For God's sake -- do you really believe that? Do you honestly beleive that there was any result but war for the administration? If so, you really need to stop drinking the kool-aid they're feeding you.
But Mr. Mbaso assured me that his relatives were being persecuted by the government of his deposed father's villainous interior minister! He was so well-spoken, he couldn't have been lying.
It's cheaper. Eductational institutions are often compelled by budget restraints to buy lower cost items than other people/institutions. I'm sure Apple would rather they buy an older machine than no Mac at all.
It'll never happen. Those cycles move more slowly than the computer style cycles. Apple had effectively moved away from colorful plastic just when they were getting to full capacity.
And try telling people that Apple doesn't sell computers by the flavor anymore.:-)
Re:So much is GNU however
on
RMS Turns 50
·
· Score: 1
I meant tell GNOME that KDE is part of GNU.
My point was that just because you use the GPL, you're not part of GNU
Re:So much is GNU however
on
RMS Turns 50
·
· Score: 1
Tell that to KDE. Heck, try telling that to GNOME.
I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's possible. Compare the last twenty years to the amount that people moved from their homes/villages a thousand years ago, five hundred years ago, a hundred years ago, fifty years ago.
Re:I'm not going to hop on the marketing bandwagon
on
Clear Case Roundup
·
· Score: 1
By my watch, we're nearly twenty years overdue for transparent aluminum.
It verbs. English, like most human languages without verbs. Do you what I'?
(To the sticklers, the apostrophe there was beyond deliberate.:-)
--proper section--
I wish I was in a position to be a linguist or have one at hand and get a meaty grant to investigate language skills/usage/customs of the 'geek' community. Not just the superficial stuff like 'verbing' and strange mutations of english influenced by the structure and timing of Japanese and C, but the fundamental understandings of both the dynamics and structure of language. The relation of same to the specific mechanics is also fascinating to me. I have a friend who hates English for its constraints, but uses an intricate, nuanced implementation of the tongue that is highly effective when communicating with some, but impenetrable to those who are unable to contort their brains to see his logic.
To a non-trivial degree, I suspect that the homogenization and misuse of degree adjectives and verbs (amazing, wretched, awful, ultimate, amazing, best and need, hate, require) has contributed to a constriction of our basic ability to assign precise labels to concepts in our realm of internal representation. The net result of that is that language becomes less powerful as our denominations for thoughts all creep to the shrinkingly-available upper end of the spectrum. The longer this phenomenon continues without extraordinary and revolutionary (and consequently unpredictable) linguistic change, the more we will turn to jargonistic or degraded constructions away from the already-existing, currently-proven basic precepts.
The disappointment that I find in the trend is that those who should be most responsible for wrestling these trends to the ground and killing them (or at least giving them structure and harmony) are the ones with the most vested interest in promoting them. Those who are at risk of losing relevance can do the most damage to that for which they are responsible. (Parallels abound -- heck, look at the evolution of MS Word and Excel from good office tools to bloated monsters.) The current linguistic elite [word used not for its implications but for its meaning] requires fresh content and concept to justify their continued work. And, unfortunately for them and us, the pursuit of what I've come to call neo-archaism has been out of style since Eliot and the modernists rebelled against the prevailing school of thought and sparked the trend that that subordinated to integration of perception and amelioration of greater uncertainty the diversity of language. Interestingly, their efforts had precisely the opposite effect on the language, producing undermining effects that depopularized meaning and traditional structure in favor of the comprehensive powers of symbol and allusion. Not knowing much about the authors, I have to speculate about their responses to what they wrought. I can't but believe that Joyce would be all for the outcome (Finnegan's Wake has to be the climax of the trend!) But could Eliot, a man with The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock rattling inside of him, be fully at ease with the careening path of postmodern deconstruction that he and his contemporaries set off? Whether a literary person or not, the average geek can't but be influenced by the inflation of pretension resulting from the relentless pursuit of "progress" by Academia. Unfortunately, the further you move from fundamentally sound structure, the more you have to resort to writing like de Lillo and Toni Morrison to fuel your self deception with novelty.
I have no idea how I got here, but that's how it goes. And there's a healthy chance that this is all bunk, as I really don't know enough about what I'm talking to properly base my speculations.
'Cause when I code for too long, I start to think about how much I really like history and how the people who write O'Reilly books seem to "get it" in the way that people who grok the fundamental coolness of good historical writing get it.
Example: If you like history or non-fiction even a little and want to understand how the world works read anything by Robert Caro. My favorite book is The Power Broker, but "Means of Ascent" is a good start. He has one of the best analytical minds out there, and you'll walk away with an appreciation of how power works in the 20th century.
Like I said, offtopic as hell, but interesting nonetheless.
Who's to say that in 1000 years, we won't have continued the trend until travel is so easy, and life so transitory, that we effectively become nomadic again? Think of being on a business trip for your entire life.
Slashdot Mirror
They're still using Bernoulli drives?
Dennis Hastert for president!
Dec 8, 1941, I believe.
And Saudis will continue to train people to blow themselves up in the cities of the white men.
For God's sake -- do you really believe that? Do you honestly beleive that there was any result but war for the administration? If so, you really need to stop drinking the kool-aid they're feeding you.
You take the ideas where you can find them...
Saddam Hussein smothers babies with patent documents! War!
The WWF.
Take that, lunkheads!
But Mr. Mbaso assured me that his relatives were being persecuted by the government of his deposed father's villainous interior minister! He was so well-spoken, he couldn't have been lying.
In my computer, I want some style. In my stapler? I probably want something that's going to push bits of metal into paper well for five years or more.
Just like I want my car to have some pizazz. My garage door opener? Pizazz is probably just going make it work poorly.
It's cheaper. Eductational institutions are often compelled by budget restraints to buy lower cost items than other people/institutions. I'm sure Apple would rather they buy an older machine than no Mac at all.
It'll never happen. Those cycles move more slowly than the computer style cycles. Apple had effectively moved away from colorful plastic just when they were getting to full capacity.
:-)
And try telling people that Apple doesn't sell computers by the flavor anymore.
I meant tell GNOME that KDE is part of GNU.
My point was that just because you use the GPL, you're not part of GNU
Tell that to KDE. Heck, try telling that to GNOME.
Then he pokes you in the eye for calling it Open Source when any Sane and Freedom Loving person knows that it's Free Software.
And I don't think it's such a great portion of humanity.
Yea, and we'd have a lot of lovely source code if it weren't for Linux.
Just like I'd have a crummy desk if it weren't built of wood, but it's not a wood/desk. It's a desk.
Watch out, Hitler. Dick Stalin is in town. More fearsome than a dozen angry Tatars, he's...Dick Stalin.
Born Iosef Vissarionovich Djugashvili, he's collected power for fifteen years and now he's back, and he's...Dick Stalin.
So if you're a Capitalist, or a Leftist, or a Dick Trotskyite, or just about anyone else, watch out: he's...Dick Stalin.
If its traffic is anything like mine, there'll be a lot of deep-fried Spam! (badam bing)
I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's possible. Compare the last twenty years to the amount that people moved from their homes/villages a thousand years ago, five hundred years ago, a hundred years ago, fifty years ago.
By my watch, we're nearly twenty years overdue for transparent aluminum.
This.
It verbs. English, like most human languages without verbs. Do you what I'?
:-)
(To the sticklers, the apostrophe there was beyond deliberate.
--proper section--
I wish I was in a position to be a linguist or have one at hand and get a meaty grant to investigate language skills/usage/customs of the 'geek' community. Not just the superficial stuff like 'verbing' and strange mutations of english influenced by the structure and timing of Japanese and C, but the fundamental understandings of both the dynamics and structure of language. The relation of same to the specific mechanics is also fascinating to me. I have a friend who hates English for its constraints, but uses an intricate, nuanced implementation of the tongue that is highly effective when communicating with some, but impenetrable to those who are unable to contort their brains to see his logic.
To a non-trivial degree, I suspect that the homogenization and misuse of degree adjectives and verbs (amazing, wretched, awful, ultimate, amazing, best and need, hate, require) has contributed to a constriction of our basic ability to assign precise labels to concepts in our realm of internal representation. The net result of that is that language becomes less powerful as our denominations for thoughts all creep to the shrinkingly-available upper end of the spectrum. The longer this phenomenon continues without extraordinary and revolutionary (and consequently unpredictable) linguistic change, the more we will turn to jargonistic or degraded constructions away from the already-existing, currently-proven basic precepts.
The disappointment that I find in the trend is that those who should be most responsible for wrestling these trends to the ground and killing them (or at least giving them structure and harmony) are the ones with the most vested interest in promoting them. Those who are at risk of losing relevance can do the most damage to that for which they are responsible. (Parallels abound -- heck, look at the evolution of MS Word and Excel from good office tools to bloated monsters.) The current linguistic elite [word used not for its implications but for its meaning] requires fresh content and concept to justify their continued work. And, unfortunately for them and us, the pursuit of what I've come to call neo-archaism has been out of style since Eliot and the modernists rebelled against the prevailing school of thought and sparked the trend that that subordinated to integration of perception and amelioration of greater uncertainty the diversity of language. Interestingly, their efforts had precisely the opposite effect on the language, producing undermining effects that depopularized meaning and traditional structure in favor of the comprehensive powers of symbol and allusion. Not knowing much about the authors, I have to speculate about their responses to what they wrought. I can't but believe that Joyce would be all for the outcome (Finnegan's Wake has to be the climax of the trend!) But could Eliot, a man with The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock rattling inside of him, be fully at ease with the careening path of postmodern deconstruction that he and his contemporaries set off? Whether a literary person or not, the average geek can't but be influenced by the inflation of pretension resulting from the relentless pursuit of "progress" by Academia. Unfortunately, the further you move from fundamentally sound structure, the more you have to resort to writing like de Lillo and Toni Morrison to fuel your self deception with novelty.
I have no idea how I got here, but that's how it goes. And there's a healthy chance that this is all bunk, as I really don't know enough about what I'm talking to properly base my speculations.
'Cause when I code for too long, I start to think about how much I really like history and how the people who write O'Reilly books seem to "get it" in the way that people who grok the fundamental coolness of good historical writing get it.
Example: If you like history or non-fiction even a little and want to understand how the world works read anything by Robert Caro. My favorite book is The Power Broker, but "Means of Ascent" is a good start. He has one of the best analytical minds out there, and you'll walk away with an appreciation of how power works in the 20th century.
Like I said, offtopic as hell, but interesting nonetheless.
Who's to say that in 1000 years, we won't have continued the trend until travel is so easy, and life so transitory, that we effectively become nomadic again? Think of being on a business trip for your entire life.
"One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic."
Not at all relevant, but a great quote, nonetheless. A +1 mod to the first person who knows who said it.