Quite the rant. Angry are we about things that we don't agree with but can't change? You must be about 23 I would guess. Don't worry, you'll get over it.
First of, get your facts about grain right. Our farmers have the exact same issue. This is a business decisions from companies that have spent millions of dollars to develop strains that improve upon the original plants and want to make a profit. If you don't like that, move to a communist or socialist country. There are plenty of natural grains that produce lower volumes and are less disease resistant that they can grow. I can buy all kinds in the local grocery store. I've been growing the same tomato plants for years.
As for the cars, I made a statement about SUVs and you made a statement about gas guzzlers. I would put trucks, planes, and boats all in the same category. If you are against one, you should be against the other. If you are not, then the only difference between you and me is the level of inconvienece we are willing to tolerate. My point was I drive my truck far less than many suburban environmentalists drive their KIAs, so who is the worse polluter. My son was a good example of a hypocrite. He wouldn't own a car because of the pollution and corporate policies, but he didn't mind hitch hicking and and getting rides from those who did.
I don't get your point about infant mortality, et. al. My point was those 'good ole days' when people didn't drive cars were a lot more deadly and less pleasant a time to live in than our current excessive culture. I wouldn't trade my 75+ life expectancy for their 35. It is hard enough for one family live off the land, but try 6 billion people. Wouldn't happen if it wasn't for those corporations you rail.
Kids in Africa are starving for many reasons, among them that their governments are corrupt and exploit them and the Christian missionaries forced them to stop their nomadic ways and build civilized homes. (We can ignore the fact that they have been basically starving for thousands of years, it's tough living off the land. Bleeding hearts have convinced Americans that you need shoes in an area where shoes where virtually unknown 50 years ago.) For thousands of years they were able to move their village every few years when they exhausted the local resources and in 20-30 years, nature took care of replenishing that area just in time for them to come back. It took the f*cking Christians to break them of that habit and condemn them to their current 'civilized' existance.
Now your last paragraph at least had some validity to it. But blaming all corporate companies for the actions of a few is the same as blaming all blacks or hispanics because of a few crimes.
The article I responded to discussed a statement from a 'group of concerened scientists' about how the Bush administration was systematically censoring and directing scientific data, specifically many that dealt with environmental v/s industry issues.
I responded with some information that questioned the ability of this group to be unbiased, that information being that their web site is heavily slanted towards environmentalist issues of the type the Sierra Club is known for. The intent being to show that ifPresident Bush may slant science towards industry, in my opinion this 'Union of Concerned Science' is probably just as guilty slanting it the other way and as such their statement does not carry any weight. It is the balancing act of the two groups that makes us strong, and a nation lead by only environmentalists would be just as bad as a nation lead only be industry interests.
The moderated response was that I was a troll.
When I then raised the opinion that I was moderated as a troll because the moderator might be an environmentalist, and hence biased and likely to slant the facts, I was moderated as off topic.
I guess that this string of postings has proven my point far better than my original post. That we all slant things in the direction we want, some are just better at it than others.
And that one group whining about another group slanting facts to suit their purpose is really what we all do, so just STFU.
And they used to die of all kinds of nasty things before they got to the age of 35. Infant mortality was through the roof, most people were illiterate, and the masses rarly traveld more than 100 miles from where they were born.
Ahhhh...the good ole days when times were simpler and dental hygiene was unknown.
I agree with you. People can just raise their own food so we don't need trucks too. I'm sure those starving kids in Africa would understand when we can no longer send them food and medicine any longer.
This group is just another environmental group. Look at the description of their e-mail newsletters:
Clean Energy: Forge environmentally and economically sustainable solutions with renewable energy
Clean Vehicles: Reduce the adverse impacts of cars, SUVs, trucks, and buses
Climate Change: Promote solutions that slow global warming and reduce its impacts
Food and Environment: Support the responsible use of biotechnology and antibiotics in agriculture
Global Environment: Promote scientifically sound solutions to the major problems of global environmental change
Global Security: Work toward a world free of nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction
Habitats and Biodiversity: Help to protect forests, control invasive species, and conserve the diversity of life
Nuclear Power Safety: Strengthen monitoring of nuclear plants and their regulators
Where is the objectivity here?? You could easily post this same info on the Sierra Club website and no one would give it a second look because of their reputation. Throw a name like 'Union of Concerned Scientists' at it though, and it must be valid. I can't find one thing in this list that anyone would disagree with.
The methods for accomplishing those goals are another matter. This group has simply stated that anyone who disagrees with our methods is wrong and must be removed from office. I think that is scarier that George W. The last thing we need is a bunch of like-minded environmentalists in power. We will be wipping our butts on... well nothing because even our feces impact the environment and we won't even be allowed to take a crap anymore.
Thank you!!! I get so damn sick and tired of hearing the Democrap candidates espouse 'kill the tax cuts!!'. Well, I don't make 6 figures (high 5 figures though), but that tax cut last year gave me $100 more a month to spend on computer games.
Let's put this in perspective, I paid $17,000 last year in federal income tax alone. All by myself. Even a 1% tax cut is $170 in my pocket, or about 15 bucks a month.
So, who is the best a distorting facts, Republicans or Democrats? Environmentalists or Business? Health officials or cigarette manufacturers? Everyone does it to suit their goals. Scientists themselves have done it for years. Their are numerous examples of the scientific community themselves fighting over theories in their attempt to prove that their's is the best.
Would anyone want a pure scientist setting public policy? There has to be a balance between what is theoritical and reality. If we only did what was best for the environment, we wouldn't have cars or toilet paper.
And since the paper is/.ed, I guess I'll have to wait until later to read more than just Wired's summary. Maybe they need fewer scientists in their IT department and some with real world experience.....
Normally, I would agree with your comment. I want to load W2K or XP so that I can use MS Money and a few other MS specific applications. No big deal, I can use either OS for whatever is needed.
But Linux loaded up just fine the first time and I have spent over 8 hours trying to get either W2K or XP to load. W2K freezes so bad that even the caps lock key won't work, and XP keeps BSODing on me and telling me that I have bad memory, which is odd since Linux works just fine.
Now, to be fair, my guess is that I have the wrong memory chips. Both Kingston and Crucial suggest other chips than what MWave shipped with the board. I think the CL value, which is 3, should be 2.5 and this is what is causing the problem.
But I would love to know why Linux worked just fine yet XP and W2K have such problems. (I say worked because I took it off just in case it was part of the problem somehow, you know the old bit about removing anything but just what you need to solve a proble.)
Re:Betty's bunnies have fluffy fur today
on
Google's Bigger Index
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Oh.. that link was just too funny.
Some people just have way too much time on their hands. (This from a guy who spent 6 hours last night building a new computer from scratch [have to get those cables just right you know], and will probably spend another 6 tonight trying to get WinBloze to load.)
I am a die-hard analog watch fan. Digital watch faces just look cheap to me, no matter how expensive they are.
Analog doesn't also mean not digital either. My Seiko has an analog face, but with digital internals. It has an alarm, chronometer, stop watch, and timer. It uses stepping motors to control the hands.
The frames I had only showed what appeard to be a gold colored pasty on a limp breast. This is much, much worse and further proves the need for Janet to keep her clothes on.
From what I could tell she bounced enough on her own without a motor. On second though, maybe if the motor spun fast enough she could keep the nipples from pointing towards the ground!
When it is all said and done, all this did was prove once again why we should limit nudity, most people look much better with their clothes on, include Janet. Seeing her boob was quite a letdown, I'm not surprised that the SuperBowl ratings sagged a bit.
Ms. Jackson needs some support, and I don't mean from her family. One would think that they could implant some convictions to prevent this sort of droopy moral character in the future. We need more pert personalities to provide better role models for our country.
I have worked with a few folks from India in my current position, and found that it is very important to draw them out and get their ideas. Initially, my suggestions were taken as direction and followed to the letter. While this is nice for my ego, it was not preferred. It is very rare that one person's idea is the best solution and is important to solicite other's opinions. On the other hand, it was nice to not have to argue about every little nit-picky thing too.
An interesting aspect that came out of this was the changes in the India nationals. The longer they were here, the more outspoken they become, and the better the teams began to operate. As it became apparent that their input was welcome, the suggestions stayed suggestions and when conflicting priorities came up, they were discussed and comprises were worked out. It became a much healthier environment, less re-work was done, and project items were done in better sequence.
I often wondered what difficulties arose when they finally went back to India. Did their new American-learned personality changes create problems, or were they quicly un-learned?
I thought the same thing about water jets when I read the article. Many, many,years ago,I worked in a factory that made corrugated boxes (not cardboard boxes, as I was corrected many times the first month or so. A cereal box is a cardboard box.) The corrugated boxes are made from two or more sheets of paper with one all wavey, or corrugated. (And for those wondering, most boxes are made from 3, 5, or 7 sheets, with every other one being corrugated. However, some boxes had the corrugation exposed on the inside.)
They use a huge machine called a corrugator that takes rolls of paper and forms them into the blanks later used to make the boxes. Since the rolls of paper are 8ft high or so, they have to run several jobs at one time to reduce waste. A wheeled slicer was used to cut the blanks parallel to the paper path. I forget how they were cut across.
I remember the 'wtf' feeling I had when I was told they were going to replace the slicers with water jets. I couldn't believe they could cut paper with water without it getting wet and had to see this. After I witnessed this spectacle myself and saw the dry paper, I was told the pressure is so high that the water molecules are not in contact with the paper long enough to be absorbed. Whether that was true or not was irrelavant, the paper was still dry.
While this reduced the cost of sharpening the slicers, it wasn't free -- there were electricity and replacement nozzles to pay for. I don't remember how cost effective it was. This is probably true of laser slicers. The cost of generating the laser beam v/s the waste and maintenance of more mechanical means will determine what applications this is suitable for.
Thanks for proving my point. You do choose to live there, and have two HIGH car payments (I have never paid over $200/month for a car until this year -- it's called THE USED CAR MARKET). I chose to live in Maine in a mobile home for many years so I could live within my means and did quite well raising two kids (I'm divorced now). When I was laid off from a COBOL job 6 years ago, it took exactly 10 days for me to find another job. And I have never been unemployed in my 20+ years of adult life other than that one time, so the jobs must be out there somewhere. And I have always been paid less than other people I work with, so I know I'm not the best.
So, take control of your live and accept the decisions YOU have made.
BTW -- I'm a conservative prick who believes government needs to stay out of both people and business, and let the capitalistic system work and evolve. It has taken me 20 years to finally be in the upper salary bands, and I still am in 5 digits. Let's see my finances...
Hmmm... $950 a month for a 2 bedroom apartment in Phoenix, in the nice part of town, $65 for electricity, $25 for water, $500 for a car (it is a very nice car!!!), $100 for gas, $140 for cable (yes, I have everything). Car insurance - $100/month
So, that's about $1880/month, or a little over $22.5K/year. Software people here make between $50K and $80K/year. So, using a 50K job using the numbers off my tax returns, 19% Fed, 8% SSN, 3% state, ins = $32K/year. I've got no mainteance on the house, my renters ins. is $150/year, umm....nothing else I can think of. So, $32K - 22.5K = $9.5K, or $790/month, almost $200 a week.
Moving 300 miles can almost double your disposable income dude, even if you take a 25% cut in pay!!!!
Ahhh...finally, what it all boils down to, choices and balance.
Company execs are free to pay low wages and treat their employees like trash, and maybe even make big bucks in the process. They are also free to treat their employees well and maybe make big bucks in the process.
That's what makes this country so great, choices. Or freedom, depending on what label you want to use. Those choices are constantly in a state of flux. Today I buy Chevy trucks, tomorrow I have a bad experience, and the next day I buy Ford.
I have worked for good CEOs/GMs and bad ones. They all say they have an 'open door policy', but some only mean if you agree with them,and some mean it (yes, they do exist.)
The one common thread is the good ones run good companies you want to work at, no matter what the salary (within reason of course) and the bad run companies that make you keep your resume updated.
They are all tasked with one goal... helping the company make as much money as possible. Some only look to the short term, some to the long term. Face it, a company that paid its employees high wages but couldn't make a profit wouldn't stay in business. It would not be responsible of them to not look at offshore development. They company execs have to strike a balance between getting work done cheaply, and getting cheap work.
My prediction is that off shore development will take the same route as outsourcing did, looks great, less filling. Already, wages in India are starting to rise as competition heats up. I have heard numerous war stories, like one line code changes taking 2 people 9 days to do and code being sent back numerous times to fix simple bugs.
Those jobs will start to be pulled back in a few years, keep your skills honed but your options open. And get your finances in order, because the salaries will not be there except for the highly skilled.
You all ran your salaries up way to far, lived outside your means, and suddenly, but bubble burst.
Look at history, the unions did the same thing. They started raising their salaries to a 'livable wage', then when companies went elsewhere to get the labor cheaper, they all started to whine to.
I knew far too many programmers that wanted to command +60K salaries that weren't worth crap. But because companies needed them, and didn't have a cheaper source, they had to pay it. Now, they have an alternative and are using it. Well boo hoo, don't cry in your lite beer too much.
It may surprise you, but Bill Gates and all the other CEOs didn't go into business to give you jobs. They went into business to make money. Get over yourselves, and if you want to be rich, do the same thing. Otherwise, settle for what other people are willing to pay, not what you think you are worth.
Anyone who runs Linux in a mainframe to run webservers is an idiot. Except for some very specific and isolated applications that I could not even dream of right now, but I'm sure someone could cost justify.
Intel/Sun/Apple/HP boxes are a hell of a lot cheaper and provide more CPU, memory, and network horsepower per buck.
Now... let's see them take the same study and use the same servers that ran M$ and load them up with Linux (or any other *nix they want) and see the results.
And make sure they include the cost of applying patches.
Oh.. I almost forgot. IDC already said that in the other Windows 2000 Versus Linux in Enterprise Computing document.
Risk analysis applications that process 10 million complex transactions in a few hours and produce hundreds of megs of output.
A large server may not be dedicated to just one database. There is a significant cost savings in purchasing a single high end system for several databases rather than splitting them over several smaller systems. With the partitioning technology available from Sun, you can start with a smallish (15 CPU) server and grow up as is needed. Using smaller servers to start with is cheaper, but the cost of swapping them out is expensive if the database requires more horsepower than the system can deliver. (Sun isn't the only one to support hardware/software partitioning, I'm just using it as an example.)
It is always a juggling act to find the appropriate cost/performance mix that provides both long term and short term advantages. Purchasing systems that are not expandable is often cheaper in the short term. Purchasing expandable systems is often cheaper in the long run, but the risk is the application may not grow enough to realize the savings before the technology becomes obsolete.
I hate estimating hardware requirements these days...
Your statement about a 'truly scaleable datacenter' does not make sense. You say you've never seen one, but then you mention that Linux has delivered scalabilty beneifts Sun could never imagine. Please make up your mind which it is.
Myself, I have seen scalability. I've have seen applications start out on 2cpu $20K database servers and migrate to E15-type servers without any code change. I'm not saying Linux (or AIX) cannot do this, but this is scalability that Sun does provide at a competitive price.
Having priced the cost of multi-CPU server-quality x86 platforms, there is very little cost benefit to going there. Multi-CPU server quality x86 boxes cost almost as much as the same Sun boxes.
As for Java, since you did not mention any alternative, I cannot provide any response. However, since the application servers and web server provide enough bandwidth, there is no reason to switch to anything else. I am not ready to jump on the 'let's switch everything to Linux' bandwagon yet, but I am on the 'let's review it as we deploy new products or grow existing ones.'
I am sure Linux will migrate into our datacenter, and eventually support production applications. It just doesn't make any sense to replace what works and is proven with something else unless there is a clear cost advantage.
I don't have much AIX experience, but there is one reason why I suggested Sun for our data center servers, binary scalability. Sun servers scale from 1U/1CPU lower cost servers (5K) and developer stations to clusters of over 300 CPU servers, all with full binary compatiblity. I have yet to not be able to take software off a 1CPU low-end sun box and not be able to run it on the top-of-the-line servers without any recompiling.
This provides the capability to develop on low-end boxes without the headaches associated with recompiling on production servers and shortens our development cycle.
I will admit though, with most of the development moving into the Java world, maybe this doesn't make as much sense. However, we have still found it useful to do some of the development work on smaller Sun boxes for performance benchmarking and forcasting performance when something goes into production.
I've stayed away from IBM because of past bad experiences, providing quotes that are not complete solutions resulting in server cost overruns or software that is not yet written. (They once replied to a quote for a automated-failover system, and provided an neat OS2 solution. When pressed on how the failover worked, they finally admitted that once we ordered the system, they would write it.)
If IBM costs have come down, and their ability to fully respond to quotes has improved, maybe they are worth another look. But if not, Sun is still my server of choice for critical production systems.
The current technique which is used to write to a recordable CDs involves mastering software which has the following drawbacks:
1) It incorporates a file interface that is unfamiliar to the user.
2) The copying process is generally accomplished through track-at-once or disc-at-once recording. This means the user must take great care to pre-plan the copying and dedicate storage resources (the source disk(s)) ahead of time.
3) The user cannot access data being stored on the disc until the track-at-once or disc-at-once recording is completed.
4) These recording techniques are very susceptible to data under run. This means that dedicated high speed data sources are needed.
5) Other mastering techniques may support incremental writing but the data on these discs can only be read by the mastering software. They cannot be used or accessed by the computer operating system or other applications.
Thus there is a need for a technique which allows the CDROM, whether blank or partially written, to appear to a user exactly as would any other storage media, such as a hard disk.
To my non-legally trained mind, this appears to apply to a process that lets someone 'mount' a burnable CD and just drag and drop files onto it, making the CD appear to be a normal disk drive. It doesn't appear to cover creating a CD project (for lack of a better word) that includes a bunch of files, then burning the CD.
If this is true, what's all the hubbub, bub?? I have never used this function of my Adaptec software, and have no desire to. I prefer to build a list of files, and burn my CDs once.
While the arguments about taking too long to sue for infrignment have merit, I think the actual impact to most users will be minimal.
Why that is so difficult (as the patent claims) I don't know. Probably a PEBKAC issue.....
The UCSD Network Telescope monitors distributed denial-of-service attacks worldwide using a novel backscatter analysis technique.
WOW... What a PR bonanza. SCO gets all kinds of press opportunities because of the DDoS, and the company they pay to monitor the SCO system proves that it was a DDoS attack and gets to have gazillions of people view the web site that talks about their product that proves the DDoS actually happened.
That's like reading MSN for unbiased news about M$....
Slashdot Mirror
Quite the rant. Angry are we about things that we don't agree with but can't change? You must be about 23 I would guess. Don't worry, you'll get over it.
First of, get your facts about grain right. Our farmers have the exact same issue. This is a business decisions from companies that have spent millions of dollars to develop strains that improve upon the original plants and want to make a profit. If you don't like that, move to a communist or socialist country. There are plenty of natural grains that produce lower volumes and are less disease resistant that they can grow. I can buy all kinds in the local grocery store. I've been growing the same tomato plants for years.
As for the cars, I made a statement about SUVs and you made a statement about gas guzzlers. I would put trucks, planes, and boats all in the same category. If you are against one, you should be against the other. If you are not, then the only difference between you and me is the level of inconvienece we are willing to tolerate. My point was I drive my truck far less than many suburban environmentalists drive their KIAs, so who is the worse polluter. My son was a good example of a hypocrite. He wouldn't own a car because of the pollution and corporate policies, but he didn't mind hitch hicking and and getting rides from those who did.
I don't get your point about infant mortality, et. al. My point was those 'good ole days' when people didn't drive cars were a lot more deadly and less pleasant a time to live in than our current excessive culture. I wouldn't trade my 75+ life expectancy for their 35. It is hard enough for one family live off the land, but try 6 billion people. Wouldn't happen if it wasn't for those corporations you rail.
Kids in Africa are starving for many reasons, among them that their governments are corrupt and exploit them and the Christian missionaries forced them to stop their nomadic ways and build civilized homes. (We can ignore the fact that they have been basically starving for thousands of years, it's tough living off the land. Bleeding hearts have convinced Americans that you need shoes in an area where shoes where virtually unknown 50 years ago.) For thousands of years they were able to move their village every few years when they exhausted the local resources and in 20-30 years, nature took care of replenishing that area just in time for them to come back. It took the f*cking Christians to break them of that habit and condemn them to their current 'civilized' existance.
Now your last paragraph at least had some validity to it. But blaming all corporate companies for the actions of a few is the same as blaming all blacks or hispanics because of a few crimes.
Let's recap
-
The article I responded to discussed a statement from a 'group of concerened scientists' about how the Bush administration was systematically censoring and directing scientific data, specifically many that dealt with environmental v/s industry issues.
-
I responded with some information that questioned the ability of this group to be unbiased, that information being that their web site is heavily slanted towards environmentalist issues of the type the Sierra Club is known for. The intent being to show that ifPresident Bush may slant science towards industry, in my opinion this 'Union of Concerned Science' is probably just as guilty slanting it the other way and as such their statement does not carry any weight. It is the balancing act of the two groups that makes us strong, and a nation lead by only environmentalists would be just as bad as a nation lead only be industry interests.
- The moderated response was that I was a troll.
- When I then raised the opinion that I was moderated as a troll because the moderator might be an environmentalist, and hence biased and likely to slant the facts, I was moderated as off topic.
I guess that this string of postings has proven my point far better than my original post. That we all slant things in the direction we want, some are just better at it than others.And that one group whining about another group slanting facts to suit their purpose is really what we all do, so just STFU.
And they used to die of all kinds of nasty things before they got to the age of 35. Infant mortality was through the roof, most people were illiterate, and the masses rarly traveld more than 100 miles from where they were born.
Ahhhh...the good ole days when times were simpler and dental hygiene was unknown.
I agree with you. People can just raise their own food so we don't need trucks too. I'm sure those starving kids in Africa would understand when we can no longer send them food and medicine any longer.
Damn environmentalists....
Yes I am
.. I get it. You think that's a bad thing.
Oh
Wow ... I got trolled. First one ever after several years as a Slashdot reader.
I guess this is what happens when you post facts that oppose the views of the moderator. Troll it down so no one reads it.
He must be an environmentalist too.
Maybe your parents need to move. My fiance's property taxes went down last year by about $250.
- Clean Energy: Forge environmentally and economically sustainable solutions with renewable energy
- Clean Vehicles: Reduce the adverse impacts of cars, SUVs, trucks, and buses
- Climate Change: Promote solutions that slow global warming and reduce its impacts
- Food and Environment: Support the responsible use of biotechnology and antibiotics in agriculture
- Global Environment: Promote scientifically sound solutions to the major problems of global environmental change
- Global Security: Work toward a world free of nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction
- Habitats and Biodiversity: Help to protect forests, control invasive species, and conserve the diversity of life
- Nuclear Power Safety: Strengthen monitoring of nuclear plants and their regulators
Where is the objectivity here?? You could easily post this same info on the Sierra Club website and no one would give it a second look because of their reputation. Throw a name like 'Union of Concerned Scientists' at it though, and it must be valid. I can't find one thing in this list that anyone would disagree with.The methods for accomplishing those goals are another matter. This group has simply stated that anyone who disagrees with our methods is wrong and must be removed from office. I think that is scarier that George W. The last thing we need is a bunch of like-minded environmentalists in power. We will be wipping our butts on
Yawn
Thank you!!! I get so damn sick and tired of hearing the Democrap candidates espouse 'kill the tax cuts!!'. Well, I don't make 6 figures (high 5 figures though), but that tax cut last year gave me $100 more a month to spend on computer games.
/.ed, I guess I'll have to wait until later to read more than just Wired's summary. Maybe they need fewer scientists in their IT department and some with real world experience.....
Let's put this in perspective, I paid $17,000 last year in federal income tax alone. All by myself. Even a 1% tax cut is $170 in my pocket, or about 15 bucks a month.
So, who is the best a distorting facts, Republicans or Democrats? Environmentalists or Business? Health officials or cigarette manufacturers? Everyone does it to suit their goals. Scientists themselves have done it for years. Their are numerous examples of the scientific community themselves fighting over theories in their attempt to prove that their's is the best.
Would anyone want a pure scientist setting public policy? There has to be a balance between what is theoritical and reality. If we only did what was best for the environment, we wouldn't have cars or toilet paper.
And since the paper is
Normally, I would agree with your comment. I want to load W2K or XP so that I can use MS Money and a few other MS specific applications. No big deal, I can use either OS for whatever is needed.
But Linux loaded up just fine the first time and I have spent over 8 hours trying to get either W2K or XP to load. W2K freezes so bad that even the caps lock key won't work, and XP keeps BSODing on me and telling me that I have bad memory, which is odd since Linux works just fine.
Now, to be fair, my guess is that I have the wrong memory chips. Both Kingston and Crucial suggest other chips than what MWave shipped with the board. I think the CL value, which is 3, should be 2.5 and this is what is causing the problem.
But I would love to know why Linux worked just fine yet XP and W2K have such problems. (I say worked because I took it off just in case it was part of the problem somehow, you know the old bit about removing anything but just what you need to solve a proble.)
Oh .. that link was just too funny.
Some people just have way too much time on their hands. (This from a guy who spent 6 hours last night building a new computer from scratch [have to get those cables just right you know], and will probably spend another 6 tonight trying to get WinBloze to load.)
I am a die-hard analog watch fan. Digital watch faces just look cheap to me, no matter how expensive they are.
Analog doesn't also mean not digital either. My Seiko has an analog face, but with digital internals. It has an alarm, chronometer, stop watch, and timer. It uses stepping motors to control the hands.
So, is this a digalog watch?? Or is it anagital?
Ick....
The frames I had only showed what appeard to be a gold colored pasty on a limp breast. This is much, much worse and further proves the need for Janet to keep her clothes on.
From what I could tell she bounced enough on her own without a motor. On second though, maybe if the motor spun fast enough she could keep the nipples from pointing towards the ground!
When it is all said and done, all this did was prove once again why we should limit nudity, most people look much better with their clothes on, include Janet. Seeing her boob was quite a letdown, I'm not surprised that the SuperBowl ratings sagged a bit.
Ms. Jackson needs some support, and I don't mean from her family. One would think that they could implant some convictions to prevent this sort of droopy moral character in the future. We need more pert personalities to provide better role models for our country.
I have worked with a few folks from India in my current position, and found that it is very important to draw them out and get their ideas. Initially, my suggestions were taken as direction and followed to the letter. While this is nice for my ego, it was not preferred. It is very rare that one person's idea is the best solution and is important to solicite other's opinions. On the other hand, it was nice to not have to argue about every little nit-picky thing too.
An interesting aspect that came out of this was the changes in the India nationals. The longer they were here, the more outspoken they become, and the better the teams began to operate. As it became apparent that their input was welcome, the suggestions stayed suggestions and when conflicting priorities came up, they were discussed and comprises were worked out. It became a much healthier environment, less re-work was done, and project items were done in better sequence.
I often wondered what difficulties arose when they finally went back to India. Did their new American-learned personality changes create problems, or were they quicly un-learned?
I thought the same thing about water jets when I read the article. Many, many,years ago,I worked in a factory that made corrugated boxes (not cardboard boxes, as I was corrected many times the first month or so. A cereal box is a cardboard box.) The corrugated boxes are made from two or more sheets of paper with one all wavey, or corrugated. (And for those wondering, most boxes are made from 3, 5, or 7 sheets, with every other one being corrugated. However, some boxes had the corrugation exposed on the inside.)
They use a huge machine called a corrugator that takes rolls of paper and forms them into the blanks later used to make the boxes. Since the rolls of paper are 8ft high or so, they have to run several jobs at one time to reduce waste. A wheeled slicer was used to cut the blanks parallel to the paper path. I forget how they were cut across.
I remember the 'wtf' feeling I had when I was told they were going to replace the slicers with water jets. I couldn't believe they could cut paper with water without it getting wet and had to see this. After I witnessed this spectacle myself and saw the dry paper, I was told the pressure is so high that the water molecules are not in contact with the paper long enough to be absorbed. Whether that was true or not was irrelavant, the paper was still dry.
While this reduced the cost of sharpening the slicers, it wasn't free -- there were electricity and replacement nozzles to pay for. I don't remember how cost effective it was. This is probably true of laser slicers. The cost of generating the laser beam v/s the waste and maintenance of more mechanical means will determine what applications this is suitable for.
Thanks for proving my point. You do choose to live there, and have two HIGH car payments (I have never paid over $200/month for a car until this year -- it's called THE USED CAR MARKET). I chose to live in Maine in a mobile home for many years so I could live within my means and did quite well raising two kids (I'm divorced now). When I was laid off from a COBOL job 6 years ago, it took exactly 10 days for me to find another job. And I have never been unemployed in my 20+ years of adult life other than that one time, so the jobs must be out there somewhere. And I have always been paid less than other people I work with, so I know I'm not the best.
...
Hmmm... $950 a month for a 2 bedroom apartment in Phoenix, in the nice part of town, $65 for electricity, $25 for water, $500 for a car (it is a very nice car!!!), $100 for gas, $140 for cable (yes, I have everything). Car insurance - $100/month
So, take control of your live and accept the decisions YOU have made.
BTW -- I'm a conservative prick who believes government needs to stay out of both people and business, and let the capitalistic system work and evolve. It has taken me 20 years to finally be in the upper salary bands, and I still am in 5 digits. Let's see my finances
So, that's about $1880/month, or a little over $22.5K/year. Software people here make between $50K and $80K/year. So, using a 50K job using the numbers off my tax returns, 19% Fed, 8% SSN, 3% state, ins = $32K/year. I've got no mainteance on the house, my renters ins. is $150/year, umm....nothing else I can think of. So, $32K - 22.5K = $9.5K, or $790/month, almost $200 a week.
Moving 300 miles can almost double your disposable income dude, even if you take a 25% cut in pay!!!!
Ahhh...finally, what it all boils down to, choices and balance.
... helping the company make as much money as possible. Some only look to the short term, some to the long term. Face it, a company that paid its employees high wages but couldn't make a profit wouldn't stay in business. It would not be responsible of them to not look at offshore development. They company execs have to strike a balance between getting work done cheaply, and getting cheap work.
Company execs are free to pay low wages and treat their employees like trash, and maybe even make big bucks in the process. They are also free to treat their employees well and maybe make big bucks in the process.
That's what makes this country so great, choices. Or freedom, depending on what label you want to use. Those choices are constantly in a state of flux. Today I buy Chevy trucks, tomorrow I have a bad experience, and the next day I buy Ford.
I have worked for good CEOs/GMs and bad ones. They all say they have an 'open door policy', but some only mean if you agree with them,and some mean it (yes, they do exist.)
The one common thread is the good ones run good companies you want to work at, no matter what the salary (within reason of course) and the bad run companies that make you keep your resume updated.
They are all tasked with one goal
My prediction is that off shore development will take the same route as outsourcing did, looks great, less filling. Already, wages in India are starting to rise as competition heats up. I have heard numerous war stories, like one line code changes taking 2 people 9 days to do and code being sent back numerous times to fix simple bugs.
Those jobs will start to be pulled back in a few years, keep your skills honed but your options open. And get your finances in order, because the salaries will not be there except for the highly skilled.
Which means they have the freedom to choose their employees....to some degree anyway.
You all ran your salaries up way to far, lived outside your means, and suddenly, but bubble burst.
Look at history, the unions did the same thing. They started raising their salaries to a 'livable wage', then when companies went elsewhere to get the labor cheaper, they all started to whine to.
I knew far too many programmers that wanted to command +60K salaries that weren't worth crap. But because companies needed them, and didn't have a cheaper source, they had to pay it. Now, they have an alternative and are using it. Well boo hoo, don't cry in your lite beer too much.
It may surprise you, but Bill Gates and all the other CEOs didn't go into business to give you jobs. They went into business to make money. Get over yourselves, and if you want to be rich, do the same thing. Otherwise, settle for what other people are willing to pay, not what you think you are worth.
Anyone who runs Linux in a mainframe to run webservers is an idiot. Except for some very specific and isolated applications that I could not even dream of right now, but I'm sure someone could cost justify.
... let's see them take the same study and use the same servers that ran M$ and load them up with Linux (or any other *nix they want) and see the results.
.. I almost forgot. IDC already said that in the other Windows 2000 Versus Linux in Enterprise Computing document.
.. nothing more to see here...
Intel/Sun/Apple/HP boxes are a hell of a lot cheaper and provide more CPU, memory, and network horsepower per buck.
Now
And make sure they include the cost of applying patches.
Oh
Sorry
Risk analysis applications that process 10 million complex transactions in a few hours and produce hundreds of megs of output.
A large server may not be dedicated to just one database. There is a significant cost savings in purchasing a single high end system for several databases rather than splitting them over several smaller systems. With the partitioning technology available from Sun, you can start with a smallish (15 CPU) server and grow up as is needed. Using smaller servers to start with is cheaper, but the cost of swapping them out is expensive if the database requires more horsepower than the system can deliver. (Sun isn't the only one to support hardware/software partitioning, I'm just using it as an example.)
It is always a juggling act to find the appropriate cost/performance mix that provides both long term and short term advantages. Purchasing systems that are not expandable is often cheaper in the short term. Purchasing expandable systems is often cheaper in the long run, but the risk is the application may not grow enough to realize the savings before the technology becomes obsolete.
I hate estimating hardware requirements these days...
Your statement about a 'truly scaleable datacenter' does not make sense. You say you've never seen one, but then you mention that Linux has delivered scalabilty beneifts Sun could never imagine. Please make up your mind which it is.
Myself, I have seen scalability. I've have seen applications start out on 2cpu $20K database servers and migrate to E15-type servers without any code change. I'm not saying Linux (or AIX) cannot do this, but this is scalability that Sun does provide at a competitive price.
Having priced the cost of multi-CPU server-quality x86 platforms, there is very little cost benefit to going there. Multi-CPU server quality x86 boxes cost almost as much as the same Sun boxes.
As for Java, since you did not mention any alternative, I cannot provide any response. However, since the application servers and web server provide enough bandwidth, there is no reason to switch to anything else. I am not ready to jump on the 'let's switch everything to Linux' bandwagon yet, but I am on the 'let's review it as we deploy new products or grow existing ones.'
I am sure Linux will migrate into our datacenter, and eventually support production applications. It just doesn't make any sense to replace what works and is proven with something else unless there is a clear cost advantage.
I don't have much AIX experience, but there is one reason why I suggested Sun for our data center servers, binary scalability. Sun servers scale from 1U/1CPU lower cost servers (5K) and developer stations to clusters of over 300 CPU servers, all with full binary compatiblity. I have yet to not be able to take software off a 1CPU low-end sun box and not be able to run it on the top-of-the-line servers without any recompiling.
This provides the capability to develop on low-end boxes without the headaches associated with recompiling on production servers and shortens our development cycle.
I will admit though, with most of the development moving into the Java world, maybe this doesn't make as much sense. However, we have still found it useful to do some of the development work on smaller Sun boxes for performance benchmarking and forcasting performance when something goes into production.
I've stayed away from IBM because of past bad experiences, providing quotes that are not complete solutions resulting in server cost overruns or software that is not yet written. (They once replied to a quote for a automated-failover system, and provided an neat OS2 solution. When pressed on how the failover worked, they finally admitted that once we ordered the system, they would write it.)
If IBM costs have come down, and their ability to fully respond to quotes has improved, maybe they are worth another look. But if not, Sun is still my server of choice for critical production systems.
If this is true, what's all the hubbub, bub?? I have never used this function of my Adaptec software, and have no desire to. I prefer to build a list of files, and burn my CDs once.
While the arguments about taking too long to sue for infrignment have merit, I think the actual impact to most users will be minimal.
Why that is so difficult (as the patent claims) I don't know. Probably a PEBKAC issue.....
That's like reading MSN for unbiased news about M$....