I can envision a block-exchange market that matches builders so that they can complete their individual projects with a minimal join purchase. It could get absurdly complex if you didn't keep strict bounds on the design parameters, but even a very simple function would be quite useful, and easily doable as a personal project.
It's always too late to improve the past, and it's never too late to improve the future.
The article seems to raise the spectre of two distinct kinds of issues: management problems and engineering problems. I think Microsoft manages its business operations very well, and perhaps could use some improvement in its management of human resources, but I won't comment about that substantively.
Realistically, the windows source base is vast at this point, and being needlessly complicated by the demand to build a dozen different versions, and by the need to maintain support for legacy applications. This is a real problem, but it's a good problem to have. The open question is what is to be done for it.
The conservative position held under Ballmer's leadership appears to be "throw more time/money/people at it" and stay the course. But there may not be enough time/money/people. Complexity compounds combinatorially.
One reasonable alternative is to maintain a Win32 legacy compatibility operating system, and fork an incompatible version that breaks backwards compatibility, in order to make the development of new technologies much more managable. For a smaller player, fragmenting a market they need to grow would be suicidal. But for a monopoly like Microsoft, whose monopoly position is threatened by rising competitors, it is a good move, because it will fragment markets which OSX and Linux would otherwise gain, while keeping their installed base secure. Moreover, with a faster release cycle they can collect more "Microsoft taxes". A faster release cycle requires a less complex technical base.
The beauty of Chinese lies not in the spoken but in the written word. There it is as far beyond all European languages as Andromeda is beyond the corner store. Japanese has most of that, plus a minimalist euphony and several orthogonal dimensions of orthography.
Serbo-Croatian really only has euphony going for it, and I would be surprised to see it last as a national language for another 200 years. Quite pleasantly surprised, since then I would be older than a Galapagos tortoise, and seeing anything would be a pleasant surprise.
The typical word "racist" is very much like a "racist" epitethic use of word such as "kike" or "nigger". Both are used to evince a knee-jerk reaction in the audience with a demonizing effect.
Such uses should be excoriated as malicious, pernicious, demagoguery. It is unfortunate that demagogues have been able to destroy the analytic utility of such an importantly useful word as "racist", but such is life.
I'm certainly not talking about fighting the military. I'm talking about decapitating it without a fight.
Besides, why should we care if the assassins die in the process? Their loss is insignificant, individually. The point is that they are saving so many innocent lives...
Then you're quite silly. Exactly what authority gives you these "rights" of which you speak when the only actual authority you recognize as having factual existence denies them? Rather than positing the real existence of rights without any actual authority, you might do better to just admit that you'll take what you can get, and go get it.
Not unless the notebooks in question were made of acid-free archival paper. I've seen cheap paper falling apart in 5 years, irrecoverable in 10. Phase-change media, like CD-RW, will easily outlast my children.
That's not conceding defeat: That's making a virtue of necessity. The purpose of gaining unchecked power is well served. The only advantage government has over the private sector is the ability to monopolize force. Increasing that ability defends the government against the citizenry, and makes it a much more capable instrument for the redistribution of global wealth by means of aggressive warfare.
> is it worth changing the relationship between > citizen and state for the sake of fifty dead?
Yes. The citizens should disarm, defang, declaw, and cripple the state so that it stops creating enemies by committing crimes against humanity. Problem solved.
That argument, while I agree with it, is utterly useless when addressing a religious atheist or agnostic -- a category that includes the majority of professing deists and theists.
The reason the governments of the USUK axis want to erase the lines that protect personal liberty from government power is that freedom is a threat to their absolute authority and a check to their autonomous capacity to concentrate global wealth.
Consider: If you could be shot at any time by a conscientious objector to wars of aggression, would you feel free to invade non-agressing nations and slaughter hundreds of thousands of people in order to seize their natural resources? Of course not. Therefore, it is crucial to disarm, monitor, subdue and desensitize the populace.
The only real energy source is creation, eh?
Put a big bang in your tank, bubba!
The Sun doesn't create energy either, it just
transmutes matter -- from hydrogen!
/me mumbles something about thermodynamic oppressors
Well, it's pretty cheap to poke a vacuum cleaner hose down there. It's not like it requires a high-tech operation. Frankly, I think it would behoove us to get the clathrates before the clathrates get us!
Where there is a democratic process of accountability, assassination is just murder. It's when there is no practicable system of holding people responsible for their actions that vigilantism is unfortunately required. Moreover, it is only warranted when its measures are commensurate with the crimes or social problems which are being addressed. What crime is Hugo Chavez guilty of? Is it infeasible for his accusers to avail themselves of a duly constituted court with the power to adequately redress their grievances?
> No company can afford to do things on principal.
But it's the interest that gets you. Oh, you meant "principle"?
That's why we need assassination politics. A few well-placed deaths amongs the boards of the worst corporations would stop them from committing horrific crimes. The Shi case is not particularly bad, but things like United Fruit in Guatemala in the 50s, or Shell in Nigeria in the 90s, where companies hire government troops or mercenaries to kill off inconvenient peasants demand substantive action. Tobacco companies still kill a third of their customers, and they do it with impunity in most of the world. If the Reynold's family name were a death sentence, that would change quickly. Even the Shi case might merit the ultimate penalty, considering that it represents participation in the brutal campaign of mass-murder that is the Chinese government.
A new technique for oil shale extraction, in situ, underground, rather than via mining and crushing operations, was announced just a couple of days ago. The pilot designers calculate the technique to be economically competitive as long as WTI spots are over $30/bbl.
Slashdot Mirror
It is perfectly feasible, however, to hot-swap SATA drives.
I can envision a block-exchange market that matches builders so that they can complete their individual projects with a minimal join purchase. It could get absurdly complex if you didn't keep strict bounds on the design parameters, but even a very simple function would be quite useful, and easily doable as a personal project.
It's always too late to improve the past, and it's
never too late to improve the future.
The article seems to raise the spectre of two distinct kinds of issues: management problems and engineering problems. I think Microsoft manages its business operations very well, and perhaps could use some improvement in its management of human resources, but I won't comment about that substantively.
Realistically, the windows source base is vast at this point, and being needlessly complicated by the demand to build a dozen different versions, and by the need to maintain support for legacy applications. This is a real problem, but it's a good problem to have. The open question is what is to be done for it.
The conservative position held under Ballmer's leadership appears to be "throw more time/money/people at it" and stay the course. But there may not be enough time/money/people. Complexity compounds combinatorially.
One reasonable alternative is to maintain a Win32 legacy compatibility operating system, and fork an incompatible version that breaks backwards compatibility, in order to make the development of new technologies much more managable. For a smaller player, fragmenting a market they need to grow would be suicidal. But for a monopoly like Microsoft, whose monopoly position is threatened by rising competitors, it is a good move, because it will fragment markets which OSX and Linux would otherwise gain, while keeping their installed base secure. Moreover, with a faster release cycle they can collect more "Microsoft taxes". A faster release cycle requires a less complex technical base.
The beauty of Chinese lies not in the spoken but in the written word. There it is as far beyond all European languages as Andromeda is beyond the corner store. Japanese has most of that, plus a minimalist euphony and several orthogonal dimensions of orthography.
Serbo-Croatian really only has euphony going for it, and I would be surprised to see it last as a national language for another 200 years. Quite pleasantly surprised, since then I would be older than a Galapagos tortoise, and seeing anything would be a pleasant surprise.
> French....the most beautiful sounding and looking language
From which I infer that you know neither Chinese nor Japanese nor Serbo-Croatian.
But yes, Rimbaud will always sound like making love to the overmind, while Rilke will always sound like a phlegm disorder.
Everyone *I* know in Basque country uses ICQ.
And is the Pope of Bhutan. And can run a 1 minute mile.
Counterfactual conditionals are wonderful things.
That depends on whether the value-add is inherent in the dominant paradigm, or contingent upon a disruptive technology.
> I think impeachment is in order for such a ludicrous statement, but given that standard, most of Congress would need to be impeached every week.
I'm looking for a reductio ad absurdum in that sentence, but the implication doesn't seem absurd at all, somehow.
There's Rocks and Racks.
And my great-grandmother remembered buying crack legally from the apothecary shop, but then, she's dead.
The typical word "racist" is very much like a "racist" epitethic use of word such as "kike" or "nigger". Both are used to evince a knee-jerk reaction in the audience with a demonizing effect.
Such uses should be excoriated as malicious, pernicious, demagoguery. It is unfortunate that demagogues have been able to destroy the analytic utility of such an importantly useful word as "racist", but such is life.
I'm certainly not talking about fighting the military. I'm talking about decapitating it without a fight.
Besides, why should we care if the assassins die in the process? Their loss is insignificant, individually. The point is that they are saving so many innocent lives...
Then you're quite silly. Exactly what authority gives you these "rights" of which you speak when the only actual authority you recognize as having factual existence denies them? Rather than positing the real existence of rights without any actual authority, you might do better to just admit that you'll take what you can get, and go get it.
Not unless the notebooks in question were made of acid-free archival paper. I've seen cheap paper falling apart in 5 years, irrecoverable in 10. Phase-change media, like CD-RW, will easily outlast my children.
That's not conceding defeat: That's making a virtue of necessity. The purpose of gaining unchecked power is well served. The only advantage government has over the private sector is the ability to monopolize force. Increasing that ability defends the government against the citizenry, and makes it a much more capable instrument for the redistribution of global wealth by means of aggressive warfare.
> is it worth changing the relationship between
> citizen and state for the sake of fifty dead?
Yes. The citizens should disarm, defang, declaw, and cripple the state so that it stops creating enemies by committing crimes against humanity.
Problem solved.
That argument, while I agree with it, is utterly useless when addressing a religious atheist or agnostic -- a category that includes the majority of professing deists and theists.
The reason the governments of the USUK axis want to erase the lines that protect personal liberty from government power is that freedom is a threat to their absolute authority and a check to their autonomous capacity to concentrate global wealth.
Consider: If you could be shot at any time by a conscientious objector to wars of aggression, would you feel free to invade non-agressing nations and slaughter hundreds of thousands of people in order to seize their natural resources? Of course not. Therefore, it is crucial to disarm, monitor, subdue and desensitize the populace.
Cellulosic ethanol from hemp kicks soya desiels' sooty booty.
Well, it's pretty cheap to poke a vacuum cleaner hose down there. It's not like it requires a high-tech operation. Frankly, I think it would behoove us to get the clathrates before the clathrates get us!
Solar irradiance is 1370 W/m^2. The Earth's mean radius is 6,371.3 km. A=pi*r^2. You do the math.
Where there is a democratic process of accountability, assassination is just murder. It's when there is no practicable system of holding people responsible for their actions that vigilantism is unfortunately required. Moreover, it is only warranted when its measures are commensurate with the crimes or social problems which are being addressed. What crime is Hugo Chavez guilty of? Is it infeasible for his accusers to avail themselves of a duly constituted court with the power to adequately redress their grievances?
But it's the interest that gets you. Oh, you meant "principle"?
That's why we need assassination politics. A few well-placed deaths amongs the boards of the worst corporations would stop them from committing horrific crimes. The Shi case is not particularly bad, but things like United Fruit in Guatemala in the 50s, or Shell in Nigeria in the 90s, where companies hire government troops or mercenaries to kill off inconvenient peasants demand substantive action. Tobacco companies still kill a third of their customers, and they do it with impunity in most of the world. If the Reynold's family name were a death sentence, that would change quickly. Even the Shi case might merit the ultimate penalty, considering that it represents participation in the brutal campaign of mass-murder that is the Chinese government.
A new technique for oil shale extraction, in situ, underground, rather than via mining and crushing operations, was announced just a couple of days ago. The pilot designers calculate the technique to be economically competitive as long as WTI spots are over $30/bbl.
> visible only with special glasses?
And written in Reformed Egyptian.