Is he right, and what actual products exist for OS X that would protect against infections?
Today, wild_berry was the billionth story submitter to place an annoying question at the end of his submission. Despite the pleas of nearly a million Slashdot users, wild_berry took part in the timeless tradition of Kindergarten Teachers and Coffee Talkers everywhere, and gave us a topic to discuss amongst ourselves.
What about YOU, what is your opinion of annoying questions at the end of postings? What do YOU think about them? Do YOU have any solutions to the problem?
I clearly remember discussing this matter on Slashdot with others.
Pentium was just a clever name for what would have been the 586... we're now many many generations out from there. Countlessly, really, since there are many Pentium 4/M/Xeon/Extreme Edition.
Now that clock speeds aren't ramping up, you can't go 5GHz P4. Changing names is the only way to keep it semi-coherent.
All of that aside, I was really just trying to be kind of funny, and a bit ribbing to be honest.
By your credentials, you're probably far more familiar with these concepts than I:-D You'll notice the massive mathematical flaws, since I was just trying to crack a joke.
I kind of have a dark outlook on this stuff. I came up with those outcomes because 1) they represent the extremes, and 2) I feel that people are kind of willing to work at these extremes. As evidence, I present the PATRIOT act, and subsidies that prop up outdated business models. The reason that we use corn syrup in the US is because sugar is too expensive. Why is it too expensive? Because we prop up the price. To that end, it makes sense that businesses can pretty much buy what they want (the tobacco lobby), and people are willing to give in if you cite a couple of patriotic words (the PATRIOT act).:-/
That said, I have a great amount of faith in my country, so, I think that people will eventually pull out of this.
We're working with infinitudes here, so expected values all fly to their expected outcome.
Ok, so, I EXPECT that things are going downhill based on the article, and other bits of legislation BUT, the chance could be less than 50%. Given that, the law of large numbers tells us eventually one or the other.:-D
Laws will pass that say that major league sports can do this. Then scientific labs will do this. Eventually, someone will see that they're plunging us into a dark age, and stop voting with their subsidies, and start voting with their morals, and stuff like this will stop.
As an addendum, leagues that don't believe in these draconian tactics will pop up.
If they keep doing this, one of two things will happen.
1) Everything that you experience for your entire life will be monitored, controlled by, and owned by a corporate entity. They'll make sure that you're not exposed to ideas like "freedom of thought." You won't care, because you won't know that there is an alternative. 2) Sometime before that happens, people will understand what's happening, and how to stop it. When MLB goes belly up (because nobody wanted to go anymore anyway), they'll oust their congresspeople from office (who, by then, will be subsidizing baseball). They'll start voting correctly, and thinking correctly. We won't need a bloody revolution, we'll just have people who don't let these things happen.
Wow, I was sleepy when I posted that. I thought that you were suggesting that Linux run NewtonOS in a VM, which made more sense than emulating it if you were going to do it all of the time, but still, not a lot of a point.
Well, you know, you know a lot more about this topic, and have a more developed opinon on it than I do. I probably can't win this argument, so, I'll let you have it.
Chernobyl was built specifically so they could poth produce weapons-grade uranium and generate power. They also did a lot of things wrong.
So, yeah, it was bad, and 12 people died. People die all of the time in coal mining and coal fired plants though, and if you set coal on fire in the street, you'd burn down a city or two too.
There's a big difference between a VM and emulation. I think that virtual machine monitors and their associated virtues are the future. I just don't see what that has to do with this (because it has nothing to do with it:-) )
Although it is not production quality, could this bring a future to the Newton platform?
No, I see no reason why emulating an OS under Linux on a PDA would bring that platform a future. I think that the best thing to do would be to incorporate those features that you liked from the Newton into an existing platform, rather than emulating it under Linux on a Zaurus, which seems more like a "fun and geeky thing to do" than a practical solution to anything.
The point isn't that coal is a dangerous source of radiation. The point is that the radiation output by a nuclear plant, being less than coal, isn't so bad.
Certainly. I really didn't mean for the statement to create such a fuss. The essence of what I was trying to say was that people up here like politics. Given the rather negative light that the article thrust upstaters into, the idea was really to promote that there are a variety of ideas kicked around up here (at least in Ithaca). As such, one could only expect for there to be a handful of people supporting any opinion (I originally was going to make a joke regarding the Alien Abduction Lobby, but decided against it).
Anyway, it's ironic that what I perceived as a defense of the intellects of upstaters has been so thoroughly slammed by every upstater posting on Slashdot.
Anyway, the site that you cite says that the 4000 people estimate is based on bad science.
Also, you might want to consider other industrial disasters. When I was in college, 7 people were killed in a collapse at a local coal fired plant. That's just 5 short of Chernobyl, but nobody cites "Morgantown, WV" when slamming coal as a dangerous power source.
The Uranium is around 500 years. The Plutonium can be refined and reused (which was the whole reason that the US stopped reprocessing, since it's weapons-grade plutonium). Even so, the Plutonium can be reused. You also have to remember, even if those Uranium minds are superfund sites, that means that the end Uranium product is no worse than when we pulled it out of the ground, putting it back into the ground would be no worse for the environment (aside from the fact that we disturbed the ground to begin with).
Even all of that aside, while I agree in essence that it should be discussed more and the political issues solved, even the current state of nuclear power is far better for the planet than continuing to rely on coal power.
It's political BS that makes the situation difficult, not any technical difficulty. People who believe that nuclear power is a problem are creating the problem of nuclear power.
Swimming pool storage is just fine, it works, it's safe. The waste doesn't last for thousands of years, in 500 years, it's less radioactive than the ore it came from. Reprocessing is perfectly safe, and should be done, but the US cut it out in hopes that other countries wouldn't build reprocessing facilities, since the material could be used in weapons. Of course, North Korea and Iran have proved that countries that want weapons will get them, and most of the industrialized world that uses nuclear power reprocesses their material somewhere.
What you are citing isn't a problem with nuclear power, it's a political problem that was created, mostly, but nuclear power's opponents. These arguments don't even make sense, since for them to be a problem, you have to do something wrong, and the reason that we have difficult times doing the right thing, is because we want to satisfy nuclear power's opponents (who wouldn't you can't appease by doing it right, since they want it gone altogether).
If wind power is super-cheap, maintanence free, and inexpensive, hey, go for it. Most of the people whose views aren't backed by some strawman argument seem to go for nuclear power though.
Here's a bit of trivia. Because we don't use nuclear power (which upsets its detractors), a large portion of the US power is provided by coal (we don't build so many plants). Burning coal puts more uranium into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. So, instead of storing uranium safely, we blast it into the atmosphere.
Also, we might as well go on about Cornell University, since we're talking about places that we know nothing about.
Cornell isn't so left-wing at all for a University. Any student who has been there knows that. There are a variety of political views spread throughout campus, most of which have their supporters and detractors. Just earlier this year we had the Diversity Arches up, which drew quite a bit of criticism from conservative organizations on campus, as do several of the program houses (for being racially divisive, in the right-wing terms).
Of course, on the other side, we had the Dirersity Arches and have the Program Houses.
The tree that the Red Buddies were chaining themselves to in front of Day Hall got chopped down. The University fenced in the Redbud forest and chopped it down to make it a parking log. Does this sound like the action of a left-wing institution?
I've spent 1 year here as a grad student at Cornell. The rest of upstate might very well be different, but my experience of upstate is from Ithaca, and that's what upstate looks like from Ithaca.
I am definately not a moron. Perhaps I just need to see more of upstate.
At any rate, the point isn't so much that Ithaca is left wing, but that they enjoy talking politics. I could have said "Ithaca is left wing," but I didn't. I made one statement, and I should have qualified (though it was obvious) that it was about Ithaca.
I would also note that I didn't decide to go name-calling. Nice oratory.
Slashdot Mirror
I just seem to remember clearly talking about Pentium going away. Perhaps it wasn't on Slashdot though. It was a couple months ago.
Is he right, and what actual products exist for OS X that would protect against infections?
Today, wild_berry was the billionth story submitter to place an annoying question at the end of his submission. Despite the pleas of nearly a million Slashdot users, wild_berry took part in the timeless tradition of Kindergarten Teachers and Coffee Talkers everywhere, and gave us a topic to discuss amongst ourselves.
What about YOU, what is your opinion of annoying questions at the end of postings? What do YOU think about them? Do YOU have any solutions to the problem?
I clearly remember discussing this matter on Slashdot with others.
Pentium was just a clever name for what would have been the 586... we're now many many generations out from there. Countlessly, really, since there are many Pentium 4/M/Xeon/Extreme Edition.
Now that clock speeds aren't ramping up, you can't go 5GHz P4. Changing names is the only way to keep it semi-coherent.
All of that aside, I was really just trying to be kind of funny, and a bit ribbing to be honest.
:-D You'll notice the massive mathematical flaws, since I was just trying to crack a joke.
:-/
By your credentials, you're probably far more familiar with these concepts than I
I kind of have a dark outlook on this stuff. I came up with those outcomes because 1) they represent the extremes, and 2) I feel that people are kind of willing to work at these extremes. As evidence, I present the PATRIOT act, and subsidies that prop up outdated business models. The reason that we use corn syrup in the US is because sugar is too expensive. Why is it too expensive? Because we prop up the price. To that end, it makes sense that businesses can pretty much buy what they want (the tobacco lobby), and people are willing to give in if you cite a couple of patriotic words (the PATRIOT act).
That said, I have a great amount of faith in my country, so, I think that people will eventually pull out of this.
I'm in computer science, so...
:-D
Take any probability.
Assume that time is infinite.
We're working with infinitudes here, so expected values all fly to their expected outcome.
Ok, so, I EXPECT that things are going downhill based on the article, and other bits of legislation BUT, the chance could be less than 50%. Given that, the law of large numbers tells us eventually one or the other.
Why would you want to buy the OVA if the ending of the show is lame.
Personally, I'm a dork. The OVAs at the top of my list are Excel Saga and all of the Tenchi series.
Oh, another option.
Laws will pass that say that major league sports can do this. Then scientific labs will do this. Eventually, someone will see that they're plunging us into a dark age, and stop voting with their subsidies, and start voting with their morals, and stuff like this will stop.
As an addendum, leagues that don't believe in these draconian tactics will pop up.
There's the flip side.
If they keep doing this, one of two things will happen.
1) Everything that you experience for your entire life will be monitored, controlled by, and owned by a corporate entity. They'll make sure that you're not exposed to ideas like "freedom of thought." You won't care, because you won't know that there is an alternative.
2) Sometime before that happens, people will understand what's happening, and how to stop it. When MLB goes belly up (because nobody wanted to go anymore anyway), they'll oust their congresspeople from office (who, by then, will be subsidizing baseball). They'll start voting correctly, and thinking correctly. We won't need a bloody revolution, we'll just have people who don't let these things happen.
No, he's serious.
He wants a bunch of people with no expertise in the area that he's asking about to tell him what to think.
That's why they have "Ask Slashdot," which is where he should have put that.
No, certainly. I agree. I'm just concerned that I'll further promulgate flamewars, which I've spent the past day doing.
I really need to get back to my research.
Wow, I was sleepy when I posted that. I thought that you were suggesting that Linux run NewtonOS in a VM, which made more sense than emulating it if you were going to do it all of the time, but still, not a lot of a point.
Well, you know, you know a lot more about this topic, and have a more developed opinon on it than I do. I probably can't win this argument, so, I'll let you have it.
*sigh*
Citing Chernobyl is just silly.
Chernobyl was built specifically so they could poth produce weapons-grade uranium and generate power. They also did a lot of things wrong.
So, yeah, it was bad, and 12 people died. People die all of the time in coal mining and coal fired plants though, and if you set coal on fire in the street, you'd burn down a city or two too.
There's a big difference between a VM and emulation. I think that virtual machine monitors and their associated virtues are the future. I just don't see what that has to do with this (because it has nothing to do with it :-) )
Although it is not production quality, could this bring a future to the Newton platform?
No, I see no reason why emulating an OS under Linux on a PDA would bring that platform a future. I think that the best thing to do would be to incorporate those features that you liked from the Newton into an existing platform, rather than emulating it under Linux on a Zaurus, which seems more like a "fun and geeky thing to do" than a practical solution to anything.
The point isn't that coal is a dangerous source of radiation. The point is that the radiation output by a nuclear plant, being less than coal, isn't so bad.
Certainly. I really didn't mean for the statement to create such a fuss. The essence of what I was trying to say was that people up here like politics. Given the rather negative light that the article thrust upstaters into, the idea was really to promote that there are a variety of ideas kicked around up here (at least in Ithaca). As such, one could only expect for there to be a handful of people supporting any opinion (I originally was going to make a joke regarding the Alien Abduction Lobby, but decided against it).
Anyway, it's ironic that what I perceived as a defense of the intellects of upstaters has been so thoroughly slammed by every upstater posting on Slashdot.
BTB, UMich rocks.
Chernobyl killed 12 people, IIRC.
Anyway, the site that you cite says that the 4000 people estimate is based on bad science.
Also, you might want to consider other industrial disasters. When I was in college, 7 people were killed in a collapse at a local coal fired plant. That's just 5 short of Chernobyl, but nobody cites "Morgantown, WV" when slamming coal as a dangerous power source.
The Uranium is around 500 years. The Plutonium can be refined and reused (which was the whole reason that the US stopped reprocessing, since it's weapons-grade plutonium). Even so, the Plutonium can be reused. You also have to remember, even if those Uranium minds are superfund sites, that means that the end Uranium product is no worse than when we pulled it out of the ground, putting it back into the ground would be no worse for the environment (aside from the fact that we disturbed the ground to begin with).
Even all of that aside, while I agree in essence that it should be discussed more and the political issues solved, even the current state of nuclear power is far better for the planet than continuing to rely on coal power.
I'm not a moron.
You upstaters get very fractious about this little bit.
here
I guess that from now on I need to be MUCH more formal in my postings than those who reply.
Yes, ok, we pump warm water back into the lake that has been shown to not have a measurable effect on the environment. Satisfied?
I meant, we're not pumping boiling hot water into the lake that causes enviromental damage, like cooling water from industrial uses.
It's political BS that makes the situation difficult, not any technical difficulty. People who believe that nuclear power is a problem are creating the problem of nuclear power.
Swimming pool storage is just fine, it works, it's safe. The waste doesn't last for thousands of years, in 500 years, it's less radioactive than the ore it came from. Reprocessing is perfectly safe, and should be done, but the US cut it out in hopes that other countries wouldn't build reprocessing facilities, since the material could be used in weapons. Of course, North Korea and Iran have proved that countries that want weapons will get them, and most of the industrialized world that uses nuclear power reprocesses their material somewhere.
What you are citing isn't a problem with nuclear power, it's a political problem that was created, mostly, but nuclear power's opponents. These arguments don't even make sense, since for them to be a problem, you have to do something wrong, and the reason that we have difficult times doing the right thing, is because we want to satisfy nuclear power's opponents (who wouldn't you can't appease by doing it right, since they want it gone altogether).
If wind power is super-cheap, maintanence free, and inexpensive, hey, go for it. Most of the people whose views aren't backed by some strawman argument seem to go for nuclear power though.
Here's a bit of trivia. Because we don't use nuclear power (which upsets its detractors), a large portion of the US power is provided by coal (we don't build so many plants). Burning coal puts more uranium into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. So, instead of storing uranium safely, we blast it into the atmosphere.
Also, we might as well go on about Cornell University, since we're talking about places that we know nothing about.
Cornell isn't so left-wing at all for a University. Any student who has been there knows that. There are a variety of political views spread throughout campus, most of which have their supporters and detractors. Just earlier this year we had the Diversity Arches up, which drew quite a bit of criticism from conservative organizations on campus, as do several of the program houses (for being racially divisive, in the right-wing terms).
Of course, on the other side, we had the Dirersity Arches and have the Program Houses.
The tree that the Red Buddies were chaining themselves to in front of Day Hall got chopped down. The University fenced in the Redbud forest and chopped it down to make it a parking log. Does this sound like the action of a left-wing institution?
So, "holy crap, you're a moron."
Dude,
I've spent 1 year here as a grad student at Cornell. The rest of upstate might very well be different, but my experience of upstate is from Ithaca, and that's what upstate looks like from Ithaca.
I am definately not a moron. Perhaps I just need to see more of upstate.
At any rate, the point isn't so much that Ithaca is left wing, but that they enjoy talking politics. I could have said "Ithaca is left wing," but I didn't. I made one statement, and I should have qualified (though it was obvious) that it was about Ithaca.
I would also note that I didn't decide to go name-calling. Nice oratory.
Rather, the heart of what I said is not wrong.