Well folks, that's what it comes down to. So I think it's time to cut to the chase and talk turkey. Evolution is, at root, just a theory at this point. Hear that? THEORY. Theory as in... not fact.
Theory as in...a hypothesis that has accumulated enough evidence to be regarded as true. You need to learn your terminology better.
That means the evidence ain't all there. The proof ain't there.
Sorry, no. It means the proof *IS* there. If it wasn't, it'd still be a hypothesis.
What about the Bible?
What about it?
As a theory, it deserves 100% of the respect and care and consideration and analysis and investigation you devote to the kewl kidz' little theory.
Um, no, it doesn't. The Bible has no evidence for what it says about creation other than "The Bible says so". That's not good enough.
Incidentally, *which* Biblical story of creation did you want to champion? It has about three, and they contradict each other.
If the network's owner has specified that anyone can use it, why is it bad to do so?
Well, for one thing, it probably violates his contract with his ISP.
Now, that's a matter between the network owner and the ISP. Another, more serious problem is that, most likely, 90%+ of the people who have a completely open AP have it that way because that's how it came out of the box and a) have no idea that they have opened their network access to the world and b) have no idea of the consequences of opening their network access to the world (inadequate bandwidth because other people are using it, legal liability for what other people are sending over your connection, and so on).
This is the dirty little secret: Linux is easier to install than Windows. Has been for years, particularly if you use one of the user-friendly distros like Gentoo or Ubuntu.
The trick is that your average user can't install *any* OS. But he gets his PC with Windows already installed and running. Linux will arrive as a desktop for the average user when the average user can easily obtain a PC with Linux pre-installed and tuned to the hardware. This means that Linux on the desktop is no longer a technical matter. Linux itself has everything needed to be a desktop OS; what it lacks is marketing support, not technical support.
Um, if the cable service is so much better, why don't you get it yourself? I can't believe the cable company told you, "No, that's one floor further up, we don't run coax up there."
eMule is not bad; I like it a bunch. Having a searchable database of what's available is nice. It's slow, but that's OK; I'm willing to let it take a few days. For BitTorrent, I use Deluge, which is good if you're only going to be using other people's torrents.
Ever try reading in and storing an arbitrary length string? I'm fairly convinced it's not possible in Ada.
It's not possible anywhere, unless you have access to an arbitrary size memory. Ada simply makes you aware of that fact before you put the code into production.
The question is what is someone considering suicide going to do a search for - suicide, suicide consueling, or suicide methods?
Not really. If the potential suicide goes searching specifically for sites that provide ways to commit suicide, then it's hard to argue that it's the search engine's for finding sites that provide ways to commit suicide.
I seriously doubt you actually have experience using linux in the early days (pre-2000): masochists and the brainfuck geeks sure loved it, but nobody else did.
I started using Linux in 1993. Started out with SLS, which I did have difficulties with, but quickly switched to the new-fangled Slackware and had much more luck with that. Never looked back since (these days I use Debian, though).
That's the level of efficiency you could not get from linux at that time (from OS/2 or BeOS yes, linux NO) but you paid for it by giving up security.
Bullshit. The Unix security model takes almost no resources to implement. It was fully implemented almost from the start, and ran first on the PDP-11/20, a box that had the amazing memory capacity of 56 K. Windows didn't have a security model because it was based on DOS, a glorified program loader for which its creator (who was *not* Bill Gates and who called it the "Quick & Dirty Operating System") did not bother to provide one. This attitude continued as personal Windows, which was based on DOS, was not regarded as a multi-user system and was not regarded as a networking system. The problem wasn't that of performance, the problem was that Microsoft did see it as necessary to spend the time and money required to graft a security model onto it. Eventually it became overwhelming obvious that the system *did* need a security model, and Microsoft finally deployed one by moving everybody over to the NT lineage, which had it, with Windows XP. But they couldn't get away from the bad habits inculcated by programming for a system with no security model; even Microsoft themselves continued to release applications that required you to be root in order to run them. And now they're still stuck with it.
..do we really need Gartner to tell us that Vista is crap - one year and 3+ months after it was release?
Considering all the "There's nothing wrong with Vista, it runs great for me" posts we see, apparently so.
Statements like "Users want a smaller Windows that can run on low-priced -- and low-powered -- hardware..." make me wonder if these guys graduated at the top of their class at Captain Obvious University.
Not really. Users might have wanted a larger Windows that offered more capabilities and features, instead. Arguably, Microsoft has laid their bets that this would be the case. Gartner is now saying that they bet on the wrong horse.
Additionally they state "...increasingly, users work with "OS-agnostic applications..." - is there a reason for them to not just say "web apps"?
Because "OS-agnostic applications" != "web apps". An OS-agnostic application might be a Java bytecode program that runs in a JVM, with no web browser or server involved. On the other hand, a web app might be coded with ActiveX controls which mean it'll only run on IE on a Windows box.
And how about the fact that most large organizations have so much legacy code that even if Windows development stopped entirely today, you wouldn't get rid of all of that desktop apps for many, many, many years.
More than a little truth here, but Microsoft isn't going to survive, let alone dominate, by just supporting legacy code. And while WINE is still immature, it's developing.
But a "so bad, it's bad" movie can still be MST3Ked--some of their most memorable episodes come from that. Manos: The Hands of Fate, Red Zone Cuba...there was nothing "so bad it's good" about those movies. None of unintentionally funny ridiculousness of an Ed Wood film.
Re:THE PINK PANZER
on
The DIY Tank
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Slashdot Mirror
Theory as in...a hypothesis that has accumulated enough evidence to be regarded as true. You need to learn your terminology better.
Sorry, no. It means the proof *IS* there. If it wasn't, it'd still be a hypothesis.
What about it?
Um, no, it doesn't. The Bible has no evidence for what it says about creation other than "The Bible says so". That's not good enough.
Incidentally, *which* Biblical story of creation did you want to champion? It has about three, and they contradict each other.
No, but it does allow dismissing opposing|differing opinions as meritless because they *are* meritless.
Yep, because we know the earth never actually changed. It's only 6000 years old, right?
Wow. That made no sense. If you had a point other than you hate evolution, it didn't make it through.
Well, for one thing, it probably violates his contract with his ISP.
Now, that's a matter between the network owner and the ISP. Another, more serious problem is that, most likely, 90%+ of the people who have a completely open AP have it that way because that's how it came out of the box and a) have no idea that they have opened their network access to the world and b) have no idea of the consequences of opening their network access to the world (inadequate bandwidth because other people are using it, legal liability for what other people are sending over your connection, and so on).
This is the dirty little secret: Linux is easier to install than Windows. Has been for years, particularly if you use one of the user-friendly distros like Gentoo or Ubuntu.
The trick is that your average user can't install *any* OS. But he gets his PC with Windows already installed and running. Linux will arrive as a desktop for the average user when the average user can easily obtain a PC with Linux pre-installed and tuned to the hardware. This means that Linux on the desktop is no longer a technical matter. Linux itself has everything needed to be a desktop OS; what it lacks is marketing support, not technical support.
Um, if the cable service is so much better, why don't you get it yourself? I can't believe the cable company told you, "No, that's one floor further up, we don't run coax up there."
They all went north, eh?
eMule is not bad; I like it a bunch. Having a searchable database of what's available is nice. It's slow, but that's OK; I'm willing to let it take a few days. For BitTorrent, I use Deluge, which is good if you're only going to be using other people's torrents.
You don't want to drink that coffee. Trust me. Well, no, it doesn't taste bad, but...
"Service Unavailable"
Who will save us now??
It's not possible anywhere, unless you have access to an arbitrary size memory. Ada simply makes you aware of that fact before you put the code into production.
They knew it was 10,000 SSNs because the web site allowed them to do a COMPLETE DUMP OF THE ENTIRE DATABASE. Lock, stock and barrel.
The search engine's *fault*, that is.
Not really. If the potential suicide goes searching specifically for sites that provide ways to commit suicide, then it's hard to argue that it's the search engine's for finding sites that provide ways to commit suicide.
I started using Linux in 1993. Started out with SLS, which I did have difficulties with, but quickly switched to the new-fangled Slackware and had much more luck with that. Never looked back since (these days I use Debian, though).
Bullshit. The Unix security model takes almost no resources to implement. It was fully implemented almost from the start, and ran first on the PDP-11/20, a box that had the amazing memory capacity of 56 K. Windows didn't have a security model because it was based on DOS, a glorified program loader for which its creator (who was *not* Bill Gates and who called it the "Quick & Dirty Operating System") did not bother to provide one. This attitude continued as personal Windows, which was based on DOS, was not regarded as a multi-user system and was not regarded as a networking system. The problem wasn't that of performance, the problem was that Microsoft did see it as necessary to spend the time and money required to graft a security model onto it. Eventually it became overwhelming obvious that the system *did* need a security model, and Microsoft finally deployed one by moving everybody over to the NT lineage, which had it, with Windows XP. But they couldn't get away from the bad habits inculcated by programming for a system with no security model; even Microsoft themselves continued to release applications that required you to be root in order to run them. And now they're still stuck with it.
Odd that the same home PC at the time, running Linux, had no trouble at all enforcing it.
Considering all the "There's nothing wrong with Vista, it runs great for me" posts we see, apparently so.
Not really. Users might have wanted a larger Windows that offered more capabilities and features, instead. Arguably, Microsoft has laid their bets that this would be the case. Gartner is now saying that they bet on the wrong horse.
Because "OS-agnostic applications" != "web apps". An OS-agnostic application might be a Java bytecode program that runs in a JVM, with no web browser or server involved. On the other hand, a web app might be coded with ActiveX controls which mean it'll only run on IE on a Windows box.
More than a little truth here, but Microsoft isn't going to survive, let alone dominate, by just supporting legacy code. And while WINE is still immature, it's developing.
Hey, at least it wasn't Ben Grimm. Although in that case, we might have been able to blame Klaw for all this...
Don't look at it, Marion! Keep your eyes shut!
Mmmmmm...home-baked bread.
And the fourteen before those are all from Zonk...double wow.
But a "so bad, it's bad" movie can still be MST3Ked--some of their most memorable episodes come from that. Manos: The Hands of Fate, Red Zone Cuba...there was nothing "so bad it's good" about those movies. None of unintentionally funny ridiculousness of an Ed Wood film.
No, not pink, darling. Peach-colored. Pink is tacky.
The original ending is the zombies win. No producer in Hollywood will ever shoot an ending like that.