Can someone explain what Carmack is talking about here? This has sparked some brain cell activity, but my inability to comprehend what he is talking about has left the brain stalled.
Carmack: There is something to be said for grappling with a challenge that only involves the forces of nature (ignoring, for the moment, the regulatory challenges), rather than consumer tastes.
The appalling inefficiency in the aerospace industry is also a bit of a driving factor. Due to an accident of history tying them to ICBMs, the evolution of space vehicles has wound up tending towards a local optimum that is in a completely different area than better global solutions, and it doesn't seem likely to break out of the current context. The aerospace industry needs a fresh reboot. There is an order of magnitude improvement available in low hanging fruit.
I have a reasonable time table going for all of our development work, and things are proceeding satisfactorily
Why should the mainland regime be able to claim an offshore island nation
First off, its an island, not an island nation
.. with millions of people that has been de-facto independent for at least 45-50 years?
By looking at the current gov't and level of corruption, i'd say that its been 45-50 years too long for some change.
the people living on the island don't seem to want to live under CCP brutality
I know numerous people from Taiwan, and they all agree (with some reservation) that Taiwan going back to China is a GOOD thing.
And why not, they've done well with it!
Again, looking at the level of corruption, do the people really have a vote?
That alone is reason enough that the mainland doesn't have a "right" to "unify" this island nation with force.
The bottom line is, that Taiwan is NOT an independent nation. And yes, China does have every right to unify its "province". Of course, preferably without force. But, I honestly don't think it will come to that.
I understand some people have a very strong opinion on this issue, as do I. But, I don't feel that the US should intervene in this situation.
I don't think so. No way. The US *SHOULD NOT* interfere, and (I hope), it won't.
This is between China and Taiwan. Period.
Oh, have you considered the manpower China has vs. Taiwan?
Even if Taiwan has some technology, China will ultimately prevail. Even (so-called) taiwanese agree that Taiwan should go back to China. Under similar conditions as Hong Kong.
i agree with a couple of the posts in that distros are *way* to insecure now.
think about what (mainstream) people want. they want to pop a cd into a box and install an OS. they don't want anything to do with partitions, etc.
out of all the (mainstream/newbie) installations done out there, how many of those do you think actually looked at what was being installed? how many people turned all services/installations off and only turned on what they needed? not too many.
its true that making an installation as simple as popping in a cd is *not* secure. i'm not saying that installations need to be easier, they need to be more secure. RPM's make installations easier, but again, they do a lot of stuff in the background, which could possibly make a system insecure. with this knowledge in mind, i suggest that rpm's need to be created with security in mind. more security.
people prefer ease of use/installation/etc over security any day. they would rather use telnet because they are familiar with it, as opposed to ssh. they would rather click "remember my password", than having to enter it in every time they goto a site with a 'members' area.
since they will/can not help themselves, the linux distros need to take up the slack and make it harder for *totally* insecure systems to go 'online'.
i know of at least one company that has put up a linux box. now, the sysadmins happen to be microsoft-certified blahblahblah. this said company happens to be a brokerage where trades are done (the conventional way) all the time. they have a direct connection to the market. now, they have put up a linux server, and with mcXX sysadmins managing/creating/etc this server, what do you think will be the result?
the sysadmin popped in a red-hat cd and installed with all the default options. lets say 6 months down the line, they get totally screwed, there systems are damaged, millions of dollars are lost, (even more??) who will be blamed??
i'm pretty sure the sysadmin who installed the os is gonna catch some heat, but so will linux in general. the linux community will end up paying a price because some fool decided to do a 'default' installation.
thats why i say we should make our 'default' installations more secure.
thats all i have to say about that.
ps. BTW, i'm sure all the script kiddies out there love all the new *default* linux boxes going up.
Slashdot Mirror
Can someone explain what Carmack is talking about here? This has sparked some brain cell activity, but my inability to comprehend what he is talking about has left the brain stalled.
Carmack: There is something to be said for grappling with a challenge that only involves the forces of nature (ignoring, for the moment, the regulatory challenges), rather than consumer tastes.
The appalling inefficiency in the aerospace industry is also a bit of a driving factor. Due to an accident of history tying them to ICBMs, the evolution of space vehicles has wound up tending towards a local optimum that is in a completely different area than better global solutions, and it doesn't seem likely to break out of the current context. The aerospace industry needs a fresh reboot. There is an order of magnitude improvement available in low hanging fruit.
I have a reasonable time table going for all of our development work, and things are proceeding satisfactorily
First off, its an island, not an island nation
By looking at the current gov't and level of corruption, i'd say that its been 45-50 years too long for some change.
the people living on the island don't seem to want to live under CCP brutality
I know numerous people from Taiwan, and they all agree (with some reservation) that Taiwan going back to China is a GOOD thing.
And why not, they've done well with it!
Again, looking at the level of corruption, do the people really have a vote?
That alone is reason enough that the mainland doesn't have a "right" to "unify" this island nation with force.
The bottom line is, that Taiwan is NOT an independent nation. And yes, China does have every right to unify its "province". Of course, preferably without force. But, I honestly don't think it will come to that.
I understand some people have a very strong opinion on this issue, as do I. But, I don't feel that the US should intervene in this situation.
Consider the untapped market China has vs. chip production.
The perception that the US is trying to give is that of neutrality. Behind the scenes, you can bet your ass that there are unseen forces at work.
Unseen forces, to unite Taiwan and China back peacefully. The US *should* remain neutral. China has every right to Taiwan.
This is between China and Taiwan. Period.
Oh, have you considered the manpower China has vs. Taiwan?
Even if Taiwan has some technology, China will ultimately prevail. Even (so-called) taiwanese agree that Taiwan should go back to China. Under similar conditions as Hong Kong.
http://sendmail.net/?feed=allabout810
think about what (mainstream) people want. they want to pop a cd into a box and install an OS. they don't want anything to do with partitions, etc.
out of all the (mainstream/newbie) installations done out there, how many of those do you think actually looked at what was being installed? how many people turned all services/installations off and only turned on what they needed? not too many.
its true that making an installation as simple as popping in a cd is *not* secure. i'm not saying that installations need to be easier, they need to be more secure. RPM's make installations easier, but again, they do a lot of stuff in the background, which could possibly make a system insecure. with this knowledge in mind, i suggest that rpm's need to be created with security in mind. more security.
people prefer ease of use/installation/etc over security any day. they would rather use telnet because they are familiar with it, as opposed to ssh. they would rather click "remember my password", than having to enter it in every time they goto a site with a 'members' area.
since they will/can not help themselves, the linux distros need to take up the slack and make it harder for *totally* insecure systems to go 'online'.
i know of at least one company that has put up a linux box. now, the sysadmins happen to be microsoft-certified blahblahblah. this said company happens to be a brokerage where trades are done (the conventional way) all the time. they have a direct connection to the market. now, they have put up a linux server, and with mcXX sysadmins managing/creating/etc this server, what do you think will be the result?
the sysadmin popped in a red-hat cd and installed with all the default options. lets say 6 months down the line, they get totally screwed, there systems are damaged, millions of dollars are lost, (even more??) who will be blamed??
i'm pretty sure the sysadmin who installed the os is gonna catch some heat, but so will linux in general. the linux community will end up paying a price because some fool decided to do a 'default' installation.
thats why i say we should make our 'default' installations more secure.
thats all i have to say about that.
ps. BTW, i'm sure all the script kiddies out there love all the new *default* linux boxes going up.