Don't get me wrong, I think that standards for Linux are one of the only ways that Linux will survive and I do believe that they are a good thing. My point was that it's hard to standardize something when it's initial purpose was to allow the user to do whatever they wanted to with it and enjoy whaetever idiosyncrasies they feel the easiest and most fit their style. This has been the purpose of open source and therfore no one has to listen. I love Linux, would love to see it really take a good share of the market. I believe that standardization is a good way to start that. But let's face it, there are many people who like using Debian's package manager vs Red Hat/Mandrake's and they would have a hard time conforming if that was set as the standard. And if by some act it does become a standard, what happens to a distro like Debian when what they have used is not the "Linux" standard?
Like I said, I love linux, standards are a good idea, I am just wondering how well it will actaully work. Like I have said a million times before:
Of course, that's just my opioion. I could be wrong --Dennis Miller
Even if we have an orginization that is giving Linux Standards, the fact that Linux is Open Source means no one has to listen. For example, let's say the Linux Standard's Orginization says RPM is the standard format that will be used for installation of software. Who has to listen? It's open source, if I want to tar and gzip my files to get them out there and force you to compile them yourself, then there is not one thing you can do about it.
The only way this will work is if all vendors come together on this and make it happen. Why would they want to do that? There are so many flaovors out there, if we start to standardize, the smaller "flavors" will be eventually out of business and we are back to capitalism at it's finest.
My take on this whole thing - I think they are just trying their ass off to get ahold on the last little bit of the market. I mean - I am a realist, M$ is really kicking ass in the OS market, Linux would seem to not really be a major player. Depends on your take.
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and I would love to see it replace Windoze, it just doesn't seem likely.
Anyway, to the point. M$ has the "large business" market, hell let's face it, they have pretty much all the business market as well as the home market. So what's left? The Open Source users. So now the pretend that they can get a hold on us if they just send us a little bait and make it seem as if they want to play along. Well Bill, I for one am not taking the bait. Linux rocks, and everything M$ sucks.
of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
I have to admit it, it's refreshing to hear from someone out here that has a grip on what parenting is. I have read your reply and many of the following replies. I can't believe sometimes what I read.
I have two children of my own, who are very young yet. We recently left our quiet little small-town neighborhood and headed for the big city and left only one thing behind. The TV. Now I don't really have a problem with the Television, but like everything else, it needs to be done in moderation. Having left it behind, I have spent more evenings playing with my kids, reading to them, and just spending time.
From the time my daughter was born, she has never seen the inside of a daycare. I pray that it stays that way. I can't believe the BS that people try to pull off with the "Socialization" excuse. My daughter meets other children at Church all the time, through family members, and our friends. There is nothing that can take the place of having mom/dad at home taking care of the children. Kids need that consistancy in their life, and the dicipline that comes with it.
Personally, I think you have hit the nail on the head. I can't respond to much of what was written over 5 years, for mine ar 3 and 1. But I will be there before I know it and I hope to keep my same parenting ideals.
I know that I hate banner ads as does everyone else. The fact of the matter is, someone has to pay the bills. Many people have said that Banners don't do any good (as was mentione in the article). I almost never click on these ads, in fact probably clicked on one in the years I have been searching the net. But, I do know there have been times when I need to look into purchasing an item and I didn't know where to go. Then I remembered that banner ad that my eye happened to catch and bang, I'm searching for the web site and usually buying. Maybe this isn't true for everyone, but for a hick turned network engineer, they aren't really that bad, and they have even helped me on occasion. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
You must want to work for Microsoft with that attitude.
. Explaining how to frame a house to someone doesn't involve understanding the different ways a house can be framed. All you're worried about is the end product.
You must not have much experience in construction if all you are worried about is the end product. How about making sure the end product is going to last for a while? That just goes to show you where that 4-year degree put you. You don't have any more of a clue about the real world then when you started. Tell you what, get a job, work for a few years, then post back and tell us how much you learned in that precious 4 years at a "higher institution". Personally, I don't put much stock in someones opinion who is still in school. You're just sayin' what they've trained you to say.
Is this possibly what happened to Bungee when Microsoft bought them out? The making of Halo could have very well put them in the same position Yamauchi talks of in making such grapically advanced software. This would put companies like Microsoft in the drivers seat. They definitely could afford to put out these games and reap the benifits afterwards. Don't know how much I like that Idea.
Why won't qualified evolutionists enter into a written, scientific debate ?
It's been tried. Why won't qualified creationists participate in such a debate without eventually resorting to "God works in mysterious ways" when cornered?
Left out the bit about all of Earth's geologic features being explainable by the Flood, because their 77 pages of well-written refutations can be sent running home with one silly heretical question: Where did all the water GO?
If you know of a qualified evolutionist that would debate, let them debate with the man from that web page. I know him personally, and I know that he would debate on scientific evidence only. You brought up some good points and should address them to someone. It would be a great debate.
Keep working hard, make a lasting impression. Don't make it seem as if you are not liking the job or the details of it. You won't want this to be a bad reflection on you after college or wherever you decide to go from here. Most people start out in goofy positions like this. Don't let it get you down and just do your best. Who knows what can happen. If they like your effort, you may end up with a position with them in the future that you really enjoy. The worst thing you could ever do for yourself is close a door.
I hope they can have a successful business. I have said before that those who use Linux know how to use it and don't always need "special" anything to run it. I have a friend who is extremely well versed in Linux and runs it on a Dell Laptop without any problems. I know that this isn't the companies only source of income but I do hope it becomes a decent source of income. Who knows, the open-sourcers of the world might go with them just because they are making an effort.
Changing a word will not change the truth. What I mean by that is we don't know what happened "In the Beginnning". None of us were there. Gravity you can prove. Hold up a rock, it falls - Gravity. You can't prove this though. All the evidence in the world still would make it nothing more than a theory. Who knows, maybe there will be proof someday in the future that is non-refutable, I just don't believe this is it.
Very simply put, we will never know. We were not there. No science can prove what happend 1,000,000,000,000 years ago no more that it could prove what happened 5,000 years ago (pick your side). What we need to do as individuals is see where the evidence leads us.
This article is no worse than a creationist shoving their beliefs of creationism down you throat. There is no real evidence/proof given in the article. All we see is what these doctors came to an agreement with.
As for my personal opinion, well this time I will keep it to myself.
My comment has nothing to do with eyesight. It's the fact that the very arguement this article is "vindicating" was Darwin's theory of Natrual Selection. (do you have an education?) He later renounced his own theory. There is no need to vindicate him. Get the picture or do I need to explain it further?
What i find completely ironic about this, is that "Survival of the Fittest" or if you would rather Darwin's theory of "Natural Selection" was refuted later by Darwin himself. He said:
"To believe that something as complex as the eyball was produced by natrual selection makes me ill."
How many times have we seen PAID "experts" give their B.S. opinions to line their own pocket books. The whole OJ Simpson Trial. Anything that you want an expert to say, they will say for the right amount of money. Wouldn't you? I mean after all, it's not like the judge can call you on it. He's not the expert, we are. This idea would bring justice to an all new level at the same time putting a stop to those who take advantage of capitalism for their own desires. Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I think something like this was a necessity (obviously so did the Great Thinkers of both companies). We, in the US, are in a recession. True, it hasn't been all that obvious, but companies have started laying people off. Venture capitalists are being more careful about where they venture their capital. This makes Turbo Linux and Linuxcare stronger and assures a little more longevity in our open-source community and anything that does that I will definitely stand for. Personally, I would have named it Turbo Care. But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
I agree completely. The speeds and feeds are increasing exponentially. What is makng news today, will be in a dumpster tomorrow. That's the way of technology, boys.
It's funny how people are so quick to desire the outlawing of something that doesn't fit their way of thinking. What's completely ironic about that, is that for the most part, Open Source (or the fact that no one copyrighted code way back when) is how Bill and Microsoft made their money. Now that they seem to have the world by the balls, they want to outlaw such things that made them rich, famous, and powerful. I guess that's like saying:
Now that I'm president, I'm going to outlaw elections.
What an irony. Of course, this is just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get that either, man. To me that doesn't deserve a Troll either but, hey, I'm just here to speak my mind.
Don't get me wrong, I think that standards for Linux are one of the only ways that Linux will survive and I do believe that they are a good thing. My point was that it's hard to standardize something when it's initial purpose was to allow the user to do whatever they wanted to with it and enjoy whaetever idiosyncrasies they feel the easiest and most fit their style. This has been the purpose of open source and therfore no one has to listen. I love Linux, would love to see it really take a good share of the market. I believe that standardization is a good way to start that. But let's face it, there are many people who like using Debian's package manager vs Red Hat/Mandrake's and they would have a hard time conforming if that was set as the standard. And if by some act it does become a standard, what happens to a distro like Debian when what they have used is not the "Linux" standard?
Like I said, I love linux, standards are a good idea, I am just wondering how well it will actaully work. Like I have said a million times before:
Of course, that's just my opioion. I could be wrong --Dennis Miller
Even if we have an orginization that is giving Linux Standards, the fact that Linux is Open Source means no one has to listen. For example, let's say the Linux Standard's Orginization says RPM is the standard format that will be used for installation of software. Who has to listen? It's open source, if I want to tar and gzip my files to get them out there and force you to compile them yourself, then there is not one thing you can do about it.
The only way this will work is if all vendors come together on this and make it happen. Why would they want to do that? There are so many flaovors out there, if we start to standardize, the smaller "flavors" will be eventually out of business and we are back to capitalism at it's finest.
My take on this whole thing - I think they are just trying their ass off to get ahold on the last little bit of the market. I mean - I am a realist, M$ is really kicking ass in the OS market, Linux would seem to not really be a major player. Depends on your take.
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and I would love to see it replace Windoze, it just doesn't seem likely.
Anyway, to the point. M$ has the "large business" market, hell let's face it, they have pretty much all the business market as well as the home market. So what's left? The Open Source users. So now the pretend that they can get a hold on us if they just send us a little bait and make it seem as if they want to play along. Well Bill, I for one am not taking the bait. Linux rocks, and everything M$ sucks.
of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Why don't you try this for starters. What would you do with 1,000,000 Atari games? It was an article Slashdot had out a while ago.
I have to admit it, it's refreshing to hear from someone out here that has a grip on what parenting is. I have read your reply and many of the following replies. I can't believe sometimes what I read.
I have two children of my own, who are very young yet. We recently left our quiet little small-town neighborhood and headed for the big city and left only one thing behind. The TV. Now I don't really have a problem with the Television, but like everything else, it needs to be done in moderation. Having left it behind, I have spent more evenings playing with my kids, reading to them, and just spending time.
From the time my daughter was born, she has never seen the inside of a daycare. I pray that it stays that way. I can't believe the BS that people try to pull off with the "Socialization" excuse. My daughter meets other children at Church all the time, through family members, and our friends. There is nothing that can take the place of having mom/dad at home taking care of the children. Kids need that consistancy in their life, and the dicipline that comes with it.
Personally, I think you have hit the nail on the head. I can't respond to much of what was written over 5 years, for mine ar 3 and 1. But I will be there before I know it and I hope to keep my same parenting ideals.
Thanks for showing me I'm not alone.
I know that I hate banner ads as does everyone else. The fact of the matter is, someone has to pay the bills. Many people have said that Banners don't do any good (as was mentione in the article). I almost never click on these ads, in fact probably clicked on one in the years I have been searching the net. But, I do know there have been times when I need to look into purchasing an item and I didn't know where to go. Then I remembered that banner ad that my eye happened to catch and bang, I'm searching for the web site and usually buying. Maybe this isn't true for everyone, but for a hick turned network engineer, they aren't really that bad, and they have even helped me on occasion. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
You must want to work for Microsoft with that attitude.
. Explaining how to frame a house to someone doesn't involve understanding the different ways a house can be framed. All you're worried about is the end product.
You must not have much experience in construction if all you are worried about is the end product. How about making sure the end product is going to last for a while? That just goes to show you where that 4-year degree put you. You don't have any more of a clue about the real world then when you started. Tell you what, get a job, work for a few years, then post back and tell us how much you learned in that precious 4 years at a "higher institution". Personally, I don't put much stock in someones opinion who is still in school. You're just sayin' what they've trained you to say.
Is this possibly what happened to Bungee when Microsoft bought them out? The making of Halo could have very well put them in the same position Yamauchi talks of in making such grapically advanced software. This would put companies like Microsoft in the drivers seat. They definitely could afford to put out these games and reap the benifits afterwards. Don't know how much I like that Idea.
Why won't qualified evolutionists enter into a written, scientific debate ?
It's been tried. Why won't qualified creationists participate in such a debate without eventually resorting to "God works in mysterious ways" when cornered?
Left out the bit about all of Earth's geologic features being explainable by the Flood, because their 77 pages of well-written refutations can be sent running home with one silly heretical question: Where did all the water GO?
If you know of a qualified evolutionist that would debate, let them debate with the man from that web page. I know him personally, and I know that he would debate on scientific evidence only. You brought up some good points and should address them to someone. It would be a great debate.
What really sucks, is I just set up a VPN between offices using DES and now their is something new out. Oh well, back to the old drawing board.
Keep working hard, make a lasting impression. Don't make it seem as if you are not liking the job or the details of it. You won't want this to be a bad reflection on you after college or wherever you decide to go from here. Most people start out in goofy positions like this. Don't let it get you down and just do your best. Who knows what can happen. If they like your effort, you may end up with a position with them in the future that you really enjoy. The worst thing you could ever do for yourself is close a door.
I hope they can have a successful business. I have said before that those who use Linux know how to use it and don't always need "special" anything to run it. I have a friend who is extremely well versed in Linux and runs it on a Dell Laptop without any problems. I know that this isn't the companies only source of income but I do hope it becomes a decent source of income. Who knows, the open-sourcers of the world might go with them just because they are making an effort.
I found some questions here. Click on the word ?Evolution on the left. There are some questions in there I can't answer. Maybe some of you can.
Changing a word will not change the truth. What I mean by that is we don't know what happened "In the Beginnning". None of us were there. Gravity you can prove. Hold up a rock, it falls - Gravity. You can't prove this though. All the evidence in the world still would make it nothing more than a theory. Who knows, maybe there will be proof someday in the future that is non-refutable, I just don't believe this is it.
Very simply put, we will never know. We were not there. No science can prove what happend 1,000,000,000,000 years ago no more that it could prove what happened 5,000 years ago (pick your side). What we need to do as individuals is see where the evidence leads us.
This article is no worse than a creationist shoving their beliefs of creationism down you throat. There is no real evidence/proof given in the article. All we see is what these doctors came to an agreement with.
As for my personal opinion, well this time I will keep it to myself.
My comment has nothing to do with eyesight. It's the fact that the very arguement this article is "vindicating" was Darwin's theory of Natrual Selection. (do you have an education?) He later renounced his own theory. There is no need to vindicate him. Get the picture or do I need to explain it further?
What i find completely ironic about this, is that "Survival of the Fittest" or if you would rather Darwin's theory of "Natural Selection" was refuted later by Darwin himself. He said:
"To believe that something as complex as the eyball was produced by natrual selection makes me ill."
Just a thought.
How many times have we seen PAID "experts" give their B.S. opinions to line their own pocket books. The whole OJ Simpson Trial. Anything that you want an expert to say, they will say for the right amount of money. Wouldn't you? I mean after all, it's not like the judge can call you on it. He's not the expert, we are. This idea would bring justice to an all new level at the same time putting a stop to those who take advantage of capitalism for their own desires. Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I think something like this was a necessity (obviously so did the Great Thinkers of both companies). We, in the US, are in a recession. True, it hasn't been all that obvious, but companies have started laying people off. Venture capitalists are being more careful about where they venture their capital. This makes Turbo Linux and Linuxcare stronger and assures a little more longevity in our open-source community and anything that does that I will definitely stand for. Personally, I would have named it Turbo Care. But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
I'd buy.
I agree completely. The speeds and feeds are increasing exponentially. What is makng news today, will be in a dumpster tomorrow. That's the way of technology, boys.
Running games is not the only use for a computer.
Finally, a box that will run the NT Kernal for more than 24 hours. Give them time, and Microsoft will be able to bring that machine to it's knees.
I only have one thing to say about open source:
Hey, don't knock it till you've tried it man!!!
It's funny how people are so quick to desire the outlawing of something that doesn't fit their way of thinking. What's completely ironic about that, is that for the most part, Open Source (or the fact that no one copyrighted code way back when) is how Bill and Microsoft made their money. Now that they seem to have the world by the balls, they want to outlaw such things that made them rich, famous, and powerful. I guess that's like saying:
Now that I'm president, I'm going to outlaw elections.
What an irony. Of course, this is just my opinion, I could be wrong.