> So what then are the post war possibilities? Long term US military occupation to hold the country together? [...] So many things can go wrong. This is going to be a fucking nightmare for decades. When your kids ask why we're constantly occupying chunks of the middle east, and why we're constantly worried about new terrorist incidents, why nobody can afford to buy gasoline anymore, etc -- remind them that this was the night it all started.
Notice that the rise of pseudo-Islamic terrorism against the USA is a direct result of putting US troops in Arab nations during Gulf War I and leaving them there for 12 years afterward. It's hard to imagine that long-term occupation of two more Islamic countries is going to help with the terrorism situation.
> The Microsoft Office document formats are not viral, because they affect nothing other than themselves. If you install Microsoft Word on your computer, all of your SurfWriter documents remain in SurfWriter format; nothing changes.
And if you install Emacs on your computer nothing changes either.
> The GPL, on the other hand, spreads. If you link GPL-licensed code in with your project, poof! Your project is now GPL-licensed as well
The GPL doesn't "spread" any more than any other license does. If you want to link your project to GPL'd code then that's your decision; as with any other license you must make an informed decision about the pros and cons of using the licensed product and whatever constraints it puts on you if you do decide to use it.
> To me the problem is it seems kinda creepy that you'd need the threat of shame from your friends or family to not do something you consider morally abhorent.
It's no surprise that so many sects with tight moral constraints and/or inflexible doctrine are based on strong personal associations between their adherents, including (but not limited to) regular assemblies of the group's members.
What I wonder is whether that kind of social engineering was designed in by those groups' founders, or whether it is simply the outcome of "survival of the fittest" - i.e., whether the groups that didn't practice social engineering were more likely to disintegrate over the centuries.
> "Your average user" is why virus like this spread.
I think there are some major "average user" human engineering exploits underway right now. Ramping up from almost nothing 2-3 weeks ago, "Windows security patches" from total strangers are now account for almost half the spam I'm getting. I wonder what the payload really is, but I doubt that strangers are sending me security updates out of concern for my wellbeing.
And at 100K-200K per message, this phenomenon can't be good for internet bandwidth.
> So SCO is enforcing their IP. It's their call what they open source not IBM's.
Their business model isn't sound in the current environment. Only those vendors who sell UNIX to support their underlying hardware business are hanging in there right now.
And even those businesses' days may be numbered, unless they can convert themselves into service companies. It's getting hard to justify buying a Sun instead of an Athlon.
> Apparently everyone who has ever posted a story on this topic, hasn't seen John Woo's: Faceoff.
There was an old Outer Limits or Twilight Zone (forgot which) where a guy had a way to give an injection to soften the facial tissues and then reform the face by pressing it into a mold. The end of the show was somewhat unforgettable; perhaps I've already said too much.
...is when I see friends together at a restaurant or something, and one or both of them spend the whole time yakking to someone else on their cell phone rather than talking to the person they're actually with.
> > "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code"
> Sounds like Penis envy to me.
It's an incredibly stupid a priori claim to base a court case on, for sure. Do they expect the court to just accept it as a given and move directly to the penalty phase?
> > "The only reason the Christian God has hung around so long is because he is defined as untestable."
> That is not nearly so true as you might think. The New Testament makes a lot of historical fact claims, that are potentially falsifiable. If enough archaeologists "get lucky," Christianity's factual foundations could very well be torpedoed.
However, even if the New Testament happens to have all its historical facts straight, that doesn't give the slightest suggestion that any of the supernatural claims it makes are true. (Perhaps you've heard of historical novels?)
The simple fact is, the core claims of Christianity are untestable. Some of the peripheral claims are testable and fail, e.g. the ability of believers to drink poison without coming to harm. More important ones get reinterpreted when they fail, e.g. contrary to Jesus' claim there was no kingdom instituted during the lifetime of his hearers, so modern doctrine says he was talking about a church when he said "kingdom" (and what a sorry substitute it is!).
Re: Dave hit the nail on the head
on
Hyatt Discusses Tabs
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
> Speaking as a longtime IE/Windows user, I never quite understood the fuss of tabs. I just use multiple browser windows and use the taskbar to flip between them.
FWIW, I keep about 20-25 browser windows open, scattered over 9 virtual desktops, with an average of 10-15 tabs open in each browser window. I use the windows to sort my tabs by "topic", but I can have lots of tabs open simultaneously on a given topic.
That 10-15 "average" covers windows with single tabs through windows with about 30. The mode must be something like 10.
And as others have already mentioned, my browser preserves all this between session on my rare logouts. Tabs have completely revolutionized my WWW experience.
> I do, however, find it interesting that any religious sentiment is "Troll" while anti-religious (Not evolutionistic, pure "Christians are morons") sentiment is "Insightful".
You err in your assumption that the moronic claims of creationists are identical with Christianity.
I know lots of Christians who aren't morons, but I don't know anyone actively peddling creationism who isn't either a moron or a con artist.
Slashdot Mirror
> So what then are the post war possibilities? Long term US military occupation to hold the country together? [...] So many things can go wrong. This is going to be a fucking nightmare for decades. When your kids ask why we're constantly occupying chunks of the middle east, and why we're constantly worried about new terrorist incidents, why nobody can afford to buy gasoline anymore, etc -- remind them that this was the night it all started.
Notice that the rise of pseudo-Islamic terrorism against the USA is a direct result of putting US troops in Arab nations during Gulf War I and leaving them there for 12 years afterward. It's hard to imagine that long-term occupation of two more Islamic countries is going to help with the terrorism situation.
The Early Bird OS?
> The Microsoft Office document formats are not viral, because they affect nothing other than themselves. If you install Microsoft Word on your computer, all of your SurfWriter documents remain in SurfWriter format; nothing changes.
And if you install Emacs on your computer nothing changes either.
> The GPL, on the other hand, spreads. If you link GPL-licensed code in with your project, poof! Your project is now GPL-licensed as well
The GPL doesn't "spread" any more than any other license does. If you want to link your project to GPL'd code then that's your decision; as with any other license you must make an informed decision about the pros and cons of using the licensed product and whatever constraints it puts on you if you do decide to use it.
Calling the GPL "viral" is FUDish misinformation.
> If you know any good that WebDAV does, I'd like to know about it.
DAV: I see you're trying to modify a remote Web page. Would you like me to help?
Hal the Human: [muttering under his breath] I think Hal's gonna unplug DAV this time around!
Why would anyone need to download patches for a Microsoft product? I've been getting about 5 in the mail every day lately.
> This man lost his rights as a US citizen when he traveled overseas and conspired with a foreign government to harm the United States.
You, like the fascists running our government these days, are deliberately obscuring the difference between "accused terrorist" and "terrorist".
There's a reason for our constitutional rights to counsel and trial by a jury of our peers.
The lumberjack laughs his ass
Right off and moves on.
> To me the problem is it seems kinda creepy that you'd need the threat of shame from your friends or family to not do something you consider morally abhorent.
It's no surprise that so many sects with tight moral constraints and/or inflexible doctrine are based on strong personal associations between their adherents, including (but not limited to) regular assemblies of the group's members.
What I wonder is whether that kind of social engineering was designed in by those groups' founders, or whether it is simply the outcome of "survival of the fittest" - i.e., whether the groups that didn't practice social engineering were more likely to disintegrate over the centuries.
> Those of you who think pornography cannot be destructive are unaware of the fact that it can ruin some peoples lives.
And religion can ruin some people's lives too. Did you have a point you wanted to make?
> "Your average user" is why virus like this spread.
I think there are some major "average user" human engineering exploits underway right now. Ramping up from almost nothing 2-3 weeks ago, "Windows security patches" from total strangers are now account for almost half the spam I'm getting. I wonder what the payload really is, but I doubt that strangers are sending me security updates out of concern for my wellbeing.
And at 100K-200K per message, this phenomenon can't be good for internet bandwidth.
> I would not let my dog be associated with the three lettter acronym SCO.
I wish some of my neighbors would have their dogs "associate with" SCO rather than with the lawn in front of my apartment.
> SCO lets loose with one of the silent-but-deadly variety, and everybody is still in the room?
It's more like an elevator: everyone is eagerly awaiting the next stop.
> So SCO is enforcing their IP. It's their call what they open source not IBM's.
Their business model isn't sound in the current environment. Only those vendors who sell UNIX to support their underlying hardware business are hanging in there right now.
And even those businesses' days may be numbered, unless they can convert themselves into service companies. It's getting hard to justify buying a Sun instead of an Athlon.
>
Yep, they could all quit and then start a new consortium without inviting SCO to join.
SCO would undoubtedly sue them though, claiming that it was impossible for a consortium to work without stealing something from SCO.
> I wonder if I can get someone else's really nice face....I wouldn't mind being a Brad Pitt.
Yeah, or you could go in for an appendectomy and wake up on the streets of Bhagdad looking like Saddam Hussein.
> Shock the world when Bill Gates announces MS are giving up software development and releasing the source to the public
Bah, shock the world when Bill Gates sees how much he can spend on a weekend in Vegas!
> Apparently everyone who has ever posted a story on this topic, hasn't seen John Woo's: Faceoff.
There was an old Outer Limits or Twilight Zone (forgot which) where a guy had a way to give an injection to soften the facial tissues and then reform the face by pressing it into a mold. The end of the show was somewhat unforgettable; perhaps I've already said too much.
> What Goes into an Enterprise Network?
Prise, of course.
I'll bet the University of Texas is eager to get in on this project too.
> > "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code"
> Sounds like Penis envy to me.
It's an incredibly stupid a priori claim to base a court case on, for sure. Do they expect the court to just accept it as a given and move directly to the penalty phase?
> > "The only reason the Christian God has hung around so long is because he is defined as untestable."
> That is not nearly so true as you might think. The New Testament makes a lot of historical fact claims, that are potentially falsifiable. If enough archaeologists "get lucky," Christianity's factual foundations could very well be torpedoed.
However, even if the New Testament happens to have all its historical facts straight, that doesn't give the slightest suggestion that any of the supernatural claims it makes are true. (Perhaps you've heard of historical novels?)
The simple fact is, the core claims of Christianity are untestable. Some of the peripheral claims are testable and fail, e.g. the ability of believers to drink poison without coming to harm. More important ones get reinterpreted when they fail, e.g. contrary to Jesus' claim there was no kingdom instituted during the lifetime of his hearers, so modern doctrine says he was talking about a church when he said "kingdom" (and what a sorry substitute it is!).
> Speaking as a longtime IE/Windows user, I never quite understood the fuss of tabs. I just use multiple browser windows and use the taskbar to flip between them.
FWIW, I keep about 20-25 browser windows open, scattered over 9 virtual desktops, with an average of 10-15 tabs open in each browser window. I use the windows to sort my tabs by "topic", but I can have lots of tabs open simultaneously on a given topic.
That 10-15 "average" covers windows with single tabs through windows with about 30. The mode must be something like 10.
And as others have already mentioned, my browser preserves all this between session on my rare logouts. Tabs have completely revolutionized my WWW experience.
> I do, however, find it interesting that any religious sentiment is "Troll" while anti-religious (Not evolutionistic, pure "Christians are morons") sentiment is "Insightful".
You err in your assumption that the moronic claims of creationists are identical with Christianity.
I know lots of Christians who aren't morons, but I don't know anyone actively peddling creationism who isn't either a moron or a con artist.