In each large organisation (and Munich's administration has 15000 seats), you don't roll out the software as it comes from the vendor, you always customize and put your own addons while removing parts you don't need or consider dangerous. So I would expect the work you have to do to tweak a Microsoft install for your organisation to be on par with modifying a Linux distribution to fit your needs.
There is much dispute about this, and while the City of Munich claims strong savings, Microsoft published a study which claimed Linux would cost more.
I tend to believe Munich more on this, because they can actually point to real numbers from the real world, while Microsoft's claims are based on speculation and estimates.
Yes, they regularly publish reports of their switch, they are giving presentations at diverse conferences, and you can get the LiMux distribution including all the changelogs.
I would actually never store porn on my computer anyway. What's the point in that? There is so much porn on the Internet available, there is simply no reason to keep it on my computer.
It was helped by a gross misrepresentation of facts before the court: Suggesting distribution while never explicitely saying so. For about 1/4 of the letters requesting the court to allow for identification of the persons behind the list of IP addresses, the requests were denied due to missing evidence. 3/4 nevertheless were agreed on, and there is much speculation going on if the court has messed up downloading and distribution, helped by a very wishi-washi formulated letter of request.
FIAT owns 61.8% of Chrysler's shares (6.6% are disputed). Everything else is owned by the VEBA trust. Which means that FIAT is the corporate owner of Chrysler. Chrysler cars get sold as Lancia (a FIAT subsidary) in Europe, and Lancia and FIAT cars are badged Chrysler in the U.S.. The CEO of Chrysler is tjhe CEO of FIAT, Sergio Marchonne.
I can't remember one event in the history of the U.S. where guns in the hand of little people made the U.S. government rethink their policies and withdraw some legislation, measures or orders. Care to elaborate?
(But I can cite several events where voting ballots in the hands of little people made the U.S. government to either change policies or itself.)
The monument as it stands today encourages the citizens to be zealous and righteous followers of the One God. At least the first four commandments talk about nothing else and dwarf everything that follows in the sheer number of words.
The laws that commanded the burning of the Cathars? The laws that allowed the destroying of cultural artefacts deemed to be of the wrong faith? The laws that caused 300 years of constant warmongering in Europe? The laws that made the Archbishop of Muenster exclaim in 1536: "Kill them all, God will recognize the righteous"?
The other guy is mocking me. He's insisting on believing in a guy who was born by a virgin, died, got resurrected and then fly up into the sky watching him while being more than 2000 years old by now. How's that for real? He must be trying to fool me.
Why? There is this invisible guy claiming to be real, and to have brought you out of Egypt. I don't think he's real, and I never was in Egypt to begin with (and if I was, it would have been the pilot of the airplane who brought me out of Egypt).
Bad answer because the counter argument uses another definition of "mutation" than the analogy.
Most mutations we have fall within a range we are already adapted to. Our genotype has some inherent malleability within which it can deal with mutations. Call it "mutation tolerance" or whatever you want. First, most mutations are recessive, that means that the affected allel will not even be expressed in the phenotype. Only if we get for one gene the same mutated allel from both parents, our phenotype will be affected, and only then the mutation has a measurable effect on us. Then there are the mutations which affect properties like eye or hair color or height, which can have a wide range of possible outcomes without being letal or otherwise disadvantageous to us. A shoe size of 10 vs. one of 9, while still being genetically determined, makes no important difference. And even outcomes which actually affect our lives like the level of aggressivenes or intelligence or the talent for different sports, and which have a genetic component and are thus open to influences by mutations, will in the end, not hamper our general ability to survive and to procreate.
The analogy was talking about mutations which fall out of the adaptable range, which are really disruptive. And of those, most are bad for us.
And nevertheless, the spying is illegal in the country you are spying on. The NSA doesn't violate any U.S. laws by spying on Angela Merkel, but it does violate German law (actually, it violates section 99 StGB for those wanting to look it up). And the same is true for the other direction, the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst) spying on U.S. politicians is illegal in the U.S..
And then we are at exactly the problem people were already complaining about in the 1960: the militarization of the energy utilities, or the military-industrial complex.
And how do you make sure that no one of the guys with the really big guns is in league with the enemy? Basicly your idea of safe containment of dangerous materials is to surround it with dangerous people. Doesn't seem to be a good idea in the long run.
Slashdot Mirror
In each large organisation (and Munich's administration has 15000 seats), you don't roll out the software as it comes from the vendor, you always customize and put your own addons while removing parts you don't need or consider dangerous. So I would expect the work you have to do to tweak a Microsoft install for your organisation to be on par with modifying a Linux distribution to fit your needs.
I tend to believe Munich more on this, because they can actually point to real numbers from the real world, while Microsoft's claims are based on speculation and estimates.
MVS was supported for 34 years, from 1966 to 2000, when it became replaced by z/OS. But z/OS still supports most code written for MVS.
Yes, they regularly publish reports of their switch, they are giving presentations at diverse conferences, and you can get the LiMux distribution including all the changelogs.
There is this strange thing called UMTS. If my landline breaks for some reason, there is still UMTS.
You don't. I reinstalled my Raspberry Pi just yesterday. And the Ultra2 is a keepsake and connected to neither power nor Internet.
I would actually never store porn on my computer anyway. What's the point in that? There is so much porn on the Internet available, there is simply no reason to keep it on my computer.
Like in the 9th century, when Normans ruled the Orkneys, Hebrids, the Isle of Man and Galloway?
As far as I know, of the 89 requests, 27 were denied. This is is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3.
Obrigkeitshörigkeit has nothing to do with this, as it is not the Obrigkeit sending the letter, it's your peers. Conformity yes, I agree.
It was helped by a gross misrepresentation of facts before the court: Suggesting distribution while never explicitely saying so. For about 1/4 of the letters requesting the court to allow for identification of the persons behind the list of IP addresses, the requests were denied due to missing evidence. 3/4 nevertheless were agreed on, and there is much speculation going on if the court has messed up downloading and distribution, helped by a very wishi-washi formulated letter of request.
Actually, dogs are smarter than cats by all available measueres. Free will has nothing to do with intelligence.
FIAT owns 61.8% of Chrysler's shares (6.6% are disputed). Everything else is owned by the VEBA trust. Which means that FIAT is the corporate owner of Chrysler. Chrysler cars get sold as Lancia (a FIAT subsidary) in Europe, and Lancia and FIAT cars are badged Chrysler in the U.S.. The CEO of Chrysler is tjhe CEO of FIAT, Sergio Marchonne.
(But I can cite several events where voting ballots in the hands of little people made the U.S. government to either change policies or itself.)
The monument as it stands today encourages the citizens to be zealous and righteous followers of the One God. At least the first four commandments talk about nothing else and dwarf everything that follows in the sheer number of words.
The laws that commanded the burning of the Cathars? The laws that allowed the destroying of cultural artefacts deemed to be of the wrong faith? The laws that caused 300 years of constant warmongering in Europe? The laws that made the Archbishop of Muenster exclaim in 1536: "Kill them all, God will recognize the righteous"?
Your attempt at being ironic has somewhat failed.
The other guy is mocking me. He's insisting on believing in a guy who was born by a virgin, died, got resurrected and then fly up into the sky watching him while being more than 2000 years old by now. How's that for real? He must be trying to fool me.
So this statement is simply not true.
So you were saying?
Most mutations we have fall within a range we are already adapted to. Our genotype has some inherent malleability within which it can deal with mutations. Call it "mutation tolerance" or whatever you want. First, most mutations are recessive, that means that the affected allel will not even be expressed in the phenotype. Only if we get for one gene the same mutated allel from both parents, our phenotype will be affected, and only then the mutation has a measurable effect on us. Then there are the mutations which affect properties like eye or hair color or height, which can have a wide range of possible outcomes without being letal or otherwise disadvantageous to us. A shoe size of 10 vs. one of 9, while still being genetically determined, makes no important difference. And even outcomes which actually affect our lives like the level of aggressivenes or intelligence or the talent for different sports, and which have a genetic component and are thus open to influences by mutations, will in the end, not hamper our general ability to survive and to procreate.
The analogy was talking about mutations which fall out of the adaptable range, which are really disruptive. And of those, most are bad for us.
And nevertheless, the spying is illegal in the country you are spying on. The NSA doesn't violate any U.S. laws by spying on Angela Merkel, but it does violate German law (actually, it violates section 99 StGB for those wanting to look it up). And the same is true for the other direction, the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst) spying on U.S. politicians is illegal in the U.S..
Hm. I don't see strong armed guards in front of large coal plants.
And then we are at exactly the problem people were already complaining about in the 1960: the militarization of the energy utilities, or the military-industrial complex.
And how do you make sure that no one of the guys with the really big guns is in league with the enemy? Basicly your idea of safe containment of dangerous materials is to surround it with dangerous people. Doesn't seem to be a good idea in the long run.