I want to highlight a few things as my post may not be completely clear. I want my country to oppose terrorism and AFAIK it has done it clearly during all it's history.
But I absolutely don't want my country to have to support more violence. That's what I have a big problem with. I think that George W. Bush was very irresponsible for demanding that every country has to support the upcoming bombings or face bombings themselves. That gives no room whatsoever for a peaceloving anti-terrorism country and that is absolutely wrong!
all the civilized countries throughout the world will classify other countries as either pro-terrorist or anti-terrorist. As of Tuesday, there's no middle ground, no room for dissembling or prevarication: they're either with us or against us, either for or against terrorism. Governments will make their choices... and they and their citizens will bear the consequences, terrible consequences.
My country stayed neutral during the cold war. My country has participated in peace keeping for ages and hosted conferences where nations have brought closer to each other.
I can't find the words to describe how sad and disappointed I am to hear how USA demands my country to give up on our neutrality and choose side. It's absolutely revolting how the strongest country in the world forces countries to look at the world in black or white.
Based on a poll 29% of US citizens do not support bombing. Is USA going to make these people "bear the concequences?" Or is US going to respect their right to free speech and own opinions? If so, why does US prohibit this right from peaceloving countries?
I've spent a fair share of time programming with CLI tools. One time I even wrote PC software remotely on Amiga complete with handcoding all the graphics. While you can automate a lot the question still is, why bother?
As someone already pointed out in this thread, Delphi gives you both GUI and CLI tools. The GUI is just great when you're developing. Draw your graphics, set properties and doubleclick controls to write code. Especially debugging is fast as you are automatically sent to the error place. I just can't see why this would be a bad idea?
The GUI sucks when you have to automate something, though. Like compiling customized executables from a set of patches. Visual Basic sucks especially bad here but Delphi shines again as it's command line compiler is excellent.
So don't argue which one is better. Have both and use the right tool for the right job.
A farmer had a problem. His rooster was growing old and didn't do his responsibilities as well as in his young days. So the farmer went and bought a new rooster to fill in.
The new rooster went all cocky to the old one and said: "Ok old timer. I'm the man in this house, so you'd better get your feathers out of here."
The old one didn't feel like giving up that easily so he challenged the new rooster for a race: "Let's run 20 laps around the henhouse. The faster wins and the loser leaves."
As the new rooster was confident of his speed, the two went outside and a hen gave them the start signal.
The old rooster sprinted and got ahead with the new rooster tightly after him.
The old rooster was leading after 1st lap.
The old rooster was still ahead after the 2nd lap.
On the 3rd lap there was a loud BANG and the new rooster flew against the henhouse wall in a big clowd of feathers. The farmer lowered his shotgun and muttered: "That'll be the last gay rooster in this house."
An OS from Finland? Does this come from the frozen small hellhole next to North Pole? Do they even have electricity there? World domination? Yeah right. Won't happen in a million years!
...said people 10 years ago and went on with their life. Boy, were they wrong.
Never underestimate an OS that comes from Finland.
Squatting deep is safe. You feel the stress in your knees as a beginner because your muscles are weaker there. However, they do get stronger fast when you squat right.
If you don't squat deep, you don't develope your muscles equally and your weaker muscles around your knees have to cope with more weight as you progress which is really not a good idea.
You also have a tendency to squat wrong if you don't go deep. You can see a lot of people at the gym doing 1/4 squats leaning front too much as they are afraid of their knees or loosing balance. That puts stress on the knees while not developing mucle.
You have back pain? Congratulation, it's because your back muscles are way too weak. And not only your back muscles. Same goes with your arms, shoulders, legs etc. Humans were really not designed to sit still. We were made for hard work.
So get your butt to the gym and start lifting weiights. It will strengthen your muscles and you will feel a lot better. However, don't be a fool and lift wrong. Study a bit so you know the right form. Read through Krista's page to find excellent advice and examples of both good and bad form. And if you're put off by the page being Women's Weightlifting Links, I assure you that this girl advices women to work out as men. And you can find a link to more masculine sites from her page anyway. misc.fitness.weights on usenet is also a great source of information.
The basic move to strengthen your back and legs is squat. Start without any weights whatsoever. Then keep your weight on your heels and lower yourself as low as you can and raise back up. I'm talking ass to the grass style here, not 90 degrees or shins to parallel. Add the bar when you get used to the move and then start working out. Don't add so much weight that you don't feel like lowering yourself all the way down. Also, you should be able to lift 8-10 reps.
Other good movements are deadlifts, good mornings, stiff legged dead lifts and side bends. There's a lot to choose from but do use free weights. While machines look nice and safe, they don't give as good results and you can also risk injury as the movements are not natural.
Also, don't be afraid of asking. You'll see big and strong guys at the gym. When you see someone who has apparently been lifting for years, do ask for advice and let him check your form. And don't be ashamed of not lifting as much as he does. After all, he's been lifting for ages and you're just starting your journey towards good health and strong body.
Great! Let's all just shout foul to IBM. How dare they give access to a computer for free? Bad bad IBM! It should be GPL! No! They should also give free T-shirts!
SourceForge is a great contribution but don't use it to put down other gifts. That's greed.
SSL through proxy (Fixed in nightly builds)
on
Mozilla 0.9 Out
·
· Score: 2
I don't know about 0.9 but nightly builds used to have this bug still two weeks ago. SSL through proxy didn't work at all. It's fixed in the nightly builds.
-final:
- Kai Germaschewski: Makefile dependency fixes. ISDN update
- Chris Mason: another reiserfs tail writing fix
- unify pte/pmd allocation
- undo some VIA PCI fixups - conflicting behaviour
-pre8:
- Paul Mackerras: PPC update for thread-safe page table handling
- Ingo Molnar: x86 PAE update for thread-safe page table handling
- Jeff Garzik: network driver updates, i810 rng driver, and
"alloc_etherdev()" network driver insert race condition fix.
- David Miller: UltraSparcIII update, network locking fixes
- Al Viro: fix fs counts on mount failure
-pre7:
- more bugs found by the automatic stanford checker, yay!
- Andrew Morton: fix SAK locking bugs by moving it into a process context
- Johannes Erdfelt: USB updates
- Jeff Garzik: merge Hermes driver by David Gibson
- Jens Axboe: cdrom merges, ll_rw_blk proper accounting
-pre6:
- Jeff Garzik: network driver merge
- Andrew Morton: fix missed page_table_lock unlock
- David Miller: Qlogic,FC bufix, page allocation order problem.
-pre5:
- Rik van Riel and others: mm rw-semaphore (ps/top ok when swapping)
- IDE: 256 sectors at a time is legal, but apparently confuses some
drives. Max out at 255 sectors instead.
- Petko Manolov: USB pegasus driver update
- make the boottime memory map printout at least almost readable.
- USB driver updates
- pte_alloc()/pmd_alloc() need page_table_lock.
-pre4:
- Petr Vandrovec, Al Viro: dentry revalidation fixes
- Stephen Tweedie / Manfred Spraul: kswapd and ptrace race
- Neil Brown: nfsd/rpc/raid cleanups and fixes
-pre3:
- Alan Cox: continued merging
- Urban Widmark: smbfs fix (d_add on already hashed dentry - no-no).
- Andrew Morton: 3c59x update
- Jeff Garzik: network driver cleanups and fixes
- Gérard Roudier: sym-ncr drivers update
- Jens Axboe: more loop cleanups and fixes
- David Miller: sparc update, some networking fixes
-pre2:
- Jens Axboe: fix loop device deadlocks
- Greg KH: USB updates
- Alan Cox: continued merging
- Tim Waugh: parport and documentation updates
- Cort Dougan: PowerPC merge
- Jeff Garzik: network driver updates
- Justin Gibbs: new and much improved aic7xxx driver 6.1.5
-pre1:
- Chris Mason: reiserfs, another null bytes bug
- Andrea Arkangeli: make SMP Athlon build
- Alexander Zarochentcev: reiserfs directory fsync SMP locking fix
- Jeff Garzik: PCI network driver updates
- Alan Cox: continue merging
- Ingo Molnar: fix RAID AUTORUN ioctl, scheduling improvements
I only stopped the madness with VB5. Passing a string to a DLL caused it to be converted from unicode to ansi thanks to VB storing them internally as unicode. Passing a table made VB convert every fscking string.
Then I wisened up and changed alltogether to Delphi.
I changed from VB to Delphi after being a die hard VB-user for ages. After two years of Delphi under my belt I can say that it was the best decision ever.
It's amazing how easy Delphi is to start with. There's a small treshold as the syntax is a bit different from VB. But when you do some serious development, you'll see how Delphi really makes sense. It's both easy and very extensive at the same time. With Delphi you can write apps that you couldn't even dream to write with VB. And no need for kludges.
What's the situation now? My new apps are small, blazingly fast and reliable. They are also written in a language whose vendor actually cares about quality and backwards compatibility. Porting from Delphi4 to Delphi5 was just a simple recompile. And now I have a chance to port them to Linux too. Oh boy, I just can't wait:-)
Needless to say it's real torture for me to write code with VB now.
I've been attending the USENIX NT and LISA NT (Large Installation Systems
Administration for NT) conference in downtown Seattle this week.
One of those magical Microsoft moments(tm) happened yesterday and I
thought that I'd share. Non-geeks may not find this funny at all, but
those in geekdom (particularly UNIX geekdom) will appreciate it.
Greg Sullivan, a Microsoft product manager (henceforth MPM), was holding
forth on a forthcoming product that will provide Unix style scripting and
shell services on NT for compatibility and to leverage UNIX expertise that
moves to the NT platform. The product suite includes the MKS (Mortise
Kern Systems) windowing Korn shell, a windowing PERL, and lots of goodies
like awk, sed and grep. It actually fills a nice niche for which other
products (like the MKS suite) have either been too highly priced or not
well enough integrated.
An older man, probably mid-50s, stands up in the back of the room and
asserts that Microsoft could have done better with their choice of Korn
shell. He asks if they had considered others that are more compatible
with existing UNIX versions of KSH.
The MPM said that the MKS shell was pretty compatible and should be able
to run all UNIX scripts.
The questioner again asserted that the MKS shell was not very compatible
and didn't do a lot of things right that are defined in the KSH language
spec.
The MPM asserted again that the shell was pretty compatible and should
work quite well.
This assertion and counter assertion went back and forth for a bit, when
another fellow member of the audience announced to the MPM that the
questioner was, in fact David Korn of AT&T (now Lucent) Bell Labs. (David
Korn is the author of the Korn shell)
Uproarious laughter burst forth from the audience, and it was one of the
only times that I have seen a (by then pink cheeked) MPM lost for words
or momentarily lacking the usual unflappable confidence. So, what's a body
to do when Microsoft reality collides with everyone elses?
Let me get this straight. You're complaining because you have a possibility to charge money from them? Just click on the ad. The evil corp will pay and a Linux site gets the money.
During all these years I haven't understood why US is so damn paranoid about being attacked. You guys waste a horrendous amount of money on your army and cruise around trying to find new threaths so that the circus can go on. I guess this paranoia also shows in the amount of hand guns in US.
Ok, before I'm moderated -1 troll, let's get down to business.
1. Should we in the rest of the people be happy that there's a trigger happy superpower who treathens our security? And now the new leader will increase the funding for their strong army. What are they doing? Are they planning to take over the world? No, we don't see it that way buy you guys would in our shoes.
2. A revenge happens if the offender is found. Imagine waking up one morning to news that Washington is totally destroyed by a nuke. There went the president and most of the administration. What if nobody saw that coming and the sender is not found? Who are you going to attack?
3. There will never be a shower of nuclear warheads. Nobody would do that. Not even the most insane leaders. A nuke is best as a strategic weapon that is smuggled in and detonated by surprise. Anything more than that just is suicide.
4. Keep in mind that you guys are the most trigger happy people in the world. Maybe Hitler would have used it but nobody else. But then again, US did use it against Japan...
5. Do you realise how paranoid you sound when you say that a nuclear shield is necessary but a public school system is redundant?
Oh yes they do have the right to filter. If the filtered product is the only one they sell and customers know it, everything is totally legal.
Think about it. Do you get shell access on dialup connections? Oh my God, they are cheating! They have no right censoring me from a shell account? Get the point?
People in US should also understand that not all countries have unlimited bandwidth and cheap access. As mp3:s or Porn pics hog a lot of bandwidth and cause extra costs, filtering most of that is a small price to pay to keep costs at a reasonable level.
I won't comment on how good those filters are or how tackily that filtering was done. Filtering has problems but so does unfiltered access.
Sure, there's a lot of new physics to research when we talk about small particles. But here we are talking about big objects which is pretty well researched, isn't it?
Let's take this "20km-long object showing on a european air controler's radar" for example.
Apparently it only showed for a while. It means that this object moves really fast. Now this kind of an abject must also have an enourmous weight. So it's not only producing enough energy to fight gravity. It's also producing enough energy to move itself very fast. How come we didn't notice anything of that energy? How come the friction from moving so fast didn't fry the object? And why didn't we at least see a huge fireball?
With all due respect, I think it's even more arrogant to expect those parts of physics we don't know to rule out fundamental parts of the physics we do know. Like gravity, for example.
It's very probable that there's a lot of life out there in the universe. It's even more probable that the existing life is mostly primitive. It's very unlikely to find advanced life forms like the animals we have on the earth. And out of those it's again very unlikely to find more intelligent life forms than animals. So multiply highly unlikely with highly unlikely with highly unlikely etc. and you may find a few. Or then not a single one, who knows?
Now then. We have a life form who can build and figure out things. They will evolve, there's no question about it. But again it's highly unlikely that they travel thousands of light years away. And it's a fat freaking impossibility that they find us. Multiply again to get the odds....
Let's suppose miracles happen and they happen to arrive here. What's the probability we can't see them? They do have a huge ship, don't they? They don't travel that far distances in a bath tub.
This is the place where common sense stops working. They must have some cloaking devices. They are too intelligent to disturb us. They have a moral code not to visit us. Just like we have a moral code not to do incest and have sex with animals. Stuff like this still happens though, so these aliens must have damn strong morals too. We start to find excuses that are again highly unlikely and make the probability even smaller and smaller.
Let's face it. It's more probable that the pig next door caused these "signs" than aliens in their space ships.
I'm not saying that intelligent life forms don't exist. I just don't think they have visited us.
Excellent comment. I'd also like to point out that on this planet we have a huge amount of life forms. However, only one has the brain capacity and motivation to actually do something intelligent. While dogs can look you in the eyes and fetch your newspaper, I don't see them inviting anything any soon now. Those planets may have life but if it's not as intelligent as humans, I doubt they will ever come knocking on our doors.
Seriously, there really is lack of signs. It's just so cool to explain everything we don't understand with aliens. Aliens built the pyramids, aliens abducted me, Jesus was an alien, the Bermuda triangle is an alien base etc.
But doesn't it make sense? Think about it. You see some strange light and apply the most logical explanation: It must be little green men from 1000 light years away moving faster than light and defying each and every law of physics. But they can do it because they have a magical rock or because they are so much more advanced than us mere human beings. Oh, and they are very friendly too as they haven't wiped us off this rock with their amazing technology. Apparently they are very shy too as the only people they meet tend to be pretty much on the ignorant side.
Face it, do you really think that aliens have different laws of physics than we do? And wouldn't they have landed here if they were here? If so, I have a bridge to sell to you.
Slashdot Mirror
I want to highlight a few things as my post may not be completely clear. I want my country to oppose terrorism and AFAIK it has done it clearly during all it's history.
But I absolutely don't want my country to have to support more violence. That's what I have a big problem with. I think that George W. Bush was very irresponsible for demanding that every country has to support the upcoming bombings or face bombings themselves. That gives no room whatsoever for a peaceloving anti-terrorism country and that is absolutely wrong!
all the civilized countries throughout the world will classify other countries as either pro-terrorist or anti-terrorist. As of Tuesday, there's no middle ground, no room for dissembling or prevarication: they're either with us or against us, either for or against terrorism. Governments will make their choices... and they and their citizens will bear the consequences, terrible consequences.
My country stayed neutral during the cold war. My country has participated in peace keeping for ages and hosted conferences where nations have brought closer to each other.
I can't find the words to describe how sad and disappointed I am to hear how USA demands my country to give up on our neutrality and choose side. It's absolutely revolting how the strongest country in the world forces countries to look at the world in black or white.
Based on a poll 29% of US citizens do not support bombing. Is USA going to make these people "bear the concequences?" Or is US going to respect their right to free speech and own opinions? If so, why does US prohibit this right from peaceloving countries?
I've spent a fair share of time programming with CLI tools. One time I even wrote PC software remotely on Amiga complete with handcoding all the graphics. While you can automate a lot the question still is, why bother?
As someone already pointed out in this thread, Delphi gives you both GUI and CLI tools. The GUI is just great when you're developing. Draw your graphics, set properties and doubleclick controls to write code. Especially debugging is fast as you are automatically sent to the error place. I just can't see why this would be a bad idea?
The GUI sucks when you have to automate something, though. Like compiling customized executables from a set of patches. Visual Basic sucks especially bad here but Delphi shines again as it's command line compiler is excellent.
So don't argue which one is better. Have both and use the right tool for the right job.
A farmer had a problem. His rooster was growing old and didn't do his responsibilities as well as in his young days. So the farmer went and bought a new rooster to fill in.
The new rooster went all cocky to the old one and said: "Ok old timer. I'm the man in this house, so you'd better get your feathers out of here."
The old one didn't feel like giving up that easily so he challenged the new rooster for a race: "Let's run 20 laps around the henhouse. The faster wins and the loser leaves."
As the new rooster was confident of his speed, the two went outside and a hen gave them the start signal.
The old rooster sprinted and got ahead with the new rooster tightly after him.
The old rooster was leading after 1st lap.
The old rooster was still ahead after the 2nd lap.
On the 3rd lap there was a loud BANG and the new rooster flew against the henhouse wall in a big clowd of feathers. The farmer lowered his shotgun and muttered: "That'll be the last gay rooster in this house."
An OS from Finland? Does this come from the frozen small hellhole next to North Pole? Do they even have electricity there? World domination? Yeah right. Won't happen in a million years!
...said people 10 years ago and went on with their life. Boy, were they wrong.
Never underestimate an OS that comes from Finland.
Of course you could use Ghostview to view pdf...
I'm sorry to say but this is a Gym Legend.
Squatting deep is safe. You feel the stress in your knees as a beginner because your muscles are weaker there. However, they do get stronger fast when you squat right.
If you don't squat deep, you don't develope your muscles equally and your weaker muscles around your knees have to cope with more weight as you progress which is really not a good idea.
You also have a tendency to squat wrong if you don't go deep. You can see a lot of people at the gym doing 1/4 squats leaning front too much as they are afraid of their knees or loosing balance. That puts stress on the knees while not developing mucle.
Won't help much. Your muscles will still be weak. Treat the problem and not the symptoms.
You have back pain? Congratulation, it's because your back muscles are way too weak. And not only your back muscles. Same goes with your arms, shoulders, legs etc. Humans were really not designed to sit still. We were made for hard work.
So get your butt to the gym and start lifting weiights. It will strengthen your muscles and you will feel a lot better. However, don't be a fool and lift wrong. Study a bit so you know the right form. Read through Krista's page to find excellent advice and examples of both good and bad form. And if you're put off by the page being Women's Weightlifting Links, I assure you that this girl advices women to work out as men. And you can find a link to more masculine sites from her page anyway. misc.fitness.weights on usenet is also a great source of information.
The basic move to strengthen your back and legs is squat. Start without any weights whatsoever. Then keep your weight on your heels and lower yourself as low as you can and raise back up. I'm talking ass to the grass style here, not 90 degrees or shins to parallel. Add the bar when you get used to the move and then start working out. Don't add so much weight that you don't feel like lowering yourself all the way down. Also, you should be able to lift 8-10 reps.
Other good movements are deadlifts, good mornings, stiff legged dead lifts and side bends. There's a lot to choose from but do use free weights. While machines look nice and safe, they don't give as good results and you can also risk injury as the movements are not natural.
Also, don't be afraid of asking. You'll see big and strong guys at the gym. When you see someone who has apparently been lifting for years, do ask for advice and let him check your form. And don't be ashamed of not lifting as much as he does. After all, he's been lifting for ages and you're just starting your journey towards good health and strong body.
Great! Let's all just shout foul to IBM. How dare they give access to a computer for free? Bad bad IBM! It should be GPL! No! They should also give free T-shirts!
SourceForge is a great contribution but don't use it to put down other gifts. That's greed.
I don't know about 0.9 but nightly builds used to have this bug still two weeks ago. SSL through proxy didn't work at all. It's fixed in the nightly builds.
Russia's biggest problem is not lack of money. It's corruption, crime and black markets. Those are very hard to fight.
-final:
- Kai Germaschewski: Makefile dependency fixes. ISDN update
- Chris Mason: another reiserfs tail writing fix
- unify pte/pmd allocation
- undo some VIA PCI fixups - conflicting behaviour
-pre8:
- Paul Mackerras: PPC update for thread-safe page table handling
- Ingo Molnar: x86 PAE update for thread-safe page table handling
- Jeff Garzik: network driver updates, i810 rng driver, and
"alloc_etherdev()" network driver insert race condition fix.
- David Miller: UltraSparcIII update, network locking fixes
- Al Viro: fix fs counts on mount failure
-pre7:
- more bugs found by the automatic stanford checker, yay!
- Andrew Morton: fix SAK locking bugs by moving it into a process context
- Johannes Erdfelt: USB updates
- Jeff Garzik: merge Hermes driver by David Gibson
- Jens Axboe: cdrom merges, ll_rw_blk proper accounting
-pre6:
- Jeff Garzik: network driver merge
- Andrew Morton: fix missed page_table_lock unlock
- David Miller: Qlogic,FC bufix, page allocation order problem.
-pre5:
- Rik van Riel and others: mm rw-semaphore (ps/top ok when swapping)
- IDE: 256 sectors at a time is legal, but apparently confuses some
drives. Max out at 255 sectors instead.
- Petko Manolov: USB pegasus driver update
- make the boottime memory map printout at least almost readable.
- USB driver updates
- pte_alloc()/pmd_alloc() need page_table_lock.
-pre4:
- Petr Vandrovec, Al Viro: dentry revalidation fixes
- Stephen Tweedie / Manfred Spraul: kswapd and ptrace race
- Neil Brown: nfsd/rpc/raid cleanups and fixes
-pre3:
- Alan Cox: continued merging
- Urban Widmark: smbfs fix (d_add on already hashed dentry - no-no).
- Andrew Morton: 3c59x update
- Jeff Garzik: network driver cleanups and fixes
- Gérard Roudier: sym-ncr drivers update
- Jens Axboe: more loop cleanups and fixes
- David Miller: sparc update, some networking fixes
-pre2:
- Jens Axboe: fix loop device deadlocks
- Greg KH: USB updates
- Alan Cox: continued merging
- Tim Waugh: parport and documentation updates
- Cort Dougan: PowerPC merge
- Jeff Garzik: network driver updates
- Justin Gibbs: new and much improved aic7xxx driver 6.1.5
-pre1:
- Chris Mason: reiserfs, another null bytes bug
- Andrea Arkangeli: make SMP Athlon build
- Alexander Zarochentcev: reiserfs directory fsync SMP locking fix
- Jeff Garzik: PCI network driver updates
- Alan Cox: continue merging
- Ingo Molnar: fix RAID AUTORUN ioctl, scheduling improvements
I had to write the DLL in Delphi :-)
I only stopped the madness with VB5. Passing a string to a DLL caused it to be converted from unicode to ansi thanks to VB storing them internally as unicode. Passing a table made VB convert every fscking string.
Then I wisened up and changed alltogether to Delphi.
I changed from VB to Delphi after being a die hard VB-user for ages. After two years of Delphi under my belt I can say that it was the best decision ever.
It's amazing how easy Delphi is to start with. There's a small treshold as the syntax is a bit different from VB. But when you do some serious development, you'll see how Delphi really makes sense. It's both easy and very extensive at the same time. With Delphi you can write apps that you couldn't even dream to write with VB. And no need for kludges.
What's the situation now? My new apps are small, blazingly fast and reliable. They are also written in a language whose vendor actually cares about quality and backwards compatibility. Porting from Delphi4 to Delphi5 was just a simple recompile. And now I have a chance to port them to Linux too. Oh boy, I just can't wait :-)
Needless to say it's real torture for me to write code with VB now.
I've been attending the USENIX NT and LISA NT (Large Installation Systems Administration for NT) conference in downtown Seattle this week.
One of those magical Microsoft moments(tm) happened yesterday and I thought that I'd share. Non-geeks may not find this funny at all, but those in geekdom (particularly UNIX geekdom) will appreciate it.
Greg Sullivan, a Microsoft product manager (henceforth MPM), was holding forth on a forthcoming product that will provide Unix style scripting and shell services on NT for compatibility and to leverage UNIX expertise that moves to the NT platform. The product suite includes the MKS (Mortise Kern Systems) windowing Korn shell, a windowing PERL, and lots of goodies like awk, sed and grep. It actually fills a nice niche for which other products (like the MKS suite) have either been too highly priced or not well enough integrated.
An older man, probably mid-50s, stands up in the back of the room and asserts that Microsoft could have done better with their choice of Korn shell. He asks if they had considered others that are more compatible with existing UNIX versions of KSH.
The MPM said that the MKS shell was pretty compatible and should be able to run all UNIX scripts.
The questioner again asserted that the MKS shell was not very compatible and didn't do a lot of things right that are defined in the KSH language spec.
The MPM asserted again that the shell was pretty compatible and should work quite well.
This assertion and counter assertion went back and forth for a bit, when another fellow member of the audience announced to the MPM that the questioner was, in fact David Korn of AT&T (now Lucent) Bell Labs. (David Korn is the author of the Korn shell)
Uproarious laughter burst forth from the audience, and it was one of the only times that I have seen a (by then pink cheeked) MPM lost for words or momentarily lacking the usual unflappable confidence. So, what's a body to do when Microsoft reality collides with everyone elses?
---Lisa
Let me get this straight. You're complaining because you have a possibility to charge money from them? Just click on the ad. The evil corp will pay and a Linux site gets the money.
Sheesh, are we a bit nationalistic or what?
During all these years I haven't understood why US is so damn paranoid about being attacked. You guys waste a horrendous amount of money on your army and cruise around trying to find new threaths so that the circus can go on. I guess this paranoia also shows in the amount of hand guns in US.
Ok, before I'm moderated -1 troll, let's get down to business.
1. Should we in the rest of the people be happy that there's a trigger happy superpower who treathens our security? And now the new leader will increase the funding for their strong army. What are they doing? Are they planning to take over the world? No, we don't see it that way buy you guys would in our shoes.
2. A revenge happens if the offender is found. Imagine waking up one morning to news that Washington is totally destroyed by a nuke. There went the president and most of the administration. What if nobody saw that coming and the sender is not found? Who are you going to attack?
3. There will never be a shower of nuclear warheads. Nobody would do that. Not even the most insane leaders. A nuke is best as a strategic weapon that is smuggled in and detonated by surprise. Anything more than that just is suicide.
4. Keep in mind that you guys are the most trigger happy people in the world. Maybe Hitler would have used it but nobody else. But then again, US did use it against Japan...
5. Do you realise how paranoid you sound when you say that a nuclear shield is necessary but a public school system is redundant?
You just forgot the most common reason:
d) Abusive or otherwise lousy parents.
Oh yes they do have the right to filter. If the filtered product is the only one they sell and customers know it, everything is totally legal.
Think about it. Do you get shell access on dialup connections? Oh my God, they are cheating! They have no right censoring me from a shell account? Get the point?
People in US should also understand that not all countries have unlimited bandwidth and cheap access. As mp3:s or Porn pics hog a lot of bandwidth and cause extra costs, filtering most of that is a small price to pay to keep costs at a reasonable level.
I won't comment on how good those filters are or how tackily that filtering was done. Filtering has problems but so does unfiltered access.
Sure, there's a lot of new physics to research when we talk about small particles. But here we are talking about big objects which is pretty well researched, isn't it?
Let's take this "20km-long object showing on a european air controler's radar" for example.
Apparently it only showed for a while. It means that this object moves really fast. Now this kind of an abject must also have an enourmous weight. So it's not only producing enough energy to fight gravity. It's also producing enough energy to move itself very fast. How come we didn't notice anything of that energy? How come the friction from moving so fast didn't fry the object? And why didn't we at least see a huge fireball?
With all due respect, I think it's even more arrogant to expect those parts of physics we don't know to rule out fundamental parts of the physics we do know. Like gravity, for example.
It's very probable that there's a lot of life out there in the universe. It's even more probable that the existing life is mostly primitive. It's very unlikely to find advanced life forms like the animals we have on the earth. And out of those it's again very unlikely to find more intelligent life forms than animals. So multiply highly unlikely with highly unlikely with highly unlikely etc. and you may find a few. Or then not a single one, who knows?
Now then. We have a life form who can build and figure out things. They will evolve, there's no question about it. But again it's highly unlikely that they travel thousands of light years away. And it's a fat freaking impossibility that they find us. Multiply again to get the odds....
Let's suppose miracles happen and they happen to arrive here. What's the probability we can't see them? They do have a huge ship, don't they? They don't travel that far distances in a bath tub.
This is the place where common sense stops working. They must have some cloaking devices. They are too intelligent to disturb us. They have a moral code not to visit us. Just like we have a moral code not to do incest and have sex with animals. Stuff like this still happens though, so these aliens must have damn strong morals too. We start to find excuses that are again highly unlikely and make the probability even smaller and smaller.
Let's face it. It's more probable that the pig next door caused these "signs" than aliens in their space ships.
I'm not saying that intelligent life forms don't exist. I just don't think they have visited us.
Excellent comment. I'd also like to point out that on this planet we have a huge amount of life forms. However, only one has the brain capacity and motivation to actually do something intelligent. While dogs can look you in the eyes and fetch your newspaper, I don't see them inviting anything any soon now. Those planets may have life but if it's not as intelligent as humans, I doubt they will ever come knocking on our doors.
Here's even an autopsy of an alien! That pesky government just lies and lies and lies...
Seriously, there really is lack of signs. It's just so cool to explain everything we don't understand with aliens. Aliens built the pyramids, aliens abducted me, Jesus was an alien, the Bermuda triangle is an alien base etc.
But doesn't it make sense? Think about it. You see some strange light and apply the most logical explanation: It must be little green men from 1000 light years away moving faster than light and defying each and every law of physics. But they can do it because they have a magical rock or because they are so much more advanced than us mere human beings. Oh, and they are very friendly too as they haven't wiped us off this rock with their amazing technology. Apparently they are very shy too as the only people they meet tend to be pretty much on the ignorant side.
Face it, do you really think that aliens have different laws of physics than we do? And wouldn't they have landed here if they were here? If so, I have a bridge to sell to you.