Good job following the thread and quoting appropriately.
As for what I would do, most likely write my own or purchase it, like I do with the majority of my software now. As has been made abundantly clear here, some OSS programmers have absolutely no loyalty to users that use and support (yes, users actually provide peer support and documentation) their software. I wouldn't use any OSS whose project hasn't outgrown the developer fiefdom stage.
After all, I wouldn't want to evangelize and provide support for someone's project if their opinion of users is they are all leaches.
I do not think responsibility means what you think it means. Please look it up in a dictionary and come back to the conversation after you have been educated.
You mean like this?
responsibility
n 1: the social force that binds you to your obligations and the courses of action demanded by that force
Maybe you should look up arrogant.
Developers have no responsibilities to the OSS community, no one does.
You obiously have no idea what a community is. And if you don't want people to use your software, why bother to release it? Or do you just like wasting people's time looking at it and resources like Sourceforge? Do you write OS software? Let us know now, we won't bother to try it and it can die in peace.
As far as entitlement, most of us don't feel 'entitled' to updates. But it would be nice to be treated civily when we report bugs or suggest improvements. FWIW, I don't write Open Source Software, but I have been involved with many community efforts, and most of them were thankless jobs. Ever run a BBS or moderated a discussion group?
At the same time I do write software for a living, and while I'm not technically responsible for any request not made through official channels, I do my best to maintain open communication with my users and implement suggested features whenever possible. I do that because I feel my work should be worthwhile, not because someone's giving me a paycheck or to booost my ego. I feel a responsibility to make my software as useful as possible to my users rather than what can make it through the corporate bureaucracy. (in case you didn't realize, this is the difference between a legal responsiblity and a moral one)
That too is a cop-out. There is a difference between taking responsibility for a project and being legally responsible. If they want us out there promoting their product, they need to take some responsibility for addressing bugs and feature requests. What would happen if Debian, Mozilla, or Samba (for example) said "our license doesn't require us to fix any bugs, and we just don't feel like it". Open Source is described as a community, so while you might not be legally responsible, you might have some obligations to the community at large.
The problem is that people like you believe you are entitled to something. You are not. Get over it.
Programmers who think their little pearls of code are what makes a project successful need to get over themselves.
The American rail network suffers from much the same problem. The track is ancient and no one wants to invest in maintenance -- not when truck transport is subsidised to the level that it is with all that investment in maintaining and developing the road system. The decrepit track and railbed limits the speed trains can travel.
I would argue that American rail lines are neither ancient nor decrepit. They simply aren't designed or maintained for passenger traffic. And I'd be curious how you think truck transport is subsidised. Amtrak, OTOH, is most definately subsidised. Amtrak also doesn't own or maintain the lines they use. And they aren't subsidised at a level that would allow them to own their own lines. Thus, we have passenger rail running on lines designed and maintained by freight companys to haul, freight.
Intra-city public transit is, for the most part, dominated by buses. One reason for this is that the decision was made years ago that buses were preferrable to trains. Now it's prohibitively expensive to purchase the right of ways that a usable light rail system would need. It keeps popping up on the ballots, but there is never enough votes to build them.
Inter-city public transit is dominated by airlines. Again, it takes deep pockets to come up with an alternative. I don't see any visionaries, or politicians, stepping forward to champion passenger rail in the US. Even though there are plenty of places it could probably compete. At least until the TSA's draconian passenger screening was applied to them too.
You're just not looking very hard. I have two terminals that I purchased new for $150 each. Even if you match it with a 17" LCD you can still come in under $400.
Exxon had sales of $100.72 billion in the third quarter last year. They made $9.92 billion in profit on that. 9.8% ROI isn't out of line (gouging). Almost anything else you buy every day has more than a 10% markup on it.
You are confusing your terms. Net profit compared to gross revenue does not give you ROI. ROI is Return on Investment. Gross revenue is not investment. Profit vs cost of goods sold would be a better indicator. Also, profit is not equal to markup. Markup is a factor of sale price and cost of goods sold. Some costs, such as taxes and reinvestment (IE research) can be excluded from net profit but are not a component of COGS.
Frankly, record profits isn't enough info to determine whether or not consumers are being gouged. But rarely in manufacturing does an increase in the price of raw materials result in an increase in profit. That alone is enough of a red flag to investigate the industry. Particularly with a commodity. (little or no brand loyalty)
750. It was the only model with the rice burner instrument cluster and shaft drive. The rest felt like wannabe Harleys.
If I put as many miles on as you do, I'd definately be looking at something bigger. Might have even considered a Harley softtail. (I don't need to beat up my kidneys on a hardtail to impress anyone)
I used to ride like you do about 20+ years ago. Rode my 78 KZ650 (4 cylinder) to graduation and the party afterward. Despite thundershowers and a tornado warning. I used to be invincible, back when I knew everything. Did the 70 below wind chill (standing still) too. Red lights were nice, get some heat from the engine, but then the visor would frost up.
I may trailer it out to Colorado this summer and do some mountain riding if I can get away from work long enough.
RE: I have a helmet with scratches from contacting a curb at 45 mph.
You shouldn't. Helmets, once they've hit the curb, should be replaced.
You can actually damage the internal structure of a helmet simply by dropping it. I wouldn't wear that one, but it's a damn good reminder why I still have two ears.
I've just about quit riding though, my '03 Vulcan barely has 500 miles on it. I don't find it relaxing any more getting tailgated by Explorers with road rage. All the leather in the world won't protect you from 6000 lbs of stupidity. I'm thinking tailgating a motorcycle should be considered attempted manslaughter.
Take a look at the disclaimer on helmets - they don't guarantee that your head will be protected even at low speed impact.
I have a helmet with scratches from contacting a curb at 45 mph. I also had a 4" hole burnt through my jeans (and pocket) as well as a 2" hole in my leather jacket on top of my shoulder. All this as a result of an old lady in a cadillac who couldn't see me. My only injury, I hurt my back trying to lift my Kaw 650 because the front tire was on the curb.
An additional factor for me; my cousin failed to see a rut that had washed across a gravel road and crushed the forks. They re-attached the tendons in his hand, replaced his boots (one caught on the shift lever and ripped) and his scratched helmet.
I also had a neighbor that crashed while riding with her boyfriend. Her helmet was shattered, but her biggest complaint was she lost her two front teeth.
I have no problem wearing a helmet. Even if they can be hot and sticky and mess up your hair. It beats not being able to tie your own shoes.
As far as choice; if you want to waive any taxpayer provided support for a critical head injury, I don't care if you wear one or not.
Giving blanket amnesty to people who violate our immigration laws is 'on our terms'? Damn, that's some serious spin.
Our terms should be; streamline guest worker program, all illegals leave the country and apply for re-entry, any immigrant currently employed can be fast tracked assuming they pass the requisite background checks. But everyone has to enter legally.
Anyone still here illegally after 1 year is deported and banned, permanently. And any employer that doesn't comply risks severe fines and mandantory jail time.
If you want to be accepted as part of our society, we require that you respect us and our laws.
Obviously, the CEO of Verizon disagrees with you. He was on Charlie Rose the other night talking about this issue. The way Verizon sees it, they could run fiber to the neighborhood like their competitors and have enough capacity for existing technologies, or they could run fiber to the premises and have suitable bandwidth for future technologies. There is more to this than internet connectivity. They are after the broadcast TV, VOD, and VoIP markets too. VoIP in particular worries them, it competes with their core business. This is also the first time I have seen any service provider admit that customers have an interest in uploading to the Internet just as fast as they download.
As far as cost, fiber is roughly the same to run as copper. The providers aren't real concerned about the cost of repairing cable cuts, those get paid for by the poor sucker who ran the backhoe without calling to get the underground lines marked first. So the real issue is whether to use existing copper or pull new fiber. Verizon is focusing on higher density areas and supporting 14-18 million households in 3 years.
This sounds like a nationwide campaign. It's going on in Kansas and Missouri too. It seemed like shortly after the SWB/AT&T merger we started seeing ads telling us the cable companies were gouging us because there is no competition.
Didn't you just write: "To get this straight: Instead of finding one of the countless case of information on this case, instead you decided to post a hopeful karma-whore on Slashdot, repeating a bunch of ignorant mistruths that you're unsure of?"
And then go on to say: NTP is a purported patent troll, existing on fluffed up patents (many created using the continuation loophole of the patent office, allowing them to add news discoveries in other people's products into a long idling patent application)."
Hmm, I seem to remember Win95 pre Active Desktop. That's a significant change. And since I work with W2k on a daily basis, the first thing I had to do was change my XP laptop to Classic desktop, because XP moved a lot of applications on the menus. Ever compared a w2k control panel to XP? And how about early versions of XP and later versions, where the whole start menu was re-arranged? Then of course there is the Outlook on my primary desktop, and the newer version on our terminal servers that defaults to Word for the editor and the send button is in a different location. Or is your idea of consistency the fact that so little changes between service packs? If you're on a software upgrade treadmill, 10 years might seem like a long time. But really it's not.
Change isn't a bad thing, but you shouldn't have to retrain your workforce everytime you upgrade your OS. Believe it or not, but the majority of computer users probably don't even know what a shortcut key is.
What I CAN say is that Windows as a dominant OS has brought us one thing: consistency.
That's why the desktops on Win31, Win95, NT, W2k, and XP all work the same way.... How about the various versions of Office? From a programmer's perspective, Win32 is almost, but not quite the same from version to version, and you can generally get by from one to the next. But consistancy is NOT a MS strong point. They'll throw it out the window for pretty much any new bit of shiny chrome or feature.
I suspect that even under Windows a networking protocol isn't tightly coupled to a graphics or file subsystem.
One difference is that open source doesn't use one technology to leverage another. For instance, IE methods were incorporated in seemingly unrelated system libraries to 'integrate' it into Windows. And I remember when I bought my laptop with XP, by default MSN messenger started automatically, with no information on how to get rid of it. To the common user it became part of the OS. They assumed they could use XP to encourage MSN membership. One of the things that got them in trouble with DOJ was desktop icons on a new installation. Taking Windows' market dominance to promote other software/services. So what happens when you start making API decisions based on marketing instead of technology? Suddenly the graphics subsystem is integrated with the file subsystem through the DRM subsystem. Sure, you can still stub test them individually, and then someone starts worrying about the graphics subsystem being hacked to bypass DRM and the fun continues.
- All the domains that are empty (parked awaiting content) will be served from Windows servers
- All the domains that have content, that somebody cares about, will be served from Linux as before
When you have GoDaddy set up your hosting account, you have a choice of Linux or Windows. So, more accurately, all parked domains will be on IIS. And all the 'domains with content' will be on the OS chosen by the customer.
Does anyone backup their computer using printer dumps (to reciepts or paper), or punch cards (or punch tape)?
Yes, I do. I print a hard copy of my tax returns every year. Even though I file them electronically. And I don't even have to worry about an unknown third party trying to alter them.
Maryland is on the right track. A paper ballot with eletronic tabulation. Too bad it's only a temporary ban. This is a cost effective, verifiable solution to the whole chad problem that started this 6 years ago.
With point 1, I get a chuckle when I walk by someone on a computer, typing up an email, and when they see someone approaching from behind they flip to another window or hit screensaver etc. I want to say to them "you DO realize that's not private in any way shape or form and I or any of your managers could easily read it?" but I usually just walk away smiling at their ignorance.
It could also be that it is simply none of your business. I'm not comfortable with anyone reading over my shoulder or off of my screen while they stand there talking to me. I will nearly always minimize e-mail, query analyzer, web pages, regardless of their content. For all you know they could be writing a priviledged message to another employee (HR, management).
For me, I'm simply not comfortable with the situation, but with direct access to databases I could also be working with data that is confidential. Not only are work areas public, but it's not uncommon for people to have relatives or consultants visiting.
You make assumptions of wrong doing, but you're comfortable walking up and looking at someone's monitor where I doubt you would be comfortable picking up papers from their desk and reading them.
For example, you could more double the effective MPG of 18 wheelers by changing the regulations that limit them so heavily (pun intended) to rather light loads.
Your analysis of just increasing the load size of semis is simplistic. First, some current statistics. Every state in the US has a maximum gross vehicle weight of 80,000 lbs without a permit. A tractor weighs in around 17,000 lbs. Leaving 63,000 for fuel, trailer, and load.
Ok, adding an axle to carry more weight; axles are generally rated at 20,000 (including the weight of the axle), so for 110,000 you would need to add 2 axles. Most likely one to the tractor and one to the trailer. A third axle reduces maneuverability and increases tire scuff (wear). You could use tag axles, but that would increase the weight of the axle assembly and would only help when you are under 80,000 lbs. On top of that, the tractors are designed to pull 80,000. To pull 110,000 they would need a heavier frame and stronger drive train. You could get by with the heavier weight for a short time, but you'd pay for it in maintenance later on.
Then of course there are the road issues. Unless you extend the length of the trucks, adding extra axles doesn't efficiently distribute the weight. Think about bridge spans that are designed for 34,000 lb tandems that are 35' apart. And the fact that our national infrastructure is already severely neglected.
Then of course there is the issue that a lot of cargo is not weight constrained, it is limited by size. Do we want it to be the norm that semis are pulling double 53s or triple pups? Already highway safety advocates are looking to federally freeze semis at current state limits. It could be a big fight to get them increased.
BTW, if those trucks you mention are only getting 5 mpg, they should probably consider newer rigs or check their driver's habits. 7 mpg should be possible without changing their loads.
Even better, they might have just mentioned to the Librarian that material they felt was objectional was publically visible. The library already had a policy in place for dealing with situations like that. But that wouldn't have done much for their egos.
Games are a one window task? MMORPGs are about the only thing I play, and for them it would definately be nice to have more than one display. I could move all the HUD off of the main viewport. Chat windows, toolbars, inventory. Take WoW for instance, about all I want on the main window is the mini map and the small character/monster health frames. Games that ran well windowed would be nice too, so I could use an extra display for IM, email or WWW. I have plenty of machines, I could run non-game apps on a separate box, but why should I?
And really, I'd prefer 3-19" thin frame LCDs to one 30" display.
Java?! Why can't Sun come up with a java compiler that can target freakin' Mono?
How many reasons would you like? It's not in their best interest. JVM supports more platforms that.NET. What motivation would they have to do so? Why doesn't Microsoft support WINE?
(a) Because Microsoft is the ONLY company involved.
Sorry, nope. Borland has been along for the whole ride, and doing a good job getting useful features added. Borland supports.NET with their own C# and Delphi. They support Win32 with C++ and Delphi. And they support JVM with JBuilder. If only they would look to their roots and support JVM with Delphi too.
I'm sure there are other companies supporting.NET as well, I seem to remember hearing about COBOL for.NET, maybe from Microfocus, but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Slashdot Mirror
Good job following the thread and quoting appropriately.
As for what I would do, most likely write my own or purchase it, like I do with the majority of my software now. As has been made abundantly clear here, some OSS programmers have absolutely no loyalty to users that use and support (yes, users actually provide peer support and documentation) their software. I wouldn't use any OSS whose project hasn't outgrown the developer fiefdom stage.
After all, I wouldn't want to evangelize and provide support for someone's project if their opinion of users is they are all leaches.
You mean like this?
Maybe you should look up arrogant.
Developers have no responsibilities to the OSS community, no one does.
You obiously have no idea what a community is. And if you don't want people to use your software, why bother to release it? Or do you just like wasting people's time looking at it and resources like Sourceforge? Do you write OS software? Let us know now, we won't bother to try it and it can die in peace.
As far as entitlement, most of us don't feel 'entitled' to updates. But it would be nice to be treated civily when we report bugs or suggest improvements. FWIW, I don't write Open Source Software, but I have been involved with many community efforts, and most of them were thankless jobs. Ever run a BBS or moderated a discussion group?
At the same time I do write software for a living, and while I'm not technically responsible for any request not made through official channels, I do my best to maintain open communication with my users and implement suggested features whenever possible. I do that because I feel my work should be worthwhile, not because someone's giving me a paycheck or to booost my ego. I feel a responsibility to make my software as useful as possible to my users rather than what can make it through the corporate bureaucracy. (in case you didn't realize, this is the difference between a legal responsiblity and a moral one)
That too is a cop-out. There is a difference between taking responsibility for a project and being legally responsible. If they want us out there promoting their product, they need to take some responsibility for addressing bugs and feature requests. What would happen if Debian, Mozilla, or Samba (for example) said "our license doesn't require us to fix any bugs, and we just don't feel like it". Open Source is described as a community, so while you might not be legally responsible, you might have some obligations to the community at large.
The problem is that people like you believe you are entitled to something. You are not. Get over it.
Programmers who think their little pearls of code are what makes a project successful need to get over themselves.
The American rail network suffers from much the same problem. The track is ancient and no one wants to invest in maintenance -- not when truck transport is subsidised to the level that it is with all that investment in maintaining and developing the road system. The decrepit track and railbed limits the speed trains can travel.
I would argue that American rail lines are neither ancient nor decrepit. They simply aren't designed or maintained for passenger traffic. And I'd be curious how you think truck transport is subsidised. Amtrak, OTOH, is most definately subsidised. Amtrak also doesn't own or maintain the lines they use. And they aren't subsidised at a level that would allow them to own their own lines. Thus, we have passenger rail running on lines designed and maintained by freight companys to haul, freight.
Intra-city public transit is, for the most part, dominated by buses. One reason for this is that the decision was made years ago that buses were preferrable to trains. Now it's prohibitively expensive to purchase the right of ways that a usable light rail system would need. It keeps popping up on the ballots, but there is never enough votes to build them.
Inter-city public transit is dominated by airlines. Again, it takes deep pockets to come up with an alternative. I don't see any visionaries, or politicians, stepping forward to champion passenger rail in the US. Even though there are plenty of places it could probably compete. At least until the TSA's draconian passenger screening was applied to them too.
Good luck buying a thin-client for under $400.
You're just not looking very hard. I have two terminals that I purchased new for $150 each. Even if you match it with a 17" LCD you can still come in under $400.
http://www.ntavo.com/
I'm not affiliated with them, just purchased a couple terminals to demo to clients. They support X and RDP.
Exxon had sales of $100.72 billion in the third quarter last year. They made $9.92 billion in profit on that. 9.8% ROI isn't out of line (gouging). Almost anything else you buy every day has more than a 10% markup on it.
You are confusing your terms. Net profit compared to gross revenue does not give you ROI. ROI is Return on Investment. Gross revenue is not investment. Profit vs cost of goods sold would be a better indicator. Also, profit is not equal to markup. Markup is a factor of sale price and cost of goods sold. Some costs, such as taxes and reinvestment (IE research) can be excluded from net profit but are not a component of COGS.
Frankly, record profits isn't enough info to determine whether or not consumers are being gouged. But rarely in manufacturing does an increase in the price of raw materials result in an increase in profit. That alone is enough of a red flag to investigate the industry. Particularly with a commodity. (little or no brand loyalty)
What cc's the Vulcan?
750. It was the only model with the rice burner instrument cluster and shaft drive. The rest felt like wannabe Harleys.
If I put as many miles on as you do, I'd definately be looking at something bigger. Might have even considered a Harley softtail. (I don't need to beat up my kidneys on a hardtail to impress anyone)
I used to ride like you do about 20+ years ago. Rode my 78 KZ650 (4 cylinder) to graduation and the party afterward. Despite thundershowers and a tornado warning. I used to be invincible, back when I knew everything. Did the 70 below wind chill (standing still) too. Red lights were nice, get some heat from the engine, but then the visor would frost up.
I may trailer it out to Colorado this summer and do some mountain riding if I can get away from work long enough.
RE: I have a helmet with scratches from contacting a curb at 45 mph.
You shouldn't. Helmets, once they've hit the curb, should be replaced.
You can actually damage the internal structure of a helmet simply by dropping it. I wouldn't wear that one, but it's a damn good reminder why I still have two ears.
I've just about quit riding though, my '03 Vulcan barely has 500 miles on it. I don't find it relaxing any more getting tailgated by Explorers with road rage. All the leather in the world won't protect you from 6000 lbs of stupidity. I'm thinking tailgating a motorcycle should be considered attempted manslaughter.
Take a look at the disclaimer on helmets - they don't guarantee that your head will be protected even at low speed impact.
I have a helmet with scratches from contacting a curb at 45 mph. I also had a 4" hole burnt through my jeans (and pocket) as well as a 2" hole in my leather jacket on top of my shoulder. All this as a result of an old lady in a cadillac who couldn't see me. My only injury, I hurt my back trying to lift my Kaw 650 because the front tire was on the curb.
An additional factor for me; my cousin failed to see a rut that had washed across a gravel road and crushed the forks. They re-attached the tendons in his hand, replaced his boots (one caught on the shift lever and ripped) and his scratched helmet.
I also had a neighbor that crashed while riding with her boyfriend. Her helmet was shattered, but her biggest complaint was she lost her two front teeth.
I have no problem wearing a helmet. Even if they can be hot and sticky and mess up your hair. It beats not being able to tie your own shoes.
As far as choice; if you want to waive any taxpayer provided support for a critical head injury, I don't care if you wear one or not.
Giving blanket amnesty to people who violate our immigration laws is 'on our terms'? Damn, that's some serious spin.
Our terms should be; streamline guest worker program, all illegals leave the country and apply for re-entry, any immigrant currently employed can be fast tracked assuming they pass the requisite background checks. But everyone has to enter legally.
Anyone still here illegally after 1 year is deported and banned, permanently. And any employer that doesn't comply risks severe fines and mandantory jail time.
If you want to be accepted as part of our society, we require that you respect us and our laws.
Obviously, the CEO of Verizon disagrees with you. He was on Charlie Rose the other night talking about this issue. The way Verizon sees it, they could run fiber to the neighborhood like their competitors and have enough capacity for existing technologies, or they could run fiber to the premises and have suitable bandwidth for future technologies. There is more to this than internet connectivity. They are after the broadcast TV, VOD, and VoIP markets too. VoIP in particular worries them, it competes with their core business. This is also the first time I have seen any service provider admit that customers have an interest in uploading to the Internet just as fast as they download.
As far as cost, fiber is roughly the same to run as copper. The providers aren't real concerned about the cost of repairing cable cuts, those get paid for by the poor sucker who ran the backhoe without calling to get the underground lines marked first. So the real issue is whether to use existing copper or pull new fiber. Verizon is focusing on higher density areas and supporting 14-18 million households in 3 years.
This sounds like a nationwide campaign. It's going on in Kansas and Missouri too. It seemed like shortly after the SWB/AT&T merger we started seeing ads telling us the cable companies were gouging us because there is no competition.
Didn't you just write:
M .20060221.wpatentlyabsured-rim21/BNStory/RIM2006/h ome
"To get this straight: Instead of finding one of the countless case of information on this case, instead you decided to post a hopeful karma-whore on Slashdot, repeating a bunch of ignorant mistruths that you're unsure of?"
And then go on to say:
NTP is a purported patent troll, existing on fluffed up patents (many created using the continuation loophole of the patent office, allowing them to add news discoveries in other people's products into a long idling patent application)."
Maybe you should read this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGA
So I guess if you invent something but can't make it profitable, you should give up all your rights and let someone else have it?
Hmm, I seem to remember Win95 pre Active Desktop. That's a significant change. And since I work with W2k on a daily basis, the first thing I had to do was change my XP laptop to Classic desktop, because XP moved a lot of applications on the menus. Ever compared a w2k control panel to XP? And how about early versions of XP and later versions, where the whole start menu was re-arranged? Then of course there is the Outlook on my primary desktop, and the newer version on our terminal servers that defaults to Word for the editor and the send button is in a different location. Or is your idea of consistency the fact that so little changes between service packs? If you're on a software upgrade treadmill, 10 years might seem like a long time. But really it's not.
Change isn't a bad thing, but you shouldn't have to retrain your workforce everytime you upgrade your OS. Believe it or not, but the majority of computer users probably don't even know what a shortcut key is.
What I CAN say is that Windows as a dominant OS has brought us one thing: consistency.
That's why the desktops on Win31, Win95, NT, W2k, and XP all work the same way.... How about the various versions of Office? From a programmer's perspective, Win32 is almost, but not quite the same from version to version, and you can generally get by from one to the next. But consistancy is NOT a MS strong point. They'll throw it out the window for pretty much any new bit of shiny chrome or feature.
I suspect that even under Windows a networking protocol isn't tightly coupled to a graphics or file subsystem.
One difference is that open source doesn't use one technology to leverage another. For instance, IE methods were incorporated in seemingly unrelated system libraries to 'integrate' it into Windows. And I remember when I bought my laptop with XP, by default MSN messenger started automatically, with no information on how to get rid of it. To the common user it became part of the OS. They assumed they could use XP to encourage MSN membership. One of the things that got them in trouble with DOJ was desktop icons on a new installation. Taking Windows' market dominance to promote other software/services. So what happens when you start making API decisions based on marketing instead of technology? Suddenly the graphics subsystem is integrated with the file subsystem through the DRM subsystem. Sure, you can still stub test them individually, and then someone starts worrying about the graphics subsystem being hacked to bypass DRM and the fun continues.
- All the domains that are empty (parked awaiting content) will be served from Windows servers
- All the domains that have content, that somebody cares about, will be served from Linux as before
When you have GoDaddy set up your hosting account, you have a choice of Linux or Windows. So, more accurately, all parked domains will be on IIS. And all the 'domains with content' will be on the OS chosen by the customer.
Does anyone backup their computer using printer dumps (to reciepts or paper), or punch cards (or punch tape)?
Yes, I do. I print a hard copy of my tax returns every year. Even though I file them electronically. And I don't even have to worry about an unknown third party trying to alter them.
Maryland is on the right track. A paper ballot with eletronic tabulation. Too bad it's only a temporary ban. This is a cost effective, verifiable solution to the whole chad problem that started this 6 years ago.
With point 1, I get a chuckle when I walk by someone on a computer, typing up an email, and when they see someone approaching from behind they flip to another window or hit screensaver etc. I want to say to them "you DO realize that's not private in any way shape or form and I or any of your managers could easily read it?" but I usually just walk away smiling at their ignorance.
It could also be that it is simply none of your business. I'm not comfortable with anyone reading over my shoulder or off of my screen while they stand there talking to me. I will nearly always minimize e-mail, query analyzer, web pages, regardless of their content. For all you know they could be writing a priviledged message to another employee (HR, management).
For me, I'm simply not comfortable with the situation, but with direct access to databases I could also be working with data that is confidential. Not only are work areas public, but it's not uncommon for people to have relatives or consultants visiting.
You make assumptions of wrong doing, but you're comfortable walking up and looking at someone's monitor where I doubt you would be comfortable picking up papers from their desk and reading them.
Whenever there's a suburban vs. urban lifestyle debate, I need to ask the question: Do you have kids?
Maybe we should get rid of the tax incentives for reproducing too...
For example, you could more double the effective MPG of 18 wheelers by changing the regulations that limit them so heavily (pun intended) to rather light loads.
Your analysis of just increasing the load size of semis is simplistic. First, some current statistics. Every state in the US has a maximum gross vehicle weight of 80,000 lbs without a permit. A tractor weighs in around 17,000 lbs. Leaving 63,000 for fuel, trailer, and load.
Ok, adding an axle to carry more weight; axles are generally rated at 20,000 (including the weight of the axle), so for 110,000 you would need to add 2 axles. Most likely one to the tractor and one to the trailer. A third axle reduces maneuverability and increases tire scuff (wear). You could use tag axles, but that would increase the weight of the axle assembly and would only help when you are under 80,000 lbs. On top of that, the tractors are designed to pull 80,000. To pull 110,000 they would need a heavier frame and stronger drive train. You could get by with the heavier weight for a short time, but you'd pay for it in maintenance later on.
Then of course there are the road issues. Unless you extend the length of the trucks, adding extra axles doesn't efficiently distribute the weight. Think about bridge spans that are designed for 34,000 lb tandems that are 35' apart. And the fact that our national infrastructure is already severely neglected.
Then of course there is the issue that a lot of cargo is not weight constrained, it is limited by size. Do we want it to be the norm that semis are pulling double 53s or triple pups? Already highway safety advocates are looking to federally freeze semis at current state limits. It could be a big fight to get them increased.
http://www.saferoads.org/issues/fs-trucks.htm
BTW, if those trucks you mention are only getting 5 mpg, they should probably consider newer rigs or check their driver's habits. 7 mpg should be possible without changing their loads.
Even better, they might have just mentioned to the Librarian that material they felt was objectional was publically visible. The library already had a policy in place for dealing with situations like that. But that wouldn't have done much for their egos.
Games are a one window task? MMORPGs are about the only thing I play, and for them it would definately be nice to have more than one display. I could move all the HUD off of the main viewport. Chat windows, toolbars, inventory. Take WoW for instance, about all I want on the main window is the mini map and the small character/monster health frames. Games that ran well windowed would be nice too, so I could use an extra display for IM, email or WWW. I have plenty of machines, I could run non-game apps on a separate box, but why should I?
And really, I'd prefer 3-19" thin frame LCDs to one 30" display.
Java?! Why can't Sun come up with a java compiler that can target freakin' Mono?
.NET. What motivation would they have to do so? Why doesn't Microsoft support WINE?
How many reasons would you like? It's not in their best interest. JVM supports more platforms that
(a) Because Microsoft is the ONLY company involved.
.NET with their own C# and Delphi. They support Win32 with C++ and Delphi. And they support JVM with JBuilder. If only they would look to their roots and support JVM with Delphi too.
.NET as well, I seem to remember hearing about COBOL for .NET, maybe from Microfocus, but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Sorry, nope. Borland has been along for the whole ride, and doing a good job getting useful features added. Borland supports
I'm sure there are other companies supporting