Nokia saw they were already on that path. And they knew making Android hardware simply won't be profitable when they are competing against the fully automated Shenzhen factories and their cheap labor. Nerval's crap above perpetuates the lie that abandoning their own OS is what killed them, when it was the combination of the market, their own complacency, and their incompetence at delivering a better Meego-based product that did them in.
If Nokia was ever to beat Apple, it would have happened in 2006. And it didn't. That's when they failed, not in 2011, and not when they sold out to Microsoft. Those were simply the visible death-throes of a vanquished fighter.
Is Google's focus on making serving up the traffic more efficient? Obviously if it improves the client experience it's a win, but I would imagine they'd be more invested in a way to pump 2,000 QUIC streams out of a box that can only handle 1,000 TCP/HTTP streams today.
I would love to see an organization like wikipedia take over a browser. Let them do their once a year fundraiser. They could block whatever they like out of the box.
A fundraiser? You think a bake sale would raise the $5,391,119 dollars per year they spend?
What part of "extracted from sea-worms" leads you to the conclusion that "it was never part of a living creature"? A polychaete annelid doesn't exactly exude proteins like a cow gives milk or a spider spins silk -- someone has to harvest the worms, kill them, gut them, dry their exoskeletons out, grind them into a powder, and dissolve them in order to "extract" the proteins. Just because that takes place in a "chemical factory" doesn't alter their animal origin.
Great point! I agree that I'll happily open a command shell and execute a program, thus allowing it to search my path. But for whatever reason, I'll only do this in the context of running command line programs. When it's a GUI application, my brain has me clicking the Firefox logo, rather than typing Firefox, or Start/Control Panel/Administrative Services instead of typing services.msc. And runas is so damn wordy as to be worthless compared to either sudo or right-click-run-as-administrator. (Do you really intend to type all of: runas/profile/env/user:mymachine\administrator "mmc %windir%\system32\services.msc" ???) When in Windows userland, I guess I do as the sheep do.
Something else I've noticed is that I often need the list. For example, I have no need to remember the name of the program that I use to mount.ISO images, because I simply don't use it that often. When I do, I can't remember nearly enough about it to find it. That's when I need the list of applications to scroll through - aha, it's called MagicDisc, not MountISO like I was thinking. Typing 'ISO' or 'disc' turns up nothing of value, and just finding the often-mismatched folder name in c:\Program Files or c:\Program Files (x86) or d:\Program Files or d:\Program Files (x86) is unhelpful. And no matter how many times I type 'mount', it's still not a UNIX box.:-(
Windows is far from ready for search to be the goto method to launch programs. Ubuntu is not ready for search. iOS might be closest, but surprisingly Apple isn't the one forcing it down my throat.
Search is Google's answer to everything.
on
The Case Against Gmail
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
That's a failing of Google. They're the kings of search, so everything should be searchable, right? So they extended that to everything should be searched - always. Want to know who batted third in the fourth game of the World Series? Search for it. Want to know who sent you that email? Search for them. Want to run a program? Search for it.
What they don't acknowledge is that people grow habits. Once we've learned a thing, we can repeat the thing pretty easily. I don't have to "search" for Excel on my PC, I know that if I click down here, then up and over here, I see the little [X~] icon. I don't open the search bar and type Excel. And I never open the search bar and type Excel.
Microsoft, in their traditionally incompetent fashion of misunderstanding their users, decided to mimic Google's unacknowledged mistakes when they came out with Windows 8. (Unity, of course, had beaten them to the punch in incompetence, as they so often do.) Apple figured it out better when they tied search to the home screen on the iPhones, but wisely kept it out of sight. Most people drag their two-dozen useful icons to the first few pages of their iPhone, and use search only when they've forgotten which folder they hid their AnimeTube player in.
Perhaps the reason GMail (beta) remained beta for so long was that they were running experiments on people. Maybe they wanted to see if people would ever adapt to their notions of "search". And maybe they finally tallied up the results, and recognized how stupid they were to believe it in the first place.
I think Snowden and the Grauniad are managing this very carefully and deliberately. Instead of dumping 100,000 powerpoint decks on an already jaded world, they're publishing a new menace every month. So instead of a transient explosion of anger (that the NSA is bracing for, and expecting they'll be able to manage), there is a seething resentment that's slowly building over time. First, people with cell phones got mad, and resentful. Then Merkel got mad, and got the EU all torqued. Today, people who use Google are getting mad. Next month, it'll probably be how they read every message and contact in iCloud, making all the Apple users mad. At this rate, everybody is going to take turns feeling violated a couple of times each over the next year or so.
With this schedule, the administration has to squirm and dodge and apologize every time the spotlight twitches. Even the left no longer trusts the words the President speaks these days, because he's so busy spitting out weasel words defending this out-of-control agency. My guess is there's still a really big expose yet to come that will reveal the NSA did something truly damaging to our democracy with this info, like they rigged a Federal election, or a Supreme Court assignment. And by then Congress will be facing an angry public demanding that they not only react, but over-react.
As a matter of fact, they're releasing this information so carefully orchestrated that I have to wonder who is guiding them. How would Snowden know exactly how to publish this data to maximum effect? He's a sysadmin, not a PR expert. This seems more like one of the successful KGB misinformation campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s.
That takes rational, clear thought. A perp in a high speed chase is panicky and probably focused on "get away now" at the expense of everything else. He probably won't recognize the thunk on his trunk; if he does, and he analyzes it rationally, he'll probably realise car jacking is a more serious offense than what he was running from. The one thing this situation is not is "simple."
We tend to give all criminals a lot of credit for being clever and ruthless, because that's what we see in movies. However, that's only because clever, ruthless villains make for interesting movies and fiction. Most are run-of-the-mill stupid, and the really violent offenders are thankfully few and far between.
High speed chases are always very risky, not only to the perp and the police, but to the public at large. Right now, many cops are under orders to break off pursuit in the interests of public safety. As a society, we have decided it is better to let the guy run away rather than chase him into a school bus full of kids, even though we don't like the idea that he should get away with it. This tool might help reduce the risks as well as the chances of him getting away.
Aeon Lighting Technology street lights are available in sizes up to 145 watts, and they emit 10,000 lumens. The entire top is a large aluminum finned heatsink. Indoors, in a 70 degree grow room*, with a little airflow, mine never get so warm that I can't grab them bare handed. The bottom glass panel in front of the chips stays room temperature. The tops would melt, but I bet they would form icicles readily.
The thing is night street lighting decisions have rarely been dominated by discussions of color. They always boil down to cost.
When mercury vapor lamps were invented, they were more energy efficient than incandescent and fluorescent, and they became the dominant street lighting technology despite their ugly blue color. As metal halide lighting improved efficiencies, (and color,) they began to displace mercury lamps. High pressure sodium came along, and was even more efficient. Cities installed them despite the distinctive golden glow that made them bad for color rendition. (It turned out to be good for avoiding light pollution.)
LED lighting is actually not as efficient as HPS. (68 lm/watt vs 100 lm/watt). Where LEDs offer a lot of benefit is in lamp life. A 145 watt LED streetlight costs $1100 for the fixture and electronics, costs $200 to install, produces 10,000 lumens, should last 50,000 hours, and the power cost is about $1100, for a total of $2400 for an 11 year service life. A 400 watt HPS or metal halide or sodium vapor bulb produces 55,000 lumens, but has to be replaced after 25,000 hours. So it costs $200 for the fixture, $30 for the bulb, $200 to install, $30 for a second bulb, $100 to change it, and $3000 for the electricity, for a total of $3560.
They could tint the color more to the red spectrum by using a different choice of phosphors on the LED chips, at a cost of reduced light output.
Most cities seem willing to settle for the lower light levels in exchange for the substantially reduced overall costs.
My point was that if you build and host your data on your own OwnCloud server, there's a chance you can plead the Fifth, and refuse to supply whatever password is needed to decrypt them. That chance doesn't exist if you have your data hosted at Microsoft's cloud.
The "who you know" certainly counts for something. If you get a recommendation from someone on the inside, you've already passed the first hurdle of HR, and would get a fairer shake from the technical teams. However, HR might still want their "requirements" met, so I don't know how that would play out. The situation hasn't come to that yet, at least not on my team.
Don't dismiss the value of "the lingo". It's painfully clear to me that one of the biggest problems is the lack of a shared meaning in words between two people or areas. When I'm in meetings where there are problems between people or groups, the key to solving them lies in discovering where they differ. And that takes careful listening.
For example, I might be in a meeting listening someone from dept A going on about unit testing their code, and someone else from dept B saying that they're not able to unit test dept A's code. So I get them both to ask each other "what do you mean by 'unit test'?" Turns out that nobody in the room knew jack about what an actual unit test was, and dept A was referring to the developer running the code in a debugger, and dept B was referring to passing the code to their testing team to run a bunch of functional tests. The start of the solution was to get them to use the right names for what each of them was doing. Once they both agreed on the terminology, we could address the real problem, which was that nobody knew shit about unit testing at all - they just thought they were doing it.
Our company's HR department posts the jobs, filters out the resumes, and passes only the ones forward that meet the job requirements we list as well as their fairly generic criteria. They also do some kind of pre-screening work, although I don't know what that is. That stops us from wasting our time weeding through a hundred applications from people who apply for any job, people who can't spell our company's name correctly, or those who claim "25 years Java experience." (Unless the resume was from James Gosling himself, that would be a hell of a thing to claim.) It's the managers and senior technical people in the departments who do the final interviews and make hiring recommendations. Over the last few years, I've only gotten a few "duds" from HR through this process - most were great candidates that I recommended we hire. This system works really well.
You might argue that we'll never hire the guy who is really smart but doesn't have a degree. And you'd be right - we won't even see his resume. It turns out that doesn't matter, because we still get a lot of very good people anyway, and I'm happy to work with any of them.
One other point - this isn't primarily about increasing capacity. It's about replacing cars that have reached the end of their service life, and must be replaced anyway.
But yeah, they then have to do a bunch of cost benefit analysis. If the cost difference between a regular car and an articulated car is $3 million, and the car is expected to be in service for 50 years, and it costs $20,000/year more to maintain, and it can carry 5% more passengers, but the capacity is only used for six trips per day, and we assume fares are held in constant 2013 dollars, will the increased up front cost be covered by the increased revenue? (Show your work.)
A big impediment to increasing capacity is the spacing required between trains for safety. Trains have to have adequate stopping distances between them, and rely on signals and blocks to prevent one train from running into the back of a stopped train. You can't just drop a few more trains onto the rails and expect them to fit in the gaps.
They can't simply add more cars to today's trains, because they can have only as many cars as they have platform space. It's possible these fully interconnected articulated cars would allow them to extend the train beyond the ends of the platform, as long as they only open the doors where it's safe, of course. But that would also increase the duration of stops, potentially reducing the number of trains.
Simply swapping cars for cars with more seats seems like the easiest and quickest approach to increasing capacity. But it's not much of an increase.
Look at OwnCloud if you want to host your own stuff "in a cloud". But the sales pitch for Office 365 is that they do all the "icky computery" stuff, like backups and upgrades.
Of course the drawbacks of cloud are well known, too: you need to be online, you need to pay them monthly, and it can be read by anyone with a warrant (or not a warrant, if they're the NSA. )
Vendor lock-in changes, too. Sure, you can download an Office 365 document to import into Open Office. Today. And just because the TOS says you can today doesn't mean those terms can't be changed tomorrow.
There's a lot to dislike about cloud solutions. But they sure meet the needs of a lot of people - at least those who don't think about it too much.
99% of their scam is to pretend to be a religion to make it more difficult to stop their scam. They are no more a religion than My Little Pony fandom is. It's not as if we don't have dozens of clues that it's a scam. Freedom of Religion is irrelevant in this case since we only have the word of the obvious scammers themselves that it's a "Religion", while we also have their word that it's a good way to dodge tax and that they took up the "Religion" angle late in the game after "Dianetics".
No, using the word "religion" is precisely what makes Freedom of Religion relevant - doesn't matter who says it, doesn't matter who believes it.
What is wrong, and what is not in the Constitution, is that any religions are tax exempt. They are all in business - might be the business of saving souls, but the only outward sign is that they're in the business of drinking wine, lighting candles and ringing bells for fun and entertainment. They all should be taxed just like any other nightclub.
Give nobody any perverse incentives to create one, and we'll have a lot fewer of them to deal with.
Slashdot Mirror
Nokia saw they were already on that path. And they knew making Android hardware simply won't be profitable when they are competing against the fully automated Shenzhen factories and their cheap labor. Nerval's crap above perpetuates the lie that abandoning their own OS is what killed them, when it was the combination of the market, their own complacency, and their incompetence at delivering a better Meego-based product that did them in.
If Nokia was ever to beat Apple, it would have happened in 2006. And it didn't. That's when they failed, not in 2011, and not when they sold out to Microsoft. Those were simply the visible death-throes of a vanquished fighter.
How would this be worse than a SYN flood attack today?
Is Google's focus on making serving up the traffic more efficient? Obviously if it improves the client experience it's a win, but I would imagine they'd be more invested in a way to pump 2,000 QUIC streams out of a box that can only handle 1,000 TCP/HTTP streams today.
I would love to see an organization like wikipedia take over a browser. Let them do their once a year fundraiser. They could block whatever they like out of the box.
A fundraiser? You think a bake sale would raise the $5,391,119 dollars per year they spend?
Perhaps if they sold cookies -- oh, wait.
Same net effect - the ignorant remain ignorant.
It's a fully accredited NYC public high school. RTFA before posting your "OMG SCAM SCARE" nonsense.
Obviously, the students at that school are already better educated than you. They can read. It's a public school that does not charge students.
if they didn't ban just export but import as well.
Great idea. The Dutch don't need Wireshark anyway.
Oh, wait, you mean "monitoring software" means software that can monitor traffic on the network?
How about jailing the people who actually abuse the tools to violate other people's rights, instead of trying to outlaw them?
What part of "extracted from sea-worms" leads you to the conclusion that "it was never part of a living creature"? A polychaete annelid doesn't exactly exude proteins like a cow gives milk or a spider spins silk -- someone has to harvest the worms, kill them, gut them, dry their exoskeletons out, grind them into a powder, and dissolve them in order to "extract" the proteins. Just because that takes place in a "chemical factory" doesn't alter their animal origin.
Great point! I agree that I'll happily open a command shell and execute a program, thus allowing it to search my path. But for whatever reason, I'll only do this in the context of running command line programs. When it's a GUI application, my brain has me clicking the Firefox logo, rather than typing Firefox, or Start/Control Panel/Administrative Services instead of typing services.msc. And runas is so damn wordy as to be worthless compared to either sudo or right-click-run-as-administrator. (Do you really intend to type all of: runas /profile /env /user:mymachine\administrator "mmc %windir%\system32\services.msc" ???) When in Windows userland, I guess I do as the sheep do.
Something else I've noticed is that I often need the list. For example, I have no need to remember the name of the program that I use to mount .ISO images, because I simply don't use it that often. When I do, I can't remember nearly enough about it to find it. That's when I need the list of applications to scroll through - aha, it's called MagicDisc, not MountISO like I was thinking. Typing 'ISO' or 'disc' turns up nothing of value, and just finding the often-mismatched folder name in c:\Program Files or c:\Program Files (x86) or d:\Program Files or d:\Program Files (x86) is unhelpful. And no matter how many times I type 'mount', it's still not a UNIX box. :-(
Windows is far from ready for search to be the goto method to launch programs. Ubuntu is not ready for search. iOS might be closest, but surprisingly Apple isn't the one forcing it down my throat.
That's a failing of Google. They're the kings of search, so everything should be searchable, right? So they extended that to everything should be searched - always. Want to know who batted third in the fourth game of the World Series? Search for it. Want to know who sent you that email? Search for them. Want to run a program? Search for it.
What they don't acknowledge is that people grow habits. Once we've learned a thing, we can repeat the thing pretty easily. I don't have to "search" for Excel on my PC, I know that if I click down here, then up and over here, I see the little [X~] icon. I don't open the search bar and type Excel. And I never open the search bar and type Excel.
Microsoft, in their traditionally incompetent fashion of misunderstanding their users, decided to mimic Google's unacknowledged mistakes when they came out with Windows 8. (Unity, of course, had beaten them to the punch in incompetence, as they so often do.) Apple figured it out better when they tied search to the home screen on the iPhones, but wisely kept it out of sight. Most people drag their two-dozen useful icons to the first few pages of their iPhone, and use search only when they've forgotten which folder they hid their AnimeTube player in.
Perhaps the reason GMail (beta) remained beta for so long was that they were running experiments on people. Maybe they wanted to see if people would ever adapt to their notions of "search". And maybe they finally tallied up the results, and recognized how stupid they were to believe it in the first place.
I think Snowden and the Grauniad are managing this very carefully and deliberately. Instead of dumping 100,000 powerpoint decks on an already jaded world, they're publishing a new menace every month. So instead of a transient explosion of anger (that the NSA is bracing for, and expecting they'll be able to manage), there is a seething resentment that's slowly building over time. First, people with cell phones got mad, and resentful. Then Merkel got mad, and got the EU all torqued. Today, people who use Google are getting mad. Next month, it'll probably be how they read every message and contact in iCloud, making all the Apple users mad. At this rate, everybody is going to take turns feeling violated a couple of times each over the next year or so.
With this schedule, the administration has to squirm and dodge and apologize every time the spotlight twitches. Even the left no longer trusts the words the President speaks these days, because he's so busy spitting out weasel words defending this out-of-control agency. My guess is there's still a really big expose yet to come that will reveal the NSA did something truly damaging to our democracy with this info, like they rigged a Federal election, or a Supreme Court assignment. And by then Congress will be facing an angry public demanding that they not only react, but over-react.
As a matter of fact, they're releasing this information so carefully orchestrated that I have to wonder who is guiding them. How would Snowden know exactly how to publish this data to maximum effect? He's a sysadmin, not a PR expert. This seems more like one of the successful KGB misinformation campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s.
That takes rational, clear thought. A perp in a high speed chase is panicky and probably focused on "get away now" at the expense of everything else. He probably won't recognize the thunk on his trunk; if he does, and he analyzes it rationally, he'll probably realise car jacking is a more serious offense than what he was running from. The one thing this situation is not is "simple."
We tend to give all criminals a lot of credit for being clever and ruthless, because that's what we see in movies. However, that's only because clever, ruthless villains make for interesting movies and fiction. Most are run-of-the-mill stupid, and the really violent offenders are thankfully few and far between.
High speed chases are always very risky, not only to the perp and the police, but to the public at large. Right now, many cops are under orders to break off pursuit in the interests of public safety. As a society, we have decided it is better to let the guy run away rather than chase him into a school bus full of kids, even though we don't like the idea that he should get away with it. This tool might help reduce the risks as well as the chances of him getting away.
Aeon Lighting Technology street lights are available in sizes up to 145 watts, and they emit 10,000 lumens. The entire top is a large aluminum finned heatsink. Indoors, in a 70 degree grow room*, with a little airflow, mine never get so warm that I can't grab them bare handed. The bottom glass panel in front of the chips stays room temperature. The tops would melt, but I bet they would form icicles readily.
*Before you call the cops, we raise orchids.
The thing is night street lighting decisions have rarely been dominated by discussions of color. They always boil down to cost.
When mercury vapor lamps were invented, they were more energy efficient than incandescent and fluorescent, and they became the dominant street lighting technology despite their ugly blue color. As metal halide lighting improved efficiencies, (and color,) they began to displace mercury lamps. High pressure sodium came along, and was even more efficient. Cities installed them despite the distinctive golden glow that made them bad for color rendition. (It turned out to be good for avoiding light pollution.)
LED lighting is actually not as efficient as HPS. (68 lm/watt vs 100 lm/watt). Where LEDs offer a lot of benefit is in lamp life. A 145 watt LED streetlight costs $1100 for the fixture and electronics, costs $200 to install, produces 10,000 lumens, should last 50,000 hours, and the power cost is about $1100, for a total of $2400 for an 11 year service life. A 400 watt HPS or metal halide or sodium vapor bulb produces 55,000 lumens, but has to be replaced after 25,000 hours. So it costs $200 for the fixture, $30 for the bulb, $200 to install, $30 for a second bulb, $100 to change it, and $3000 for the electricity, for a total of $3560.
They could tint the color more to the red spectrum by using a different choice of phosphors on the LED chips, at a cost of reduced light output.
Most cities seem willing to settle for the lower light levels in exchange for the substantially reduced overall costs.
How many pulses do dolphins and this radar send, and what purpose does that serve?
I'm sure it's all for a greater porpoise.
My point was that if you build and host your data on your own OwnCloud server, there's a chance you can plead the Fifth, and refuse to supply whatever password is needed to decrypt them. That chance doesn't exist if you have your data hosted at Microsoft's cloud.
The "who you know" certainly counts for something. If you get a recommendation from someone on the inside, you've already passed the first hurdle of HR, and would get a fairer shake from the technical teams. However, HR might still want their "requirements" met, so I don't know how that would play out. The situation hasn't come to that yet, at least not on my team.
Don't dismiss the value of "the lingo". It's painfully clear to me that one of the biggest problems is the lack of a shared meaning in words between two people or areas. When I'm in meetings where there are problems between people or groups, the key to solving them lies in discovering where they differ. And that takes careful listening.
For example, I might be in a meeting listening someone from dept A going on about unit testing their code, and someone else from dept B saying that they're not able to unit test dept A's code. So I get them both to ask each other "what do you mean by 'unit test'?" Turns out that nobody in the room knew jack about what an actual unit test was, and dept A was referring to the developer running the code in a debugger, and dept B was referring to passing the code to their testing team to run a bunch of functional tests. The start of the solution was to get them to use the right names for what each of them was doing. Once they both agreed on the terminology, we could address the real problem, which was that nobody knew shit about unit testing at all - they just thought they were doing it.
I'm not so sure I'd trust a neurosurgeon who picked it up at home in his spare time.
Our company's HR department posts the jobs, filters out the resumes, and passes only the ones forward that meet the job requirements we list as well as their fairly generic criteria. They also do some kind of pre-screening work, although I don't know what that is. That stops us from wasting our time weeding through a hundred applications from people who apply for any job, people who can't spell our company's name correctly, or those who claim "25 years Java experience." (Unless the resume was from James Gosling himself, that would be a hell of a thing to claim.) It's the managers and senior technical people in the departments who do the final interviews and make hiring recommendations. Over the last few years, I've only gotten a few "duds" from HR through this process - most were great candidates that I recommended we hire. This system works really well.
You might argue that we'll never hire the guy who is really smart but doesn't have a degree. And you'd be right - we won't even see his resume. It turns out that doesn't matter, because we still get a lot of very good people anyway, and I'm happy to work with any of them.
One other point - this isn't primarily about increasing capacity. It's about replacing cars that have reached the end of their service life, and must be replaced anyway.
But yeah, they then have to do a bunch of cost benefit analysis. If the cost difference between a regular car and an articulated car is $3 million, and the car is expected to be in service for 50 years, and it costs $20,000/year more to maintain, and it can carry 5% more passengers, but the capacity is only used for six trips per day, and we assume fares are held in constant 2013 dollars, will the increased up front cost be covered by the increased revenue? (Show your work.)
A big impediment to increasing capacity is the spacing required between trains for safety. Trains have to have adequate stopping distances between them, and rely on signals and blocks to prevent one train from running into the back of a stopped train. You can't just drop a few more trains onto the rails and expect them to fit in the gaps.
They can't simply add more cars to today's trains, because they can have only as many cars as they have platform space. It's possible these fully interconnected articulated cars would allow them to extend the train beyond the ends of the platform, as long as they only open the doors where it's safe, of course. But that would also increase the duration of stops, potentially reducing the number of trains.
Simply swapping cars for cars with more seats seems like the easiest and quickest approach to increasing capacity. But it's not much of an increase.
Look at OwnCloud if you want to host your own stuff "in a cloud". But the sales pitch for Office 365 is that they do all the "icky computery" stuff, like backups and upgrades.
Of course the drawbacks of cloud are well known, too: you need to be online, you need to pay them monthly, and it can be read by anyone with a warrant (or not a warrant, if they're the NSA. )
Vendor lock-in changes, too. Sure, you can download an Office 365 document to import into Open Office. Today. And just because the TOS says you can today doesn't mean those terms can't be changed tomorrow.
There's a lot to dislike about cloud solutions. But they sure meet the needs of a lot of people - at least those who don't think about it too much.
99% of their scam is to pretend to be a religion to make it more difficult to stop their scam. They are no more a religion than My Little Pony fandom is. It's not as if we don't have dozens of clues that it's a scam.
Freedom of Religion is irrelevant in this case since we only have the word of the obvious scammers themselves that it's a "Religion", while we also have their word that it's a good way to dodge tax and that they took up the "Religion" angle late in the game after "Dianetics".
No, using the word "religion" is precisely what makes Freedom of Religion relevant - doesn't matter who says it, doesn't matter who believes it.
What is wrong, and what is not in the Constitution, is that any religions are tax exempt. They are all in business - might be the business of saving souls, but the only outward sign is that they're in the business of drinking wine, lighting candles and ringing bells for fun and entertainment. They all should be taxed just like any other nightclub.
Give nobody any perverse incentives to create one, and we'll have a lot fewer of them to deal with.