Ribbon generators and windbelts can, in arrays, compete with solar panels.
See, this is your problem. They don't need to compete with solar panels. They need to compete against coal and nuclear. They can't. True, there are oil and coal subsidies, but there are also wind and solar subsidies. You also have to figure in the cost of a massive power grid upgrade, which is not cheap.
Oil and coal produce more nasty by-products than wind or solar, and cause a lot of long-term damage in their mining, none of which is factored into the overall "cost" of energy generation. These are "externalised" costs, and therefore not visible to the consumer as being part of the price they pay for energy.
All factored in, if you put a high value on environmental and cost issues, then nuke is the way to go.
See above, only factor in several thousand years for the safe disposal of the "byproducts".
Even if you are after keeping the information secret rather than protecting its integrity, encryption is more effective than steel doors.
Well, at least with steel doors you have a good chance of knowing when your security has been breached. With encryption, you have no such luxury. You're just relying on the fact that no-one has been clever enough yet to break your particular encryption method, and you don't even know if that is a fact still.
It'll eventually (in a few million years) end up being some really bad-assed coal?
It does bring up a point, though - for a movement that utterly detests genetically-modifying things like food, I wonder how the overly-eco crowd will react to genetically modified trees... 'course, I'm thinking they'll just turn around and complain that humanity should instead modify its own behavior.
Er - yes. Much the same way as the doctor tells the alcoholic to stop drinking or he'll die horribly, or the smoker about the dangers of lung cancer.
The difference is, in the case of environmental destruction, the behaviour of individuals has far-reaching consequences beyond their own mortality.
Posting lots and lots of copied text doesn't really help you prove a point, it just makes you look like a dick.
I'll just quote you the bits you missed:
Windows PowerShell is Microsoft's task automation framework, consisting of a command-line shell and associated scripting language...
So far so good... only one shell, and one scripting language - but still, I suppose it's better than none, which is what we had 10 years ago when I cared.
... built on top of, and integrated with, the.NET Framework.
I think you were referring to PowerShell in your other post. PowerShell looks to me like an afterthought to windows to deal with the lack of a shell, not a fundamental cornerstone of the OS.
But you are right, I don't care because I have nothing to do with Windows servers.
Not really a fair comparison. You are comparing a hardware company with a software company.
Apple are not a hardware company. I believe they write some software, but apart from that they buy hardware from partners in the far east and concentrate on brand development.
Oh, yes - they did venture into antenna development recently. Look how good they were at that.
But what does "anemic" mean? That Windows servers don't have much iron in them? It sounds like you are picking a line of related features and targeting them as a weak point. But if you are spending that much time remotely administering your servers, you are incompetent.
I agree anemic is a poor choice of word in this context. Inflexible might be better. However, calling someone incompetent because they would prefer to be emailed when an error appears in a log file than have to open the log file and look at it periodically, or whatever the alternative is on windows, is just rude.
For that matter, is there even an alternative such as "tail -f" or less with shift-F on windows?
So, you are apparently arguing from the perspective of an incompetent administrator. If you assume a competent administrator who wants the server to actually do something, rather than sit there being remotely administered 24/7, how does it do? Not that I'm arguing you are wrong or right, but that you didn't address server performance at all, and I still have no idea what "anemic" means in this sense. Given the same hardware it's "harder" to administer. That's unrelated to the actual performance. Install VNC to control the GUI on a Linux and Windows server and who's faster?
Again, here windows is inflexible. You *must* use the GUI, therefore you must be near a terminal with a large enough screen and fast enough network connection to draw those extraneous pixels. However, with a Linux box, that transient error appearing in my log file can be emailed to my smartphone while I'm watching my kid play football, and I can ssh onto the server from the phone and check whatever I need to check. If I happen to be at my desk, I can use VNC. My choice.
I'm not implying that Windows is, but I'm arguing that if you are attacking one, at least be fair about it. There are enough valid reasons to dislike Windows or Microsoft that making up reasons isn't necessary and just further convinces people that Windows is just fine and it's a fringe of nutters that have a problem with it.
Windows is fine as long as everything is working. However when something does break there are very few diagnostic facilities built in, and no remote management capability to speak of.
everything on a network as TCP/IP currently works is being delivered according to factors that have nothing whatsoever to do with financial input. yes, you can use financial input to build network infrastructure or build more servers, but on an existing pipe, to make financial input a factor, you would need to do artificial things that would add to overhead and cost. you would have to
1. proactively examine the headers,
2. pick out the headers from companies that are paying you,
3. proactively block all other headers
ironically, the effort involved to do this proactive promotion of certain headers is an additional cost on the speed of your network
This is BT and Talk Talk we're talking about. Remember Phorm? I don't think they're too bothered about the extra overhead of packet analysis if it makes them a few more quid.
"Thank you sir. Please scan next item or press done to continue." ----- Yes that's right. I stole an item. Not my fault the machine doesn't work right. It's the store's fault.
How does the machine know you're a man? That's scary.
Unless of course you're not - in which case, you're right, the damn machine doesn't work right.
The best toy for a kid that age is a good sized cardboard box. Nothing else comes close when it comes to stimulating their imagination, curiosity and social development. If you for some reason are opposed to cardboard boxes: How about some real world open ended interactive toys like blocks, teddybears, a tricycle, a pail and a shovel, some toy cars or a... gasp... big red ball?
+1.
And don't forget - turn off the TV, put down the laptop, and interact as a human. Toddlers don't need computers, they need messy tactile 3D objects and people to interact with. Computers (and TV) should come later, when social and physical skills are developed.
Just use adblock and block the tracking pixel. Its fucking trivial.
To you and me, possibly. Not to the vast majority of the internet-using populace who aren't even aware of it. I assume they were the targets of the ad in Times Square, not us.
So? Can I demand that the shopkeeper turn off the CCTV before I enter the store? Try buying gas without ending up being recorded on tape somehow.
Don't know where you live, but round here they don't feed it back to a central location monitored by a private company, so they can inspect the footage to see what you bought. It's purely a crime-prevention mechanism.
If someone is that paranoid about being tracked, turn off the damned cookies in your browser. If you're super-duper paranoid, get off the internet - no-one is forcing you to browse.
I've been using the internet longer than google - why should I go?
Anyway, I'm just pointing out the fact that you don't need to be using google services to be tracked by them - some people may not be aware of this fact. I personally think the ever-more-pervasive nature of it is slightly worrying, not for what they currently do with the data (targetted advertising) but what they could do with this or similar data in the future.
just stop using the free services provided on the internet, and nobody will want your data anyways.
how is it news to people that somebody want's something in exchange for what they give away?
Google Analytics means that you can be visiting any of an ever increasing range of sites with no visible affiliation to Google, but still be being tracked by them.
I'm playing a game at the minute, about a guy who relives his ancestor's life as an assassin in the middle ages. It triggered a latent ancestral memory in me and I realised this guy actually assassinated my mother's mother's father's mother's father's uncle's mother's mother's father. How could they to market this game to me? The disgrace.
You are tracked by your bank and CC company every time you use your card anyways.
That's acceptable - you want your bank to check it is you using your card, not someone else, right? The bigger issue is being tracked when you are not using your card...
At least in USA, the schools have been exposing children to computers from fourth grade. Have been doing so for years. So how many people who have not used computers before are starting to use computers now?
Those very children are starting to use computers. We are still making more of them (children), and as far as I am aware netbooks running Windows 7 are not (yet) being handed out in-utero so there is still a chance to educate them in the alternatives before they become indoctrinated. Modern children are arguably the most important group to wean off a software monoculture - many of us oldies are past it.
Re:No people complain when you over claim
on
Wine 1.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
For example I was trying to move to a Linux desktop at work, to learn more about Linux and its working in our setup. However, being work, I had to be able to get everything done. So I tried Linux AV software and it was crap, couldn't do what I needed to do. I went and asked our Linux head if he'd be willing to help see if Wine could run Sony Vegas. He said sure. After 3 days of fairly intense work and research, he said no, he could find no way to make it run. He was pretty good too, he didn't blow this off he really tried.
You're approaching it the wrong way. If the existing linux-specific software is not acceptable, and the only alternative is to run some windows software, then run it on windows - especially for AV stuff (that gets really pernickety about HW and drivers for sound and graphics cards, and even on Windows can be difficult to get right).
Then you need to lobby your boss. If running everything on Linux is beneficial for your business, but you are unable to do so because of the lack of suitable software, then you need to get your boss to agree to allocate a certain percentage of your time to improving the software portfolio for AV stuff on Linux. Say, spend every Friday afternoon for the next year testing and bug-reporting on existing Linux alternatives. Won't cost your boss a lot, but may mean that in a year or two's time you are able to ditch your Windows box and the proprietary software you run on it, and migrate to an open source solution you have had a hand in developing and making sure did what you needed it to do.
Then you can happily run some non-critical but useful tools using wine while performing your main tasks using a native application.
Think WINE 1.2 will run Netscape ISP's Dialup program or Web Accelerator? Last time I tried Wine crashed on both of these these programs. It also didn't run any Internet Explorer more advanced than IE6.
Anticipated question:
"You're still on dialup?"
I would have thought the anticipated question should have been "you need a proprietary Windows application to access your dialup?!". Lots of people still need dialup, most of them use standardised utilities to configure it. My 60 year old mother used a dialup connection on her Linux computer for years, and the only wine she needed was in a glass.
Perhaps you missed this part:
"...most of which..."
Nokia has made many, many phone models, orders of magnitude more in number than Apple has. I believe his point was that Nokia has much more experience in antenna design than Apple so it isn't wise to completely discount their opinions, especially when their track record overall is pretty good.
Hence Nokia sueing apple for their "unlawful use of Nokia innovation": geek.com
It is the opinion of some people that Nokia legal action was the driver for Apple to invest in their own antenna designs - Apple are apparently convinced they will lose (can't remember where I read that) which implies they were actually just using Nokia designs until now. Of course Nokia have made a few mistakes along the way, but they - and others, like Ericsson, LG, Motorola, etc have much more experience in these areas, and know what works and what doesn't. And they don't put form before function.
Any success that BP may or may not have in this endeavor does not change the fact that they should have had methods to cap a blowout ready before they started drilling. The fact that this well has been gushing for months is simply unacceptable. The keystone cops spectacle of Top-Hat, Hot-Tap, Junk Shot (tm) is strong evidence that BP didn't devote any significant resources to dealing with a deep water blowout. Strong regulation of these rogue corporations is needed. They should not be able to drill without having capping equipment and emergency tankers ready at dock.
sed 's/BP/the oil industry/g'
I didn't see any of the other large multinationals drilling in the area jumping in and offering their solutions. This gung-ho approach is not restricted to BP, it's endemic in the culture of the oil industry, and all the other companies are looking on grateful it wasn't them that got "unlucky".
Just wait until this happens in Alaska or somewhere where it's a trifle more difficult to get to with the relief equipment.
I'm off down to the local planetarium to put a down-payment on a new planet for my kids. They're going to need it.
Imagine the fuel savings if every office worker that was able could telecommute instead of burning fuel to get to a job that could be done from home. Imagine the money saved on road maintenance and other things associated with the reduction in traffic. For at least the last 15 years I have commuted back and forth every day to perform a job I could have done without ever leaving my home.
Most office workers would be incapable of working from home all the time - partly from lack of motivation, partly from lack of social interaction. A lot of face to face meetings are pretty important too, and much as they are laughed at, water fountain conversations are where a lot of personal and business relationships are fostered.
The real alternative would be if people lived close to their offices and walked or cycled in every day. It would improve fitness, but also improve communities. In my country lots of people cannot afford to live close to city centers or business parks where they work, so they live in large housing estates on the edge of the city. This leads to estates where essentially everyone is away all day, everyone spends an hour or two in their cars instead of socialising or spending time with families. Then people spend the weekends in their cars again because suddenly all their friends, shops, social and sporting engagements are long distances away from where they live, and so the estates themselves never achieve a sense of community. And, of course, lots of fuel gets burnt.
I'm not sure how this can be rectified - town planning, perhaps, but it also needs a cultural mind-shift away from the car as the preferred mode of transport. It amazes me to see how people will drive 10 miles to the sports center, cycle 20 miles on an exercise bike in an air-conditioned room under strip lights, then drive 10 miles back. WTF?
Slashdot Mirror
English isn't a programming language
English is a programming language. The problem is there are more than 7 billion different compiler implementations.
Ribbon generators and windbelts can, in arrays, compete with solar panels.
See, this is your problem. They don't need to compete with solar panels. They need to compete against coal and nuclear. They can't. True, there are oil and coal subsidies, but there are also wind and solar subsidies. You also have to figure in the cost of a massive power grid upgrade, which is not cheap.
Oil and coal produce more nasty by-products than wind or solar, and cause a lot of long-term damage in their mining, none of which is factored into the overall "cost" of energy generation. These are "externalised" costs, and therefore not visible to the consumer as being part of the price they pay for energy.
All factored in, if you put a high value on environmental and cost issues, then nuke is the way to go.
See above, only factor in several thousand years for the safe disposal of the "byproducts".
Even if you are after keeping the information secret rather than protecting its integrity, encryption is more effective than steel doors.
Well, at least with steel doors you have a good chance of knowing when your security has been breached. With encryption, you have no such luxury. You're just relying on the fact that no-one has been clever enough yet to break your particular encryption method, and you don't even know if that is a fact still.
It'll eventually (in a few million years) end up being some really bad-assed coal?
It does bring up a point, though - for a movement that utterly detests genetically-modifying things like food, I wonder how the overly-eco crowd will react to genetically modified trees... 'course, I'm thinking they'll just turn around and complain that humanity should instead modify its own behavior.
Er - yes. Much the same way as the doctor tells the alcoholic to stop drinking or he'll die horribly, or the smoker about the dangers of lung cancer.
The difference is, in the case of environmental destruction, the behaviour of individuals has far-reaching consequences beyond their own mortality.
I'll just quote you the bits you missed:
Windows PowerShell is Microsoft's task automation framework, consisting of a command-line shell and associated scripting language ...
So far so good ... only one shell, and one scripting language - but still, I suppose it's better than none, which is what we had 10 years ago when I cared.
Ah - so it is just a bolt-on afterthought.
But you are right, I don't care because I have nothing to do with Windows servers.
Not really a fair comparison. You are comparing a hardware company with a software company.
Apple are not a hardware company. I believe they write some software, but apart from that they buy hardware from partners in the far east and concentrate on brand development.
Oh, yes - they did venture into antenna development recently. Look how good they were at that.
But what does "anemic" mean? That Windows servers don't have much iron in them? It sounds like you are picking a line of related features and targeting them as a weak point. But if you are spending that much time remotely administering your servers, you are incompetent.
I agree anemic is a poor choice of word in this context. Inflexible might be better. However, calling someone incompetent because they would prefer to be emailed when an error appears in a log file than have to open the log file and look at it periodically, or whatever the alternative is on windows, is just rude.
For that matter, is there even an alternative such as "tail -f" or less with shift-F on windows?
So, you are apparently arguing from the perspective of an incompetent administrator. If you assume a competent administrator who wants the server to actually do something, rather than sit there being remotely administered 24/7, how does it do? Not that I'm arguing you are wrong or right, but that you didn't address server performance at all, and I still have no idea what "anemic" means in this sense. Given the same hardware it's "harder" to administer. That's unrelated to the actual performance. Install VNC to control the GUI on a Linux and Windows server and who's faster?
Again, here windows is inflexible. You *must* use the GUI, therefore you must be near a terminal with a large enough screen and fast enough network connection to draw those extraneous pixels. However, with a Linux box, that transient error appearing in my log file can be emailed to my smartphone while I'm watching my kid play football, and I can ssh onto the server from the phone and check whatever I need to check. If I happen to be at my desk, I can use VNC. My choice.
I'm not implying that Windows is, but I'm arguing that if you are attacking one, at least be fair about it. There are enough valid reasons to dislike Windows or Microsoft that making up reasons isn't necessary and just further convinces people that Windows is just fine and it's a fringe of nutters that have a problem with it.
Windows is fine as long as everything is working. However when something does break there are very few diagnostic facilities built in, and no remote management capability to speak of.
everything on a network as TCP/IP currently works is being delivered according to factors that have nothing whatsoever to do with financial input. yes, you can use financial input to build network infrastructure or build more servers, but on an existing pipe, to make financial input a factor, you would need to do artificial things that would add to overhead and cost. you would have to
1. proactively examine the headers, 2. pick out the headers from companies that are paying you, 3. proactively block all other headers
ironically, the effort involved to do this proactive promotion of certain headers is an additional cost on the speed of your network
This is BT and Talk Talk we're talking about. Remember Phorm? I don't think they're too bothered about the extra overhead of packet analysis if it makes them a few more quid.
"Thank you sir. Please scan next item or press done to continue." ----- Yes that's right. I stole an item. Not my fault the machine doesn't work right. It's the store's fault.
How does the machine know you're a man? That's scary.
Unless of course you're not - in which case, you're right, the damn machine doesn't work right.
The best toy for a kid that age is a good sized cardboard box. Nothing else comes close when it comes to stimulating their imagination, curiosity and social development. If you for some reason are opposed to cardboard boxes: How about some real world open ended interactive toys like blocks, teddybears, a tricycle, a pail and a shovel, some toy cars or a ... gasp... big red ball?
+1.
And don't forget - turn off the TV, put down the laptop, and interact as a human. Toddlers don't need computers, they need messy tactile 3D objects and people to interact with. Computers (and TV) should come later, when social and physical skills are developed.
Just use adblock and block the tracking pixel. Its fucking trivial.
To you and me, possibly. Not to the vast majority of the internet-using populace who aren't even aware of it. I assume they were the targets of the ad in Times Square, not us.
Moron.
Is that your real name? Your parents must have really hated you.
So? Can I demand that the shopkeeper turn off the CCTV before I enter the store? Try buying gas without ending up being recorded on tape somehow.
Don't know where you live, but round here they don't feed it back to a central location monitored by a private company, so they can inspect the footage to see what you bought. It's purely a crime-prevention mechanism.
If someone is that paranoid about being tracked, turn off the damned cookies in your browser. If you're super-duper paranoid, get off the internet - no-one is forcing you to browse.
I've been using the internet longer than google - why should I go?
Anyway, I'm just pointing out the fact that you don't need to be using google services to be tracked by them - some people may not be aware of this fact. I personally think the ever-more-pervasive nature of it is slightly worrying, not for what they currently do with the data (targetted advertising) but what they could do with this or similar data in the future.
just stop using the free services provided on the internet, and nobody will want your data anyways. how is it news to people that somebody want's something in exchange for what they give away?
Google Analytics means that you can be visiting any of an ever increasing range of sites with no visible affiliation to Google, but still be being tracked by them.
I'm playing a game at the minute, about a guy who relives his ancestor's life as an assassin in the middle ages. It triggered a latent ancestral memory in me and I realised this guy actually assassinated my mother's mother's father's mother's father's uncle's mother's mother's father. How could they to market this game to me? The disgrace.
Hey, what they hell do I know? I'm just a guy on a couch.
watch it - if you sit there too long you'll die.
You are tracked by your bank and CC company every time you use your card anyways.
That's acceptable - you want your bank to check it is you using your card, not someone else, right? The bigger issue is being tracked when you are not using your card ...
At least in USA, the schools have been exposing children to computers from fourth grade. Have been doing so for years. So how many people who have not used computers before are starting to use computers now?
Those very children are starting to use computers. We are still making more of them (children), and as far as I am aware netbooks running Windows 7 are not (yet) being handed out in-utero so there is still a chance to educate them in the alternatives before they become indoctrinated. Modern children are arguably the most important group to wean off a software monoculture - many of us oldies are past it.
For example I was trying to move to a Linux desktop at work, to learn more about Linux and its working in our setup. However, being work, I had to be able to get everything done. So I tried Linux AV software and it was crap, couldn't do what I needed to do. I went and asked our Linux head if he'd be willing to help see if Wine could run Sony Vegas. He said sure. After 3 days of fairly intense work and research, he said no, he could find no way to make it run. He was pretty good too, he didn't blow this off he really tried.
You're approaching it the wrong way. If the existing linux-specific software is not acceptable, and the only alternative is to run some windows software, then run it on windows - especially for AV stuff (that gets really pernickety about HW and drivers for sound and graphics cards, and even on Windows can be difficult to get right).
Then you need to lobby your boss. If running everything on Linux is beneficial for your business, but you are unable to do so because of the lack of suitable software, then you need to get your boss to agree to allocate a certain percentage of your time to improving the software portfolio for AV stuff on Linux. Say, spend every Friday afternoon for the next year testing and bug-reporting on existing Linux alternatives. Won't cost your boss a lot, but may mean that in a year or two's time you are able to ditch your Windows box and the proprietary software you run on it, and migrate to an open source solution you have had a hand in developing and making sure did what you needed it to do.
Then you can happily run some non-critical but useful tools using wine while performing your main tasks using a native application.
>>>I raid 25/10's under wine with no problem
Think WINE 1.2 will run Netscape ISP's Dialup program or Web Accelerator? Last time I tried Wine crashed on both of these these programs. It also didn't run any Internet Explorer more advanced than IE6.
Anticipated question: "You're still on dialup?"
I would have thought the anticipated question should have been "you need a proprietary Windows application to access your dialup?!". Lots of people still need dialup, most of them use standardised utilities to configure it. My 60 year old mother used a dialup connection on her Linux computer for years, and the only wine she needed was in a glass.
Perhaps you missed this part: "...most of which..." Nokia has made many, many phone models, orders of magnitude more in number than Apple has. I believe his point was that Nokia has much more experience in antenna design than Apple so it isn't wise to completely discount their opinions, especially when their track record overall is pretty good.
Hence Nokia sueing apple for their "unlawful use of Nokia innovation": geek.com
It is the opinion of some people that Nokia legal action was the driver for Apple to invest in their own antenna designs - Apple are apparently convinced they will lose (can't remember where I read that) which implies they were actually just using Nokia designs until now. Of course Nokia have made a few mistakes along the way, but they - and others, like Ericsson, LG, Motorola, etc have much more experience in these areas, and know what works and what doesn't. And they don't put form before function.
Any success that BP may or may not have in this endeavor does not change the fact that they should have had methods to cap a blowout ready before they started drilling. The fact that this well has been gushing for months is simply unacceptable. The keystone cops spectacle of Top-Hat, Hot-Tap, Junk Shot (tm) is strong evidence that BP didn't devote any significant resources to dealing with a deep water blowout. Strong regulation of these rogue corporations is needed. They should not be able to drill without having capping equipment and emergency tankers ready at dock.
sed 's/BP/the oil industry/g'
I didn't see any of the other large multinationals drilling in the area jumping in and offering their solutions. This gung-ho approach is not restricted to BP, it's endemic in the culture of the oil industry, and all the other companies are looking on grateful it wasn't them that got "unlucky".
Just wait until this happens in Alaska or somewhere where it's a trifle more difficult to get to with the relief equipment.
I'm off down to the local planetarium to put a down-payment on a new planet for my kids. They're going to need it.
is there a link for them without WMV? I'd rather not rely on such
ubuntu -> firefox -> totem works for me.
Imagine the fuel savings if every office worker that was able could telecommute instead of burning fuel to get to a job that could be done from home. Imagine the money saved on road maintenance and other things associated with the reduction in traffic. For at least the last 15 years I have commuted back and forth every day to perform a job I could have done without ever leaving my home.
Most office workers would be incapable of working from home all the time - partly from lack of motivation, partly from lack of social interaction. A lot of face to face meetings are pretty important too, and much as they are laughed at, water fountain conversations are where a lot of personal and business relationships are fostered.
The real alternative would be if people lived close to their offices and walked or cycled in every day. It would improve fitness, but also improve communities. In my country lots of people cannot afford to live close to city centers or business parks where they work, so they live in large housing estates on the edge of the city. This leads to estates where essentially everyone is away all day, everyone spends an hour or two in their cars instead of socialising or spending time with families. Then people spend the weekends in their cars again because suddenly all their friends, shops, social and sporting engagements are long distances away from where they live, and so the estates themselves never achieve a sense of community. And, of course, lots of fuel gets burnt.
I'm not sure how this can be rectified - town planning, perhaps, but it also needs a cultural mind-shift away from the car as the preferred mode of transport. It amazes me to see how people will drive 10 miles to the sports center, cycle 20 miles on an exercise bike in an air-conditioned room under strip lights, then drive 10 miles back. WTF?