Tivo is a bit different. Embedded machines are very different than PCs. All Linux is really doing in embedded applications is replacing the old, proprietary operating systems. If Tivo had existed 10 years ago, they would have written their own OS to do just what they needed to.
IMO, it's too early to use Linux as a Windows replacement. Servers are fine (its a sysadmin's job to learn new software) and embedded systems are fine (the user never really gets beyond the UI, so the OS is irrelevant) but on the desktop Linux really isn't ready yet.
Device support and application support are the two areas where Linux REALLY lacks. Sure, Linux supports devices, but it's often buggy, requires lots of configuration, and generally isn't available for the newest hardware (drivers are often developed after the product is no longer the "great new thing".) A lot of more obscure hardware is only partially supported, if at all.
Software support is basically an issue of Linux running Windows programs. Free software is great and all, but users don't give a flying fuck about the GNU/FSF ideals. They want a computer that will run the software they already own, because most people are against lerning new software. Until Linux can run Windows software as well as (or better than) Windows, it will never be a major player on the desktop.
I've bought Walmart PCs before. Not because I was particularly impressed with them or anything, but when I'm building a cheap server box (i.e. nothing mission critical or anything) I can buy one from Walmart for about the same price as I can build it with the same hardware, except I don't have to worry about shipping 8 different pieces of hardware from 8 different online vendors. The quality is not phenomenal, but if you just need a web/ftp server, they're very decent machines for a fair price.
You have to use a scope anyway to even SEE the laser on a sniper rifle. If it's mounted on the scope, no, you wouldn't have to move it, but if it's mounted on the barrel (as it is in most movies and most real-world laser sights) yes, the angle would be off. In essence, you're pointing the barrel of the gun higher than your target to compensate for the fall of the bullet. If you want to readjust your laser sight as well as your scope, I guess you could, but I think that's a bit redundant (as the scope already performs the same function as a laser sight anyway.) Any decent long-range rifle scope has a fine-adjustment knob to adjust for distance, but this just seems like too much work for something whose function is already implemented with the scope anyway.
Aah, but someone has to write the porn simulation (or should I say stimulation) software. Someone has to produce the hardware. You see, there will always be something to do in the adult industry. Plus, they ARE the first ones to use new technology. Long distance telephone, VHS and web-video are just some of the examples of where the porn industry has been way ahead of the rest of the market.
This is sort of right. Laser sights are pretty much only useful for close range fighting, where a soldier would need to "shoot from the hip" while maintaining some semblance of accuracy. Snipers often do use IR lasers, however, they don't use them as laser sights. That's what they have a scope for. The lasers are used as rangefinders, so the sniper can tell how far away his target is and adjust his scope accordingly.
The problem with lasers is that they basically say "Look! Here I am!" And with infrared nightvision available for under $1000, it's not a stretch to assume the enemy has it as well. IR scopes are also not as common as you would assume. Their range is limited compared to a conventional scope, plus they're a lot heavier.
One other thing to note is that extreme distance, a laser would be utterly useless for aim on a rifle anyway. Keep in mind the bullet travels on independent axes, both forward (inertia of the bullet) and DOWN (force of gravity.) At longer ranges, the bullet's path is going to look more like an arc than a straight line. Last I checked, lasers don't arc. This brings me back to the rangefinder. If your target is 1500m away (not inconcievable with say, a.50 cal rifle) the arc of the bullet is significant. You have to adjust your scope to compensate for the range (thus why you need to know how far away the target is.)
Another use of IASER sights is to have special forces operatives "paint" targets with the laser for use in bomb targeting systems. This is much more effective than painting the target from the plane itself, as the forces on the ground can keep a better hold on the target and there's minimal risk to them, as they're not actually firing any rounds (and thus the enemy isn't looking for them.)
So, essentially, the detriments of using a laser sight on a sniper rifle far outweigh the benefits. The main problem is that it compromises the snipers location (his best weapon) while not being very effective. Rangefinders are only in use for a fraction of a second, and aren't likely to be spotted. Lasers, even IR lasers, are stupid as sights at long range. The only ops who actually use laser sights do so at very close range (say, less than 20 feet.) At that range, your presence is already compromised, the bullets won't arc, and you can get a split-second faster target acquisition. But on sniper rifles they really have no point.
You must not know much about CS jobs. If you go to any of the top CS schools in the country, you'll see where most of the top of the class goes-- Microsoft. The general consensus among students in the CS dept I attend is that people working for MS are real badasses. And it's the truth. The guys working for MS REALLY know what they're doing.
The bugs arise from the fact that MS products are MASSIVE projects with literally hundreds of developers. It's simply impossible to produce bug-free products that large in a reasonable timeframe. Sure, many people cite Linux as an example. Linux (not just the kernel, XFree, KDE/Gnome and all related things) are buggy too. This doesn't mean that the developers suck, but squashing bugs takes time. Also, MANY hardware drivers in the kernel are incomplete/missing. Sure, they may not be as buggy as Windows, but if they don't do what I need them to, they might as well not exist at all.
I don't mean to bash Linux here or anything, but simply use it as a tool to point out the logistical nightmare of any large software project. Microsoft does a rather good job of keeping the show-stopper bugs away and working to fix the minor ones with service packs. Microsoft's legal and marketing departments may be Evil (tm), but their developers are top-notch.
Yes, and it was good music. Difference is, the people decided who was the next hot star, not the record companies. They became famous because a lot of people went to see them, not because some famous producer spent a few million bucks to assemble a band of pretty boys, spent a few million more to promote them and then sold a ton of copies while drowning out everything else. This was back in the day where you actually had to bring something good to the table to get success.
I wholeheartedly agree. Believe it or not, many Americans hate the crap MTV plays. I live in Austin, Texas, which is pretty much the live music capitol of the USA, so I may be a bit biased, but I listen to local/smaller bands a lot more than I do the crap on the radio. Heck, if you mention Britney Spears or N'Sync in Austin, you're likely to get lynched on the steps of the capitol building.
Big music sucks. It's like fuck-buddy sex: just going through the motions without any feeling whatsoever. I like music that sounds good but still has some sort of feeling. And big music simply doesn't have that.
As a reply to your side note, my Sony STR-DE675 (sold at Best Buy, I'm sure) is more than powerful enough to overload 16 gauge wire. I had to drop to 12 gauge on my center channel (not sold at Best Buy, but not incredibly high-powered speakers) because the amp kept overloading on rather low sound levels. And a DE675 isn't even all that powerful a stereo. But I did buy that 12 gauge from Home Depot, cos I'm sure as shit not paying $10/ft for Monster cable. I see that 8 gauge gold plated crap and kind of wonder what people are thinking when they buy that stuff. Everyone knows it's all going fiber optic anyway.:)
Web development no longer means exclusively writing code. You're going to get a lot better results sticking a designer in front of Dreamweaver than you will sticking a unix-head in front of vi and gimp. And in probably a quarter of the time. The way web development is often done these days is the designers design the page in Dreamweaver and the code-monkeys write the CGI/PHP/ASP in over blocks of code. The days of writing web pages exclusively by hand are pretty much over. HTML isn't really "code" anyway, it's a markup language (and a very limited one at that.) It has more in common with PDF or PostScript than anything else. I think the original poster's problem was that she was recieving the same attitude from Sun as from you.
The "creative types" at tech companies usually have a high turnover rate because they don't mesh with the rest of the company. This seems to me to come from a difference in the idea of what a computer is. To a "creative" person, a computer is just a tool, but it has to be the RIGHT tool. For example, you can't really expect a sculptor to do well if you give him a can of paint. Geeks or tech people tend to be more willing to accept changes like that. Neither way is more "right," certain people just work certain ways.
Re:Katz is even more pathetic than usual
on
The Empire Stumbles
·
· Score: 2
Also, Spider-Man cost somewhere on the order of $120 million to make, and AotC cost about $60-90 million to make. That's a large discrepancy in budget, even for Hollywood. Especially considering the CG scenes in Spider-Man sucked.
Also, at the risk of sounding racist here.. When I saw AotC, the theater was packed with 10-30 year old middle class white people. When I saw Spider-Man (at the same theater) the audience was MUCH more diverse (mostly 18-25 year olds of all races.) Spider-Man doesn't carry the "geek stigma" that Star Wars carries. When I asked some of my friends if they wanted to go see Star Wars, their reply was something along the lines of "I don't want to see that geek shit."
But I do agree with this poster. Jon Katz tends to try and make a big deal out of nothing. He also uses some funky logic as to why Star Wars didn't make as much money as Spider-Man (which Lucas had already said would happen.) He often uses this logic in his postings, and it's fallacious. I'm curious as to why the Slashdot editors continue to post his stories when they're as rife with logical inaccuracies as this one.
If it looks like shit, smells like shit, tastes like shit.. It sure ain't filet mignon.
Re:article illustrated something about family...
on
Tracking Mafiaboy
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Middle class families are often just as messed up as everyone else. Friends of mine had parents who didn't speak to eachother, slept in separate rooms. Middle class families often keep up the facade of being normal, which can be even more damaging. Living a lie is harder than admitting you're fucked up. I was fortunate to grow up in a normal family, but many of my friends were not. I still smoked weed and got in trouble at school, but it wasn't because of my family. Family troubles can be a factor in being a troublemaker, but they're not the only cause.
You seem to think that Iraq cannot get a supercomputer any other way. The US is not the entire world, hell, most of the rest of the world thinks the embargo has served its purpose and should be removed. Then there are technologically advanced countries which never participated in the first place, such as China. Besides, it wouldn't be too hard to smuggle American computer parts into Iraq if they really wanted to. I'm sure the Iraqi government could drive a truck to Kuwait/Saudi Arabia, buy a bunch of Athlon XP boxes and drive the truck back. It's not rocket science. Just because they're not allowed to buy them doesn't mean they can't.
If there IS an xbox2. Microsoft's main problem is their top guys have no idea what the Japanese market wants. The Japanese market is much smaller than the US market, granted, but the games that sell consoles are RPGs (namely the Final Fantasy series.) The Japanese (at least IMO, but apparently many others feel the same) make the best RPGs (Square, Enix, etc.) American RPGs feel distinctly.. well, American. There's little emotional conflict (and when there is it comes off as uber-cheesy) and the story is usually the cliched "good-triumphs-over-evil-with-American-flag-flying " fare.
If there is going to be an Xbox2, Microsoft has to learn that it's not the hardware that sells a console, it's the games. A few friends of mine bought an Xbox for Halo, and while they said it was fun, it got boring after a week or so. After looking at the Xbox's release schedule, they returned it, as there are virtually NO desirable titles on it. Microsoft tried to pull the same bullshit Nintendo did with N64 by trying to make all games "XBox exclusives." Sony doesn't do this, rather they let the market dictate which platforms their developers games would be on (which often meant just PS2.)
It seems to me that this "legal stealing" clause is there to keep them/the consumer from getting ripped off. Yes, the clause COULD be used to rip fans off. But it also protects fans from being ripped off by third parties. As he says, the clause won't be used to simply rip fans off; he's right, it would be suicide.
Another analogy: I bought a gun to protect myself from intruders. Theoretically, I can use that gun to shoot anyone I decide I don't like. But I don't, because the consequences far outweigh the benefits of doing so. Same thing here. Just because they can doesn't mean they will. Infogrames is still a small enough company and the game market is volatile enough that one bad PR disaster can sink a game and cause massive loss in profit. They also know that one successful game can make a company big time, and one big flop can put them out of business.
Cannabis Nothing builds relationships better than seeing the people you're with diminished to the mental capacity of a fifth grader in need of Ritalin.
proCrastination If you don't do this well, expect to be burnt out at work by the end of your first week. The American economy is built on this principle, and to deny it would be, of course, to support terrorism.
I was a sysadmin for 2 years. Now, there are two types of sysadmins.. Those who work at ISPs who get paid shit, work long hours, have absolutely no job security, are disposable and generally are self-taught (and not very well) and there are corporate sysadmins, who are paid very well, but they administer Novell, Tivoli, SAP, etc (in other words, not much UNIX involved.) To be a corporate sysadmin, you basically NEED a college degree; or at least an associates degree from some tech institute. You don't want to be the other type of sysadmin, you're basically about a notch above the janitor.
Fact is though, right now, the sysadmin market is VERY oversaturated. I know a guy who was a sysadmin over at Enron (we all know what happened there) who is now bagging groceries because NOBODY is hiring, and this guy has like 5 or 6 years experience on enterprise hardware (aka he's a guru.) Most of the ISPs have gone out of business or are laying people off. Regardless of what you know, you'll be very hard pressed to find a job, especially at 18 years old.
My suggestion is to go to college first. The job market sucks right now anyway, so now's a great time to go get some skills while losing the minimum potential earnings. If you want to do corporate stuff (where you make decent cash) go for a degree in MIS (Management Information Systems, usuallly in the Business school) or CS (Computer Science, usually Engineering.)
I was one of the first kind of sysadmins, I worked at an ISP and was very disposable. But that was okay, I was only 16 and the business climate was very different. Now I'm in college, and am doing some sysadmin stuff on the side for my school and am still getting paid shit, but again, it doesn't matter. The job is basically just for extra spending money. If I wanted more money I could go be a waiter (seriously, friend of mine who works at Chili's makes more per hour than I or my co-workers make.)
Anyway, my suggestion is: go to college. You're not going to find a job right now anyway, so you might as well go get a degree. And if you still want to be a sysadmin when you get out, you'll have that many more possibilities open to you. It's a no-lose situation.
They don't market themselves as a "Cyber Theater." The 802.11 access point was installed by a local WLAN group. The main users of it, I would believe, would not be the nightly movie patrons, but the businesses they rent the theater out to for presentations during the day. Hell, the Drafthouse doesn't even tell anyone that they have it, said local WLAN group has been doing all the advertising (much to the Drafthouse's chagrin, now they have to deal with laptop-toting geeks)
I concur to the last statement, especially at the Drafthouse. As theaters go, it's a pretty shitty place to go watch a movie. The food is pretty good, plus they serve beer, but the main reasons people go there are to watch indie films or really, really bad movies. Hell, they devote two nights of the week to the really bad movies, with Mister Sinus Theater (sort of a live MST3K, very, very funny) and Something Weird Wednesdays (where they show the most god-awful and obscure flick they can find, a few weeks back I saw "Bruce Lee Fights Back from Beyond the Grave," an absolute classic Drafthouse flick.. It was horrible, but hilarious.)
I'd also be pissed if someone opened a laptop during a movie. You went to the movie to see the damn movie, not surf the web. You can do that on your own time. If you absolutely insist on watching a movie while surfing the web, go to Blockbuster, plop in front of the TV, and have at it. By abusing public service, you're just going to ensure that nobody else offers it. From what I've heard, the Drafthouse is having more trouble than they bargained for with the 802.11, and are considering disabling it when the place is not rented out to a conference (they also do large theater-style corporate presentations during the weekdays.) Too many geeks going in and thinking along the lines of this guy.
I attend the University of Texas and am a member of SigLinux (per mentioned in the article.) I was also one of the more vocal ones for leaving the name as it is. I figure I might as well post my thoughts on the subject here..
Yes, GNU has done great things for Linux. gcc, the userland, etc. But others have also done great things, such as apache, xfree86, samba, etc. If we want to be fair, and call it GNU/Linux, we can't stop there. We'd have to call it GNU/XFree86/perl/PHP/mySQL/apache/Linux. Yes, GNU has made extensive contributions to Linux. But to call it GNU/Linux makes it seem like others have not.
Personally, I don't agree with a lot of things RMS says, but I chalk them up to ideological differences and agree to disagree with a lot of GNUbies. But this issue is less ideological and more egotistical. The OS is called Linux not out of the worship we have for Linus (legend has it he first called it Freeix, but the person who ran the ftp site hated that name and just called it Linux,) it's because we've always called it Linux. The name is not about taking credit for things, it's about giving people an easy reference.
RMS contends that "Linux" refers to only the kernel. I don't know about you, but I say "Linux" when I mean the entire system and "the kernel" when I mean the kernel. I don't mean to take credit/fame/glory/whatever away from anyone, it's just easier and a lot less confusing. People also don't call Windows "Microsoft Windows," they just call it "Windows."
Calling the entire system "Linux" is not incorrect or wrong, but calling it "GNU/Linux" can get confusing, especially when talking about different distros. I've known less experienced Linux types ask if I've used the GNU Linux distro, not knowing that it was just what some people call the entire system. But I won't say that "GNU/Linux" is wrong, because it's not, but it's all just geeky semantics anyway.
My whole argument for not changing the name of SIGLinux was because we are NOT a GNU/Linux user group, we're a Linux user group. Should a version of Linux without GNU tools exist, that would fall under our area of expertise. Changing our name just to pet Stallman's ego and represent our group as holding a certain belief (where in actuality, there are some VERY widely differing opinions on the issue in SIGLinux) would misrepresent us, as we don't all buy into the GNU philosophy.
Anyway, this is a lot longer than I originally intended. So I'll stop. I'm actually looking for replies, I have enough karma already. So reply!;)
Re:Id like to see him try to stor the elements....
on
Periodic Table Table
·
· Score: 2
There is depleted uranium, which iirc is used for tank armor as it's fucking hard as hell. Only downside is that it's also heavy as hell, thus why an M1A3 tank weighs something like 70 tons. Of course, I just could have watched too much anime and be totally wrong...
You seem to have the illusion that Apple actually gives a shit about the Linux community. No company is going to do something "for the good of the community" if they're not going to make money off it. If Apple's not going to make money off releasing a piece of software that maybe 50% of the Linux community will use, they won't do it. Thing is, Sorenson is used for many more things than home video playback. It's a very professional piece of software which underwent many hours of engineering. Apple/Sorenson is NOT going to release the source code to that just to please some Open Source zealots because it would provide much more detriment to them as a business than benefit.
Yes, maybe these codecs you mention should become standard. But they probably won't, because the other 90% of the computing world that doesn't really care about Linux already has good codecs. MP3 works just fine, Windows users aren't going to move to Ogg. Nor are they going to move to VP3 if Sorenson and DivX/3ivx work fine. The "computing world" is not synonymous with Linux, hell, most of the "computing world" doesn't know what Linux really is; it's just a buzzword to them. The computing world is driven by companies with money, not geeks with dreams and ideals.
Slashdot Mirror
Tivo is a bit different. Embedded machines are very different than PCs. All Linux is really doing in embedded applications is replacing the old, proprietary operating systems. If Tivo had existed 10 years ago, they would have written their own OS to do just what they needed to.
IMO, it's too early to use Linux as a Windows replacement. Servers are fine (its a sysadmin's job to learn new software) and embedded systems are fine (the user never really gets beyond the UI, so the OS is irrelevant) but on the desktop Linux really isn't ready yet.
Device support and application support are the two areas where Linux REALLY lacks. Sure, Linux supports devices, but it's often buggy, requires lots of configuration, and generally isn't available for the newest hardware (drivers are often developed after the product is no longer the "great new thing".) A lot of more obscure hardware is only partially supported, if at all.
Software support is basically an issue of Linux running Windows programs. Free software is great and all, but users don't give a flying fuck about the GNU/FSF ideals. They want a computer that will run the software they already own, because most people are against lerning new software. Until Linux can run Windows software as well as (or better than) Windows, it will never be a major player on the desktop.
I've bought Walmart PCs before. Not because I was particularly impressed with them or anything, but when I'm building a cheap server box (i.e. nothing mission critical or anything) I can buy one from Walmart for about the same price as I can build it with the same hardware, except I don't have to worry about shipping 8 different pieces of hardware from 8 different online vendors. The quality is not phenomenal, but if you just need a web/ftp server, they're very decent machines for a fair price.
You have to use a scope anyway to even SEE the laser on a sniper rifle. If it's mounted on the scope, no, you wouldn't have to move it, but if it's mounted on the barrel (as it is in most movies and most real-world laser sights) yes, the angle would be off. In essence, you're pointing the barrel of the gun higher than your target to compensate for the fall of the bullet. If you want to readjust your laser sight as well as your scope, I guess you could, but I think that's a bit redundant (as the scope already performs the same function as a laser sight anyway.) Any decent long-range rifle scope has a fine-adjustment knob to adjust for distance, but this just seems like too much work for something whose function is already implemented with the scope anyway.
Aah, but someone has to write the porn simulation (or should I say stimulation) software. Someone has to produce the hardware. You see, there will always be something to do in the adult industry. Plus, they ARE the first ones to use new technology. Long distance telephone, VHS and web-video are just some of the examples of where the porn industry has been way ahead of the rest of the market.
This is sort of right. Laser sights are pretty much only useful for close range fighting, where a soldier would need to "shoot from the hip" while maintaining some semblance of accuracy. Snipers often do use IR lasers, however, they don't use them as laser sights. That's what they have a scope for. The lasers are used as rangefinders, so the sniper can tell how far away his target is and adjust his scope accordingly.
.50 cal rifle) the arc of the bullet is significant. You have to adjust your scope to compensate for the range (thus why you need to know how far away the target is.)
The problem with lasers is that they basically say "Look! Here I am!" And with infrared nightvision available for under $1000, it's not a stretch to assume the enemy has it as well. IR scopes are also not as common as you would assume. Their range is limited compared to a conventional scope, plus they're a lot heavier.
One other thing to note is that extreme distance, a laser would be utterly useless for aim on a rifle anyway. Keep in mind the bullet travels on independent axes, both forward (inertia of the bullet) and DOWN (force of gravity.) At longer ranges, the bullet's path is going to look more like an arc than a straight line. Last I checked, lasers don't arc. This brings me back to the rangefinder. If your target is 1500m away (not inconcievable with say, a
Another use of IASER sights is to have special forces operatives "paint" targets with the laser for use in bomb targeting systems. This is much more effective than painting the target from the plane itself, as the forces on the ground can keep a better hold on the target and there's minimal risk to them, as they're not actually firing any rounds (and thus the enemy isn't looking for them.)
So, essentially, the detriments of using a laser sight on a sniper rifle far outweigh the benefits. The main problem is that it compromises the snipers location (his best weapon) while not being very effective. Rangefinders are only in use for a fraction of a second, and aren't likely to be spotted. Lasers, even IR lasers, are stupid as sights at long range. The only ops who actually use laser sights do so at very close range (say, less than 20 feet.) At that range, your presence is already compromised, the bullets won't arc, and you can get a split-second faster target acquisition. But on sniper rifles they really have no point.
You must not know much about CS jobs. If you go to any of the top CS schools in the country, you'll see where most of the top of the class goes-- Microsoft. The general consensus among students in the CS dept I attend is that people working for MS are real badasses. And it's the truth. The guys working for MS REALLY know what they're doing.
The bugs arise from the fact that MS products are MASSIVE projects with literally hundreds of developers. It's simply impossible to produce bug-free products that large in a reasonable timeframe. Sure, many people cite Linux as an example. Linux (not just the kernel, XFree, KDE/Gnome and all related things) are buggy too. This doesn't mean that the developers suck, but squashing bugs takes time. Also, MANY hardware drivers in the kernel are incomplete/missing. Sure, they may not be as buggy as Windows, but if they don't do what I need them to, they might as well not exist at all.
I don't mean to bash Linux here or anything, but simply use it as a tool to point out the logistical nightmare of any large software project. Microsoft does a rather good job of keeping the show-stopper bugs away and working to fix the minor ones with service packs. Microsoft's legal and marketing departments may be Evil (tm), but their developers are top-notch.
Yes, and it was good music. Difference is, the people decided who was the next hot star, not the record companies. They became famous because a lot of people went to see them, not because some famous producer spent a few million bucks to assemble a band of pretty boys, spent a few million more to promote them and then sold a ton of copies while drowning out everything else. This was back in the day where you actually had to bring something good to the table to get success.
I wholeheartedly agree. Believe it or not, many Americans hate the crap MTV plays. I live in Austin, Texas, which is pretty much the live music capitol of the USA, so I may be a bit biased, but I listen to local/smaller bands a lot more than I do the crap on the radio. Heck, if you mention Britney Spears or N'Sync in Austin, you're likely to get lynched on the steps of the capitol building.
Big music sucks. It's like fuck-buddy sex: just going through the motions without any feeling whatsoever. I like music that sounds good but still has some sort of feeling. And big music simply doesn't have that.
As a reply to your side note, my Sony STR-DE675 (sold at Best Buy, I'm sure) is more than powerful enough to overload 16 gauge wire. I had to drop to 12 gauge on my center channel (not sold at Best Buy, but not incredibly high-powered speakers) because the amp kept overloading on rather low sound levels. And a DE675 isn't even all that powerful a stereo. But I did buy that 12 gauge from Home Depot, cos I'm sure as shit not paying $10/ft for Monster cable. I see that 8 gauge gold plated crap and kind of wonder what people are thinking when they buy that stuff. Everyone knows it's all going fiber optic anyway. :)
Web development no longer means exclusively writing code. You're going to get a lot better results sticking a designer in front of Dreamweaver than you will sticking a unix-head in front of vi and gimp. And in probably a quarter of the time. The way web development is often done these days is the designers design the page in Dreamweaver and the code-monkeys write the CGI/PHP/ASP in over blocks of code. The days of writing web pages exclusively by hand are pretty much over. HTML isn't really "code" anyway, it's a markup language (and a very limited one at that.) It has more in common with PDF or PostScript than anything else. I think the original poster's problem was that she was recieving the same attitude from Sun as from you.
The "creative types" at tech companies usually have a high turnover rate because they don't mesh with the rest of the company. This seems to me to come from a difference in the idea of what a computer is. To a "creative" person, a computer is just a tool, but it has to be the RIGHT tool. For example, you can't really expect a sculptor to do well if you give him a can of paint. Geeks or tech people tend to be more willing to accept changes like that. Neither way is more "right," certain people just work certain ways.
Also, Spider-Man cost somewhere on the order of $120 million to make, and AotC cost about $60-90 million to make. That's a large discrepancy in budget, even for Hollywood. Especially considering the CG scenes in Spider-Man sucked.
Also, at the risk of sounding racist here.. When I saw AotC, the theater was packed with 10-30 year old middle class white people. When I saw Spider-Man (at the same theater) the audience was MUCH more diverse (mostly 18-25 year olds of all races.) Spider-Man doesn't carry the "geek stigma" that Star Wars carries. When I asked some of my friends if they wanted to go see Star Wars, their reply was something along the lines of "I don't want to see that geek shit."
But I do agree with this poster. Jon Katz tends to try and make a big deal out of nothing. He also uses some funky logic as to why Star Wars didn't make as much money as Spider-Man (which Lucas had already said would happen.) He often uses this logic in his postings, and it's fallacious. I'm curious as to why the Slashdot editors continue to post his stories when they're as rife with logical inaccuracies as this one.
If it looks like shit, smells like shit, tastes like shit.. It sure ain't filet mignon.
Middle class families are often just as messed up as everyone else. Friends of mine had parents who didn't speak to eachother, slept in separate rooms. Middle class families often keep up the facade of being normal, which can be even more damaging. Living a lie is harder than admitting you're fucked up. I was fortunate to grow up in a normal family, but many of my friends were not. I still smoked weed and got in trouble at school, but it wasn't because of my family. Family troubles can be a factor in being a troublemaker, but they're not the only cause.
You seem to think that Iraq cannot get a supercomputer any other way. The US is not the entire world, hell, most of the rest of the world thinks the embargo has served its purpose and should be removed. Then there are technologically advanced countries which never participated in the first place, such as China. Besides, it wouldn't be too hard to smuggle American computer parts into Iraq if they really wanted to. I'm sure the Iraqi government could drive a truck to Kuwait/Saudi Arabia, buy a bunch of Athlon XP boxes and drive the truck back. It's not rocket science. Just because they're not allowed to buy them doesn't mean they can't.
Heh, I think this is the one time posting a link to a urinal poop website would NOT be a troll.. /. trolls? anyone?
If there IS an xbox2. Microsoft's main problem is their top guys have no idea what the Japanese market wants. The Japanese market is much smaller than the US market, granted, but the games that sell consoles are RPGs (namely the Final Fantasy series.) The Japanese (at least IMO, but apparently many others feel the same) make the best RPGs (Square, Enix, etc.) American RPGs feel distinctly.. well, American. There's little emotional conflict (and when there is it comes off as uber-cheesy) and the story is usually the cliched "good-triumphs-over-evil-with-American-flag-flying " fare.
If there is going to be an Xbox2, Microsoft has to learn that it's not the hardware that sells a console, it's the games. A few friends of mine bought an Xbox for Halo, and while they said it was fun, it got boring after a week or so. After looking at the Xbox's release schedule, they returned it, as there are virtually NO desirable titles on it. Microsoft tried to pull the same bullshit Nintendo did with N64 by trying to make all games "XBox exclusives." Sony doesn't do this, rather they let the market dictate which platforms their developers games would be on (which often meant just PS2.)
It seems to me that this "legal stealing" clause is there to keep them/the consumer from getting ripped off. Yes, the clause COULD be used to rip fans off. But it also protects fans from being ripped off by third parties. As he says, the clause won't be used to simply rip fans off; he's right, it would be suicide.
Another analogy: I bought a gun to protect myself from intruders. Theoretically, I can use that gun to shoot anyone I decide I don't like. But I don't, because the consequences far outweigh the benefits of doing so. Same thing here. Just because they can doesn't mean they will. Infogrames is still a small enough company and the game market is volatile enough that one bad PR disaster can sink a game and cause massive loss in profit. They also know that one successful game can make a company big time, and one big flop can put them out of business.
I was a sysadmin for 2 years. Now, there are two types of sysadmins.. Those who work at ISPs who get paid shit, work long hours, have absolutely no job security, are disposable and generally are self-taught (and not very well) and there are corporate sysadmins, who are paid very well, but they administer Novell, Tivoli, SAP, etc (in other words, not much UNIX involved.) To be a corporate sysadmin, you basically NEED a college degree; or at least an associates degree from some tech institute. You don't want to be the other type of sysadmin, you're basically about a notch above the janitor.
Fact is though, right now, the sysadmin market is VERY oversaturated. I know a guy who was a sysadmin over at Enron (we all know what happened there) who is now bagging groceries because NOBODY is hiring, and this guy has like 5 or 6 years experience on enterprise hardware (aka he's a guru.) Most of the ISPs have gone out of business or are laying people off. Regardless of what you know, you'll be very hard pressed to find a job, especially at 18 years old.
My suggestion is to go to college first. The job market sucks right now anyway, so now's a great time to go get some skills while losing the minimum potential earnings. If you want to do corporate stuff (where you make decent cash) go for a degree in MIS (Management Information Systems, usuallly in the Business school) or CS (Computer Science, usually Engineering.)
I was one of the first kind of sysadmins, I worked at an ISP and was very disposable. But that was okay, I was only 16 and the business climate was very different. Now I'm in college, and am doing some sysadmin stuff on the side for my school and am still getting paid shit, but again, it doesn't matter. The job is basically just for extra spending money. If I wanted more money I could go be a waiter (seriously, friend of mine who works at Chili's makes more per hour than I or my co-workers make.)
Anyway, my suggestion is: go to college. You're not going to find a job right now anyway, so you might as well go get a degree. And if you still want to be a sysadmin when you get out, you'll have that many more possibilities open to you. It's a no-lose situation.
Why, the standard basis for C^n, of course!
They don't market themselves as a "Cyber Theater." The 802.11 access point was installed by a local WLAN group. The main users of it, I would believe, would not be the nightly movie patrons, but the businesses they rent the theater out to for presentations during the day. Hell, the Drafthouse doesn't even tell anyone that they have it, said local WLAN group has been doing all the advertising (much to the Drafthouse's chagrin, now they have to deal with laptop-toting geeks)
I concur to the last statement, especially at the Drafthouse. As theaters go, it's a pretty shitty place to go watch a movie. The food is pretty good, plus they serve beer, but the main reasons people go there are to watch indie films or really, really bad movies. Hell, they devote two nights of the week to the really bad movies, with Mister Sinus Theater (sort of a live MST3K, very, very funny) and Something Weird Wednesdays (where they show the most god-awful and obscure flick they can find, a few weeks back I saw "Bruce Lee Fights Back from Beyond the Grave," an absolute classic Drafthouse flick.. It was horrible, but hilarious.)
I'd also be pissed if someone opened a laptop during a movie. You went to the movie to see the damn movie, not surf the web. You can do that on your own time. If you absolutely insist on watching a movie while surfing the web, go to Blockbuster, plop in front of the TV, and have at it. By abusing public service, you're just going to ensure that nobody else offers it. From what I've heard, the Drafthouse is having more trouble than they bargained for with the 802.11, and are considering disabling it when the place is not rented out to a conference (they also do large theater-style corporate presentations during the weekdays.) Too many geeks going in and thinking along the lines of this guy.
In contrast, Apple's dual CPU systems have one fan. No chassis fan, no CPU fans, only a power supply fan.
I attend the University of Texas and am a member of SigLinux (per mentioned in the article.) I was also one of the more vocal ones for leaving the name as it is. I figure I might as well post my thoughts on the subject here..
;)
Yes, GNU has done great things for Linux. gcc, the userland, etc. But others have also done great things, such as apache, xfree86, samba, etc. If we want to be fair, and call it GNU/Linux, we can't stop there. We'd have to call it GNU/XFree86/perl/PHP/mySQL/apache/Linux. Yes, GNU has made extensive contributions to Linux. But to call it GNU/Linux makes it seem like others have not.
Personally, I don't agree with a lot of things RMS says, but I chalk them up to ideological differences and agree to disagree with a lot of GNUbies. But this issue is less ideological and more egotistical. The OS is called Linux not out of the worship we have for Linus (legend has it he first called it Freeix, but the person who ran the ftp site hated that name and just called it Linux,) it's because we've always called it Linux. The name is not about taking credit for things, it's about giving people an easy reference.
RMS contends that "Linux" refers to only the kernel. I don't know about you, but I say "Linux" when I mean the entire system and "the kernel" when I mean the kernel. I don't mean to take credit/fame/glory/whatever away from anyone, it's just easier and a lot less confusing. People also don't call Windows "Microsoft Windows," they just call it "Windows."
Calling the entire system "Linux" is not incorrect or wrong, but calling it "GNU/Linux" can get confusing, especially when talking about different distros. I've known less experienced Linux types ask if I've used the GNU Linux distro, not knowing that it was just what some people call the entire system. But I won't say that "GNU/Linux" is wrong, because it's not, but it's all just geeky semantics anyway.
My whole argument for not changing the name of SIGLinux was because we are NOT a GNU/Linux user group, we're a Linux user group. Should a version of Linux without GNU tools exist, that would fall under our area of expertise. Changing our name just to pet Stallman's ego and represent our group as holding a certain belief (where in actuality, there are some VERY widely differing opinions on the issue in SIGLinux) would misrepresent us, as we don't all buy into the GNU philosophy.
Anyway, this is a lot longer than I originally intended. So I'll stop. I'm actually looking for replies, I have enough karma already. So reply!
There is depleted uranium, which iirc is used for tank armor as it's fucking hard as hell. Only downside is that it's also heavy as hell, thus why an M1A3 tank weighs something like 70 tons. Of course, I just could have watched too much anime and be totally wrong...
You seem to have the illusion that Apple actually gives a shit about the Linux community. No company is going to do something "for the good of the community" if they're not going to make money off it. If Apple's not going to make money off releasing a piece of software that maybe 50% of the Linux community will use, they won't do it. Thing is, Sorenson is used for many more things than home video playback. It's a very professional piece of software which underwent many hours of engineering. Apple/Sorenson is NOT going to release the source code to that just to please some Open Source zealots because it would provide much more detriment to them as a business than benefit.
Yes, maybe these codecs you mention should become standard. But they probably won't, because the other 90% of the computing world that doesn't really care about Linux already has good codecs. MP3 works just fine, Windows users aren't going to move to Ogg. Nor are they going to move to VP3 if Sorenson and DivX/3ivx work fine. The "computing world" is not synonymous with Linux, hell, most of the "computing world" doesn't know what Linux really is; it's just a buzzword to them. The computing world is driven by companies with money, not geeks with dreams and ideals.