That's a load of bull. The GPL and the BSD license have different liberties and obligations. In some cases the GPL will be a superior choice and in other cases it will be the BSD license (or other non-Free licenses). But you shouldn't equate the (relative) lack of restrictions in the BSD license with leeching/stealing. History has shown that many individuals and companies are willing to contribute to BSD/MIT/Apache licensed code. People will contribute back, if only out of self-interest (merging custom code costs $$$ and that code will not be tested (for free!) by other users).
Furthermore, the BSD license allows companies and individuals that want to contribute to use code without necessarily having to open source all other code that touches the open source stuff. This is important to companies if only to prevent accidental GPL violations. You also get into trouble if you want to assemble and distribute a system with closed and open source components (you might want to create the best of breed solution). IMHO, a more liberal approach is often better than forcing people to comply to fairly arbitrary rules.
Last and most importantly, my interest is in promoting the reuse of code, resulting in better software. If someone wants to leech, that's fine with me. I believe that open source is one of the strongest methods of cooperation between companies. In the long term, the companies that leech will be at a disadvantage to those that actively cooperate and share knowledge.
PS. I'm getting sick and tired of the "M$ will steal my work" argument that gets thrown around everytime the BSD license is mentioned. It seems to me that MS goes out of its way not to reuse existing open source code (resulting in mediocre products). I understand that you want to use the bogeyman of the open source community for an easy ad hominem attack, but its really not much better than those Hitler references that supposedly end a Usenet thread. FUD is easy, insightful comments are challenging. I dare you;)
There were some pretty good german commanders in the east. The major problem was that Hitler was micromanaging everything (badly). He became extremely paranoid towards his generals (just like Stalin, dictators make bad military leaders, it seems). I think that Rommel had quite a bit of leeway in the Ardennes (where his only task was to counter the allieds), which he probably wouldnÂt have had in the east (Hitler wouldnÂt think of giving up Stalingrad, even when his men became surrounded). Hitler had become such a liability that I donÂt think that Germany had any chance after 1943.
Lend-lease was important, especially in Â42 when the russians were still ramping up their production, but I really donÂt believe that it was decisive. The more comfortable US jeeps were certainly not the key to germanyÂs defeat:)
Right, those Stalin Organs were US artillery. Har Har. You can find some data here. As you can see, AA Lend-lease was the only significant artillery contribution. It was still less than a quarter of what the russians produced themselves (26thou vs 6thou). AT and field guns from the US and UK constituted an even smaller part of the russians artillery force.
Hitler couldn't take either Moscow or the oil fields because he overextended his army and diverted troops to try to take an unimportant city. After he lost at Stalingrad, he no longer had the ability to take either Moscow or the oil fields. Especially after a major part of his army got encircled and destroyed. Many months later, Hitler was losing on the eastern front and the western Allieds invaded France. So perhaps you should check your timeline again, before you start making ridiculous claims. I would recommend Antony Beevor's The Fall of Berlin 1945 and Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege, 1942-1943
I wasn't saying that Chernobyl was a safe reactor. I was just pointing out that the disaster was caused mostly by operator error. This contradicts your statement that russian safety systems were the cause. I think that statement was misleading (IMHO).
Of course, a nuclear reactor from the 70's shouldn't neccesarily tell us anything about the safety of their current space program. The success record is pretty good for the last century of russian space flights (manned and unmanned).
In WWII we proped up two different nations that were facing complete defeat (UK and USSR) and proceeded with the largest invasion and land battle in History.
Right. You gave some trucks and weapons to the USSR and that turned the war around??!! The truth is that Hitler overextended his army and the russians were able to quickly ramp up production in East-Russia and could expend millions of soldiers. Last, but not least, Hitler was an idiot (choosing an insignificant city as the most important military goal, even if it caused him to lose half his army). If Stalin had been a good leader, he would have won (relatively) easily. He dismantled the defense line just before the war, disregarded all reports of a pending attack, cleansed the army of many good commanders around 1937 and prevented effective leadership by giving communist party officials the right to negate orders (which was changed in 1942 and had an immediate effect on combat effectiveness).
The heaviest fighting took place in Russia, they made the greatest sacrifices and caused the heaviest damage to the German army. I'm not saying this to take away from the valiant achievements by American soldiers, but you should realize that the war was more than an American Victory(tm).
The problem with Chernobyl was that they turned off all safety systems to do a 'test'. It was operator stupidity that caused the meltdown, not a flaw in the system. Russian engineering is pretty reliable (based on KISS). I would rather go up in a russian rocket than in the space shuttle.
Ok, so you're only pirating works that are more than 14 years old, or 28 years old with extention, right? Yeah, I didn't think so. Don't try to talk about being all high and mighty when you're just a cheapskate.
The deal is that I honor copyrights and get the work for free after a reasonable period of time. If copyright owners don't honor their side of the deal, I don't have to honor my side.
The copyright laws have gone into the land of the absurd, but that doesn't mean to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Copyright infringement allows works to be saved for our children and grandchildren that otherwise would have been lost. The rights of copyright holders are puny compared to this enormous loss to our culture.
May as well buy their oil and let them use the money to rebuild their own shit the way they want it.
They don't have anything to say in this matter. You make it seem like the Iraqis were in control, which they aren't. That wouldn't be so bad in itself (in the short term) if the US administration would spend the Iraqi money purely for the good of the Iraqi people. Unfortunately, the US seems to feel justified in using this money as corporate welfare to recuperate their expenses. It's the white collar variant of looting.
Free to finally make a choice. Convince me that a system that gives a single man 100% of the popular vote isn't flawed.
That's a bit of a cop-out. There is justified concern how to elect a government for a country that has been held together by violence. A worst case scenario is that a civil war might erupt and will spread to other countries. A more likely scenario is an oppressive government, possibly fundamentalist. It's very unlikely that the country will suddenly become democratic and freedom-based.
Ever been in a large scale natural disaster that requires martial law (I have)? [...] The military saved our home and our lives with their style of law enforcement.
Unfortunately, the US military doesn't seem to interact with the population very well. It started with insufficient policing of hospitals and musea and the relationship with the population seemed to get even worse after the shooting incidents. AFAIK there has been some effort to have the military help the population (repairing stuff, etc), which is positive. I remember reading about the attitudes of certain nationalities when doing peacekeeping. Some armies were in close contact with the population (patrol on foot, talk to the civvies, solve problems) and others are more distant (patrol in jeep, little contact). The difference is very apparent between the British and the US soldiers in Iraq. The US army might want to invest in 'socializing' their soldiers. Bombs might win a war, but diplomacy wins peace.
Re:Dang it, there goes my stomach lining...
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 1
You can make the same argument about drug raids. How does the police know the crack house from the kindergarten? There should be proper evidence and checks and balances (judge gives warrant after checking police evidence, etc). Without those you'll never be safe. You can't seriously argue that we never raid anyone. I wouldn't feel safe if murderers and rapists aren't arrested.
I sincerely hope that mass mailers get nailed. They are relatively few, but cause a great deal of damage. Busting a few will probably be a good deterrent and you can simply block the mail from countries that don't stop domestic spammers. The most difficult thing is probably to come up with proper laws that don't criminalize innocents, but I don't understand why header forgery isn't illegal. Is there any valid reason to do so? Furthermore, it shouldn't be that hard to set up a do-not-call lists for unsollicited bulkmail. Why aren't these things being done?
I have to disagree a bit. CS is not a programmers course. A degree in CS doesn't mean that you are good at hacking code. Of course, you do have to know basic datastructures, basic algorithms, basic math, basic design, basic programming, etc. Some use this knowledge to become programmers, others become architects and there are those who become strategic consultants (they take everyone with a graduate degree, since they reprogram you anyway). I personally know a perfectly smart guy that just hasn't got the programmers touch. He'll never be one, but he's still a good CS graduate.
Personally, I consider a CS degree to be a nice base line. That person will have a basic understanding on a broad range of CS-related topics. Still, I was never taught design patterns or unit testing, things that I consider to be essential for a good programmer. If you choose to be a programmer, you will have to learn those things yourself (and plenty more). In that respect, every good programmer is (at least partially) self-taught. A fully self-taught man is usually very strong in some areas, but very weak in others. Sometimes it is good to be pushed to do things you normally wouldn't choose to pursue. I don't think that someone with a CS degree is automatically better than someone without or vice versa. A mix might be optimal (as each has their strenghts).
BTW, was that programmer with a Masters in CS ever taught to be a good programmer or did management leave him hanging because 'he should know already'? The lack of proper training might be the answer to your question why the people with degrees don't seem to perform that well. Another possibility is that he was hired as a programmer because of his degree, instead of his qualities as a programmer.
Disclaimer: I only have experience with one dutch university. I can't vouch for crappy US institutions;)
First, the issue about how IBM said that the chips would work with Apple's platform. I doubt they said that, because they won't work with Apple's "platform" in that they aren't pin-compatible with the existing PowerPC offerings. At least so I presume, since going 64 bit generally means a wider data bus and a wider address bus. I guess I could be wrong about this part.:P If you mean, the instruction set is compatible, I'm not sure I'd believe that either, but I'm willing to reserve judgement until I look at the user's manual for the new processor.
They didn't put that very well. I'm pretty sure that they wanted to say that Apple can use the 970 in a new Mac which will work with existing software. You wouldn't have that with x86 processors. Not that I believe that IBM has said anything to Businessweek, the story is lacking hard data and reeks of rumormonging to increase page-views (succesful with the help of slashdot).
Assuming these chips haven't been sampled yet, Apple has no chance to get these things out in time to compete with Athlon 64.
IBM's original roadmap was sampling in 2Q03 with production in 2H03. So they should be sampling already. IBM is known to be very conservative in its estimates, so we might see full production very soon. I've heard rumors that things are going well at IBM.
Video is about a zillion times more intensive, and people are doing it NOW, but he cites "digital photography and digital music" as the reasons people need CPU? PLEASE.
I'm not an expert on digital audio, but I do know that photoshop artist are always looking for more speed. Complex operations on 100+MB images still take too long. The same might be true for sound editing.
As for "WATCH OUT, SUN" -- Sun is in no danger whatsoever from Apple.
A 1U XServe 970 will certainly compete with Suns low end. The current XServe is already doing fairly well in that market and a fast 64 bit offering will only do better. x86-64 is a bigger threat to Sun, but a new XServe will probably be another nail in their coffin.
I understand the new processor has a 400MHz DDR (800MHz equivalent) bus, so perhaps Apple will match it with DDR400 SDRAM, and then it will do them some good.
The bus is half the speed of the CPU, the announced high-end chip (1.8 Ghz) will have a 900Mhz (equivalent) bus.
Face it, this chip will not "breathe new life" into Apple. It will only allow it to keep fighting the "good fight" against other platforms which are going or have gone 64 bit.
This chip will address Apple's main weakness, a (very) slow CPU (and bus + RAM, but those are all tied to the CPU). There are many, many people waiting for faster PowerMacs, I forsee an enormous sales surge. As for "breathing new life" into Apple, they have done so already. The enormous succes of the iPod and the iTunes Music Store is changing them into much more than 'just' a computer company.
No, the german military police was called Feldgendarmerie (Fieldpolice). These soldiers wore a gorget around their necks which earned them the name Kettenhunde (chained dogs). This site contains both historical and reenactment pictures. Here you can find an excellent historical overview.
The SS started out as Hitler's personal bodyguard, but was soon turned into a paramilitary organisation led by Himmler. Special SS units were in charge of the concentration camps and 'cleansed' occupied territory. The SS was declared a criminal organisation at Neurenberg and many of it's leaders were executed.
I don't understand your point. This doesn't really support a libertarian viewpoint since the monopoly can do a lot of damage. Look at MS, how much innovation has it stopped/prevented? I really can't wait 10+ years. I prefer a system that prevents such a monopoly from forming (stopping big mergers) and/or prevents it from abusing it's power (mandating certain behaviour).
Besides, the same logic you use can be applied to defend an interventionist system: every company strives to be a monopolist (in the entire market or in a niche through diversification). As such, a total free market will rarely exist for long. The marketplace often self regulates towards monopolies (through price matching for instance). Those might be unstable, but once they break up, new ones will form. A perfect free market is mostly a fluke and thus we need to intervene to stay (reasonably) close to that ideal.
Have you tried EOF (part of WebObjects)? It uses an extensive caching structure and cascades modifications. It's not completely transparent though, but I doubt that any package can provide that given the complexities of such a solution. This explains how to extract EOF for use in a pure Java app.
The thing I liked about Bowling for Columbine was that Moore was willing to be convinced. He started out believing that gun ownership/control is the major issue, but he later becomes convinced that a culture of fear is the main reason for the gun violence in America. If you really believe that the movie is simply advocating gun control, you should probably see it again with a more open mind.
Most of today's "peace protestors" are liberal issue-of-the-day types who protest whatever is popular. When you were writing about Yugoslavia, they were screaming "Free Mumia!" or screaming about t-shirt factories in Thailand.
That's not true at all. Many of the people who protested were those that never protested before. Your media might not have shown it, but I've seen plenty of regular citizens who protested against the war in Iraq.
Some people are useless, either lazy, stupid, or incapable. These people won't do well, unless we create a system that rewards laziness, stupidity, and incapacity.
How do these people dare to become handicapped! I guess that bad luck is a good reason for someone to starve.
How hard is this for you to understand? What's mine is mine, not what's mine is yours, both physically and intellectually.
This is perfectly clear for physical goods and ideas that you keep to yourself, but what about ideas and works you divulge to the world? I can not simply unforget the things you have shown me. IMO, you have given up property rights when you impurify my bodily fluids with a book, song or idea. We grant creators some rights for the good of society, but they are not inalienable rights.
Your allegation that "society is breaking down" is patently untrue.
People can be locked up indefinately or assasinated without a trial. Politicians listen to those who fund them, not those who vote for them. Journalists don't tell you the truth, instead they rally behind the regime. Yes, everything is fine in the US of A.
...poorer supermarkets also make up for it with excellent meat (...) prices. Apparently there are some good sources out there that are not available to all venues.
I'll bet that a lot of cats and dogs go missing in those neigbourhoods, or don't they?
Good post, but not entirely accurate. Iran is a theocratic country, in which substantial power is granted to religious leaders. They are not democratically elected and are deeply conservative. The citizens are mostly young and progressive and have voted for a modern and intelligent president during the previous elections. Unfortunately, he has been unable to change much. I fear that this will result in bloodshed, because democracy is not in sight until the religious leaders are replaced/shot.
One good point about living in the Netherlands (aka Holland) is the strict rules for contracts. EULA's and such are not enforceable, unlike the US. The contract must be (clearly) shown in advance of buying a product, you cannot be confronted with it later.
Personally I believe that TCP/IP is just too entrenched too be changed into TCP/MS. MS will probably focus more on the protocols at a higher level of abstraction, like HTML, NetBeui and the layers on top of SOAP+XML.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a load of bull. The GPL and the BSD license have different liberties and obligations. In some cases the GPL will be a superior choice and in other cases it will be the BSD license (or other non-Free licenses). But you shouldn't equate the (relative) lack of restrictions in the BSD license with leeching/stealing. History has shown that many individuals and companies are willing to contribute to BSD/MIT/Apache licensed code. People will contribute back, if only out of self-interest (merging custom code costs $$$ and that code will not be tested (for free!) by other users).
;)
Furthermore, the BSD license allows companies and individuals that want to contribute to use code without necessarily having to open source all other code that touches the open source stuff. This is important to companies if only to prevent accidental GPL violations. You also get into trouble if you want to assemble and distribute a system with closed and open source components (you might want to create the best of breed solution). IMHO, a more liberal approach is often better than forcing people to comply to fairly arbitrary rules.
Last and most importantly, my interest is in promoting the reuse of code, resulting in better software. If someone wants to leech, that's fine with me. I believe that open source is one of the strongest methods of cooperation between companies. In the long term, the companies that leech will be at a disadvantage to those that actively cooperate and share knowledge.
PS. I'm getting sick and tired of the "M$ will steal my work" argument that gets thrown around everytime the BSD license is mentioned. It seems to me that MS goes out of its way not to reuse existing open source code (resulting in mediocre products). I understand that you want to use the bogeyman of the open source community for an easy ad hominem attack, but its really not much better than those Hitler references that supposedly end a Usenet thread. FUD is easy, insightful comments are challenging. I dare you
There were some pretty good german commanders in the east. The major problem was that Hitler was micromanaging everything (badly). He became extremely paranoid towards his generals (just like Stalin, dictators make bad military leaders, it seems). I think that Rommel had quite a bit of leeway in the Ardennes (where his only task was to counter the allieds), which he probably wouldnÂt have had in the east (Hitler wouldnÂt think of giving up Stalingrad, even when his men became surrounded). Hitler had become such a liability that I donÂt think that Germany had any chance after 1943.
:)
Lend-lease was important, especially in Â42 when the russians were still ramping up their production, but I really donÂt believe that it was decisive. The more comfortable US jeeps were certainly not the key to germanyÂs defeat
Right, those Stalin Organs were US artillery. Har Har. You can find some data here. As you can see, AA Lend-lease was the only significant artillery contribution. It was still less than a quarter of what the russians produced themselves (26thou vs 6thou). AT and field guns from the US and UK constituted an even smaller part of the russians artillery force.
Hitler couldn't take either Moscow or the oil fields because he overextended his army and diverted troops to try to take an unimportant city. After he lost at Stalingrad, he no longer had the ability to take either Moscow or the oil fields. Especially after a major part of his army got encircled and destroyed. Many months later, Hitler was losing on the eastern front and the western Allieds invaded France. So perhaps you should check your timeline again, before you start making ridiculous claims. I would recommend Antony Beevor's The Fall of Berlin 1945 and Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege, 1942-1943
I wasn't saying that Chernobyl was a safe reactor. I was just pointing out that the disaster was caused mostly by operator error. This contradicts your statement that russian safety systems were the cause. I think that statement was misleading (IMHO).
Of course, a nuclear reactor from the 70's shouldn't neccesarily tell us anything about the safety of their current space program. The success record is pretty good for the last century of russian space flights (manned and unmanned).
In WWII we proped up two different nations that were facing complete defeat (UK and USSR) and proceeded with the largest invasion and land battle in History.
Right. You gave some trucks and weapons to the USSR and that turned the war around??!! The truth is that Hitler overextended his army and the russians were able to quickly ramp up production in East-Russia and could expend millions of soldiers. Last, but not least, Hitler was an idiot (choosing an insignificant city as the most important military goal, even if it caused him to lose half his army). If Stalin had been a good leader, he would have won (relatively) easily. He dismantled the defense line just before the war, disregarded all reports of a pending attack, cleansed the army of many good commanders around 1937 and prevented effective leadership by giving communist party officials the right to negate orders (which was changed in 1942 and had an immediate effect on combat effectiveness).
The heaviest fighting took place in Russia, they made the greatest sacrifices and caused the heaviest damage to the German army. I'm not saying this to take away from the valiant achievements by American soldiers, but you should realize that the war was more than an American Victory(tm).
The problem with Chernobyl was that they turned off all safety systems to do a 'test'. It was operator stupidity that caused the meltdown, not a flaw in the system. Russian engineering is pretty reliable (based on KISS). I would rather go up in a russian rocket than in the space shuttle.
Ok, so you're only pirating works that are more than 14 years old, or 28 years old with extention, right? Yeah, I didn't think so. Don't try to talk about being all high and mighty when you're just a cheapskate.
The deal is that I honor copyrights and get the work for free after a reasonable period of time. If copyright owners don't honor their side of the deal, I don't have to honor my side.
The copyright laws have gone into the land of the absurd, but that doesn't mean to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Copyright infringement allows works to be saved for our children and grandchildren that otherwise would have been lost. The rights of copyright holders are puny compared to this enormous loss to our culture.
May as well buy their oil and let them use the money to rebuild their own shit the way they want it.
They don't have anything to say in this matter. You make it seem like the Iraqis were in control, which they aren't. That wouldn't be so bad in itself (in the short term) if the US administration would spend the Iraqi money purely for the good of the Iraqi people. Unfortunately, the US seems to feel justified in using this money as corporate welfare to recuperate their expenses. It's the white collar variant of looting.
Free to finally make a choice. Convince me that a system that gives a single man 100% of the popular vote isn't flawed.
That's a bit of a cop-out. There is justified concern how to elect a government for a country that has been held together by violence. A worst case scenario is that a civil war might erupt and will spread to other countries. A more likely scenario is an oppressive government, possibly fundamentalist. It's very unlikely that the country will suddenly become democratic and freedom-based.
Ever been in a large scale natural disaster that requires martial law (I have)? [...] The military saved our home and our lives with their style of law enforcement.
Unfortunately, the US military doesn't seem to interact with the population very well. It started with insufficient policing of hospitals and musea and the relationship with the population seemed to get even worse after the shooting incidents. AFAIK there has been some effort to have the military help the population (repairing stuff, etc), which is positive. I remember reading about the attitudes of certain nationalities when doing peacekeeping. Some armies were in close contact with the population (patrol on foot, talk to the civvies, solve problems) and others are more distant (patrol in jeep, little contact). The difference is very apparent between the British and the US soldiers in Iraq. The US army might want to invest in 'socializing' their soldiers. Bombs might win a war, but diplomacy wins peace.
You can make the same argument about drug raids. How does the police know the crack house from the kindergarten? There should be proper evidence and checks and balances (judge gives warrant after checking police evidence, etc). Without those you'll never be safe. You can't seriously argue that we never raid anyone. I wouldn't feel safe if murderers and rapists aren't arrested.
I sincerely hope that mass mailers get nailed. They are relatively few, but cause a great deal of damage. Busting a few will probably be a good deterrent and you can simply block the mail from countries that don't stop domestic spammers. The most difficult thing is probably to come up with proper laws that don't criminalize innocents, but I don't understand why header forgery isn't illegal. Is there any valid reason to do so? Furthermore, it shouldn't be that hard to set up a do-not-call lists for unsollicited bulkmail. Why aren't these things being done?
I have to disagree a bit. CS is not a programmers course. A degree in CS doesn't mean that you are good at hacking code. Of course, you do have to know basic datastructures, basic algorithms, basic math, basic design, basic programming, etc. Some use this knowledge to become programmers, others become architects and there are those who become strategic consultants (they take everyone with a graduate degree, since they reprogram you anyway). I personally know a perfectly smart guy that just hasn't got the programmers touch. He'll never be one, but he's still a good CS graduate.
;)
Personally, I consider a CS degree to be a nice base line. That person will have a basic understanding on a broad range of CS-related topics. Still, I was never taught design patterns or unit testing, things that I consider to be essential for a good programmer. If you choose to be a programmer, you will have to learn those things yourself (and plenty more). In that respect, every good programmer is (at least partially) self-taught. A fully self-taught man is usually very strong in some areas, but very weak in others. Sometimes it is good to be pushed to do things you normally wouldn't choose to pursue. I don't think that someone with a CS degree is automatically better than someone without or vice versa. A mix might be optimal (as each has their strenghts).
BTW, was that programmer with a Masters in CS ever taught to be a good programmer or did management leave him hanging because 'he should know already'? The lack of proper training might be the answer to your question why the people with degrees don't seem to perform that well. Another possibility is that he was hired as a programmer because of his degree, instead of his qualities as a programmer.
Disclaimer: I only have experience with one dutch university. I can't vouch for crappy US institutions
First, the issue about how IBM said that the chips would work with Apple's platform. I doubt they said that, because they won't work with Apple's "platform" in that they aren't pin-compatible with the existing PowerPC offerings. At least so I presume, since going 64 bit generally means a wider data bus and a wider address bus. I guess I could be wrong about this part. :P If you mean, the instruction set is compatible, I'm not sure I'd believe that either, but I'm willing to reserve judgement until I look at the user's manual for the new processor.
They didn't put that very well. I'm pretty sure that they wanted to say that Apple can use the 970 in a new Mac which will work with existing software. You wouldn't have that with x86 processors. Not that I believe that IBM has said anything to Businessweek, the story is lacking hard data and reeks of rumormonging to increase page-views (succesful with the help of slashdot).
Assuming these chips haven't been sampled yet, Apple has no chance to get these things out in time to compete with Athlon 64.
IBM's original roadmap was sampling in 2Q03 with production in 2H03. So they should be sampling already. IBM is known to be very conservative in its estimates, so we might see full production very soon. I've heard rumors that things are going well at IBM.
Video is about a zillion times more intensive, and people are doing it NOW, but he cites "digital photography and digital music" as the reasons people need CPU? PLEASE.
I'm not an expert on digital audio, but I do know that photoshop artist are always looking for more speed. Complex operations on 100+MB images still take too long. The same might be true for sound editing.
As for "WATCH OUT, SUN" -- Sun is in no danger whatsoever from Apple.
A 1U XServe 970 will certainly compete with Suns low end. The current XServe is already doing fairly well in that market and a fast 64 bit offering will only do better. x86-64 is a bigger threat to Sun, but a new XServe will probably be another nail in their coffin.
I understand the new processor has a 400MHz DDR (800MHz equivalent) bus, so perhaps Apple will match it with DDR400 SDRAM, and then it will do them some good.
The bus is half the speed of the CPU, the announced high-end chip (1.8 Ghz) will have a 900Mhz (equivalent) bus.
Face it, this chip will not "breathe new life" into Apple. It will only allow it to keep fighting the "good fight" against other platforms which are going or have gone 64 bit.
This chip will address Apple's main weakness, a (very) slow CPU (and bus + RAM, but those are all tied to the CPU). There are many, many people waiting for faster PowerMacs, I forsee an enormous sales surge. As for "breathing new life" into Apple, they have done so already. The enormous succes of the iPod and the iTunes Music Store is changing them into much more than 'just' a computer company.
No, the german military police was called Feldgendarmerie (Fieldpolice). These soldiers wore a gorget around their necks which earned them the name Kettenhunde (chained dogs). This site contains both historical and reenactment pictures. Here you can find an excellent historical overview.
The SS started out as Hitler's personal bodyguard, but was soon turned into a paramilitary organisation led by Himmler. Special SS units were in charge of the concentration camps and 'cleansed' occupied territory. The SS was declared a criminal organisation at Neurenberg and many of it's leaders were executed.
When I say "mandating behaviour", jail time, fines and break-ups are included (no extra charge) ;)
I just hope the EU has the balls to stop MS.
I don't understand your point. This doesn't really support a libertarian viewpoint since the monopoly can do a lot of damage. Look at MS, how much innovation has it stopped/prevented? I really can't wait 10+ years. I prefer a system that prevents such a monopoly from forming (stopping big mergers) and/or prevents it from abusing it's power (mandating certain behaviour).
Besides, the same logic you use can be applied to defend an interventionist system: every company strives to be a monopolist (in the entire market or in a niche through diversification). As such, a total free market will rarely exist for long. The marketplace often self regulates towards monopolies (through price matching for instance). Those might be unstable, but once they break up, new ones will form. A perfect free market is mostly a fluke and thus we need to intervene to stay (reasonably) close to that ideal.
Have you tried EOF (part of WebObjects)? It uses an extensive caching structure and cascades modifications. It's not completely transparent though, but I doubt that any package can provide that given the complexities of such a solution. This explains how to extract EOF for use in a pure Java app.
The thing I liked about Bowling for Columbine was that Moore was willing to be convinced. He started out believing that gun ownership/control is the major issue, but he later becomes convinced that a culture of fear is the main reason for the gun violence in America. If you really believe that the movie is simply advocating gun control, you should probably see it again with a more open mind.
Most of today's "peace protestors" are liberal issue-of-the-day types who protest whatever is popular. When you were writing about Yugoslavia, they were screaming "Free Mumia!" or screaming about t-shirt factories in Thailand.
That's not true at all. Many of the people who protested were those that never protested before. Your media might not have shown it, but I've seen plenty of regular citizens who protested against the war in Iraq.
Some people are useless, either lazy, stupid, or incapable. These people won't do well, unless we create a system that rewards laziness, stupidity, and incapacity.
How do these people dare to become handicapped! I guess that bad luck is a good reason for someone to starve.
How hard is this for you to understand? What's mine is mine, not what's mine is yours, both physically and intellectually.
This is perfectly clear for physical goods and ideas that you keep to yourself, but what about ideas and works you divulge to the world? I can not simply unforget the things you have shown me. IMO, you have given up property rights when you impurify my bodily fluids with a book, song or idea. We grant creators some rights for the good of society, but they are not inalienable rights.
You can find a more extensive argument here
Your allegation that "society is breaking down" is patently untrue.
People can be locked up indefinately or assasinated without a trial. Politicians listen to those who fund them, not those who vote for them. Journalists don't tell you the truth, instead they rally behind the regime. Yes, everything is fine in the US of A.
It was an attempt at humor ;)
...poorer supermarkets also make up for it with excellent meat (...) prices. Apparently there are some good sources out there that are not available to all venues.
I'll bet that a lot of cats and dogs go missing in those neigbourhoods, or don't they?
Good post, but not entirely accurate. Iran is a theocratic country, in which substantial power is granted to religious leaders. They are not democratically elected and are deeply conservative. The citizens are mostly young and progressive and have voted for a modern and intelligent president during the previous elections. Unfortunately, he has been unable to change much. I fear that this will result in bloodshed, because democracy is not in sight until the religious leaders are replaced/shot.
One good point about living in the Netherlands (aka Holland) is the strict rules for contracts. EULA's and such are not enforceable, unlike the US. The contract must be (clearly) shown in advance of buying a product, you cannot be confronted with it later.
I checked it out, NetBeui is unsupported but still provided. It seems they are indeed fasing it out in favor of TCP/IP. Good ;)
The guy is Robert X. Cringely and this is the column.
Personally I believe that TCP/IP is just too entrenched too be changed into TCP/MS. MS will probably focus more on the protocols at a higher level of abstraction, like HTML, NetBeui and the layers on top of SOAP+XML.