Linus Torvalds himself says the same thing - that if it weren't for the BDSI lawsuits, he would have just used BSD.
That is not the same thing. Torvalds is saying Linux likely would not have existed. That doesn't mean the success of Linux is correlated to the temporarily hamstrung BSD, that simply means Linux may not have had an opportunity to succeed if BSD was not hamstrung because it would not have existed.
No, the most enthusiastic Linux developer and hobbyist is saying he would have spent his time somewhere else if BSD were available. Other early developers would have had similar behaviors. The pool of people willing to work on Linux would have been severely diminished. In other words, there would not have been a vacuum for Linux to fill.
That is not accurate, many PCs have low to midrange GPUs as well, the majority of PCs sold today to individuals are laptops, and what good does a better performing GPU do if developers do not target your platform? It is a frequent comment of Linux users that they configure their system to dual boot to Windows because of the lack of games under Linux.
Is it just the transmission of DNA? Then if it is, then transmitting our DNA via high powered radio telescopes would be far cheaper than a space program.
But not nearly as fun as the more traditional method.:-)
So he wants us to explore space, but not talk to aliens
Getting the human race into space does not necessarily mean zipping around from one solar system to another like in Star Trek. Getting the human race to colonize our solar system would be quite sufficient and quite plausible given our understanding of science and technology. We are not likely to run into aliens elsewhere in our solar system so there is no real inconsistency.:-)
As far as cars go? No we don't. What we have is a "branded" product where most of the guts come from somewhere else, often a LOT of somewhere elses, and then are simply thrown together here.
It works both ways. Which is the more American car, the American branded car with 60% US made components and assembled in a NAFTA trading partner or the Foreign branded car with 40% US made components and assembled in the US? I personally can't decide. By "more American" I'm thinking employed more US workers.
BTW, the details are not made up for the sake of argument. Those numbers came off of two vehicles I looked at.
I wonder if it's because more *iux developers have moved to Mac, especially on laptops. 10 years ago I knew more "switchers" who switched from Linux to MacOSX for development including myself. Mainly because all the hardware worked and I had the same software stack for the projects I was working on even if the final deployment would be to linux servers. Every year since I've watched the number of developers using macs increase at conferences so much so that in the past couple years non-mac laptop users really stood out at the three conferences I attend every year.
Don't forget the games. While not as good for gaming as Windows, Mac OS X was certainly far better than Linux.
Somehow I can't help but feel this money would have been better allocated to a game developer instead of a defense contractor.
Nope, many employees at game development studios won't pass the piss test.
That is not a joke. That is reality. More than one non-gaming corporation that diversified into gaming was asked if the bought the game studio for the brand name or the talented people. If the later then they were advised not to bring certain aspects of their corporate policy to the game studio, in particular the piss test. It was explained that they would end up firing much of the value behind their investment.
Besides, what makes you think defense contractors lack genuine game developers. You may have heard all those stories from former developers who complain of companies taking advantage of naive college grads who think game development must be the coolest thing there is and work long hours for low pay and no overtime. Some of these move on to defense contractors.
In the middle of the greatest deficit it's good to see our government spending money on games.
Serious games are actually useful and they can save not only money but lives. One area of serious gaming are training simulators. Think beyond flight simulators. They are serious games that teach soldiers how to interact with members of a very different culture. There are serious games that present fire fighters with different types of chemical spills to see how they handle it and react to unfolding events. This particular game also has a very serious and seemingly worthwhile goal:
"The goal of the Sirius Program is to create experimental Serious Games to train participants and measure their proficiency in recognizing and mitigating the cognitive biases that commonly affect all types of intelligence analysis. The research objective is to experimentally manipulate variables in Serious Games and to determine whether and how such variables might enable player-participant recognition and persistent mitigation of cognitive biases. The Program will provide a basis for experimental repeatability and independent validation of effects, and identify critical elements of design for effective analytic training in Serious Games. The cognitive biases of interest that will be examined include: (1) Confirmation Bias, (2) Fundamental Attribution Error, (3) Bias Blind Spot, (4) Anchoring Bias, (5) Representativeness Bias, and (6) Projection Bias." https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=1793ab48906acabaf923c76486c29c0f&_cview=0
The only alternative is coal. Nucular and coal is all there is. And coal is worse. Coal ash has more radioactive emissions than nucular plants, and arsenic and landslides too. There is no geothermal. Don't look at geothermal.
In Europe I believe the backup plan is buying more natural gas from Russia.
Exaggeration and the spinning of events is likely to be coming from both sides. It was well known that the removal and cleanup was coming. Like some tents, I can't help but suspect that some books were left in the camp with the hope that they would get tossed, manufacturing a PR incident.
As for the Mayor. I can easily envision him instructing workers to set books aside and I can equally envision sanitation workers ignoring the mayor and intentionally tossing books in with the trash. Both to reduce the amount of work they would need to do and to "voice" their disapproval of what was happening in the park.
The relevant laws apply to both public and private parks open to the public. The owners, Brookfield, requested that the city enforce the law.
The Mayor: "We have been in constant contact with Brookfield and yesterday they requested that the City assist it in enforcing the no sleeping and camping rules in the park."
The Owners: "In our view, these risks were unacceptable and it would have been irresponsible to not request that the City take action," http://www.observer.com/term/brookfield-properties/
However, I think the "camping" is actually a good strategy, for many reasons, foremost probably being the 24/7 presence accelerated coverage of the protest.
The problem is that I think the coverage may be counterproductive. As the 99% watch on TV they feel less in common with these people. Basically the movement "leaders" are playing into the hands of their opponents who want to mischaracterize the protesters as largely the neo-hippie "professional protesters" who travel from one WTO/G20/etc event to another. The more the TV cameras focus on campers rather than protesters with signs on wall street the more distorted the perception of the movement gets.
There are MANY precedents for american citizens "camping out" for their rights. Of the top of my head, the biggest one I can think of was the WW1 vets in Washington DC in the 30s. Tent city for miles...
You might want to follow that precedent a little further. The veterans were successfully mischaracterized as a mob and the President sent General Douglas MacArthur down there with federal troops to remove and disperse the "bonus army".
People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things.
People you've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s weren't going through Great Depression 2: Foreclosure Boogaloo. Do the math. There are altogether fewer couches. People big-hearted enough to open their homes to protesters likely already have their homeless friends on the couch...
Are you sure that most of the regrettably foreclosed upon are homeless rather than renting a smaller less expensive place? Those couches may still exist, just sitting in a smaller rented property rather than a larger owned property.
From what I heard from the 60s protesters they often stayed in a crappy little rented apartment, not some large home. I think the comparison to the 60s is still appropriate.
So you're saying it's okay to destroy property, but not lives. Funny -- the bill of rights seems to disagree with that.
The Bill of Rights speaks of due process. Setting up a camp in a public park against regulations, being *notified* to remove your property, being *warned* that property left in the park will be thrown out, might be considered a constitutionally acceptable due process. Requiring a permit to camp may also be considered a constitutionally acceptable practice.
To be fair everyone was given notice that the park had to be cleared for cleanup. If a person chooses to leave their stuff there despite such announcements and warning there is an argument that the property was abandoned in a legal sense. It is a public park where camping is not allowed, is there not an inherent risk in setting up a tent? Personally I suspect may of those tents were left there in the hope they would get tossed, they were more valuable as PR tools than shelter. The cold weather is going to shut this thing down real soon and the tents will not be needed much longer.
Police throwing 5,000 donated books into a dumpster is not a visage of democracy.
The Mayor's office is reporting that Sanitation workers, not police, cleaned up things and that they handled books separately from trash. Books are being held at a city garage and may be picked up.
praises of brave souls trying to bring democracy into their lives in 3,2,1 while at the same time making fun of the occupy protests in "free" countries.
Very few people are making fun of "occupy" protesters. Its "occupy" campers that are being made fun of to some degree, even by supporters of the "occupy" protesters and the occupy movement in general.
Camping in a public park despite regulations to the contrary is something quite separate and different from showing up on wall street carrying signs and speaking up about abusive practices. Get a room? Stay with a friend who lives in the city? Stay with a supporter who lives in the city? Camp in a *real* campsite outside the city and take a bus into the city? People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things. Is there a lack or organization and planning today compared to the 60s, or is there a lack of supporters offering their couch or living room floor?
Anything that makes Microsoft or Microsoft shareholders unhappy is a good thing, IMHO.
Until one considers people with a pension plan, IRA, or 401K. For many of these people with the later two they don't pick individual stocks, they pick funds that are managed by a "pro". Many of these funds own Microsoft.
Except to demonstrate that your example of a company name appearing within a family name was a pretty weak straw man. That was its only intent.
Also, you're not very well-versed on this subject, so I'll lay it out for you since you seem incapable of doing critical thinking and research.
Yet another bad guess on your part. This was all covered quite extensively on Ars Technica a couple of days ago.
So this whole tit for tat is a litigation soup.
Red herrings aren't going to work much better than straw men. The merits of this particular issue are not change by being bundled with other issues. Whether these other issues have merits is a different conversation.
Your reasoning is garbage.
So says the guy whose reasoning consisted of straw men, red herrings, and ad hominem attacks.:-)
The fact remains that an employee created an account name that included the company's trademarked name, represented himself as an agent of the company to the public, discussed company related things,... That he also discussed personal things hardly outweighs the preceding. That lack of specific instructions to create this account also seems a quite minor point. Employees are given a certain amount of discretion in accomplishing their tasks and the preceding indicates he acted as an agent of the company not as an independent individual. There is a mix of work and personal here, but the scales seem to tip in favor of company agent. Therefore it seems quite reasonable for the former employee to be the one who creates a new account and invites followers to migrate.
Oh look, she has Nissan in her name, must be promoting/representing Nissan. NOT.
From the summary: "PhoneDog_Noah". Note that capitalization is the same as his employer and the trademarked company name is set off from his name with an "_". Hardly the same as having a company name coincidentally appearing as a substring in a family name.
if his job didn't require him to create the account then it is not their property....
Except that by using the trademarked company name in the handle he was presenting himself as some sort of representative of the company. Doing so enhanced his credibility and the followers were obtained in this context. I think this tips the balance in favor of the company retaining the account and its followers and he needing to have his personal followers to switch to his personal account.
just go make the twitter handle on a new account and give them the password...
Its not that simple. He attracted the followers while using the trademarked company name in the handle. The new account should probably be his personal account and those who want to truly follow him can switch. The mistake, incorporating the trademarked company name in the handle, was his so he should probably deal with the inconvenience of having followers switch over.
Of course as someone using a business account to post perhaps I am biased.:-)
We're paying Cadillac prices in order to get a Chevy Aveo delivered here, and a couple of bombs delivered in the Mid East
No. The services that the original poster used as examples are pretty much provided by local, county and state agencies. The local and state governments that levy taxes for and provide these services aren't sending anything to the middle east.
You are correct that wars are quite expensive but thats a different topic.
Spending on schools has increased over the decades as test scores have dropped, but I don't think increased spending directly led to scores dropping.
That is not my position. My argument is that increased spending in recent decades has failed to address the problem. So why should we accept the premise, once again, that if we only raised spending a little more we can reverse the trend. I think we need to accept that the problem lies outside of funding, identify this problem and come up with a new plan.
Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds himself says the same thing - that if it weren't for the BDSI lawsuits, he would have just used BSD.
That is not the same thing. Torvalds is saying Linux likely would not have existed. That doesn't mean the success of Linux is correlated to the temporarily hamstrung BSD, that simply means Linux may not have had an opportunity to succeed if BSD was not hamstrung because it would not have existed.
No, the most enthusiastic Linux developer and hobbyist is saying he would have spent his time somewhere else if BSD were available. Other early developers would have had similar behaviors. The pool of people willing to work on Linux would have been severely diminished. In other words, there would not have been a vacuum for Linux to fill.
I've thought they've ended this flame war several years ago?
Several years ago when BSD based Mac OS X took over the Unix desktop market? ;-)
I think things are a little more complicated than in the 1990s with respect to BSD vs Linux.
Macs have laptop-class GPUs at best...
That is not accurate, many PCs have low to midrange GPUs as well, the majority of PCs sold today to individuals are laptops, and what good does a better performing GPU do if developers do not target your platform? It is a frequent comment of Linux users that they configure their system to dual boot to Windows because of the lack of games under Linux.
Is it just the transmission of DNA? Then if it is, then transmitting our DNA via high powered radio telescopes would be far cheaper than a space program.
But not nearly as fun as the more traditional method. :-)
So he wants us to explore space, but not talk to aliens
Getting the human race into space does not necessarily mean zipping around from one solar system to another like in Star Trek. Getting the human race to colonize our solar system would be quite sufficient and quite plausible given our understanding of science and technology. We are not likely to run into aliens elsewhere in our solar system so there is no real inconsistency. :-)
As far as cars go? No we don't. What we have is a "branded" product where most of the guts come from somewhere else, often a LOT of somewhere elses, and then are simply thrown together here.
It works both ways. Which is the more American car, the American branded car with 60% US made components and assembled in a NAFTA trading partner or the Foreign branded car with 40% US made components and assembled in the US? I personally can't decide. By "more American" I'm thinking employed more US workers.
BTW, the details are not made up for the sake of argument. Those numbers came off of two vehicles I looked at.
I wonder if it's because more *iux developers have moved to Mac, especially on laptops. 10 years ago I knew more "switchers" who switched from Linux to MacOSX for development including myself. Mainly because all the hardware worked and I had the same software stack for the projects I was working on even if the final deployment would be to linux servers. Every year since I've watched the number of developers using macs increase at conferences so much so that in the past couple years non-mac laptop users really stood out at the three conferences I attend every year.
Don't forget the games. While not as good for gaming as Windows, Mac OS X was certainly far better than Linux.
Somehow I can't help but feel this money would have been better allocated to a game developer instead of a defense contractor.
Nope, many employees at game development studios won't pass the piss test.
That is not a joke. That is reality. More than one non-gaming corporation that diversified into gaming was asked if the bought the game studio for the brand name or the talented people. If the later then they were advised not to bring certain aspects of their corporate policy to the game studio, in particular the piss test. It was explained that they would end up firing much of the value behind their investment.
Besides, what makes you think defense contractors lack genuine game developers. You may have heard all those stories from former developers who complain of companies taking advantage of naive college grads who think game development must be the coolest thing there is and work long hours for low pay and no overtime. Some of these move on to defense contractors.
In the middle of the greatest deficit it's good to see our government spending money on games.
Serious games are actually useful and they can save not only money but lives. One area of serious gaming are training simulators. Think beyond flight simulators. They are serious games that teach soldiers how to interact with members of a very different culture. There are serious games that present fire fighters with different types of chemical spills to see how they handle it and react to unfolding events. This particular game also has a very serious and seemingly worthwhile goal:
"The goal of the Sirius Program is to create experimental Serious Games to train participants and measure their proficiency in recognizing and mitigating the cognitive biases that commonly affect all types of intelligence analysis. The research objective is to experimentally manipulate variables in Serious Games and to determine whether and how such variables might enable player-participant recognition and persistent mitigation of cognitive biases. The Program will provide a basis for experimental repeatability and independent validation of effects, and identify critical elements of design for effective analytic training in Serious Games. The cognitive biases of interest that will be examined include: (1) Confirmation Bias, (2) Fundamental Attribution Error, (3) Bias Blind Spot, (4) Anchoring Bias, (5) Representativeness Bias, and (6) Projection Bias."
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=1793ab48906acabaf923c76486c29c0f&_cview=0
The only alternative is coal. Nucular and coal is all there is. And coal is worse. Coal ash has more radioactive emissions than nucular plants, and arsenic and landslides too. There is no geothermal. Don't look at geothermal.
In Europe I believe the backup plan is buying more natural gas from Russia.
Exaggeration and the spinning of events is likely to be coming from both sides. It was well known that the removal and cleanup was coming. Like some tents, I can't help but suspect that some books were left in the camp with the hope that they would get tossed, manufacturing a PR incident.
As for the Mayor. I can easily envision him instructing workers to set books aside and I can equally envision sanitation workers ignoring the mayor and intentionally tossing books in with the trash. Both to reduce the amount of work they would need to do and to "voice" their disapproval of what was happening in the park.
Except it's a private park. Good work though.
The relevant laws apply to both public and private parks open to the public. The owners, Brookfield, requested that the city enforce the law.
The Mayor: "We have been in constant contact with Brookfield and yesterday they requested that the City assist it in enforcing the no sleeping and camping rules in the park."
The Owners: "In our view, these risks were unacceptable and it would have been irresponsible to not request that the City take action,"
http://www.observer.com/term/brookfield-properties/
However, I think the "camping" is actually a good strategy, for many reasons, foremost probably being the 24/7 presence accelerated coverage of the protest.
The problem is that I think the coverage may be counterproductive. As the 99% watch on TV they feel less in common with these people. Basically the movement "leaders" are playing into the hands of their opponents who want to mischaracterize the protesters as largely the neo-hippie "professional protesters" who travel from one WTO/G20/etc event to another. The more the TV cameras focus on campers rather than protesters with signs on wall street the more distorted the perception of the movement gets.
There are MANY precedents for american citizens "camping out" for their rights. Of the top of my head, the biggest one I can think of was the WW1 vets in Washington DC in the 30s. Tent city for miles...
You might want to follow that precedent a little further. The veterans were successfully mischaracterized as a mob and the President sent General Douglas MacArthur down there with federal troops to remove and disperse the "bonus army".
People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things.
People you've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s weren't going through Great Depression 2: Foreclosure Boogaloo. Do the math. There are altogether fewer couches. People big-hearted enough to open their homes to protesters likely already have their homeless friends on the couch...
Are you sure that most of the regrettably foreclosed upon are homeless rather than renting a smaller less expensive place? Those couches may still exist, just sitting in a smaller rented property rather than a larger owned property.
From what I heard from the 60s protesters they often stayed in a crappy little rented apartment, not some large home. I think the comparison to the 60s is still appropriate.
So you're saying it's okay to destroy property, but not lives. Funny -- the bill of rights seems to disagree with that.
The Bill of Rights speaks of due process. Setting up a camp in a public park against regulations, being *notified* to remove your property, being *warned* that property left in the park will be thrown out, might be considered a constitutionally acceptable due process. Requiring a permit to camp may also be considered a constitutionally acceptable practice.
To be fair everyone was given notice that the park had to be cleared for cleanup. If a person chooses to leave their stuff there despite such announcements and warning there is an argument that the property was abandoned in a legal sense. It is a public park where camping is not allowed, is there not an inherent risk in setting up a tent? Personally I suspect may of those tents were left there in the hope they would get tossed, they were more valuable as PR tools than shelter. The cold weather is going to shut this thing down real soon and the tents will not be needed much longer.
Police throwing 5,000 donated books into a dumpster is not a visage of democracy.
The Mayor's office is reporting that Sanitation workers, not police, cleaned up things and that they handled books separately from trash. Books are being held at a city garage and may be picked up.
praises of brave souls trying to bring democracy into their lives in 3,2,1 while at the same time making fun of the occupy protests in "free" countries.
Very few people are making fun of "occupy" protesters. Its "occupy" campers that are being made fun of to some degree, even by supporters of the "occupy" protesters and the occupy movement in general.
Camping in a public park despite regulations to the contrary is something quite separate and different from showing up on wall street carrying signs and speaking up about abusive practices. Get a room? Stay with a friend who lives in the city? Stay with a supporter who lives in the city? Camp in a *real* campsite outside the city and take a bus into the city? People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things. Is there a lack or organization and planning today compared to the 60s, or is there a lack of supporters offering their couch or living room floor?
All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there.
If only we had a space program that would warrant such a warning.
Dividends are not growth. Learn stock basics.
Stock basics would include that there are growth investors and value investors. Hint: the later are not looking for growth.
Anything that makes Microsoft or Microsoft shareholders unhappy is a good thing, IMHO.
Until one considers people with a pension plan, IRA, or 401K. For many of these people with the later two they don't pick individual stocks, they pick funds that are managed by a "pro". Many of these funds own Microsoft.
And no, capitalization doesn't mean jack shit.
Except to demonstrate that your example of a company name appearing within a family name was a pretty weak straw man. That was its only intent.
Also, you're not very well-versed on this subject, so I'll lay it out for you since you seem incapable of doing critical thinking and research.
Yet another bad guess on your part. This was all covered quite extensively on Ars Technica a couple of days ago.
So this whole tit for tat is a litigation soup.
Red herrings aren't going to work much better than straw men. The merits of this particular issue are not change by being bundled with other issues. Whether these other issues have merits is a different conversation.
Your reasoning is garbage.
So says the guy whose reasoning consisted of straw men, red herrings, and ad hominem attacks. :-)
... That he also discussed personal things hardly outweighs the preceding. That lack of specific instructions to create this account also seems a quite minor point. Employees are given a certain amount of discretion in accomplishing their tasks and the preceding indicates he acted as an agent of the company not as an independent individual. There is a mix of work and personal here, but the scales seem to tip in favor of company agent. Therefore it seems quite reasonable for the former employee to be the one who creates a new account and invites followers to migrate.
The fact remains that an employee created an account name that included the company's trademarked name, represented himself as an agent of the company to the public, discussed company related things,
"http://twitter.com/#!/dinabennissan"
Oh look, she has Nissan in her name, must be promoting/representing Nissan. NOT.
From the summary: "PhoneDog_Noah". Note that capitalization is the same as his employer and the trademarked company name is set off from his name with an "_". Hardly the same as having a company name coincidentally appearing as a substring in a family name.
if his job didn't require him to create the account then it is not their property....
Except that by using the trademarked company name in the handle he was presenting himself as some sort of representative of the company. Doing so enhanced his credibility and the followers were obtained in this context. I think this tips the balance in favor of the company retaining the account and its followers and he needing to have his personal followers to switch to his personal account.
just go make the twitter handle on a new account and give them the password...
Its not that simple. He attracted the followers while using the trademarked company name in the handle. The new account should probably be his personal account and those who want to truly follow him can switch. The mistake, incorporating the trademarked company name in the handle, was his so he should probably deal with the inconvenience of having followers switch over.
:-)
Of course as someone using a business account to post perhaps I am biased.
We're paying Cadillac prices in order to get a Chevy Aveo delivered here, and a couple of bombs delivered in the Mid East
No. The services that the original poster used as examples are pretty much provided by local, county and state agencies. The local and state governments that levy taxes for and provide these services aren't sending anything to the middle east.
You are correct that wars are quite expensive but thats a different topic.
Spending on schools has increased over the decades as test scores have dropped, but I don't think increased spending directly led to scores dropping.
That is not my position. My argument is that increased spending in recent decades has failed to address the problem. So why should we accept the premise, once again, that if we only raised spending a little more we can reverse the trend. I think we need to accept that the problem lies outside of funding, identify this problem and come up with a new plan.