Honestly, I can point out several, but I won't and it would appear that you are the only one here who requires it anyway, AC. I can't point out examples in the last two years, as I quit contributing after many thousands of edits and photos.
Have you even been to college? You're describing most of the tenured professors I've had the displeasure of working with!
Except now they would be hiding behind nicks, and have the ability to roll back everything you spent all night crashing on for a test the next day. And yes, even I realized there was a certain amount of irony in my statement, whereby wikifying a university was just in some ways only changing the shade of pale.
Also according to Steve's memo, the role of CSA was unique and it will not be filled.
This has Balmer sounding like Francisco Franco, who created a monarchy but put in no king, only leaving himself as regent. For decades. Somehow I don't feel that Microsoft's situation isn't going to benefit any more than Spains, for the same reasons.
Run universities like Wikipedia? So you can have tenured nazi's running around like they own certain subjects wholesale, like some Wikipedia admins do? So "truth" is only relative to what the most powerful group of professors (admins) that give a damn about the subject matter?
No thanks. The USA has one of the best university systems in the world, flaws and all, but running it like Wikipedia would just insure that the most incompetent and most vocal (who are often the same) will have an even larger voice.
I do everything I can to buy games via Steam, including those that are available in the box as well. First, it is easier to install a game via Steam (two clicks), and second, I like to put my money where my mouth is and support the good guys.
And to further prove your point, it would be easier to create a whitelist of great game developers rather than a black list of crappy companies. At least the list would be shorter.
AND just like ipv4 exhaustion, nothing serious is going to be done about this until stuff actually starts falling apart.
All of this rather assumes we live in a bubble, a static universe, like most studies of this nature. Once natural resources are in shorter supply than the demand, the system corrects itself. Usually this means the price goes up dramatically, which causes starvation in some parts of the world, and wars in others, thus reducing the demand on the system until it reaches equilibrium.
The earth is a giant petri dish, my friends, and when the resources run low, one group of organisms will simply destroy the competition in what is typically called "survival of the fittest". Right or wrong, that is what happens. To think that instead, the entire global population of 12 billion people will simply just have to eat and consume less is naive. The biggest 6 billion will kill off the weakest, so they can have twice as much. History is absolutely full of these examples, only on a more regional scale as the technology to quickly kill people on the other side of the globe didn't exist. Call it sad, morbid or entirely too dark, but half the wars over the history of man have been over resources. Of course, the other half were due to religious differences.
I've gotten to where I do the same thing. The thing is, if you are patient, the model you want will go on sale. It took me about 3 months to get the configuration I wanted on sale, but it saved me about $500, and I ended up with quite a nice system for around $1500 (year ago, Q9550/8gb/750gb/24"/etc). Add a drive or two and go for 4+ more years. Usually Dell is way overpriced on their video cards, although I got the 'upgrade' for about the same price as street this time. I do the same at work when I can. If you don't buy their low end boxes, Dell are, well, somewhere between "decent" and "pretty good", and the sales make them a good value. Their low end stuff is, well, junk.
They key is patience, as they rotate some pretty good deals, depending on their current demand.
What is irresponsible to accept the "fact" that no Afghans have, or ever will be hurt, by the release of their names. I'm fine with the idea of releasing information, I'm just saying they shouldn't release any names of operatives in the field, AND to give the Afghans the same respect you give the American soldiers, by not releasing names. It doesn't add context to what is going on anyway. It was a mistake on their part, no matter how innocent, but it shouldn't be repeated.
There are two other points that I thought would be obvious but I guess I was wrong. 1. Would we really KNOW if even one of the mentioned Afghans was killed? There is a very good chance that we would not. It isn't like these guys work at the bank and someone noticed they didn't show up to work. The government could also be lying about it for their own political sake. Or not, which doesn't change the risk. 2. "Yet" is very literal. Muslim extremists have a very good track record about being patient when it comes to revenge or simply removing their enemies. On average, much more than Americans. They are still pissed off about things that happened 800 years ago. So, is there a possibility that if the Taliban knows an Afghan involved, they might wait until it is convenient, or at least safe, to take revenge? I would say the possibility is very real. These guys don't work on the same time frame that we do. They have a history of waiting the in the mountains and just spot attacking the enemy until they get tired and go home. Ask the USSR.
Will none of the Afghans suffer from having their names released? It is entirely possible as well. It doesn't change the fact that releasing the names should be treated no differently than releasing the US military names, after all, we are on the same side, and in all cases, it is a very, very bad thing. Same with releasing information that could get people killed. You might be surprised at how information can be patched together to figure out who was where and when. Even if they get it wrong and kill someone else they THOUGHT was helping the US, someone died needlessly. I'm ex-military, and one thing they teach you is don't do anything to get your allies killed, it gives you less allies and is not good politics either. I am completely aware that civilians don't have the same perspective and experience, but it is easier than you might think to dissuade other Afghans in helping us, to help them. Showing a double standard is one way, as it just confirms that the Taliban has been saying all along.
So to Wikileaks, please DO release any political information, and any and all information that we should know about, THAT DOESN'T PUT LIVES AT RISK, and for FSM's sake, be entirely MORE careful about not releasing names of ANYONE.
Firefly has a 9.5 rating on IMDB. Very, very few programs have ever accomplished that. As for ratings, they are also affected by time slots, moving programs around, and showing the episodes OUT OF ORDER. And yes, the media blitz that was planned for Serenity was cancelled at the last minute by the studio, so it had to sink or swim purely by word of mouth. With DVD sales, it still managed to better than break even, although not by much.
Yea, Family Guy had lousy ratings and was cancelled by Fox. Right before it set a new record for DVD purchases of a TV show. And they cancelled it yet again after that.
here has been no indication' that any Afghans who have collaborated with the NATO occupation have been harmed as a result of the leaks
The word that was left out was "yet". And it doesn't say that no Afghans have been hurt, it says they don't see an indication. It is pretty hard to be more vague, considering the condition of the country and communications in general there.
More importantly, it proves a point: It is ok to release the names of Afghans, but would be criminal if the same was said of Americans. It was an oversight by Wikileaks to include those names, an error, as their intent was originally to NOT do so. That doesn't change my point in the least, that American lives > Afghan lives in the eyes of the press, the military, and it would appear, many others. I'm not so sure that is a good position to take in regards to Wikileaks, which claims to be politically neutral in these matters.
The reason I say MS wins, is now that LibreOffice no longer has strong, direct, corporate backing, it is likely the code base will mature at a much slower pace, making it less viable as an alternative. Not this week, and not so much next year, but within a couple years. Perhaps some corp will throw some muscle behind it, but it isn't very likely in the current economic situation unless they can justify it as a long term profit move.
Actually, it has gotten a great deal of press, but it is a bit incorrect. Wikileaks did disclose the names of several Afghanistan operatives, potentially putting them at risk of retaliation by the Taliban. This is also reported, but ironically, the media appears to consider their lives as without value. If an American dies because of Wikileaks, that would be a crime, but if an Afghan dies because of it, oh well it was "important" data released. It is no wonder over half the world thinks we are pricks.
And Oracle has the people who actually know the code.
Yes, that is the fly in the ointment. The real winner would seem to be Google Docs, even if it isn't immediately apparent. And Microsoft. Not everyone uses Open Office for the "support of Freedom". Some use it simply because it is "free as in beer", which is meaningless if they can't keep up with the needed features to be compatible with MS Office. Many small business offices (ours, 12 stations, 2 MS, 10 OO) would fit this mold.
So that means that 96% of the people in today's world are buying physical books.
For what it is worth, I would imagine it is even higher. Likely, ebooks are purchased mainly by people who also buy physical books, so it is a supplement to their book collections, not a replacement of. I would imagine there are very few people who only buy ebooks (not counting piracy and free books), perhaps as low as 1%.
No matter how cool a reading medium gets, it will always be an uphill battle to beat the tactile, analog feel of dead tree when it comes to reading. If you put a paperback in your back pocket, and sit down, it doesn't break. It never needs batteries or recharging, and even if one "breaks", you only lose one book. Ebooks are handy for some things (searching text, skipping around tech manuals, etc.) but they will never completely replace physical books.
If you would have read the entire comment, I clearly stated "a few decades ago". As in the 1970s. Back when Detroit had a strong majority market share in the USA. And thanks to their arrogance then, they lost that lead to Japanese makers who have continued to carve up their once mighty empire. I wasn't talking about what YOU like, I was talking about the majority of people, which is obvious if you look at actual sales numbers. And by the way, most of the popular Toyota models sold in the US are actually made here in the US. Just not by the big 3 in Detroit.
The old "you must be new here" expression has lost meaning lately, and poor quality articles seem to be the norm more and more here. It is starting to be a joke, except no one is laughing. It is like having high school students as editors, with no ability to discern what is news and what is just hype, as they have no worldly experience to judge it against.
We live in an age of amazing technological advances that happen at a pace that is unrivaled in human history, yet this is what passes as "news for nerds". Sigh.
Doesn't matter. He can choose to make HIS websites as linear as he chooses. Of course, fewer and fewer people will visit them, but hey, he can do that if he chooses. A few media companies are making the same mistake that Detroit did a few decades ago: Telling the customer what they want, thinking they didn't have a choice but to be be spoon fed the dog food that Detroit was dishing out. Toyota, Nissan (Datsun) and Honda pretty much built an American empire on a foundation of Detroit's arrogance. That's one of the beauties of an open, capitalistic market: It is self-correcting with time.
I'm sure you realize that all land-line owners pay something like $3-$4 a month as a fee, exclusively for the purpose of subsidizing phone lines like your mom's? This has been an ever increasing fee for many, many years now. In theory, it works well, where we all pitch in a little so that everyone can have the same basic level of phone service, more or less, even if they live far away from anyplace that remotely resembles a town or city. It would appear that she got the less end of that stick if all she can get on dial-up is 2.4k and there is actual pops and crackle on the line. Ironically, she also pays that same fee for the substandard service.
And pardon me if I'm wrong on the amount, I don't pay it since I have only had cell service for the last few years. Not much reason to have it if you move and can't keep your old number nowadays.
Slashdot Mirror
According to this news report, the answer is yes.
Honestly, I can point out several, but I won't and it would appear that you are the only one here who requires it anyway, AC. I can't point out examples in the last two years, as I quit contributing after many thousands of edits and photos.
The title was created for Bill Gates, not for Ray. Ray is the 2nd person to have the position.
Have you even been to college? You're describing most of the tenured professors I've had the displeasure of working with!
Except now they would be hiding behind nicks, and have the ability to roll back everything you spent all night crashing on for a test the next day. And yes, even I realized there was a certain amount of irony in my statement, whereby wikifying a university was just in some ways only changing the shade of pale.
Touché :) Unfortunately, both edits were reverted by the guy who wrote the original text, because he's an admin now.
Also according to Steve's memo, the role of CSA was unique and it will not be filled.
This has Balmer sounding like Francisco Franco, who created a monarchy but put in no king, only leaving himself as regent. For decades. Somehow I don't feel that Microsoft's situation isn't going to benefit any more than Spains, for the same reasons.
{{notability}}
Wikipedia University
An Almost Entirely {{weasel words}} Accurate Education {{dubious}}
Fixed that for you...
Run universities like Wikipedia? So you can have tenured nazi's running around like they own certain subjects wholesale, like some Wikipedia admins do? So "truth" is only relative to what the most powerful group of professors (admins) that give a damn about the subject matter?
No thanks. The USA has one of the best university systems in the world, flaws and all, but running it like Wikipedia would just insure that the most incompetent and most vocal (who are often the same) will have an even larger voice.
That is very good news! Now we can look forward to a sequel of Duke Nukem Forever in a year or two! ;)
Oh ok, as long as it was compiled by an objective team with no financial incentive...
Very good points, but sometimes a President actually does the wrong things, even with good intentions, regardless of how you feel about him.
I do everything I can to buy games via Steam, including those that are available in the box as well. First, it is easier to install a game via Steam (two clicks), and second, I like to put my money where my mouth is and support the good guys.
And to further prove your point, it would be easier to create a whitelist of great game developers rather than a black list of crappy companies. At least the list would be shorter.
AND just like ipv4 exhaustion, nothing serious is going to be done about this until stuff actually starts falling apart.
All of this rather assumes we live in a bubble, a static universe, like most studies of this nature. Once natural resources are in shorter supply than the demand, the system corrects itself. Usually this means the price goes up dramatically, which causes starvation in some parts of the world, and wars in others, thus reducing the demand on the system until it reaches equilibrium.
The earth is a giant petri dish, my friends, and when the resources run low, one group of organisms will simply destroy the competition in what is typically called "survival of the fittest". Right or wrong, that is what happens. To think that instead, the entire global population of 12 billion people will simply just have to eat and consume less is naive. The biggest 6 billion will kill off the weakest, so they can have twice as much. History is absolutely full of these examples, only on a more regional scale as the technology to quickly kill people on the other side of the globe didn't exist. Call it sad, morbid or entirely too dark, but half the wars over the history of man have been over resources. Of course, the other half were due to religious differences.
I've gotten to where I do the same thing. The thing is, if you are patient, the model you want will go on sale. It took me about 3 months to get the configuration I wanted on sale, but it saved me about $500, and I ended up with quite a nice system for around $1500 (year ago, Q9550/8gb/750gb/24"/etc). Add a drive or two and go for 4+ more years. Usually Dell is way overpriced on their video cards, although I got the 'upgrade' for about the same price as street this time. I do the same at work when I can. If you don't buy their low end boxes, Dell are, well, somewhere between "decent" and "pretty good", and the sales make them a good value. Their low end stuff is, well, junk.
They key is patience, as they rotate some pretty good deals, depending on their current demand.
What is irresponsible to accept the "fact" that no Afghans have, or ever will be hurt, by the release of their names. I'm fine with the idea of releasing information, I'm just saying they shouldn't release any names of operatives in the field, AND to give the Afghans the same respect you give the American soldiers, by not releasing names. It doesn't add context to what is going on anyway. It was a mistake on their part, no matter how innocent, but it shouldn't be repeated.
There are two other points that I thought would be obvious but I guess I was wrong. 1. Would we really KNOW if even one of the mentioned Afghans was killed? There is a very good chance that we would not. It isn't like these guys work at the bank and someone noticed they didn't show up to work. The government could also be lying about it for their own political sake. Or not, which doesn't change the risk. 2. "Yet" is very literal. Muslim extremists have a very good track record about being patient when it comes to revenge or simply removing their enemies. On average, much more than Americans. They are still pissed off about things that happened 800 years ago. So, is there a possibility that if the Taliban knows an Afghan involved, they might wait until it is convenient, or at least safe, to take revenge? I would say the possibility is very real. These guys don't work on the same time frame that we do. They have a history of waiting the in the mountains and just spot attacking the enemy until they get tired and go home. Ask the USSR.
Will none of the Afghans suffer from having their names released? It is entirely possible as well. It doesn't change the fact that releasing the names should be treated no differently than releasing the US military names, after all, we are on the same side, and in all cases, it is a very, very bad thing. Same with releasing information that could get people killed. You might be surprised at how information can be patched together to figure out who was where and when. Even if they get it wrong and kill someone else they THOUGHT was helping the US, someone died needlessly. I'm ex-military, and one thing they teach you is don't do anything to get your allies killed, it gives you less allies and is not good politics either. I am completely aware that civilians don't have the same perspective and experience, but it is easier than you might think to dissuade other Afghans in helping us, to help them. Showing a double standard is one way, as it just confirms that the Taliban has been saying all along.
So to Wikileaks, please DO release any political information, and any and all information that we should know about, THAT DOESN'T PUT LIVES AT RISK, and for FSM's sake, be entirely MORE careful about not releasing names of ANYONE.
Firefly has a 9.5 rating on IMDB. Very, very few programs have ever accomplished that. As for ratings, they are also affected by time slots, moving programs around, and showing the episodes OUT OF ORDER. And yes, the media blitz that was planned for Serenity was cancelled at the last minute by the studio, so it had to sink or swim purely by word of mouth. With DVD sales, it still managed to better than break even, although not by much.
Yea, Family Guy had lousy ratings and was cancelled by Fox. Right before it set a new record for DVD purchases of a TV show. And they cancelled it yet again after that.
here has been no indication' that any Afghans who have collaborated with the NATO occupation have been harmed as a result of the leaks
The word that was left out was "yet". And it doesn't say that no Afghans have been hurt, it says they don't see an indication. It is pretty hard to be more vague, considering the condition of the country and communications in general there.
More importantly, it proves a point: It is ok to release the names of Afghans, but would be criminal if the same was said of Americans. It was an oversight by Wikileaks to include those names, an error, as their intent was originally to NOT do so. That doesn't change my point in the least, that American lives > Afghan lives in the eyes of the press, the military, and it would appear, many others. I'm not so sure that is a good position to take in regards to Wikileaks, which claims to be politically neutral in these matters.
The reason I say MS wins, is now that LibreOffice no longer has strong, direct, corporate backing, it is likely the code base will mature at a much slower pace, making it less viable as an alternative. Not this week, and not so much next year, but within a couple years. Perhaps some corp will throw some muscle behind it, but it isn't very likely in the current economic situation unless they can justify it as a long term profit move.
Actually, it has gotten a great deal of press, but it is a bit incorrect. Wikileaks did disclose the names of several Afghanistan operatives, potentially putting them at risk of retaliation by the Taliban. This is also reported, but ironically, the media appears to consider their lives as without value. If an American dies because of Wikileaks, that would be a crime, but if an Afghan dies because of it, oh well it was "important" data released. It is no wonder over half the world thinks we are pricks.
And Oracle has the people who actually know the code.
Yes, that is the fly in the ointment. The real winner would seem to be Google Docs, even if it isn't immediately apparent. And Microsoft. Not everyone uses Open Office for the "support of Freedom". Some use it simply because it is "free as in beer", which is meaningless if they can't keep up with the needed features to be compatible with MS Office. Many small business offices (ours, 12 stations, 2 MS, 10 OO) would fit this mold.
So that means that 96% of the people in today's world are buying physical books.
For what it is worth, I would imagine it is even higher. Likely, ebooks are purchased mainly by people who also buy physical books, so it is a supplement to their book collections, not a replacement of. I would imagine there are very few people who only buy ebooks (not counting piracy and free books), perhaps as low as 1%.
No matter how cool a reading medium gets, it will always be an uphill battle to beat the tactile, analog feel of dead tree when it comes to reading. If you put a paperback in your back pocket, and sit down, it doesn't break. It never needs batteries or recharging, and even if one "breaks", you only lose one book. Ebooks are handy for some things (searching text, skipping around tech manuals, etc.) but they will never completely replace physical books.
If you would have read the entire comment, I clearly stated "a few decades ago". As in the 1970s. Back when Detroit had a strong majority market share in the USA. And thanks to their arrogance then, they lost that lead to Japanese makers who have continued to carve up their once mighty empire. I wasn't talking about what YOU like, I was talking about the majority of people, which is obvious if you look at actual sales numbers. And by the way, most of the popular Toyota models sold in the US are actually made here in the US. Just not by the big 3 in Detroit.
I can't believe this was even approved by /.
The old "you must be new here" expression has lost meaning lately, and poor quality articles seem to be the norm more and more here. It is starting to be a joke, except no one is laughing. It is like having high school students as editors, with no ability to discern what is news and what is just hype, as they have no worldly experience to judge it against.
We live in an age of amazing technological advances that happen at a pace that is unrivaled in human history, yet this is what passes as "news for nerds". Sigh.
Doesn't matter. He can choose to make HIS websites as linear as he chooses. Of course, fewer and fewer people will visit them, but hey, he can do that if he chooses. A few media companies are making the same mistake that Detroit did a few decades ago: Telling the customer what they want, thinking they didn't have a choice but to be be spoon fed the dog food that Detroit was dishing out. Toyota, Nissan (Datsun) and Honda pretty much built an American empire on a foundation of Detroit's arrogance. That's one of the beauties of an open, capitalistic market: It is self-correcting with time.
I'm sure you realize that all land-line owners pay something like $3-$4 a month as a fee, exclusively for the purpose of subsidizing phone lines like your mom's? This has been an ever increasing fee for many, many years now. In theory, it works well, where we all pitch in a little so that everyone can have the same basic level of phone service, more or less, even if they live far away from anyplace that remotely resembles a town or city. It would appear that she got the less end of that stick if all she can get on dial-up is 2.4k and there is actual pops and crackle on the line. Ironically, she also pays that same fee for the substandard service.
And pardon me if I'm wrong on the amount, I don't pay it since I have only had cell service for the last few years. Not much reason to have it if you move and can't keep your old number nowadays.