So, in your mind, a CIO who is smart, plans well, and succeeds should be fired for doing his job right and not screwing up, failing, and wasting money.
Having read the linked document, one thing stands out. Seizure rests on the person planning, assisting or committing "acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people".
This only applies to people doing obviously bad things in Iraq, or helping people doing obviously bad things in Iraq. It applies to people giving money and guns to Al Qeda in Iraq or the militias which are kidnapping and killing people and setting of car and suicide bombs.
I will say I am not happy at there being no mention due process or providing proof or warrants by a court. But, I am also not happy at the felony seizure statue either.
"I know I should eat better, but when I go into a health food restaurant, there are 300 things on the menu and I don't know what any of them are and no one can tell me what is good. I get frustrated and I am still hungry so I go to McDonald's for a burger and fries. At least there I know what I am getting."
The problem is not actual complexity, but rather perceived complexity. Joe User decides he doesn't want to pay $600 to upgrade to Vista, so he decides to look at Linux. What does he see: Red Hat, SuSE/Novell, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Debian, Gentoo, Fedora, Slackware, etc.
What should he pick? Which is right for him? If they are all Linux then what is the differences? Is one as good as the next?
The problem is not that there is choice, but that there is too much choice. Most average users would rather just fork over the money and get Vista rather than spend hours, days, or even weeks trying to figure out what distribution of Linux to get, then installing it, then learning how to do actually use it.
What you and so many other people forget is that people are willing pay for familiarity and ease of use rather than accept strange, confusing and a learning curve for free.
Non Sequitur: Proof that Windows is not secure is not proof that open source is secure.
Lack of viruses for Linux may be a result of there being many fewer Linux computers than Windows computers. Why work on a set of computers comprising 5% when one can work on a set of computers comprising 90%? Windows is a much more tempting target than Linux because the pay off in success is almost 20 times larger.
But is it actually beneficial to use proprietary licenses for your code?
He needs for it to be proprietary if he want to be able to sell it and make money. As has been shown numerous times, one can not make money selling source code. Even Novell/SuSE and RedHat make their money on support contracts and not the code.
There is no new ID to get. Perhaps if you were to read you would understand that. It sets minimum standards for ID cards and minimum standards proving one's identity when getting an ID card.
"National ID is not at all meant to deal with naturalization." It is called RealID and one of the functions of the standards is to prevent illegal aliens from obtaining ID, thus allowing law enforcement to better identify citizens, legal immigrants, and illegal aliens.
"since current citizens would have to get this ID as well, that supercedes any naturalization argument and becomes a generic 'ID' argument, which is not explicitly enumerated" Actually, that does not supersede the naturalization argument, nor does the power to create a national ID need to be "explicitly enumerated". That is why Article 1, section 8, paragraph 18 exists. It allows Congress to pass laws on subject not explicitly stated in the Constitution.
And, seeing as ID cards are matters of public record, I will refer to Article 4, section 1:
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Which gives Congress to make laws concerning how public acts and records are proved. RealID would also fall under that article as well.
You need to study up on the whole Constitution before making arguments that are not supported by your own statements.
Why? the delegation of identification is not, constitutionally, the purview of the federal Government and as such it falls under the 10th amendment. Just because something might be a good idea and might be useful does not mean it should be forced on the states despite clear constitutional roles. The more money and or information you give the federal government the more power you hand them.
However, regulation of immigration is in the federal governments purview, per Article 1 section 8 paragraph 4. Coupled with Article 1 section 8 paragraph 18,
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Congress has the right to establish laws concerning national standards for ID cards as it would be a means of identifying citizens, immigrants, and aliens, both legal and illegal, which falls under laws concerning naturalizations (USCONS Art1 Sec 8 Para 4).
In fact, using Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the right to create a national ID card, because it would be a law created under paragraph 18 to support paragraph 4.
Perhaps you should learn the Constitution before trying to interpret it.
I'll be honest about my bias, I've been involved with Linux for about 14 years and love it! I held an officer position at a US LUG and have made my Linux machine my main home system (with a little OS X on my G5 for diversity). In addition, as are some Linux users, I'm usually a Microsoft-hater but am forced to use Windows and associated bloatware at work so I try to see the best in it- sigh."... In the end, though impressed with MythTV, I'm going to stick with Vista for a while.
If someone who is already biased for MythTV thinks Vista MCE is marginally better, what will an unbiased person think? Or, someone who is just used to Microsoft operating systems?
I believe that if this were a review from anyone who is not a Linuxophile, everyone would be screaming that MS paid for the good review, that it was astroturfing, etc.
So, to get better performance out of Firefox, one must use about:config, but only experts are supposed to use about:config. So, only experts are supposed to have good performance in Firefox?
Joe User is not supposed to know about about:config, but in order to become an expert he has to know about about:config. So, Joe User can never become an expert?
If there wasn't, you'd be able to put it in the Knowledge Base yourself.
We don't need Joe user to put information into the Knowledge Base, because very knowledgable people have already put the information there.
Which is it?
Your arguments for about:config sound a lot like MS's arguments for the Windows registry.
Suppose I am Joe user and don't know anything other than I use Firefox. How am I supposed to know about it? How am I supposed to even know there is an about:config section. How am I supposed to know about the MozillaZine Knowledge Base, and why would I go there? I use Firefox, no Mozilla.
How am I supposed to know to do a google search for "about:config"? There is nothing in the documentation that came with Firefox about "about:config". Why would I even do that. I might do a google search on "firefox config"
If there wasn't, you'd be able to put it in the Knowledge Base yourself.
Hey, I am Joe User. How am I supposed to put information on something I know nothing about into the KB?
You are proving my point for me and you don't even know it.
It is that kind of thinking that makes the phrase "software engineering" an oxymoron. There is are reasons software can not be reliable, large-scale, distributed, and highly concurrent: laziness and incompetence.
Of course "Linux" is out of touch with the average user. "By geeks for geeks", remember. As I have said before, the one of the main problems with Linux is that it is not designed for the average user.
Some of the reasons Linux is not and will not be a popular success:
Not designed for the average user
Crappy standards
Non-intuitive names and locations
Tries to be all things
Poor documentation
Unresponsive and rude user communities
The average computer user wants something that is easy to use and "just works". That does not describe Linux, especially in the minds of the average computer user.
And before everyone blows in with how it is great for them, you are not average computer users. You are on/., therefore you are nerds, geeks, etc. and not average computer users. You might have been back in the day, but you are not anymore. The average computer user is your mom, your air-head cousin, and that hot chick at the book store.
Slashdot Mirror
So, in your mind, a CIO who is smart, plans well, and succeeds should be fired for doing his job right and not screwing up, failing, and wasting money.
Interesting business sense you have there.
Having read the linked document, one thing stands out. Seizure rests on the person planning, assisting or committing "acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people".
This only applies to people doing obviously bad things in Iraq, or helping people doing obviously bad things in Iraq. It applies to people giving money and guns to Al Qeda in Iraq or the militias which are kidnapping and killing people and setting of car and suicide bombs.
I will say I am not happy at there being no mention due process or providing proof or warrants by a court. But, I am also not happy at the felony seizure statue either.
Bad analogy. Try this instead.
"I know I should eat better, but when I go into a health food restaurant, there are 300 things on the menu and I don't know what any of them are and no one can tell me what is good. I get frustrated and I am still hungry so I go to McDonald's for a burger and fries. At least there I know what I am getting."
The problem is not actual complexity, but rather perceived complexity. Joe User decides he doesn't want to pay $600 to upgrade to Vista, so he decides to look at Linux. What does he see: Red Hat, SuSE/Novell, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Debian, Gentoo, Fedora, Slackware, etc.
What should he pick? Which is right for him? If they are all Linux then what is the differences? Is one as good as the next?
The problem is not that there is choice, but that there is too much choice. Most average users would rather just fork over the money and get Vista rather than spend hours, days, or even weeks trying to figure out what distribution of Linux to get, then installing it, then learning how to do actually use it.
What you and so many other people forget is that people are willing pay for familiarity and ease of use rather than accept strange, confusing and a learning curve for free.
But trying to force his ideological views on other through the use of what is supposed to be a license for software freedom does make him wrong.
But, RMS is a fanatic.
Non Sequitur: Proof that Windows is not secure is not proof that open source is secure.
Lack of viruses for Linux may be a result of there being many fewer Linux computers than Windows computers. Why work on a set of computers comprising 5% when one can work on a set of computers comprising 90%? Windows is a much more tempting target than Linux because the pay off in success is almost 20 times larger.
I guess the thousands of calls the Congresscritters got denouncing the bill for providing amnesty to illegal aliens had nothing to do with it.
One-third of 16 to 24 year olds in the UK are stupid.
He needs for it to be proprietary if he want to be able to sell it and make money. As has been shown numerous times, one can not make money selling source code. Even Novell/SuSE and RedHat make their money on support contracts and not the code.
Unless, of course, for his application, the dynamic linking doesn't work well.
You are right, there is a troll, and it is you.
There is no new ID to get. Perhaps if you were to read you would understand that. It sets minimum standards for ID cards and minimum standards proving one's identity when getting an ID card.
"National ID is not at all meant to deal with naturalization."
It is called RealID and one of the functions of the standards is to prevent illegal aliens from obtaining ID, thus allowing law enforcement to better identify citizens, legal immigrants, and illegal aliens.
"since current citizens would have to get this ID as well, that supercedes any naturalization argument and becomes a generic 'ID' argument, which is not explicitly enumerated"
Actually, that does not supersede the naturalization argument, nor does the power to create a national ID need to be "explicitly enumerated". That is why Article 1, section 8, paragraph 18 exists. It allows Congress to pass laws on subject not explicitly stated in the Constitution.
And, seeing as ID cards are matters of public record, I will refer to Article 4, section 1:
However, regulation of immigration is in the federal governments purview, per Article 1 section 8 paragraph 4.
Coupled with Article 1 section 8 paragraph 18,
Congress has the right to establish laws concerning national standards for ID cards as it would be a means of identifying citizens, immigrants, and aliens, both legal and illegal, which falls under laws concerning naturalizations (USCONS Art1 Sec 8 Para 4).
In fact, using Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the right to create a national ID card, because it would be a law created under paragraph 18 to support paragraph 4.
Perhaps you should learn the Constitution before trying to interpret it.
I guess someone needs to read the Constitution.
They don't have to emulate windows. They only have to emulate x86 arch.
One word: Emulation.
Joe User is not supposed to know about about:config, but in order to become an expert he has to know about about:config. So, Joe User can never become an expert?
Which is it?
Your arguments for about:config sound a lot like MS's arguments for the Windows registry.
How am I supposed to know to do a google search for "about:config"? There is nothing in the documentation that came with Firefox about "about:config". Why would I even do that. I might do a google search on "firefox config"Hey, I am Joe User. How am I supposed to put information on something I know nothing about into the KB?
You are proving my point for me and you don't even know it.
It is that kind of thinking that makes the phrase "software engineering" an oxymoron. There is are reasons software can not be reliable, large-scale, distributed, and highly concurrent: laziness and incompetence.
My question is simple: Is there good, concise documentation of the about:config page and it's options?
If yes, where is it and is there an an easy why to find it?
If no, why not? If this is all about choice, should people be able to learn about their choices?
OK, where is it so I can go dumpster diving. I will keep the best one and sell the rest on EBay!
Where do I apply?
Some of the reasons Linux is not and will not be a popular success:
The average computer user wants something that is easy to use and "just works". That does not describe Linux, especially in the minds of the average computer user.
And before everyone blows in with how it is great for them, you are not average computer users. You are on
10 days for the video camera
10 days for disrupting the class
10 days for mocking the teacher
10 days for being stupid enough to the evidence on line.
I would say 40 days is about right.