Nah just like learning to swim really, more a question of loosing ones fear of failure, than anything else. If you do make the transition you will end up in control of your machine, instead of your machine being in control of you.
Regards
Peter
For me computers have always been a hobby, I started out around 1983 with a TRS80 then a BBC micro, taught myself assembler, in Z80 then 6502, then I had to leave my hobby because my job as a truck driver meant I was away most of the time. Then around 1995 I came off the road and took up my old hobby again, a 286 running 3.1 then '95 then '98 then ME, finally the penny dropped.
I realised how immoral a closed source operating system is and decided to give Linux a try.
This was around the year 2000, Suse to be precise, could not get on the net with it, could not get Xserver to work. Then I tried Coral linux, Xserver worked fine, could not get dialup to work, then I tried Redhat that did not work either.
Then I heard about Mandrake (probably on Slash:) at last I had an open source OS that seemed to work with hardly any hassle.
Gael Duval, opened the open source OS door for me and for many others I would imagine. What the organisation that Duval started, solved was the driver problem, for this he deserves respect and support from the Linux community and I hope the Slashdot community.
Back in the day, chemistry was not called chemistry, it was called alchemy. The only real difference between alchemy and chemistry, is that chemists published their results and alchemists kept their results a secret. Once alchemy became chemistry, people could stand on the shoulders of giants.
People think the whole debate is about windows vs linux, it is not so. This debate is about open source vs closed source. One comment I read seemed to be complaining about the average linux distro requiring about three CD iso's for an installation, whereas XP will quite happily sit on one CD.
Will the little snotty nosed kid at the back of the class, please tell me why wasting two blank CDs to download an OS, to you're 'puter is wasting two blank CDs, yes ladies an gentlemen, windows XP will fit happily fit on one CD and is garaunteed to cure coughs and sneezes.
I am on the 'net from when I get up in the morning, till I go to bed at night, barring vists to the toilet, kitchen and answering the door. The reason for this is, I am more or less housebound after a mild stroke about five years ago, that means I find walking difficult.
I have about 12 - 15 regular visitors, all close friends, it is a rare day when someone does not visit, so I have a social life as well. If I spent all this time on the 'net and did not have meat space contact, I would have a problem. Forgot to mention - I also have an African Grey Parrot, named Fred Yoda Tyson who keeps me in my place.
So what do I spend all this time doing on the 'net?
Reading! I'd hate to think how many words I read on average a day 'coz I naturally speed read, after about 45 years as an incurable bookworm.
I write some to.
May I present my blog to slashdot - please do not crash googles servers with the slashdot effect:)
Reading some of the comments here tells me the real problem. People play the language game, commercial interests play the language game, otherwise known as branding. Google Korzybski or 'General semantics' to get more background.
Comparing Windows and Linux is like comparing freedom and slavery. Treating the comparison as Linux versus Windows, as some kind of dumb food fight, completely misses the point. Windows is closed source, Linux is open source, sadly the majority of our species does not understand this crucial difference.
To drive home the point, if when Windows 95 was released, it was released with its source code, by now, it would have been the best damn operating system on the planet, greed and ignorance prevented this.
Perhaps he is going to teach Billy boy Unix, the defacto clustering OS. It could be said, the internet is Unix based, Google is Unix, Apple is Unix, Amazon is Unix, I could go on - Beowolf anyone? 'Tiz a shame Billy boy did not complete his computer science education.
The moon has no magnetic field and virtually no atmosphere, helium gas streams from the sun, about one in ten thousand helium atoms lacks a proton, hence helium 3. The earths ionosphere and atmosphere stop the helium in the solar wind reaching the earths surface.
Exploring space is horrendously expensive especially when America does it. I remember reading years ago, that the Russian space achievements during the cold war period were achieved at a tenth of the cost of the American achievements. Yes America reached the moon but what have we got to show for it? Apart from an inflated ego zilch! that was up until about twenty ago, when a lab in the University of Wisconsin discovered with little fanfare, something remarkable.
Shmitt (The only scientist to visit the moon) reckons that He3 is worth about $40000 an ounce or $1428 dollars a gram , gold is worth around 15 dollars a gram. If Shmitt is correct in his estimate of the value of He3, this makes He3 nearly a hundred times more valuable than gold. Had the astronaughts have struck gold on the moon, I have little doubt that we would be living on the moon by now.
How on earth can it be possible to compare open source with closed source. Closed source is a kind of mental slavery. Owning ideas is not far off from owning people.
Operating systems are mathematical - not art.
Chemistry used to be called alchemy. Alchemy was a process where researchers kept everything a secret, because they wanted to be able to turn base metal into gold, so only they would benefit. Bgates has applied this process to computer science, in doing so has made himself the richest man on the planet.
Science became a dominant process in human affairs because alchemists gave up the idea that discoveries made should only benefit them. Please try to imagine what a fine operating system we would have now, had M$ released the source code to win 95. Bgates made himself disgustingly rich + his cronies and shareholders, but made the rest of us poorer.
To my understanding, it is not a question of MS vs Linux vs Apple. It is much more a question of open source vs closed source.
Many years ago, there was no such thing as chemistry, because it was all a big secret called alchemy, alchemy was closed source chemistry. The point being is, if anyone wanted to do basic research into the fundamental nature of matter, they had to reinvent the wheel, they could not build on the discoveries made by others. Even Issac Newton was very secretive about his research into Alchemy.
It is very ironic that B Gates by holding to the principle that computer science is a modern version of alchemy, managed to turn base metal into virtual gold and in so doing became the richest man on the planet.
Imagine how good our operating systems would be now, if source code was open from the beginning, published and peer reviewed just like any other science.
Mr Gates you held back computer science and for this I do not admire you.
What I suggest is a helium3 fusion reactor is built on the moon by
telepresence (hands at a distance), part of the infrastructure would have to be transport. I would guess the helium3 would be in a different place (where the moon gets the most sunlight?) to the deuterium (the moon's poles?).
The first payload to the moon could be a fission reactor, coupled to a
telepresence machine shop and a seed supply of raw materials. This would
construct mobile mining technology and once the necessary minerals have been acquired the production of solar panels which would facilitate more distance travelled by the remote mining equipment. If it was done correctly it would grow exponentially
The Columbia tragedy shows that entering the earths atmosphere at 17,000 miles an hour in the equivalent of a flying brick is not a very good idea.
De-orbitting space craft should be powered if reusable, otherwise we are
stuck with the Russian method, crude but tried and tested.
The only way to have an economic and *safe* powered de-orbit method, is for
rocket fuel to be manufactured in space, the obvious place for this is the
moon.
We must manufacture the requisite materials for a biosphere in space before we send up wetware, all the right ingredients exist in space they just need assembling in the correct order.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah just like learning to swim really, more a question of loosing ones fear of failure, than anything else. If you do make the transition you will end up in control of your machine, instead of your machine being in control of you. Regards Peter
I realised how immoral a closed source operating system is and decided to give Linux a try.
This was around the year 2000, Suse to be precise, could not get on the net with it, could not get Xserver to work. Then I tried Coral linux, Xserver worked fine, could not get dialup to work, then I tried Redhat that did not work either.
Then I heard about Mandrake (probably on Slash :) at last I had an open source OS that seemed to work with hardly any hassle.
Gael Duval, opened the open source OS door for me and for many others I would imagine. What the organisation that Duval started, solved was the driver problem, for this he deserves respect and support from the Linux community and I hope the Slashdot community.
Regards
Peter
Back in the day, chemistry was not called chemistry, it was called alchemy. The only real difference between alchemy and chemistry, is that chemists published their results and alchemists kept their results a secret. Once alchemy became chemistry, people could stand on the shoulders of giants.
People think the whole debate is about windows vs linux, it is not so. This debate is about open source vs closed source. One comment I read seemed to be complaining about the average linux distro requiring about three CD iso's for an installation, whereas XP will quite happily sit on one CD.
Will the little snotty nosed kid at the back of the class, please tell me why wasting two blank CDs to download an OS, to you're 'puter is wasting two blank CDs, yes ladies an gentlemen, windows XP will fit happily fit on one CD and is garaunteed to cure coughs and sneezes.
I have about 12 - 15 regular visitors, all close friends, it is a rare day when someone does not visit, so I have a social life as well. If I spent all this time on the 'net and did not have meat space contact, I would have a problem. Forgot to mention - I also have an African Grey Parrot, named Fred Yoda Tyson who keeps me in my place.
So what do I spend all this time doing on the 'net?
Reading! I'd hate to think how many words I read on average a day 'coz I naturally speed read, after about 45 years as an incurable bookworm.
I write some to.
May I present my blog to slashdot - please do not crash googles servers with the slashdot effect :)
http://he3isthekey.blogspot.com/
Comparing Windows and Linux is like comparing freedom and slavery. Treating the comparison as Linux versus Windows, as some kind of dumb food fight, completely misses the point. Windows is closed source, Linux is open source, sadly the majority of our species does not understand this crucial difference.
To drive home the point, if when Windows 95 was released, it was released with its source code, by now, it would have been the best damn operating system on the planet, greed and ignorance prevented this.
That has happened to me too.
If I were a moderator you would be moderated up
Tell your friends about slashdot :)
He3 is the incomplete work of God - go figure :)
LOLLL
Google '"helium 3" value'
Exploring space is horrendously expensive especially when America does it. I remember reading years ago, that the Russian space achievements during the cold war period were achieved at a tenth of the cost of the American achievements. Yes America reached the moon but what have we got to show for it? Apart from an inflated ego zilch! that was up until about twenty ago, when a lab in the University of Wisconsin discovered with little fanfare, something remarkable.
Read
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/
Shmitt (The only scientist to visit the moon) reckons that He3 is worth about $40000 an ounce or $1428 dollars a gram , gold is worth around 15 dollars a gram. If Shmitt is correct in his estimate of the value of He3, this makes He3 nearly a hundred times more valuable than gold. Had the astronaughts have struck gold on the moon, I have little doubt that we would be living on the moon by now.
There are many news articles about He3 here http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/
The science of He3 here http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/Research/he3.html/
The thing that will make human endevours in space viable, is when space makes a profit.
Why would we need warfare when we have a whole universe to explore?
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/
and here
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/
Operating systems are mathematical - not art.
Chemistry used to be called alchemy. Alchemy was a process where researchers kept everything a secret, because they wanted to be able to turn base metal into gold, so only they would benefit. Bgates has applied this process to computer science, in doing so has made himself the richest man on the planet.
Science became a dominant process in human affairs because alchemists gave up the idea that discoveries made should only benefit them. Please try to imagine what a fine operating system we would have now, had M$ released the source code to win 95. Bgates made himself disgustingly rich + his cronies and shareholders, but made the rest of us poorer.
No No, the fuel is up there already http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/
Many years ago, there was no such thing as chemistry, because it was all a big secret called alchemy, alchemy was closed source chemistry. The point being is, if anyone wanted to do basic research into the fundamental nature of matter, they had to reinvent the wheel, they could not build on the discoveries made by others. Even Issac Newton was very secretive about his research into Alchemy.
It is very ironic that B Gates by holding to the principle that computer science is a modern version of alchemy, managed to turn base metal into virtual gold and in so doing became the richest man on the planet.
Imagine how good our operating systems would be now, if source code was open from the beginning, published and peer reviewed just like any other science.
Mr Gates you held back computer science and for this I do not admire you.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/
What I suggest is a helium3 fusion reactor is built on the moon by telepresence (hands at a distance), part of the infrastructure would have to be transport. I would guess the helium3 would be in a different place (where the moon gets the most sunlight?) to the deuterium (the moon's poles?).
The first payload to the moon could be a fission reactor, coupled to a telepresence machine shop and a seed supply of raw materials. This would construct mobile mining technology and once the necessary minerals have been acquired the production of solar panels which would facilitate more distance travelled by the remote mining equipment. If it was done correctly it would grow exponentially
The Columbia tragedy shows that entering the earths atmosphere at 17,000 miles an hour in the equivalent of a flying brick is not a very good idea. De-orbitting space craft should be powered if reusable, otherwise we are stuck with the Russian method, crude but tried and tested.
The only way to have an economic and *safe* powered de-orbit method, is for rocket fuel to be manufactured in space, the obvious place for this is the moon.
We must manufacture the requisite materials for a biosphere in space before we send up wetware, all the right ingredients exist in space they just need assembling in the correct order.
We could send up wetware like this
http://www.orbital.com/SpaceLaunch/Pegasus/
One at a time please :)
Read John Walker and take note of his figures, he is the guy that wrote autocad. http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/rocketaday.html/