That's partly (if not more than partly) because of the (traditionally) high cost for your ticket to enter Linux/Un*x Land (both monitarily and intellectually). Keep the entry barriers high (steep learning curve, tools that are difficult to use, etc.) and the only ones who can stick it out will typically be the above average folks.
Actually, there are 2 classes of Linux programmers: (1) those of us who grew up in a Unix environment before Windows came along (and are thus very experienced) and (2) those who started computing with Windows or DOS but were technically adventurous and confident enough to venture beyond that. Either way, it lifts the average competency of Linux developers.
Linux isn't there yet until Joe Shmoe can throw together a toy app quickly and easily that can keep track of his beer, cigarette, and pork rind expenditures.
I work for the weather service and anytime we make anything new available for the public, we have to go through this whole process to make sure it shouldn't be provided by private business.
Ideology aside, the real reason for this is that private companies can make campaign contributions and government agencies obviously can't. Every time another function of government is "privatized", it's another opportunity to effectively collect kickbacks.
A few months ago I wanted to putz around with some hourly temperature data covering a year or so for a couple of cities. Since this data is produced by the National Weather Service using MY tax dollars (OK - yours too), I was sure I'd find treasure troves of it online.
Wrong! What I did find was a couple of companies that wanted quite a bit of money for it. Since I was just playing around anyway, I passed on that. As with all other evils, I'm sure the republicans are to blame for this...
Most opponents to this idea don't consider that they are talking about realigning NASA in the direction of achieving this one big mission instead of the aimless direction it has been moving if for quite awhile.
There's also the question of whether NASA should emphasize real science (as it arguably has) or instead blow the bank on big-ticket manned missions that do little other than to feed the fantasies of a few SF fans. Huge advances have been made because of Hubble, COBE, WMAP, and the various interplanetary probes. I'd hate to see that compromised in favor of another bottomless money pit like the ISS...
I know of no formal studies on the relative level of mental illness in religious vs. non-religious people, but based on my own observations, I'd bet the numbers would come out pretty much the same accross the board.
The prevalence of religious belief pretty much precludes it being considered mental illness. I wonder if that would still be the case if, say, only 2% of people were strongly religious?
I would never begrudge you your right to say and do whatever you want whenever you want
If only more evangelical Christians felt this way...
If all that would be required to debit these things is proximity to a receiver - pretty much necessary if they're to be used in the manner described - where is the security? Could someone just carry a receiver through a crowd, charging $1 from everyone who passes within a meter or so? I'll have to get me one of those!
Why is there this attitude that if your project is free, then it does not matter if it is garbage.
Except that no one here is defending "garbage"; they're complaining that an old version of an OS product is being compared to new versions of commercial products. That it is necessary to do this in order to make the commercial software look good in comparison is interesting, no?
As for the old "ready for the desktop" FUD, well... I used to dual-boot (Linux/Windows) but after over a year of not booting Windows even once I reclaimed that disk space and I'm happy as can be. Many of my friends & family still run MS and I just have to shake my head at the cesspool they're stuck in, dealing with viruses, spyware, adware, you name it. Most of them will probably stay there, too, because they've been convinced that Linux is way over their heads. The truth is that it's just different, and even then not nearly as much (from a user POV) as they imagine.
Anyway, the debate isn't really about which software is better, because there's no blanket answer to that question. For me the real issue is whether I (as the user) am in control of the software or, as is often case in the shrink-wrap world, it's the other way around.
That's nice, but it's really important to break it down between false positives and negatives. I get over 200 spams a day (before filtering), and while it's quite tolerable for 2 or 3 of those to get through, missing that many legitimate messages a day is not.
It's 'ignorance and superstition' to find it repellant that someone has abused their rectum to the point where it's a big pouty thing that bulges out like a set of lips?
Well, I wouldn't have chosen exactly that definition... I was really thinking of the sexual repression and denial of the 1950s, which really was all about "virtue" through ignorance and shame. We can all thank the 1960s for overthrowing that regime. But I'm not a fan of the "big pouty thing" either...
Do you really think goatse will be "disturbing" 100 years from now? Only 40 years ago, people thought the Beatles were disturbing
I wouldn't rule it out. There are people who are working very hard now to drag us all back into a new era of ignorance and superstition. Can they succeed? Maybe not, but things were pretty wide-open in the 20s, and then look what happened!
I'd contend that researchers & scientists in general would be quite silly to site an electronic-only resource in their publications
I don't necessarily see a problem here, as long as serious academic research is maintained online by trusted, stable parties. That's not demanding any more than we have up to now now with a print-based distribution system, since that depends on the continuity of a large network of brick-and-morter libraries (and associated infrastructure) to function effectively. Imagine how difficult things would look if we were going in the opposite direction technologically!
As for the volume of dreck available on the web... Well, that's been equally true of print media, something I'm reminded of whenever I stand in a grocery checkout line. Credibility will always be judged by the trustworthiness of the source.
Unfortunately that only rebates a fraction of your mortgage interest. That's a whole lot less than the commercial rental value of the space. In effect the employer is being subsidized mostly by the employee, but partly by the government as well...
That's what telecommuting is. You're just traffic on a network connection. In principle, if you're clever and can automate at least the appearance of getting the job done, you could probably take several full-time jobs and still have lots of time to spare!
Not to be pedantic... Oh, what the hell. I'd probably say asocial rather than antisocial, which implies that they're beating up or killing people or something. And who wants that in the workplace!
And DDT was an invention once too. That change went well.
Hmmm... I guess I wasn't thinking about DDT when I said this. Maybe it was a foolish mistake to leave the Microsoft nest, after all! Software is like sausage: the less we know about how it's made and what's in it, the better.
In the days before the Pure Food and Drug Act, it was considered "nobody's business" what was in the food we eat, either; you just opened the can and accepted whatever was in there. Times change.
I hear you and mostly agree; I just don't think there's much that anybody can do about it. Some people are just very gullible and willing to sign on to even the most obvious scams. In my experience they often get defensive when you try to give them a heads-up, too, as if you're screwing with their sacred right to get ripped off or something. Marketers know this and sometimes I can hardly blame them for taking advantage...
If the vast majority of people weren't so damn irresponsable and stupid...
That may be true, but unfortunately we have to work with what's out there. Things would be a lot nicer if everyone would drop their other interests and talents to focus instead on e-mail and internet technology, for sure.
If the goal of such a tax is to inhibit spam (and not primarily to raise revenue), then the work-arounds you note don't make much difference. I agree that it would still be difficult to administer, though, and it might even give government another excuse to monitor for content (not that they really need one)...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, there are 2 classes of Linux programmers: (1) those of us who grew up in a Unix environment before Windows came along (and are thus very experienced) and (2) those who started computing with Windows or DOS but were technically adventurous and confident enough to venture beyond that. Either way, it lifts the average competency of Linux developers.
Linux isn't there yet until Joe Shmoe can throw together a toy app quickly and easily that can keep track of his beer, cigarette, and pork rind expenditures.
Isn't that what Perl is for?
Hmmm... Doesn't this sound suspiciously like MS marketing drivel?
Ideology aside, the real reason for this is that private companies can make campaign contributions and government agencies obviously can't. Every time another function of government is "privatized", it's another opportunity to effectively collect kickbacks.
Wrong! What I did find was a couple of companies that wanted quite a bit of money for it. Since I was just playing around anyway, I passed on that. As with all other evils, I'm sure the republicans are to blame for this...
There's also the question of whether NASA should emphasize real science (as it arguably has) or instead blow the bank on big-ticket manned missions that do little other than to feed the fantasies of a few SF fans. Huge advances have been made because of Hubble, COBE, WMAP, and the various interplanetary probes. I'd hate to see that compromised in favor of another bottomless money pit like the ISS...
No, I don't think it ever was considered a "crazy idea" at all, at least not by anyone who understood it. It was a hit right out of the chute.
The prevalence of religious belief pretty much precludes it being considered mental illness. I wonder if that would still be the case if, say, only 2% of people were strongly religious?
I would never begrudge you your right to say and do whatever you want whenever you want
If only more evangelical Christians felt this way...
Because idiots like us keep responding to it.
If all that would be required to debit these things is proximity to a receiver - pretty much necessary if they're to be used in the manner described - where is the security? Could someone just carry a receiver through a crowd, charging $1 from everyone who passes within a meter or so? I'll have to get me one of those!
Except that no one here is defending "garbage"; they're complaining that an old version of an OS product is being compared to new versions of commercial products. That it is necessary to do this in order to make the commercial software look good in comparison is interesting, no?
As for the old "ready for the desktop" FUD, well... I used to dual-boot (Linux/Windows) but after over a year of not booting Windows even once I reclaimed that disk space and I'm happy as can be. Many of my friends & family still run MS and I just have to shake my head at the cesspool they're stuck in, dealing with viruses, spyware, adware, you name it. Most of them will probably stay there, too, because they've been convinced that Linux is way over their heads. The truth is that it's just different, and even then not nearly as much (from a user POV) as they imagine.
Anyway, the debate isn't really about which software is better, because there's no blanket answer to that question. For me the real issue is whether I (as the user) am in control of the software or, as is often case in the shrink-wrap world, it's the other way around.
> Messages classified: 1,440
> Classification errors: 19
> Accuracy: 98.68%
That's nice, but it's really important to break it down between false positives and negatives. I get over 200 spams a day (before filtering), and while it's quite tolerable for 2 or 3 of those to get through, missing that many legitimate messages a day is not.
Well, I wouldn't have chosen exactly that definition... I was really thinking of the sexual repression and denial of the 1950s, which really was all about "virtue" through ignorance and shame. We can all thank the 1960s for overthrowing that regime. But I'm not a fan of the "big pouty thing" either...
I wouldn't rule it out. There are people who are working very hard now to drag us all back into a new era of ignorance and superstition. Can they succeed? Maybe not, but things were pretty wide-open in the 20s, and then look what happened!
I don't necessarily see a problem here, as long as serious academic research is maintained online by trusted, stable parties. That's not demanding any more than we have up to now now with a print-based distribution system, since that depends on the continuity of a large network of brick-and-morter libraries (and associated infrastructure) to function effectively. Imagine how difficult things would look if we were going in the opposite direction technologically!
As for the volume of dreck available on the web... Well, that's been equally true of print media, something I'm reminded of whenever I stand in a grocery checkout line. Credibility will always be judged by the trustworthiness of the source.
Unfortunately that only rebates a fraction of your mortgage interest. That's a whole lot less than the commercial rental value of the space. In effect the employer is being subsidized mostly by the employee, but partly by the government as well...
That's what telecommuting is. You're just traffic on a network connection. In principle, if you're clever and can automate at least the appearance of getting the job done, you could probably take several full-time jobs and still have lots of time to spare!
Not to be pedantic... Oh, what the hell. I'd probably say asocial rather than antisocial, which implies that they're beating up or killing people or something. And who wants that in the workplace!
Hmmm... I guess I wasn't thinking about DDT when I said this. Maybe it was a foolish mistake to leave the Microsoft nest, after all! Software is like sausage: the less we know about how it's made and what's in it, the better.
Wrong. I got one of these letters too, and I've never had an account there!
In the days before the Pure Food and Drug Act, it was considered "nobody's business" what was in the food we eat, either; you just opened the can and accepted whatever was in there. Times change.
I hear you and mostly agree; I just don't think there's much that anybody can do about it. Some people are just very gullible and willing to sign on to even the most obvious scams. In my experience they often get defensive when you try to give them a heads-up, too, as if you're screwing with their sacred right to get ripped off or something. Marketers know this and sometimes I can hardly blame them for taking advantage...
That may be true, but unfortunately we have to work with what's out there. Things would be a lot nicer if everyone would drop their other interests and talents to focus instead on e-mail and internet technology, for sure.
But it would fit in so nicely with the rest of our foreign policy!
You don't need to tax childbirth; it's expensive enough as it is, and getting ever more so...
If the goal of such a tax is to inhibit spam (and not primarily to raise revenue), then the work-arounds you note don't make much difference. I agree that it would still be difficult to administer, though, and it might even give government another excuse to monitor for content (not that they really need one)...