The fact that there is no mechanism at all to enforce the Constitution so the courts ended up taking that power for themselves in Marbury v. Madison being the very first one.
The constitution was meant to be a frame work to describe how this new government may enact laws. The enforcement is in allowing for a set of checks and balances to ensure that no one branch of government can operate without the approval of the others. You seem to be talking about it as though this is a description of criminal law.
The second being that the Constitution, having no penalties for violating it, is merely the highest "suggestion" in the land
Again, this isn't criminal law. Unless you are referring to the bits about treason. The notion of penalties truly has no business in any Constitution.
The third, leading directly from the first in that the courts are the only recourse for unconstitutional acts
Not true. Case in point, recently the House of Reps threatened to cut funding for the military actions going in on Libya. Regardless of whether or not you agree with this, they have direct recourse for something they see as being in violation of the Constitution. Every branch has powers to hold other branches accountable to the Constitution and federal law. Just because the House decides not to utilize it's power of the purse in this case does not mean it doesn't exist.
Fourth, also deriving from the first issue, combined with Congress's power to regulate the courts, means that the government gets to define what a "grievance" is.
Yeah... that sort of comes with the ability to write the laws the court is responsible for interpreting.
This is just scratching the surface of what's missing from the Constitution. I haven't even gotten to the problems of what is actually in it.
If you were looking for a collection of laws to be enforced then you won't, nor should you expect to, find that in the Constitution. Unfortunately you get some cruft in there like the 18th and 21st amendments doing things that federal law should have been used for. The Constitution is supposed to be the frame work by which the laws are created, not the container of the laws themselves.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Perhaps we should put in a very clear right to privacy
Okay:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
such as the right to contraception, to interracial marriage, and to abortion, perhaps
Sounds good, how about we toss this bit into there as well:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
instead of having a non-elected Supreme Court cobble that together.
If there is a flaw in the Constitution, it is a lack of checks on the court. I honestly don't know how you could set it up differently.
300,000 years would be longer than there have been anatomically modern humans on Earth. If we make it, by the time we get there, we'll be a whole new species.
By the time we got there, "They" would have reached Earth, destroyed it and became the dominant species for 299,999 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 45 minutes.
If the patent doesn't cross the line of scrimmage then I believe this would be a lateral to assassination. In this case it was a failed play action fake that resulted in a 4th down turn over to the bankruptcy courts. Had the patent seen a 3rd down conversion to a first down we'd still be in play, so long as the assassin didn't shoot the ball.
No, let me repeat that, advertising is very expensive.
Why is this? I know this probably sounds hopelessly naive, but where do these "marketing" funds go to? I'm not talking about advertising a live show. More along the lines of how any of us ever heard of Miss Spears in the first place.
It may be the more interesting aspect of this story isn't the record industry losing customers, but the younger generations skipping the main marketing arm of the recording industry, FM radio. The overtly corporate and hopelessly generic radio stations across the country all playing the exact same line up paid for by the "recording industry". I'm old enough to have witnessed this transition from edgy to safe FM stations in my life. Due to this I have satellite radio in my car, and I listen to streaming Internet stations at home.
If FM survives the fall of the RIAA giants it will likely mean that stations will go back to when they chose for themselves what they would play. I think we'd all be better off if that kind of marketing money were to vanish.
(a license called the GNU Public License = GPL, you did notice the word GNU in it?)
I noticed you put that in there. In reality, it is the General Public License. Using the GPL does not in any way mean you are using GNU derived work. You would be using a license created by the GNU project however. There is a not so subtle difference between the two.
Ummm, wasn't that Hillary Clinton's idea when she was trying to work over our health care system way back when? As I seem to recall, it was republicans who were opposed to that aspect of the system she was proposing.
No major kudos for republicans back then either. While the Clintons were busy offering up their socialized medicine plan, Bob Dole was showing the country the republican version of socialized medicine. Of course, both went up in flames.
Would have been really nifty if you had quoted someone with a background in biology. You'd still be a bit of a kook, but it would have been nifty just the same.
teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men
On this point I think most people would agree. Not knowing the difference between a "theory" and a "fact" would tend to cause one to question the knowledge of said teacher.
Yet noone can believe this book we have that lays it all out for us.
Cool! So you have "facts" to present that back up your book's claims? I'm sure all of slashdot would love to hear about them.
The real question that should be asked is whether or not the crime rate has gone down in those areas
That is a fair question, but I believe it to be a bit too simplistic. Of course when you do get around the RTFA you'll find that it's extremely simplistic.
Simply hearing a crime rate number isn't what most people are truly interested in. Speaking for myself I'm not all that concerned with the rate of illegal parking or j-walking when I'm out at night. I want to know about the violent crime rates as well as the rate at which those types of crimes are being solved.
Some other folks have made references to gun stats, which reminds me quite a bit about this article. Most stories involving guns come at it from one angle or another, trying to make some point. Usually the press offers up the dangers of not enough gun control. The response to this is a listing of the dangers of gun control by groups like the NRA. What we rarely get is a substantial break down of the real effects of weapons in our society. What happened to the city that instituted strong gun control measures? Did the murder rate drop as control advocates suggest? Did other types of crime rise as gun rights advocates suggest? How about what happens when gun controls are relaxed, like instituting concealed carry laws?
The manner in which gun control articles approach the matter is by leaving out all those nasty little details that may support a position contrary to the author's. If the murder rate went down you then talk about a subset of the population where it went up. If the gun related death rate is up use it, but don't talk about what the circumstances of the deaths were. Never mind that suicides, police shootings, and defence of life or property are also included. It's all a little statistical game to get an emotional point across. Both pro and anti gun control folks do this.
This article was written with the notion that the surveillance cameras are a bad deal, and thus provided only the stats the adequately supported this notion. In so doing, at least in my mind, this actually weakens the argument against the cameras. A clear bias is shown, and the reader is left wanting for the rest of the facts. Well, the reader that reads past what the author would like you to conclude anyway.
Personally, I'd like to see every one of those damn cameras things removed. It's just WAY too much power in the hands of our government for my liking. With that being said, this article does little to support the notion of getting rid of those things. In another 5-10 years they'll most likely be one of those little tid bits of life we think about as always being there.
Seems that ZFS will be available for FreeBSD here soon. Available now for the adventurous, which I imagine is not how the poster is feeling. As a FreeBSD user I'm definitely looking forward to a stable ZFS on there.
I had a chat with some friends about this very subject not too horribly long ago, which I came up with a theory of my own. I don't think the problem here is that Hollywood is out of ideas. The problem may very well be too many!
Consider how the original Star Wars got to be the highest grossing movie of it's time. It spent over a year in theaters. Heck, the ads for it weren't much more than the movie's logo and some of the music. This movie had the time to let it be judged by the movie goers, who convinced others they needed to see this thing.
Today, there are so many new movies coming out that they're barely in the major theaters for more than a couple of weeks. Even a reasonably successful film may only see a month out there.
This is a huge shift in how movies are marketed, which is coming back to your point about all these remakes, sequels, and TV series. Today, if a movie doesn't produce big time within a couple of weeks, the studios lose money. There's no time for word of mouth, or generating interest in a good movie. If you were a movie executive whose primary concern is making sure everyone gets paid (especially yourself) what would you do?
Heck, we're already seeing what they'd do. Generate movies based on subjects that are already established household names which your marketing department has identified a certain demographic for. Let's toss together a "Bewitched" movie with some notable names and put it out there! Lots of folks over 30 at least saw reruns, and it should have a predictable attendance.
Even as of a few weeks ago I was reading an article concerning a debate over how much time after a movie leaves the theater should the DVD come out. If this shortens up even further (as it likely will) you can expect the remakes and the like to get even worse. 1 year for marketing, 2 weeks in distribution, 3 weeks later the DVD. Sounds like a recipe for even worse film making.
In all fairness, even Microsoft was talking about this years ago. A lot of companies were. I recall Creative Labs really pushing a "digital living room" thing. Intel was also heavily on the bandwagon. I'm sure others could rattle off several companies that had this concept in mind.
I honestly don't know if Apple is the best at being this hub, but it would seem they've done a pretty darn good job at putting themselves out there as the best. Perception being reality and all. It also doesn't hurt to have the defacto standard for portable media in your product line.
Computers aren't used for anything more important that a paperclip for most people.
A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you on this. One aspect that has changed in many people's lives is the entry of a wide variety of digital toys. Digital cameras, video cameras with hard drives, digital music players, and the stack of other goodies flooding the retail chains. Today the computer at home is an important resource for bringing all these things together, as well as the other stuff you mentioned.
Apple has positioned itself pretty well in this regard, as the company producing the computer that is built to deal with this. I suspect that they'll be better positioned to take advantage of this over the next couple of years than Microsoft will be.
Please note, I'm anything but an Apple fan boy. What the heck do I know though? I think KDE on FreeBSD is the bestest game around!
Not so. Just have to dig a bit into the court records provided publicly. Here's the PDF of the court document.
It shows the address of these folks on page 2 as 107 Grand Street, New York, NY. Pulling up Google Earth it looks like you can find these folks at 40 deg 43'15.8N 74 deg 00'04.9W.
Not that I would suggest anything as childish as signing these folks up for free advertisements or any such thing. Just seems like since these folks are digging through everyone else's privacy I'm sure they wouldn't mind having their company address a matter of well known public record.
(WOW!!!1 With Ubuntu Randy Rabbit stuff "just works"... half as good as in Fedora or SuSE 5 years ago!!~! Ubuntu is like the bestest thing evaRR!! OMGPonies!!
From what I've seen of Ubuntu, the hype is deserved.
First off, a friend of mine, who isn't the most computer savvy fella, was wanting to install Linux on his laptop. I had him on FreeBSD for a while, but he simply wasn't up to keeping it up to date or configuring beyond what I set up for him. I suggested he try Kubuntu, as he had been using KDE in the past.
Without any assistance from me he got Kubuntu installed, and had a properly working dual boot setup with Windows XP that was already on the box. I've since done a bit of tweaking on there since then, like configuring his E-Mail client and such.
As for myself I had an older Thinkpad that I had previously been running FreeBSD on. I thought I'd toss a Linux distro on there to play around with. Tried Fedora 5, but both the CD and DVD installer kept locking up during the installation. Tried Gentoo, which also suffered the same fate. Even played with the FreeBSD based desktop distros, which were able to install but weren't able to properly detect the hardware. I'm well versed in FreeBSD, so I was able to get them to play... which wasn't the point of my testing. I wanted to see how easy one of these desktop OS's would be to install and maintain for a non-expert.
So, I then decided to toss Ubuntu on this laptop. Jaw dropping impressive so far as I'm concerned. The only OS to properly detect all the hardware right out of the gate. Even picked the correct monitor specs. Windows can't even do that right without the proper drivers. Then, that whole hardware testing utility that sends a driver report back to Ubuntu just seemed like a brilliant idea. Left me wondering why ALL OS's don't do this. Instead of having folks file bug reports, provide them with a tool that reports back all the good and the bad.
I was further impressed with the software installation and maintenance. It really did "just work". The only bad part of that experience was having to open up the Universe and Restricted repositories, which wasn't readily evident.
I'm still a FreeBSD desktop user at heart, but I would HIGHLY recommend Ubuntu to folks without prior Linux experience as an outstanding alternative to being left stranded in the world of Windows.
Look on the brightside. At least we know now what's driving the current administration.
Wow! Bush jokes really are too clever and funny. That one was an especially good knee slapper there. You done got him but good. Keep up the great work!
Hmmm, perhaps the sarcasm is a bit too subtle? Yeah, probably. Back to your regularly scheduled "Parasites are controlling your brain" article. Nothing to see here.
This software is really only suitable for computer experts and you shouldn't expect it to be as easy as a Mac or Windows
Have you ever installed either OS X or any version of Windows on an empty hard drive? For those of us who have, Linux is a pretty damn easy installation in comparison. OS X isn't so bad, but it definitely can get weird in a hurry.
Case in point, picked up a brand new box from a vendor that came with Windows XP on it. For a variety of reasons at the time I wanted to downgrade to Windows 2k. I slapped the CD into the drive and had to do all that arcane partitioning thing, and have some clue as to the difference between FAT32 and NTFS.
After getting it all installed, no ethernet support included! Windows didn't have the driver for this device. Worse yet, I don't even know what device it is because it's built on to the motherboard. I go to the vendor's site for the driver, thinking I can xfer it to this machine via a floppy. Turns out the vendor has graciously provided an 8 Meg driver file, for just the ethernet card.
I break down and burn the darn thing to a CD to transfer it on over to this machine. Turns out that the vendor has included every kind of card on every PC they sell into this file, and there's no way to tell which driver to choose from! Oh, that was a joyful day. I did finally manage to get it to work, but it was clever.
The very same model of box I tried both FreeBSD and a couple of Linux distros on. Quicky installs just to see how they did. Every free OS picked up on all the devices on this PC without any problems. This includes the ethernet card.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact that there is no mechanism at all to enforce the Constitution so the courts ended up taking that power for themselves in Marbury v. Madison being the very first one.
The constitution was meant to be a frame work to describe how this new government may enact laws. The enforcement is in allowing for a set of checks and balances to ensure that no one branch of government can operate without the approval of the others. You seem to be talking about it as though this is a description of criminal law.
The second being that the Constitution, having no penalties for violating it, is merely the highest "suggestion" in the land
Again, this isn't criminal law. Unless you are referring to the bits about treason. The notion of penalties truly has no business in any Constitution.
The third, leading directly from the first in that the courts are the only recourse for unconstitutional acts
Not true. Case in point, recently the House of Reps threatened to cut funding for the military actions going in on Libya. Regardless of whether or not you agree with this, they have direct recourse for something they see as being in violation of the Constitution. Every branch has powers to hold other branches accountable to the Constitution and federal law. Just because the House decides not to utilize it's power of the purse in this case does not mean it doesn't exist.
Fourth, also deriving from the first issue, combined with Congress's power to regulate the courts, means that the government gets to define what a "grievance" is.
Yeah... that sort of comes with the ability to write the laws the court is responsible for interpreting.
This is just scratching the surface of what's missing from the Constitution. I haven't even gotten to the problems of what is actually in it.
If you were looking for a collection of laws to be enforced then you won't, nor should you expect to, find that in the Constitution. Unfortunately you get some cruft in there like the 18th and 21st amendments doing things that federal law should have been used for. The Constitution is supposed to be the frame work by which the laws are created, not the container of the laws themselves.
Here ya go:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Perhaps we should put in a very clear right to privacy
Okay:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
such as the right to contraception, to interracial marriage, and to abortion, perhaps
Sounds good, how about we toss this bit into there as well:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
instead of having a non-elected Supreme Court cobble that together.
If there is a flaw in the Constitution, it is a lack of checks on the court. I honestly don't know how you could set it up differently.
300,000 years would be longer than there have been anatomically modern humans on Earth. If we make it, by the time we get there, we'll be a whole new species.
By the time we got there, "They" would have reached Earth, destroyed it and became the dominant species for 299,999 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 45 minutes.
How do we know that this hasn't already happened?
If the patent doesn't cross the line of scrimmage then I believe this would be a lateral to assassination. In this case it was a failed play action fake that resulted in a 4th down turn over to the bankruptcy courts. Had the patent seen a 3rd down conversion to a first down we'd still be in play, so long as the assassin didn't shoot the ball.
No, let me repeat that, advertising is very expensive.
Why is this? I know this probably sounds hopelessly naive, but where do these "marketing" funds go to? I'm not talking about advertising a live show. More along the lines of how any of us ever heard of Miss Spears in the first place.
It may be the more interesting aspect of this story isn't the record industry losing customers, but the younger generations skipping the main marketing arm of the recording industry, FM radio. The overtly corporate and hopelessly generic radio stations across the country all playing the exact same line up paid for by the "recording industry". I'm old enough to have witnessed this transition from edgy to safe FM stations in my life. Due to this I have satellite radio in my car, and I listen to streaming Internet stations at home.
If FM survives the fall of the RIAA giants it will likely mean that stations will go back to when they chose for themselves what they would play. I think we'd all be better off if that kind of marketing money were to vanish.
This made clicking through worthwhile...
I believe the term coined for this is the "Internet". Truth and lies can be found in abundance throughout. Buyer beware!
Ummm, wasn't that Hillary Clinton's idea when she was trying to work over our health care system way back when? As I seem to recall, it was republicans who were opposed to that aspect of the system she was proposing.
No major kudos for republicans back then either. While the Clintons were busy offering up their socialized medicine plan, Bob Dole was showing the country the republican version of socialized medicine. Of course, both went up in flames.
scientist for the Atomic Energy Commission
Would have been really nifty if you had quoted someone with a background in biology. You'd still be a bit of a kook, but it would have been nifty just the same.
teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men
On this point I think most people would agree. Not knowing the difference between a "theory" and a "fact" would tend to cause one to question the knowledge of said teacher.
Yet noone can believe this book we have that lays it all out for us.
Cool! So you have "facts" to present that back up your book's claims? I'm sure all of slashdot would love to hear about them.
The real question that should be asked is whether or not the crime rate has gone down in those areas
That is a fair question, but I believe it to be a bit too simplistic. Of course when you do get around the RTFA you'll find that it's extremely simplistic.
Simply hearing a crime rate number isn't what most people are truly interested in. Speaking for myself I'm not all that concerned with the rate of illegal parking or j-walking when I'm out at night. I want to know about the violent crime rates as well as the rate at which those types of crimes are being solved.
Some other folks have made references to gun stats, which reminds me quite a bit about this article. Most stories involving guns come at it from one angle or another, trying to make some point. Usually the press offers up the dangers of not enough gun control. The response to this is a listing of the dangers of gun control by groups like the NRA. What we rarely get is a substantial break down of the real effects of weapons in our society. What happened to the city that instituted strong gun control measures? Did the murder rate drop as control advocates suggest? Did other types of crime rise as gun rights advocates suggest? How about what happens when gun controls are relaxed, like instituting concealed carry laws?
The manner in which gun control articles approach the matter is by leaving out all those nasty little details that may support a position contrary to the author's. If the murder rate went down you then talk about a subset of the population where it went up. If the gun related death rate is up use it, but don't talk about what the circumstances of the deaths were. Never mind that suicides, police shootings, and defence of life or property are also included. It's all a little statistical game to get an emotional point across. Both pro and anti gun control folks do this.
This article was written with the notion that the surveillance cameras are a bad deal, and thus provided only the stats the adequately supported this notion. In so doing, at least in my mind, this actually weakens the argument against the cameras. A clear bias is shown, and the reader is left wanting for the rest of the facts. Well, the reader that reads past what the author would like you to conclude anyway.
Personally, I'd like to see every one of those damn cameras things removed. It's just WAY too much power in the hands of our government for my liking. With that being said, this article does little to support the notion of getting rid of those things. In another 5-10 years they'll most likely be one of those little tid bits of life we think about as always being there.
Seems that ZFS will be available for FreeBSD here soon. Available now for the adventurous, which I imagine is not how the poster is feeling. As a FreeBSD user I'm definitely looking forward to a stable ZFS on there.
crash nuclear program
Perhaps you'd like to rephrase that?
Because you are white apparently. Peach, muave, and blue people need not be concerned.
I had a chat with some friends about this very subject not too horribly long ago, which I came up with a theory of my own. I don't think the problem here is that Hollywood is out of ideas. The problem may very well be too many!
Consider how the original Star Wars got to be the highest grossing movie of it's time. It spent over a year in theaters. Heck, the ads for it weren't much more than the movie's logo and some of the music. This movie had the time to let it be judged by the movie goers, who convinced others they needed to see this thing.
Today, there are so many new movies coming out that they're barely in the major theaters for more than a couple of weeks. Even a reasonably successful film may only see a month out there.
This is a huge shift in how movies are marketed, which is coming back to your point about all these remakes, sequels, and TV series. Today, if a movie doesn't produce big time within a couple of weeks, the studios lose money. There's no time for word of mouth, or generating interest in a good movie. If you were a movie executive whose primary concern is making sure everyone gets paid (especially yourself) what would you do?
Heck, we're already seeing what they'd do. Generate movies based on subjects that are already established household names which your marketing department has identified a certain demographic for. Let's toss together a "Bewitched" movie with some notable names and put it out there! Lots of folks over 30 at least saw reruns, and it should have a predictable attendance.
Even as of a few weeks ago I was reading an article concerning a debate over how much time after a movie leaves the theater should the DVD come out. If this shortens up even further (as it likely will) you can expect the remakes and the like to get even worse. 1 year for marketing, 2 weeks in distribution, 3 weeks later the DVD. Sounds like a recipe for even worse film making.
In all fairness, even Microsoft was talking about this years ago. A lot of companies were. I recall Creative Labs really pushing a "digital living room" thing. Intel was also heavily on the bandwagon. I'm sure others could rattle off several companies that had this concept in mind.
I honestly don't know if Apple is the best at being this hub, but it would seem they've done a pretty darn good job at putting themselves out there as the best. Perception being reality and all. It also doesn't hurt to have the defacto standard for portable media in your product line.
Computers aren't used for anything more important that a paperclip for most people.
A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you on this. One aspect that has changed in many people's lives is the entry of a wide variety of digital toys. Digital cameras, video cameras with hard drives, digital music players, and the stack of other goodies flooding the retail chains. Today the computer at home is an important resource for bringing all these things together, as well as the other stuff you mentioned.
Apple has positioned itself pretty well in this regard, as the company producing the computer that is built to deal with this. I suspect that they'll be better positioned to take advantage of this over the next couple of years than Microsoft will be.
Please note, I'm anything but an Apple fan boy. What the heck do I know though? I think KDE on FreeBSD is the bestest game around!
Not so. Just have to dig a bit into the court records provided publicly. Here's the PDF of the court document.
It shows the address of these folks on page 2 as 107 Grand Street, New York, NY. Pulling up Google Earth it looks like you can find these folks at 40 deg 43'15.8N 74 deg 00'04.9W.
Not that I would suggest anything as childish as signing these folks up for free advertisements or any such thing. Just seems like since these folks are digging through everyone else's privacy I'm sure they wouldn't mind having their company address a matter of well known public record.
From what I've seen of Ubuntu, the hype is deserved.
First off, a friend of mine, who isn't the most computer savvy fella, was wanting to install Linux on his laptop. I had him on FreeBSD for a while, but he simply wasn't up to keeping it up to date or configuring beyond what I set up for him. I suggested he try Kubuntu, as he had been using KDE in the past.
Without any assistance from me he got Kubuntu installed, and had a properly working dual boot setup with Windows XP that was already on the box. I've since done a bit of tweaking on there since then, like configuring his E-Mail client and such.
As for myself I had an older Thinkpad that I had previously been running FreeBSD on. I thought I'd toss a Linux distro on there to play around with. Tried Fedora 5, but both the CD and DVD installer kept locking up during the installation. Tried Gentoo, which also suffered the same fate. Even played with the FreeBSD based desktop distros, which were able to install but weren't able to properly detect the hardware. I'm well versed in FreeBSD, so I was able to get them to play... which wasn't the point of my testing. I wanted to see how easy one of these desktop OS's would be to install and maintain for a non-expert.
So, I then decided to toss Ubuntu on this laptop. Jaw dropping impressive so far as I'm concerned. The only OS to properly detect all the hardware right out of the gate. Even picked the correct monitor specs. Windows can't even do that right without the proper drivers. Then, that whole hardware testing utility that sends a driver report back to Ubuntu just seemed like a brilliant idea. Left me wondering why ALL OS's don't do this. Instead of having folks file bug reports, provide them with a tool that reports back all the good and the bad.
I was further impressed with the software installation and maintenance. It really did "just work". The only bad part of that experience was having to open up the Universe and Restricted repositories, which wasn't readily evident.
I'm still a FreeBSD desktop user at heart, but I would HIGHLY recommend Ubuntu to folks without prior Linux experience as an outstanding alternative to being left stranded in the world of Windows.
Look on the brightside. At least we know now what's driving the current administration.
Wow! Bush jokes really are too clever and funny. That one was an especially good knee slapper there. You done got him but good. Keep up the great work!
Hmmm, perhaps the sarcasm is a bit too subtle? Yeah, probably. Back to your regularly scheduled "Parasites are controlling your brain" article. Nothing to see here.
May I ask what you define as a super destructive virus?
:)
If it infected my FreeBSD desktop and wiped out my text and OpenOffice files. Now THAT would be devestating!
OTOH, if it's just Windows... eh, not that big a deal. Must be a perspective thing
He deserved a week suspension.
Yeah, a week of sitting at home hitting F5!
Heck, who still uses that legacy stuff anyway?
This software is really only suitable for computer experts and you shouldn't expect it to be as easy as a Mac or Windows
Have you ever installed either OS X or any version of Windows on an empty hard drive? For those of us who have, Linux is a pretty damn easy installation in comparison. OS X isn't so bad, but it definitely can get weird in a hurry.
Case in point, picked up a brand new box from a vendor that came with Windows XP on it. For a variety of reasons at the time I wanted to downgrade to Windows 2k. I slapped the CD into the drive and had to do all that arcane partitioning thing, and have some clue as to the difference between FAT32 and NTFS.
After getting it all installed, no ethernet support included! Windows didn't have the driver for this device. Worse yet, I don't even know what device it is because it's built on to the motherboard. I go to the vendor's site for the driver, thinking I can xfer it to this machine via a floppy. Turns out the vendor has graciously provided an 8 Meg driver file, for just the ethernet card.
I break down and burn the darn thing to a CD to transfer it on over to this machine. Turns out that the vendor has included every kind of card on every PC they sell into this file, and there's no way to tell which driver to choose from! Oh, that was a joyful day. I did finally manage to get it to work, but it was clever.
The very same model of box I tried both FreeBSD and a couple of Linux distros on. Quicky installs just to see how they did. Every free OS picked up on all the devices on this PC without any problems. This includes the ethernet card.
I want Xen support before BSD has anything like it
Funny thing of it, primary reason I use FreeBSD for my servers is that Linux doesn't have jail support. I am NOT talking about a chroot jail either.
The Xen stuff would be pretty cool too, but I personally don't have much interest in running a bunch of virtual OS machines.