The prohibition amendment was repealed, so congress has legal precident to repeal the Bill of Rights as well.
Yes the prohibition amendment was repealed... with another amendment. No, it wasn't a legal precedent, it was simply an application of the rules in the Constitution providing for amendments:
Artivle V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The Bill of Rights is nothing more (or less) than the first 10 Amendments because it wasn't even in the Constitution at first. It was a list of 11 (yes 11!) laws which were proposed to insure that the people would be protected just a bit more from the governement. 10 of them passed through this process to become part of the Constitution and the 11th fell short of the 2/3 of the States and sat around unratified but ratifiable(sp?) for 200+ years until several years ago the requisite 34th State (don't remember which) ratified it:
Amendment XXVII
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
The Bill of Rights legally have a status identical to all other amendments, and thus all other parts of the Constitution, making them subject to amendment (and, yes, repeal). What sets the Bill of Rights apart is this almost worshipful attitude most Americans have towards them (which you displayed to a small degree:-), leading to the IMO relatively safe assumption that if there are ever 3/4 of both Houses and 2/3 of all States ready to ratify a repeal of one of them, then the Government has already become a monster which ignores the rights anyway.
I reccomend you read up a little on the relevant documents:
You're lucky to be in Germany where ISDN is quite cheap. Most households in the UK don't have ISDN...
In that case you have my sympathy. I think that just strengthens my point then, if Germany isn't even the worst-case scenario. That was actually a best-case scenario for Germany, since, particularly for a really large download, the $/byte ratio is better for ISDN than for modem.
>> Minors racking up enormous phonebills by trying to download the file over a 28.8kbps link?
> That's ridiculous and you know it. Hardly anyone uses a long-distance ISP any more.
Who says phone charges only apply to long-distance? You are making the assumption that local calls are free just because they are in the U.S. The assumption isn't necessarily unreasonable, but unfortunately most of the Telecoms from other countries don't make the same assumption:-(
If I were to download the ISO from my house through my free (university) provider w/ ISDN it would still set me back about USD $20 more or less, depending on the time of day. Sure, it's not enourmous, but it's not necessarily meaningless...
Well in theory, the GPL is a license, a contract of sorts. So in theory, minors can't legally agree to it in the first place.
Wow, I'd never thought about that before. Does that mean that a minor could technically write a proprietary program with GPL parts? After all, he isn't legally allowed to agree to the GPL.
You never have to use the spacebar when typing long sentences. Just keep hitting the keys without stopping
All monitors display 2 inch high letters.
High-tech computers, such as those used by NASA, the CIA, or some such governmental institution, have easy-to-understand graphical interfaces.
Those that don't will have incredibly powerful text-based command shells that can correctly understand and execute commands typed in plain English.
Corollary: You can gain access to any information you want by simply typing "ACCESS ALL OF THE SECRET FILES" on any keyboard.
Likewise, you can infect a computer with a destructive virus by simply typing "UPLOAD VIRUS." Viruses cause temperatures in computers, just like they do in humans. After a while, smoke billows out of disk drives and monitors.
All computers are connected. You can access the information on the villain's desktop computer, even if it's turned off.
Powerful computers beep whenever you press a key or whenever the screen changes. Some computers also slow down the output on the screen so that it doesn't go faster than you can read. The *really* advanced ones also emulate the sound of a dot-matrix printer as the characters come across the screen.
All computer panels have thousands of volts and flash pots just underneath the surface. Malfunctions are indicated by a bright flash, a puff of smoke, a shower of sparks, and an explosion that forces you backward. (See #7, above)
People typing away on a computer will turn it off without saving the data.
A hacker can get into the most sensitive computer in the world before intermission and guess the secret password in two tries.
Any PERMISSION DENIED has an OVERRIDE function.
Complex calculations and loading of huge amounts of data will be accomplished in under three seconds. In the movies, modems transmit data at two gigabytes per second.
When the power plant/missile site/whatever overheats, all the control panels will explode, as will the entire building.
If you display a file on the screen and someone deletes the file, it also disappears from the screen. There are no ways to copy a backup file -- and there are no undelete utilities.
If a disk has encrypted files, you are automatically asked for a password when you try to access it.
No matter what kind of computer disk it is, it'll be readable by any system you put it into. All application software is usable by all computer platforms.
The more high-tech the equipment, the more buttons it has. However, everyone must have been highly trained, because the buttons aren't labelled.
Most computers, no matter how small, have reality-defying three-dimensional, real-time, photo-realistic animated graphics capability.
Laptops, for some strange reason, always seem to have amazing real-time video phone capabilities and the performance of a CRAY-MP.
Whenever a character looks at a VDU, the image is so bright that it projects itself onto his/her face.
Computers never crash during key, high-intensity activities. Humans operating computers never make mistakes under stress.
Programs are fiendishly perfect and never have bugs that slow down users.
Any photograph can have minute details pulled out of it. You can zoom into any picture as far as you want to.
Be sure to keep an eye peeled for these and other interesting things which NBC is sure to teach the public.
(I'm afraid I don't know the source of this list, so I can't give credit, but if anyone knows, then please speak up!)
It doesn't sound so unreasonable to me to offer the version online, but requiring the retail box to run it.
It wouldn't sound unreasonable if I got a discount for the service (support) I'm not getting. After all, effectively paying them to provide service for clueless prisoners of Bill (not that all prisoners of Bill are clueless, but probably the ones calling support;-) is not the message I want to send to them. "Hey cool" says the marketing guy, "These Linux users are great, we can skimp on support and still get them to buy the boxed versions for full price."
And it just occured to me that Rendus thinks the DoJ is part of the Judicial branch. If that's the case, sorry, wrong again. DoJ is part of the Executive. The President is their boss. He (or his cabinet; which doesn't include Gore, of course, since the Vice-Presidency is an elected position) can't interfere because it's not interfering. The prosecution of this case is the responsibility of his branch.
Legislature (spelling?) propose laws, Executive make them laws or drop them, and judicial enforce them (and make sure they don't violate anybody's rights)
Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.
1. Legislative branch make laws 2. Executive branch enforces them 3. Judicial branch interprets them
and no branch, again in theory, has the authority to interfere in another's operation....
1. The Legislative branch can interfere with the Judicial branch and with the Executive by confirming or not confirming Justices, through impeachment, and by overriding Presidential vetos
2. The Executive branch can interfere with the legislative through its veto, and interferes with the Judicial by nominating new Justices.
3. The Judicial can interfere with the others by declaring laws to be unconstitutional, etc.
It's called checks and balances and is based on the fact that any branch of government can be trumped by one or both of the others.
If a Republican is elected... and If a spot on the Supreme Court becomes vacant and If the Republican nominates a judge based on an antitrust litmus test and If a Senate hasn't been elected which would refuse to confirm such a candidate and If this new Justice is confirmed by the time the case is heard there and If his vote is a deciding one...
Then it depends.
If Microsoft is basing their legal strategy on this string of events, then their lawyers are cheating them worse than Microsoft cheats its consumers!
The suit is being prosecuted by the DoJ and 19 states. It would require a pretty complete change at the next election for all 19 attorneys general to change their mind about penalties, expecially in light of Judge Jackson's ruling. IIRC, some of the states are out for even more blood than the DoJ...
I had a machine that connected to the German stockmarket on 2 nics (in case one died), and the other 2 nices were to bridge up to our mainframe, again in case 1 died (emphasis mine)
Ummm... so you're using two nics, and two are serving as backup? If that counts as using 4, then I guess my computer uses 3 mouses: 1 which I use, and two sitting in a drawer in case it breaks...
Your friend made the mistake to start at 2/3 of a normal salary I think.
I can confirm this. I'm a Student Worker (that's right, I have no degree yet), I have no formal IT education, and I do exactly the same as Bartmoss' friend; i.e. a little Perl (CGI and web-site maint.) and the company I'm working for is paying me DM 36 / hour. Of course I'd already acquired a little experience with their web-site working for one of their contracters; Still, keep in mind I'm not even a CS student (Linguistics) so my 'only' qualification is that I don't run screaming when I see a command line (Thank you Linux!) and that I picked up some Perl in my spare time (Thank you Larry!)
I think this quote in the wired article about the FoF says it all:
"We will continue to vigorously contest the issues of this case in court, but at the same time we will continue to look for ways to resolve these issues in a fair and responsible manner," spokesman Jim Cullinan told Reuters.
Translation:
"We will continue to deny we broke the law in court, but at the same time we will continue to look for ways to be more subtle about how we do it in the future, including maybe cutting back a little until this blows over."
They specifically state that the patches are applicable to the English version. Does that mean none of the patches work with the German version? I would think that the main differences between the versions would be in seperate language files or something.
One of my main problems with CTP is the rather meager set of configuration options; at least, that's my impression. Above all: I would love to be able to turn off the line which extends from the active unit to the mouse pointer, or, for that matter, I'd like to turn off mouse-based movement completely. I mean, I use the keypad to move units, and if I move my mouse-pointer out of the way, I get this stupid line stretching half-way across the screen. Anyone know of a way of doing this?
Aspirin used to be a trademark of (I think) Bristol-Meyers but they lost that because people began referring to any headache pills as aspirin.
Actually, that's Bayer (as in Bavarian), and the trademark still holds here in Germany. This led to a great deal of confusion on my part when I first moved here since I couldn't understand that all the other kinds of 'aspirin' were never referred to as 'aspirin' despite the fact that they consist of the exact same chemicals. This is true even in common speech.
Of course the other side effect is that a packet of 10 (yes 10!!!) 300 mg. (or is it 500 mg.?) Aspirin(tm) costs about U.S. $6. Draw your own conclusions as to who profits from this kind of trademark enforcement...
...is a way to turn off that damn mouse-based movement of units! Did anyone add that? Or is there an option/config to do that which I haven't found? I mean, I generally use the number-pad to move my units and put the mouse pointer out of the way; only, then I have this green and blue line extending half-way across the screen which drives me nuts!
Well, it doesn't come as much of a surprise to me to see a number of common misconceptions about language running rampant through this discussion; this is generally due to the fact that, because everyone speaks at least one language (aside from extreme physical/mental deformities, injuries etc.), most people feel that they are qualified to give an informed opinion about language. Now, while I would never claim that statements about language by laypersons are worthless (far from it), they are more often relevant as data than as analysis (The opposite is generally the case with Linguists, who often have exposure to a large variety of languages/language families and are thus unable to give gut-feeling answers about the acceptability of certain language constructs in even their native tongue(s)). A comparison clarifies this: would you stop a person on the street to give you a qualified explanation on Cognition/Cognitive-Science because he can think?
That said, allow me to say quickly what I believe qualifies me to say a little bit (or maybe not so little;-) about language without completely talking out of my ass. I'm a 4th year Linguistics major, with a minor in Psycholinguistics at the University of Munich, Germany. I am an American (the U.S. type), my native language is English (the Northern-Californian variety), I speak German fluently, can get by in French, have beginning conversational proficiency in Estonian and Hungarian (my wife is Hungarian), and with the help of a dictionary I can translate simple Central Siberian Yupik Eskimo texts. I have also had theoretical exposure to a number of other non-Indo-European languages in the course of my studies. I'm explaining all this just to prevent the knee-jerk reaction: "Typical of an American to say xxxx about English/language/anything...".
1. Language !== Writing Many (most) people from literate cultures tend to make the mistake that writing is language, in the sense that a statement about the writing system used in a particular language is applicable to the language itself. In fact the vast majority (ca. %90) of all living (app. 4000-7000) languages have no written form other than in descriptive systems used by Linguists. Spoken language evolved (unless you're from Kansas;-) and writing was invented.
Example: Someone above mentioned something about languages using the Latin alphabet and equated it to Latin-descended languages.
Counter-Example: Hungarian, Estonian, Finnish, and various Eskimo languages (to name a very few) all use the Latin alphabet. None of these languages is remotely related to Latin or English. Russian, the various Caucasian languages (e.g. Udi), and a number of Finno-Ugric languages (e.g. Khanty) all use the Cyrillic alphabet; however, Russian is related to English (both belong to the Indo-European family), Khanty to Hungarian (and more distantly to Estonian and Finnish), and Udi only to the other Caucasian languages.
2. Language X is Superior/has simpler Grammar/is easier to Learn/is more elegant/is more sensible/etc. than Language Y It's all relative. Learning German is easier for an English speaker than a Finnish speaker because German and English are closely related (both Western Germanic); likewise, learning Hungarian is easier for a Finnish speaker than an English speaker since the large number of postfixes and postpositions to express case isn't as daunting to her since Finnish uses a similar system. And that's completely ignoring natural talent, previous exposure to other foreign languages, etc.
The fact of the matter is, that languages are vastly too complicated to make any blanket comparisons. Think about doing a regex search in Assembly and writing directly to give processor registers in pure Perl to get a very rough idea of what I mean (and this comparison really doesn't do justice to natural languages).
Hmmmm.... it's getting a little long here and I need to do a little work before my boss gets annoyed, so I'll continue later...
I tried both an external NEC and an internal Toshiba.
You mean these companies each make exactly one CD-ROM drive? How about narrowing down the possibilities just a little.
The other OSes found all devices without issue so what other conclusion can I have except that linux is lacking good SCSI drivers/logic
Sigh. How about addressing my other points? More specifically, what do you mean by not finding? - Does Linux tell you "I can't find the CD-ROM"? - Or did you just cd into the/cdrom directory, and upon not finding anything, assume that Linux can't find your CD-ROM?
Combine this with the known fact that the Linux SCSI subsystem is in terrible need of redesigning/rewriting and I think the conclusion is obvious.
Known by whom? Can you show me some concrete references from experts in SCSI driver design?
Again, I say show us a boot message, something like this:
Linux could find my CD-ROM on my SCSI controller (AHA-2940 series) so I tried BusLogic.
I assume you mean could not find.
- What kind of CD-ROM? - Have you verified that your SCSI controller has been properly recognized? - did you check that the following link is there? /dev/cdrom -> scd0
Show us a boot message with the relevant parts (i.e. SCSI, block devices) and we might find your story a little more credible...
Slashdot Mirror
The prohibition amendment was repealed, so congress has legal precident to repeal the Bill of Rights as well.
:-), leading to the IMO relatively safe assumption that if there are ever 3/4 of both Houses and 2/3 of all States ready to ratify a repeal of one of them, then the Government has already become a monster which ignores the rights anyway.
Yes the prohibition amendment was repealed... with another amendment. No, it wasn't a legal precedent, it was simply an application of the rules in the Constitution providing for amendments:
Artivle V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The Bill of Rights is nothing more (or less) than the first 10 Amendments because it wasn't even in the Constitution at first. It was a list of 11 (yes 11!) laws which were proposed to insure that the people would be protected just a bit more from the governement. 10 of them passed through this process to become part of the Constitution and the 11th fell short of the 2/3 of the States and sat around unratified but ratifiable(sp?) for 200+ years until several years ago the requisite 34th State (don't remember which) ratified it:
Amendment XXVII
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
The Bill of Rights legally have a status identical to all other amendments, and thus all other parts of the Constitution, making them subject to amendment (and, yes, repeal). What sets the Bill of Rights apart is this almost worshipful attitude most Americans have towards them (which you displayed to a small degree
I reccomend you read up a little on the relevant documents:
The Constitution
The Amendments
There are also 1 or 2 papers and books and articles and such which have been written about these documents if you want to brush up on the background.
Chris
You're lucky to be in Germany where ISDN is quite cheap. Most households in the UK don't have ISDN...
In that case you have my sympathy. I think that just strengthens my point then, if Germany isn't even the worst-case scenario. That was actually a best-case scenario for Germany, since, particularly for a really large download, the $/byte ratio is better for ISDN than for modem.
Chris
>> Minors racking up enormous phonebills by trying to download the file over a 28.8kbps link?
:-(
> That's ridiculous and you know it. Hardly anyone uses a long-distance ISP any more.
Who says phone charges only apply to long-distance? You are making the assumption that local calls are free just because they are in the U.S. The assumption isn't necessarily unreasonable, but unfortunately most of the Telecoms from other countries don't make the same assumption
If I were to download the ISO from my house through my free (university) provider w/ ISDN it would still set me back about USD $20 more or less, depending on the time of day. Sure, it's not enourmous, but it's not necessarily meaningless...
Chris
Well in theory, the GPL is a license, a contract of sorts. So in theory, minors can't legally agree to it in the first place.
Wow, I'd never thought about that before. Does that mean that a minor could technically write a proprietary program with GPL parts? After all, he isn't legally allowed to agree to the GPL.
Chris
Cool, thanks for the info!
Chris
Be sure to keep an eye peeled for these and other interesting things which NBC is sure to teach the public.
(I'm afraid I don't know the source of this list, so I can't give credit, but if anyone knows, then please speak up!)
Chris
It doesn't sound so unreasonable to me to offer the version online, but requiring the retail box to run it.
;-) is not the message I want to send to them. "Hey cool" says the marketing guy, "These Linux users are great, we can skimp on support and still get them to buy the boxed versions for full price."
It wouldn't sound unreasonable if I got a discount for the service (support) I'm not getting. After all, effectively paying them to provide service for clueless prisoners of Bill (not that all prisoners of Bill are clueless, but probably the ones calling support
Chris
But is it possible to put the loopback on a file-server and boot from the network?
Chris
And it just occured to me that Rendus thinks the DoJ is part of the Judicial branch. If that's the case, sorry, wrong again. DoJ is part of the Executive. The President is their boss. He (or his cabinet; which doesn't include Gore, of course, since the Vice-Presidency is an elected position) can't interfere because it's not interfering. The prosecution of this case is the responsibility of his branch.
Chris
Legislature (spelling?) propose laws, Executive make them laws or drop them, and judicial enforce them (and make sure they don't violate anybody's rights)
Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.
1. Legislative branch make laws
2. Executive branch enforces them
3. Judicial branch interprets them
and no branch, again in theory, has the authority to interfere in another's operation....
1. The Legislative branch can interfere with the Judicial branch and with the Executive by confirming or not confirming Justices, through impeachment, and by overriding Presidential vetos
2. The Executive branch can interfere with the legislative through its veto, and interferes with the Judicial by nominating new Justices.
3. The Judicial can interfere with the others by declaring laws to be unconstitutional, etc.
It's called checks and balances and is based on the fact that any branch of government can be trumped by one or both of the others.
Chris
depends if it hits the Supreme court though...
how?
If a Republican is elected...
and If a spot on the Supreme Court becomes vacant
and If the Republican nominates a judge based on an antitrust litmus test
and If a Senate hasn't been elected which would refuse to confirm such a candidate
and If this new Justice is confirmed by the time the case is heard there
and If his vote is a deciding one...
Then it depends.
If Microsoft is basing their legal strategy on this string of events, then their lawyers are cheating them worse than Microsoft cheats its consumers!
Chris
The suit is being prosecuted by the DoJ and 19 states. It would require a pretty complete change at the next election for all 19 attorneys general to change their mind about penalties, expecially in light of Judge Jackson's ruling. IIRC, some of the states are out for even more blood than the DoJ...
Chris
Even if this is a coincidence, it's a pretty amazing one; this leads me to believe it might not be one.
Chris
I had a machine that connected to the German stockmarket on 2 nics (in case one died), and the other 2 nices were to bridge up to our mainframe, again in case 1 died (emphasis mine)
Ummm... so you're using two nics, and two are serving as backup? If that counts as using 4, then I guess my computer uses 3 mouses: 1 which I use, and two sitting in a drawer in case it breaks...
Chris
Your friend made the mistake to start at 2/3 of a normal salary I think.
I can confirm this. I'm a Student Worker (that's right, I have no degree yet), I have no formal IT education, and I do exactly the same as Bartmoss' friend; i.e. a little Perl (CGI and web-site maint.) and the company I'm working for is paying me DM 36 / hour.
Of course I'd already acquired a little experience with their web-site working for one of their contracters; Still, keep in mind I'm not even a CS student (Linguistics) so my 'only' qualification is that I don't run screaming when I see a command line (Thank you Linux!) and that I picked up some Perl in my spare time (Thank you Larry!)
Chris
I think this quote in the wired article about the FoF says it all:
"We will continue to vigorously contest the issues of this case in court, but at the same time we will continue to look for ways to resolve these issues in a fair and responsible manner," spokesman Jim Cullinan told Reuters.
Translation:
"We will continue to deny we broke the law in court, but at the same time we will continue to look for ways to be more subtle about how we do it in the future, including maybe cutting back a little until this blows over."
Chris
Three things spring immediately to mind:
:-)
- venetian blinds
- window shade
- curtains
I like that! I'd go with the third choice, since it's got such a nice ring to it:
Well, it's curtains for Windows
Chris
Chris
You'll note that Bayer is no longer the only company selling "Aspirin".
They still are in Germany. See my post above
Chris
Aspirin used to be a trademark of (I think) Bristol-Meyers but they lost that because people began referring to any headache pills as aspirin.
Actually, that's Bayer (as in Bavarian), and the trademark still holds here in Germany. This led to a great deal of confusion on my part when I first moved here since I couldn't understand that all the other kinds of 'aspirin' were never referred to as 'aspirin' despite the fact that they consist of the exact same chemicals. This is true even in common speech.
Of course the other side effect is that a packet of 10 (yes 10!!!) 300 mg. (or is it 500 mg.?) Aspirin(tm) costs about U.S. $6. Draw your own conclusions as to who profits from this kind of trademark enforcement...
Chris
...is a way to turn off that damn mouse-based movement of units! Did anyone add that? Or is there an option/config to do that which I haven't found? I mean, I generally use the number-pad to move my units and put the mouse pointer out of the way; only, then I have this green and blue line extending half-way across the screen which drives me nuts!
Chris
They can complain about where we aren't but they can't keep us from getting there.
:-)
I like this quote!
Chris
Well, it doesn't come as much of a surprise to me to see a number of common misconceptions about language running rampant through this discussion; this is generally due to the fact that, because everyone speaks at least one language (aside from extreme physical/mental deformities, injuries etc.), most people feel that they are qualified to give an informed opinion about language. Now, while I would never claim that statements about language by laypersons are worthless (far from it), they are more often relevant as data than as analysis (The opposite is generally the case with Linguists, who often have exposure to a large variety of languages/language families and are thus unable to give gut-feeling answers about the acceptability of certain language constructs in even their native tongue(s)). A comparison clarifies this: would you stop a person on the street to give you a qualified explanation on Cognition/Cognitive-Science because he can think?
;-) about language without completely talking out of my ass. I'm a 4th year Linguistics major, with a minor in Psycholinguistics at the University of Munich, Germany. I am an American (the U.S. type), my native language is English (the Northern-Californian variety), I speak German fluently, can get by in French, have beginning conversational proficiency in Estonian and Hungarian (my wife is Hungarian), and with the help of a dictionary I can translate simple Central Siberian Yupik Eskimo texts. I have also had theoretical exposure to a number of other non-Indo-European languages in the course of my studies. I'm explaining all this just to prevent the knee-jerk reaction: "Typical of an American to say xxxx about English/language/anything...".
;-) and writing was invented.
That said, allow me to say quickly what I believe qualifies me to say a little bit (or maybe not so little
1. Language !== Writing
Many (most) people from literate cultures tend to make the mistake that writing is language, in the sense that a statement about the writing system used in a particular language is applicable to the language itself. In fact the vast majority (ca. %90) of all living (app. 4000-7000) languages have no written form other than in descriptive systems used by Linguists. Spoken language evolved (unless you're from Kansas
Example: Someone above mentioned something about languages using the Latin alphabet and equated it to Latin-descended languages.
Counter-Example: Hungarian, Estonian, Finnish, and various Eskimo languages (to name a very few) all use the Latin alphabet. None of these languages is remotely related to Latin or English. Russian, the various Caucasian languages (e.g. Udi), and a number of Finno-Ugric languages (e.g. Khanty) all use the Cyrillic alphabet; however, Russian is related to English (both belong to the Indo-European family), Khanty to Hungarian (and more distantly to Estonian and Finnish), and Udi only to the other Caucasian languages.
2. Language X is Superior/has simpler Grammar/is easier to Learn/is more elegant/is more sensible/etc. than Language Y
It's all relative. Learning German is easier for an English speaker than a Finnish speaker because German and English are closely related (both Western Germanic); likewise, learning Hungarian is easier for a Finnish speaker than an English speaker since the large number of postfixes and postpositions to express case isn't as daunting to her since Finnish uses a similar system. And that's completely ignoring natural talent, previous exposure to other foreign languages, etc.
The fact of the matter is, that languages are vastly too complicated to make any blanket comparisons. Think about doing a regex search in Assembly and writing directly to give processor registers in pure Perl to get a very rough idea of what I mean (and this comparison really doesn't do justice to natural languages).
Hmmmm.... it's getting a little long here and I need to do a little work before my boss gets annoyed, so I'll continue later...
Chris
Yes I meant could not.
/cdrom directory, and upon not finding anything, assume that Linux can't find your CD-ROM?
Good you understood my first sentence
I tried both an external NEC and an internal Toshiba.
You mean these companies each make exactly one CD-ROM drive? How about narrowing down the possibilities just a little.
The other OSes found all devices without issue so what other conclusion can I have except that linux is lacking good SCSI drivers/logic
Sigh. How about addressing my other points? More specifically, what do you mean by not finding?
- Does Linux tell you "I can't find the CD-ROM"?
- Or did you just cd into the
Combine this with the known fact that the Linux SCSI subsystem is in terrible need of redesigning/rewriting and I think the conclusion is obvious.
Known by whom? Can you show me some concrete references from experts in SCSI driver design?
Again, I say show us a boot message, something like this:
(scsi0) <Adaptec AIC-7880 Ultra SCSI host adapter> found at PCI 12/0
(scsi0) Wide Channel, SCSI ID=7, 16/255 SCBs
(scsi0) Downloading sequencer code... 413 instructions downloaded
scsi0 : Adaptec AHA274x/284x/294x (EISA/VLB/PCI-Fast SCSI) 5.1.19/3.2.4
<Adaptec AIC-7880 Ultra SCSI host adapter>
scsi : 1 host.
(scsi0:0:0:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 8.
Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
(scsi0:0:1:0) Synchronous at 40.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 8.
Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST318275LW Rev: 0001
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi disk sdb at scsi0, channel 0, id 1, lun 0
(scsi0:0:4:0) Synchronous at 10.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 15.
Vendor: MATSHITA Model: PD-2 LF-D100 Rev: A108
Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi CD-ROM sr0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 4, lun 0
(scsi0:0:5:0) Synchronous at 5.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 8.
Vendor: SONY Model: SDT-5000 Rev: 3.26
Type: Sequential-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi tape st0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 5, lun 0
scsi : detected 1 SCSI tape 1 SCSI cdrom 2 SCSI disks total.
sr0: scsi3-mmc drive: 0x/0x cd/rw xa/form2 cdda tray
Uniform CDROM driver Revision: 2.55
...otherwise: SHUT YOUR FUD AC
Chris
Linux could find my CD-ROM on my SCSI controller (AHA-2940 series) so I tried BusLogic.
/dev/cdrom -> scd0
I assume you mean could not find.
- What kind of CD-ROM?
- Have you verified that your SCSI controller has been properly recognized?
- did you check that the following link is there?
Show us a boot message with the relevant parts (i.e. SCSI, block devices) and we might find your story a little more credible...
Chris