I've read that every human culture with the exception of one has it's own intoxicants. All but the Inuit (what are you gonna do, ferment whale blubber?) have found some form of mind alternation. Extending this to the rest of the animal kingdom, it's not surprising to me that other species are just as keen to how much fun booze or drugs can be.
Wonder if the Inuit just made themselves dizzy like kids do to alter their consciousness. I do note that a type of Icelandic moss contains a cannabinoid precursor (olivitol?) - don't know if it has any effects though.
Humans ARE mentally superior to all other animals. Even those humans who deny it, as the gap is pretty freaking wide.
Some, maybe, to really dumb animals. Maybe. I'm especially doubtful when measuring the output of those (humans) that like to associate themselves with the word "superior"
Ever seen a house-trained dog that wants "out" for the toilet and doesn't get it? I missed the signs a couple of times - my dog pissed on the back door mat - and then comes and gives me the "ashamed" look (that's the look she gives me when she misses a rabbit), followed by the low whine and the tugging on the fingers with her teeth to make me follow her and see what the problem is. She's never been punished, even verbally - so I doubt it's a fear of punishment. Sure it's my interpretation.
I think, therefore I am - I cannot, though, rule out the possibility that my dog is not self-conscious, though probably not in the same way as I
She gets outside when (on rare occasions) cannabis is being smoked, one because she doesn't put in, two because she doesn't have a choice about inhaling, and three because she acts like a stoned human - gets up, pauses, looks back, looks forward, looks sheepish and then wanders back to her basket (what was I doing?) - and becoming very vocal (not barking, vocalizing). The vocalizing is something she does whenever she is in company with conversation - and acts just like a child who feels excluded. Close enough to a form of consciousness for me
Whether you are right or wrong about the meaning of the word - many animals exhibit a form of self-awareness (and a knowledge of time). Even human consciousness is just a theory with no more "provable" substance than a drug experience
I'm not sure all "humans" have the same degree of consciousness either - so maybe it's not as clear cut as conscious, or, not conscious.
And horses (farmers call it "laugh chaff") and cannabis plants don't go together - the horses will eat your plants, and just like possums, wallabies, kangaroos, cattle, sheep, chooks, cockatoos, and rabbits - once they've had a nibble fences won't stop them.
Catnip is interesting - some cats love it, but not all. The weird thing is it seems to make cats forget where they found it - I used to grow some in a garden of a house I shared with a cat lover. Everytime I went into the garden they'd follow through the gate and hunt for the catnip. They'd look everywhere until they found it - which was a little weird given it only grew in one pot, and that pot was never moved. Even I could use my nose to find it - but they had to investigate every carrot, lettuce, and tomato plant to work out which was the catnip. They didn't always take the same route whilst looking for it either. Strange - maybe that's part of the effect of catnip.
The real question in my mind, is not whether animals take drugs (they do), or why humans take them, but how plants (and fungi) determined that producing drugs would get the drug users to pay attention to them.
It is sad to see it posted. I see nothing but hear-say and conjecture.
Accompanied by the smell of shit? Hint: it's because you've got your head up your arse.
Nothing in it is actual scientific evidence of these happenings except vague references.
I question what this articles intention is except to perhaps attempt to make a case for drugs, which almost seems like a drug addicts logical reasoning after being blitzed on weed and watching a "National Geographic" documentary on something.
What is truly sad is a/clowns like yourself - who abuse the ability to read by not researching, and disregard anything that stands in the way of their deep emotional investment in stupid beliefs
Kind of like those that persist with the belief that nature is pure and humans are sinners - we are all animals, just some more "civilized" than others. Next week - perverts insist not all animals are monogamous and heterosexual, and murderers claim animals sometimes kill more than they eat.
Of course (recreational) drugs are just a crutch for those that can't cope with reality... and spouting patently, and demonstrably, bullshit opinions like yours isn't avoiding reality?
Or is this a "god" thing - the same one that made the drugs and the capacity to be affected by them?
It's actually a very old truth. Try a little research - not just reindeer either.
Note: there are many plants (and fungi) containing drugs - and a few cultures that credit animals with discovering drugs (coffee, cocaine, mushrooms) - but just because animals/birds get high on them doesn't mean it's a good idea for humans. Fly agaric is about as fun a recreational drug as Datura. As a general rule - if the side effects are comparatively minimal - the drug is popular, and illegal. Psilocibin bearing mushrooms for example are illegal in place where Fly Agaric is not.
In defense of reindeer - this time of year they are Christmas lunch (I'm looking at you Linus). So you can hardly blame them for wanting to escape reality for a little while.
Drugs work because of, um, receptors. Given that most animals (not insects) have endocannabinoid receptors next we'll be surprised that animals like pot.
Slow news week - and, where's the usual filler about how Santa visits all the chimneys?
Atwood's opinion is about as intelligent as saying "You can't be a good architect if you don't draw fast." Typing is an essential part of the process of being a software engineer, but typing speed is important only to the most brainless parts of the job -- parts that are likely either done by code monkeys or while the engineer is mentally processing the rest of the design.
Typing is writing, programming is writing. Whether you are typing pseudocode on the fly (because you are practiced), actual code, or documentation, accuracy in translating thoughts into words is important.
I consider learning to touch type almost as useful as learning to speed-read. They're both things that a programmer does a lot of, and any task the is often repeated bears examining for improvements. Unless of course, you don't have deadlines.
However - planning and testing are more important (IMO) than execution, and accuracy beats output any day. I'm not sure how you'd weight the importance of those things - but 5 words a minute with 100% accuracy is better than 40 words a minute with 90% accuracy. It can't be measured just in terms of output, and probably varies between individual programmers but... when you finally have the idea in your head as to how you are going to deal with the problem, accurate touch-typing (typing fast ain't the same thing) enables you to write what you think without being distracted hunting for keys - and hampered by the fact that you cannot hunt and peck as fast as you think. Of course that all rests on the premise that we "think" at roughly the same speed as we talk.
When I write code I tend to do so in long sessions - firstly walking or just idling while I think about the task and try and fit the entirety in my head - then (don't interrupt me) I want to "get it down". Usually as pseudocode, then triple space and replace the pseudocode with actual code (self-documenting). It's when I want to write the pseudocode that the touch-typing is most useful - actual code writing speed doesn't really matter because I can interrupt that, go away on holidays, come back, and still the plan is obvious in the pseudocode.
I know a number of good programmers who cannot touch-type - I don't have any opinions on whether they produce more, of less, useful code than I. What is consistent though - is that they all produce programs that are a pain in the arse to maintain because only they can work out what the hell the program is doing - it's never self-documenting, and rarely has sufficient, or useful, comments.
Note: this post took maybe 5 minutes to post - it will have errors (I'm not even going to check), I have been sucking down the Solstice spirit, and there are people talking to me while I type this - try that using hunt and peck
yes, instead you have signatures, which are just as laughable.
And recorded right on the back of the card, even.
Worse - a little solvent, a quick rub, a re-write, and the signature-based authentication system works in favour of the thief. Another version of security through obscurity (and insanity).
The alternatives for small farmers is to buy land closer to cities and specialize in organic or other niche varieties or move more heavily into livestock where there is a higher margin, etc.
I'm going to have to take exception to the higher margin for livestock bit - anywhere near cities(?). For your own sake don't spout the criminally naive bullshit near a farmer. How's your math? Price just 100 acres within 50 kilometres of a significant market, with arable land, and water (it's called prime yuppie real estate) and the only livestock that'll allow you to break even (ever) can't be eaten (carpetbag steak?). Sure they exist - they're called "Pitt St" farmers - it's negative gearing which only works if you have a very large non-farming income to write the tax off against.
What you propose sounds good to most people, and may even be possible in the US and Europe. In Australia almost all residential developments are on arable land, and the vast majority of land is not arable. For 200 years the model has been - settle (build housing and industry) an area because it's got water, coastal access and arable land - expand and extend the settled area. Every time the city/town is expanded the land prices rise (and rates are increased) pushing up the price of farming. So most of the farming takes place in areas a long way from the consumers of the produced goods - with each move increasing the reliance on petroleum products (transport, planting, harvesting, spraying etc), poorer (lower yielding) soil, and more unreliable irrigation.
This has resulted in the rise of "super-farms" - which have an increase need for petroleum fuels (transport, distribution. refrigeration, spraying, Monsanto, packaging) which drives down margins further stressing smaller farms. Whether the farm is small, large, or super - the bottom line is that food quality goes down.
Yes, there is a "boutique" market for high-priced commodities (salad greens, herbs, truffles etc) that are viable closer to cities - where the land and the water are much more expensive. But - most of the demand is for organic product - which is damn near impossible to produce on less than pristine soil. The majority of the market for those top price products is overseas.
Any Monsanto crops nearby? If there is you can kiss your market goodbye - you will either lose your Organic accreditation, or Mon-spit-santo lawyers will drive you out of business.
Livestock? Are you joking? Do you mean those "stations" that cover huge areas and are owned by large corporations? Where do you think Saudi Arabia gets it's sheep?
The (arable) land closest to cities is the best place for food production - it is also the most expensive land due to demand from the wealthy for their country retreat/self sufficiency fantasies
You want healthy food? By locally produced food - it keeps the producers and retailers honest about the product, and is good for your local economy. Grow your own? - I suggest you check your soil first if you live anywhere near a built up area - chances are that it was once industrial or used for livestock (DDT lasts a lo-ong time)
I believe it's time (at least in Australia) to preserve all arable land for food production - and give farmers greater water rights. Instead of sending most of the water to housing where the occupants drink bottled water and will not recycle water.
I know these are not popular views. But we all need to eat, it may appear cheaper to import from China (or wherever) but transport costs are unlikely to go down, and, the countries it's cheaper to import from will eventually have to pay more for the labour components of the production and transport
In short - grow the things that a easy to grow yourself and that don't keep very well (tomatoes, herbs, greens), give farmers priority with water and land, and buy locally wherever possible (local inorganic is cleaner than organic from overseas
Fresh, healthy food doesn't taste like crap and (obviously) isn't preserver - so eliminating most of the corn syrup/sugar/"healthy fats"/salt bullshit.
Actually I know exactly what you all do. You whine and pule and cry like you have a hard job, and you bitch and moan and get basic concepts incorrect and regurgitate things we programmers invented that you ill understand.
Go unclog the toilet.
On behalf of all admins - please accept my apologies.
Your.net programming skills are awesome - you what? wrote a program that performs mathematical equations? only how many megabytes? you are awesome!
Not only do I love the idea of a digital calculator - I also admire your cubicle art. Have you ever considered painting in a colour other than brown?
I don't get it. I read stories like yours all the time. People complaining about activation and DRM.
I've never had a single issue with DRM or activation of any product. Ever. And i've dealt with hundreds of users needing products activated across dozens of hardware platforms. I've *heard* lots of stories, but never actually seen any of them personally.
Makes you wonder...
Makes me wonder too.... if you only deal with single users, on single machines, in take your time environments. Try that with Adobe multi-license, SAP, Oracle, Quickbooks, MYOB, etc, etc, et-fucking-cetera (sigh).in mission-critical government environments.
But then you did say "hundreds" - which is something I (and many other admins) deal with before my morning coffee. In mitigation - perhaps you've had the luxury of having only one version of a particular piece of DRMed software installed at a time
Just don't get me started on dongles for six figure must-have hardware that isn't supported (and won't be) on the version of OS forced on me by non-IT "decision" makers.
I just wish more operating systems had not just an install mechanism (msiexec, rpm), but an update mechanism from repos (yum, macports). This would make life a lot easier, especially if it can be configured from custom repositories so enterprises can have their own mirrors.
You missed one....deb
And, I agree with all except #15 - that's what privilege escalation is for.
Clearly you have reversed the meaning of intelligence
See wikipedia for a list of definitions - all of which can be summarized as a "measure of understanding and ability to adapt. Stupid and/or lazy are *not* forms of intelligence.
Somewhere between glancing at the subject, and writing the subject headline, the Solstice drinkypoos kicked in. And a comment made by someone called Nick, on a blog written by someone called Tim (both "developers") became the official position of the company that employs them?
I agree with the(ir) sentiments, but not the interpretation it's turned into. Bah humbug
As to Google becoming a carrier... pretty likely I'd guess. Verizon'll give the the spectrum they need (in the US). Add VoIP to that and the other carriers have serious competition. Dig a little through Google's acquisitions over the last few years and maybe, just maybe, dark fibre will extend that network.
Good gods, how did *that* get modded "Informative"? (Yah, yah, pretend I'm new here.)
POTS calls, by definition, start on a line with Plain Old Telephone Service. 48 volts, analog, more or less the same thing that's been in use for roughly a century now.
Now, once you get to the CO, you're almost certainly going to go digital. That digital channel is still commonly pure TDM and circuit-switched (especially if you don't leave the exchange). You have a 64 Kbit/sec timeslice dedicated to your call all the way. Or it may go into an ATM network ("A technology that lets telephone companies turn your WAN problems into something they can tariff") and be cell-switched. Or, yes, it may go into a packet-switched IP network. Maybe even the Internet, if you're using a cheap LD carrier.
But "all"?? No. Not by a long shot.
Even if your call *does* go VoIP, you may still never leave the domain of the PSTN, where things like QoS can be enforced end-to-end. The Internet's generally a "unreliable, best effort" service. Different operators do different things, and all you can do is plug in somewhere and hope for the best. A telco deploying VoIP as a backhaul internally is a very different beast.
If you're describing the US carriers (all of them) then you may be right. I wouldn't know - never worked for them.
In Australia - where there is only one copper carrier (Telstra) the line voltage is significantly higher, the Nortel cards do VOIP, demux is VOIP, and even within.50 cal range of the National Parliament mobile is unreliable. I have a "standard" POTS on the farm (capital city) - which is analogue measuring 92VDC (this morning), but between my place and the Civic exchange it most certainly is VOIP (for 200 metres). Reliable? Only when it hasn't been raining recently when the loss to earth causes the calls to drop. SIP isn't an option. Mobile is more reliable than the landline but on any day between 4pm and 8pm all callers will be told my phone is switched off (bullshit, 3 different phones, three different carriers?) and their calls go straight to voicemail.
In last years bushfires I was only able to call the affected areas with Skype. In the recent floods all the landlines in the valley were out (0 VDC on POTs). My power was off (batteries work fine though) so I'm glad I had Skype then.
Just wish some of the other VOIP choices were more popular with Windoof users *and* had a GNU/Linux client
Disclaimers: I was a Telstra Complex Data tester - I don't get my info from Whirlpool - Linux is the kernel on my laptop, Hurd isn't Linux
Skpye-to-skype calls are either 3 cents/minute or $4/month, so I don't know how you can call that "free" unless this is some new definition I'm not aware of?
Sadly, your parents either failed to warn you about the brown acid... or you didn't listen
Ouch! Maybe Skype callout rates are (much) higher in the US.... you are quoting your International call rates right?
Disclaimer: I have no association with Skype - I simply use them for my calls to land/mobile phones and free calls to other computer users. Because it's so commonly installed on all OSs - not because Skype is cheap. Compared to other VOIP solutions (yes, Skype is VOIP) Skype is not cheap.
The outage frustrated and inconvenienced me, mostly because it's uncommon. Unlike the daily afternoon outage of the #@$k@#g! Optus mobile network in my area:-(
and everything to do with shutting down an alternative Music and Movie distribution network.
As has been pointed out many times before - those being pursued and prosecuted (for the most part) took no actual money from the pockets of the studios. Which begs the question - why spend the money chasing them?
Answer: because to try and shutdown attempts by musicans and movie makers to market their product directly to the market would not be allowed.
Invent a reason (illegal downloaders/sharers) that allows teh MAFIIA to shutdown competition.
Actually, piracy is a good term - it refers to an era when pirates were private armies approved by the Crown, and a threat through dilution of power to the "official" armies. Though it would be amusing if the pirates of old (lacking modern digital methods) had pulled alongside Spanish galleons and whipped off sketches of Inca treasure - therefore depriving the Spanish crown their rightful revenue.
Typical Linux user - smug, sarcastic, and, wrong. Linux is the cause of all malware, it's Linux boxes that control the botnets and it's Linux users that claim their system is impervious to attack. Get a life (and a decent OS).
Slashdot Mirror
On further thought - an absence of plants wouldn't mean the Inuit had no access to drugs. Adrenal glands?
I've read that every human culture with the exception of one has it's own intoxicants. All but the Inuit (what are you gonna do, ferment whale blubber?) have found some form of mind alternation. Extending this to the rest of the animal kingdom, it's not surprising to me that other species are just as keen to how much fun booze or drugs can be.
Wonder if the Inuit just made themselves dizzy like kids do to alter their consciousness. I do note that a type of Icelandic moss contains a cannabinoid precursor (olivitol?) - don't know if it has any effects though.
In fact alcohol is one of the rare bad drugs.
In fact alcohol is not a drug.
Humans ARE mentally superior to all other animals. Even those humans who deny it, as the gap is pretty freaking wide.
Some, maybe, to really dumb animals. Maybe. I'm especially doubtful when measuring the output of those (humans) that like to associate themselves with the word "superior"
I think (hope) that he is confusing "consciousness" with "conscientiousness"
That's a much lower amount of ignorance than someone who actually assumes animals aren't conscious.
I think he ate his dogs stash - the dictionary he's currently using is just a hallucination.
I think, therefore I am - I cannot, though, rule out the possibility that my dog is not self-conscious, though probably not in the same way as I
She gets outside when (on rare occasions) cannabis is being smoked, one because she doesn't put in, two because she doesn't have a choice about inhaling, and three because she acts like a stoned human - gets up, pauses, looks back, looks forward, looks sheepish and then wanders back to her basket (what was I doing?) - and becoming very vocal (not barking, vocalizing). The vocalizing is something she does whenever she is in company with conversation - and acts just like a child who feels excluded. Close enough to a form of consciousness for me
Whether you are right or wrong about the meaning of the word - many animals exhibit a form of self-awareness (and a knowledge of time). Even human consciousness is just a theory with no more "provable" substance than a drug experience
I'm not sure all "humans" have the same degree of consciousness either - so maybe it's not as clear cut as conscious, or, not conscious.
And horses (farmers call it "laugh chaff") and cannabis plants don't go together - the horses will eat your plants, and just like possums, wallabies, kangaroos, cattle, sheep, chooks, cockatoos, and rabbits - once they've had a nibble fences won't stop them.
Catnip is interesting - some cats love it, but not all. The weird thing is it seems to make cats forget where they found it - I used to grow some in a garden of a house I shared with a cat lover. Everytime I went into the garden they'd follow through the gate and hunt for the catnip. They'd look everywhere until they found it - which was a little weird given it only grew in one pot, and that pot was never moved. Even I could use my nose to find it - but they had to investigate every carrot, lettuce, and tomato plant to work out which was the catnip. They didn't always take the same route whilst looking for it either. Strange - maybe that's part of the effect of catnip.
The real question in my mind, is not whether animals take drugs (they do), or why humans take them, but how plants (and fungi) determined that producing drugs would get the drug users to pay attention to them.
It is sad to see it posted. I see nothing but hear-say and conjecture.
Accompanied by the smell of shit? Hint: it's because you've got your head up your arse.
Nothing in it is actual scientific evidence of these happenings except vague references. I question what this articles intention is except to perhaps attempt to make a case for drugs, which almost seems like a drug addicts logical reasoning after being blitzed on weed and watching a "National Geographic" documentary on something.
What is truly sad is a/clowns like yourself - who abuse the ability to read by not researching, and disregard anything that stands in the way of their deep emotional investment in stupid beliefs
Kind of like those that persist with the belief that nature is pure and humans are sinners - we are all animals, just some more "civilized" than others. Next week - perverts insist not all animals are monogamous and heterosexual, and murderers claim animals sometimes kill more than they eat.
Of course (recreational) drugs are just a crutch for those that can't cope with reality... and spouting patently, and demonstrably, bullshit opinions like yours isn't avoiding reality?
Or is this a "god" thing - the same one that made the drugs and the capacity to be affected by them?
Note: there are many plants (and fungi) containing drugs - and a few cultures that credit animals with discovering drugs (coffee, cocaine, mushrooms) - but just because animals/birds get high on them doesn't mean it's a good idea for humans. Fly agaric is about as fun a recreational drug as Datura. As a general rule - if the side effects are comparatively minimal - the drug is popular, and illegal. Psilocibin bearing mushrooms for example are illegal in place where Fly Agaric is not.
BZZT. Nothing stupider than a prescriptivist has ever been found, despite ongoing studies in rock slime.
That's only because we're actively avoiding you - not because we're looking, and can't
In defense of reindeer - this time of year they are Christmas lunch (I'm looking at you Linus). So you can hardly blame them for wanting to escape reality for a little while.
Slow news week - and, where's the usual filler about how Santa visits all the chimneys?
Atwood's opinion is about as intelligent as saying "You can't be a good architect if you don't draw fast." Typing is an essential part of the process of being a software engineer, but typing speed is important only to the most brainless parts of the job -- parts that are likely either done by code monkeys or while the engineer is mentally processing the rest of the design.
Typing is writing, programming is writing. Whether you are typing pseudocode on the fly (because you are practiced), actual code, or documentation, accuracy in translating thoughts into words is important.
I consider learning to touch type almost as useful as learning to speed-read. They're both things that a programmer does a lot of, and any task the is often repeated bears examining for improvements. Unless of course, you don't have deadlines.
However - planning and testing are more important (IMO) than execution, and accuracy beats output any day. I'm not sure how you'd weight the importance of those things - but 5 words a minute with 100% accuracy is better than 40 words a minute with 90% accuracy. It can't be measured just in terms of output, and probably varies between individual programmers but... when you finally have the idea in your head as to how you are going to deal with the problem, accurate touch-typing (typing fast ain't the same thing) enables you to write what you think without being distracted hunting for keys - and hampered by the fact that you cannot hunt and peck as fast as you think. Of course that all rests on the premise that we "think" at roughly the same speed as we talk.
When I write code I tend to do so in long sessions - firstly walking or just idling while I think about the task and try and fit the entirety in my head - then (don't interrupt me) I want to "get it down". Usually as pseudocode, then triple space and replace the pseudocode with actual code (self-documenting). It's when I want to write the pseudocode that the touch-typing is most useful - actual code writing speed doesn't really matter because I can interrupt that, go away on holidays, come back, and still the plan is obvious in the pseudocode.
I know a number of good programmers who cannot touch-type - I don't have any opinions on whether they produce more, of less, useful code than I. What is consistent though - is that they all produce programs that are a pain in the arse to maintain because only they can work out what the hell the program is doing - it's never self-documenting, and rarely has sufficient, or useful, comments.
Note: this post took maybe 5 minutes to post - it will have errors (I'm not even going to check), I have been sucking down the Solstice spirit, and there are people talking to me while I type this - try that using hunt and peck
"Security by obscurity" is a perfectly valid technique. It just shouldn't be used alone.
Perhaps (and so is eye-gouging). Certainly it makes denial of insecurity easier.
yes, instead you have signatures, which are just as laughable.
And recorded right on the back of the card, even.
Worse - a little solvent, a quick rub, a re-write, and the signature-based authentication system works in favour of the thief. Another version of security through obscurity (and insanity).
The alternatives for small farmers is to buy land closer to cities and specialize in organic or other niche varieties or move more heavily into livestock where there is a higher margin, etc.
I'm going to have to take exception to the higher margin for livestock bit - anywhere near cities(?). For your own sake don't spout the criminally naive bullshit near a farmer. How's your math? Price just 100 acres within 50 kilometres of a significant market, with arable land, and water (it's called prime yuppie real estate) and the only livestock that'll allow you to break even (ever) can't be eaten (carpetbag steak?). Sure they exist - they're called "Pitt St" farmers - it's negative gearing which only works if you have a very large non-farming income to write the tax off against.
What you propose sounds good to most people, and may even be possible in the US and Europe. In Australia almost all residential developments are on arable land, and the vast majority of land is not arable. For 200 years the model has been - settle (build housing and industry) an area because it's got water, coastal access and arable land - expand and extend the settled area. Every time the city/town is expanded the land prices rise (and rates are increased) pushing up the price of farming. So most of the farming takes place in areas a long way from the consumers of the produced goods - with each move increasing the reliance on petroleum products (transport, planting, harvesting, spraying etc), poorer (lower yielding) soil, and more unreliable irrigation.
This has resulted in the rise of "super-farms" - which have an increase need for petroleum fuels (transport, distribution. refrigeration, spraying, Monsanto, packaging) which drives down margins further stressing smaller farms. Whether the farm is small, large, or super - the bottom line is that food quality goes down.
Yes, there is a "boutique" market for high-priced commodities (salad greens, herbs, truffles etc) that are viable closer to cities - where the land and the water are much more expensive. But - most of the demand is for organic product - which is damn near impossible to produce on less than pristine soil. The majority of the market for those top price products is overseas.
Any Monsanto crops nearby? If there is you can kiss your market goodbye - you will either lose your Organic accreditation, or Mon-spit-santo lawyers will drive you out of business.
Livestock? Are you joking? Do you mean those "stations" that cover huge areas and are owned by large corporations? Where do you think Saudi Arabia gets it's sheep?
The (arable) land closest to cities is the best place for food production - it is also the most expensive land due to demand from the wealthy for their country retreat/self sufficiency fantasies
You want healthy food? By locally produced food - it keeps the producers and retailers honest about the product, and is good for your local economy. Grow your own? - I suggest you check your soil first if you live anywhere near a built up area - chances are that it was once industrial or used for livestock (DDT lasts a lo-ong time)
I believe it's time (at least in Australia) to preserve all arable land for food production - and give farmers greater water rights. Instead of sending most of the water to housing where the occupants drink bottled water and will not recycle water.
I know these are not popular views. But we all need to eat, it may appear cheaper to import from China (or wherever) but transport costs are unlikely to go down, and, the countries it's cheaper to import from will eventually have to pay more for the labour components of the production and transport
In short - grow the things that a easy to grow yourself and that don't keep very well (tomatoes, herbs, greens), give farmers priority with water and land, and buy locally wherever possible (local inorganic is cleaner than organic from overseas
Fresh, healthy food doesn't taste like crap and (obviously) isn't preserver - so eliminating most of the corn syrup/sugar/"healthy fats"/salt bullshit.
Actually I know exactly what you all do. You whine and pule and cry like you have a hard job, and you bitch and moan and get basic concepts incorrect and regurgitate things we programmers invented that you ill understand.
Go unclog the toilet.
On behalf of all admins - please accept my apologies.
Your .net programming skills are awesome - you what? wrote a program that performs mathematical equations? only how many megabytes? you are awesome!
Not only do I love the idea of a digital calculator - I also admire your cubicle art. Have you ever considered painting in a colour other than brown?
I don't get it. I read stories like yours all the time. People complaining about activation and DRM.
I've never had a single issue with DRM or activation of any product. Ever. And i've dealt with hundreds of users needing products activated across dozens of hardware platforms. I've *heard* lots of stories, but never actually seen any of them personally.
Makes you wonder...
Makes me wonder too.... if you only deal with single users, on single machines, in take your time environments. Try that with Adobe multi-license, SAP, Oracle, Quickbooks, MYOB, etc, etc, et-fucking-cetera (sigh).in mission-critical government environments.
But then you did say "hundreds" - which is something I (and many other admins) deal with before my morning coffee. In mitigation - perhaps you've had the luxury of having only one version of a particular piece of DRMed software installed at a time
Just don't get me started on dongles for six figure must-have hardware that isn't supported (and won't be) on the version of OS forced on me by non-IT "decision" makers.
I just wish more operating systems had not just an install mechanism (msiexec, rpm), but an update mechanism from repos (yum, macports). This would make life a lot easier, especially if it can be configured from custom repositories so enterprises can have their own mirrors.
You missed one... .deb
And, I agree with all except #15 - that's what privilege escalation is for.
I disagree,
take any person of reasonable intelligence
Clearly you have reversed the meaning of intelligence
See wikipedia for a list of definitions - all of which can be summarized as a "measure of understanding and ability to adapt. Stupid and/or lazy are *not* forms of intelligence.
Feel free to make hay with "reasonable"...
I trust Google more than AT&T by far.
I distrust Google less the AT&T by far.
There, fixed that for you.
Somewhere between glancing at the subject, and writing the subject headline, the Solstice drinkypoos kicked in. And a comment made by someone called Nick, on a blog written by someone called Tim (both "developers") became the official position of the company that employs them?
I agree with the(ir) sentiments, but not the interpretation it's turned into. Bah humbug
As to Google becoming a carrier... pretty likely I'd guess. Verizon'll give the the spectrum they need (in the US). Add VoIP to that and the other carriers have serious competition. Dig a little through Google's acquisitions over the last few years and maybe, just maybe, dark fibre will extend that network.
A very Happy Solstice and a merry New Year to all
Currently all POTS calls *are* VOIP calls!
Good gods, how did *that* get modded "Informative"? (Yah, yah, pretend I'm new here.)
POTS calls, by definition, start on a line with Plain Old Telephone Service. 48 volts, analog, more or less the same thing that's been in use for roughly a century now.
Now, once you get to the CO, you're almost certainly going to go digital. That digital channel is still commonly pure TDM and circuit-switched (especially if you don't leave the exchange). You have a 64 Kbit/sec timeslice dedicated to your call all the way. Or it may go into an ATM network ("A technology that lets telephone companies turn your WAN problems into something they can tariff") and be cell-switched. Or, yes, it may go into a packet-switched IP network. Maybe even the Internet, if you're using a cheap LD carrier.
But "all"?? No. Not by a long shot.
Even if your call *does* go VoIP, you may still never leave the domain of the PSTN, where things like QoS can be enforced end-to-end. The Internet's generally a "unreliable, best effort" service. Different operators do different things, and all you can do is plug in somewhere and hope for the best. A telco deploying VoIP as a backhaul internally is a very different beast.
If you're describing the US carriers (all of them) then you may be right. I wouldn't know - never worked for them.
In Australia - where there is only one copper carrier (Telstra) the line voltage is significantly higher, the Nortel cards do VOIP, demux is VOIP, and even within .50 cal range of the National Parliament mobile is unreliable. I have a "standard" POTS on the farm (capital city) - which is analogue measuring 92VDC (this morning), but between my place and the Civic exchange it most certainly is VOIP (for 200 metres). Reliable? Only when it hasn't been raining recently when the loss to earth causes the calls to drop. SIP isn't an option. Mobile is more reliable than the landline but on any day between 4pm and 8pm all callers will be told my phone is switched off (bullshit, 3 different phones, three different carriers?) and their calls go straight to voicemail.
In last years bushfires I was only able to call the affected areas with Skype. In the recent floods all the landlines in the valley were out (0 VDC on POTs). My power was off (batteries work fine though) so I'm glad I had Skype then.
Just wish some of the other VOIP choices were more popular with Windoof users *and* had a GNU/Linux client
Disclaimers: I was a Telstra Complex Data tester - I don't get my info from Whirlpool - Linux is the kernel on my laptop, Hurd isn't Linux
Skpye-to-skype calls are either 3 cents/minute or $4/month, so I don't know how you can call that "free" unless this is some new definition I'm not aware of?
Sadly, your parents either failed to warn you about the brown acid... or you didn't listen
5 cents a minute
Ouch! Maybe Skype callout rates are (much) higher in the US.... you are quoting your International call rates right?
Disclaimer: I have no association with Skype - I simply use them for my calls to land/mobile phones and free calls to other computer users. Because it's so commonly installed on all OSs - not because Skype is cheap. Compared to other VOIP solutions (yes, Skype is VOIP) Skype is not cheap.
The outage frustrated and inconvenienced me, mostly because it's uncommon. Unlike the daily afternoon outage of the #@$k@#g! Optus mobile network in my area :-(
As has been pointed out many times before - those being pursued and prosecuted (for the most part) took no actual money from the pockets of the studios. Which begs the question - why spend the money chasing them?
Answer: because to try and shutdown attempts by musicans and movie makers to market their product directly to the market would not be allowed.
Invent a reason (illegal downloaders/sharers) that allows teh MAFIIA to shutdown competition.
Actually, piracy is a good term - it refers to an era when pirates were private armies approved by the Crown, and a threat through dilution of power to the "official" armies. Though it would be amusing if the pirates of old (lacking modern digital methods) had pulled alongside Spanish galleons and whipped off sketches of Inca treasure - therefore depriving the Spanish crown their rightful revenue.
Typical Linux user - smug, sarcastic, and, wrong. Linux is the cause of all malware, it's Linux boxes that control the botnets and it's Linux users that claim their system is impervious to attack. Get a life (and a decent OS).