the bottom fell out of the real estate market tomorrow, and I could only sell my house for half of what I bought it for, I'd STILL be better off than if I was renting because my house payment wouldn't change, and still woudn't be paying out significantly more per month for living expenses than I'd be paying in rent.
Slashdot Mirror
That's pretty mild as far as fundie double-think goes... if you really want to hear some convolouted logic, ask them how come "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" are not mutually contridictory.
Hell, you could probably even turn a profit on the deal by selling your version of Perl to companies who are in the same boat as you are.
Reinventing the wheel is seldom a profitable activity. Let's say that a senior programmer's time costs you $125/hr. A copy of Installshield Premier is $2,499. That equates to 20 hours of your programmer's time. Do you really believe that ANYONE can produce a complete, fully-tested installer in less than 20 hours? Good luck selling *that* idea to your investors.
As a software customer, if I installed a windows program and it saw that DIDN'T use installshield or one of the other major installers, I'd be HIGHLY suspicious about the company and the product.
Last week I used cdparanoia to recover one of my son's CDs that got mangled (toddlers and CDs - not a good mix). CDParanoia did a great job of getting the data off the mangled disk, but K3B refused to properly finalize the disk when I burned it. It still plays OK, but after the last track plays the CD player shows an error message. Annoying because it keeps random play from working, but that's not fatal.
Besides, if my time in the Air Force taught me one thing, it was that you can get a waiver for ANYTHING.
The problem with this testing approach is that it ONLY works for errors that result in a crash. While these bugs are important, they aren't necessarily the most important ones. There are lots of important bugs which will never be detected by crash analysis.
In the case of Pulp Fiction, I can accept an opinion which says it lacks artistic merit, because it's just that -- opinion, and I'm sure you know the old saying about opinions. You can debate this back and forth, because there are many different schools of thought.
However, if you judge it on a more objective basis, you get different results. Commercial success is easy to measure: did the movie bring in more money than it cost to make? If so, it's a good movie, at least for a given value of "good". Entertainment value, while personal, is still quantifiable: watch an audience's reactions. What percentage of the audience is distracted or not involved in the story? How often do they look away from the screen? How much of the movie do they remember a week later? Etc...
Crypto, particuarly public key crypto, is based on the fact that there is no KNOWN fast factoring method, and the UNPROVEN ASSUMPTION that such an algorithm is impossible to derive. It's entirely possible that some mathematical genius might come along and come up with a proof saying that it is impossible, or demonstating that it IS possible. The point is that right now, it's an unknown, and as a plot point, isn't outrageously bad.
Unfortunately, Sneakers was written a few years before people heard about Quantum computing. A quantum computer WOULD for all intents and purposes BE a "magic box" in the true sense of Clarke's Law.
The point is that the entire concept of holding people without charges and torturing them is antithetical to the concepts on which the Constitution is based. It is, explicitly and implicitly, an unconstitutional abuse of power by the government.
The military/wartime exception ONLY applies to the requirement for a grand jury indictment, it does NOT remove the due process requirement or permit double jepordy.
Or else every renter in your area is crazy
Yep, you have to be crazy to rent anywhere within 25 miles of DC.There's also the Georgetowner. I walk by a rack of them every day when I get off the MARC train.
If giving away words printed on paper is a viable business model, there's no way you can argue that giving away words on a computer screen isn't. Walking through Union Station in the morning, I see no fewer than three different free daily newspapers. Obviously someone is making money doing this, otherwise they wouldn't keep doing it.
Governments can penalize you for not paying your taxes. What's your point?
"I'll give you 2 dollars if you give my friend 10".
Hello, dumbass, your friend Uncle Sam is robbing you of $10 every month. Wouldn't you rather have him only steal $8 instead?
Let's see: I have the choice of paying Mr Landlord $10/mo and Uncle Sam $10/mo, or paying Mr. Banker $12/mo and Uncle Sam $8/mo. Which is a better deal? Either way, I'm out $20 each month; the difference is that if I pay Mr Banker $12/mo for 30 years, I get a house that I own free in clear that I can live in until I die and then leave it to my kids in my will. If I pay Mr Landlord $10/mo for 30 years, I get to keep on paying him for the rest of my life or I get to live in a cardboard box, and my kids get nothing. Which sounds like a better deal to you?
When you rent, you are paying someone else's mortgage for them. If you pay rent, you're paying interest -- you just don't know it, and you're not getting any of the benefits.
If you think your landlord doesn't have a mortgage against the property you're renting, guess again. The tax benefits are too good, and mortgage rates are too low for him to do otherwise. If you own a $1,000,000 apartment complex outright, you're better off getting an $800,000 mortgage and letting your tenants pay back the loan for you while you invest the $800,000 cash you borrowed in something else. Paying someone else's mortgage is STUPID. Pay your own and reap the benefits.
If you pay rent, you're making someone else's mortgage payment for them. They get all the equity you're paying for, and when you move you get nothing. Unless you're living in your mother's basement rent free, owning is the way to go.
I've owned my house for 3 years. When I was renting I was paying about $1,200 a month, now I pay about $1,800 in mortgage payments. After taxes I'm only paying about $100 more a month out-of-pocket, which gets me more than double the living space (2100 ft^2, 4 bedrooms vs 900 ft^2 2 bedrooms). That alone is worth it.
If I had rented for the last 3 years and invested the difference I'd have saved $3,600. Even if I sold my house at the exact same price I bought it for, I'd have well over three times that amount in equity. Even if 99% of your house payment is interest, that's still 1% that comes back to you. With rent, you get NOTHING back.
Of course, my house is worth a lot more now then when I bought it -- at it's current value I have over $100,000 in equity. I defy you to name any other investment that could yield a $100K return in 3 years for $100 per month.
Even if the bottom fell out of the real estate market tomorrow, and I could only sell my house for half of what I bought it for, I'd STILL be better off than if I was renting because my house payment wouldn't change, and still woudn't be paying out significantly more per month for living expenses than I'd be paying in rent.