I know what you meant, but you can't have it both ways. Either the population of Microsoft is just like the general population, or it's not.
In general, your attitudes can be influenced by your background, including economic status, religion, and race. Therefore, if there are fewer blacks at Microsoft, the mix of attitudes will be different too.
For example, very few blacks are white supremecists. If there are more whites at Microsoft than in the general population, and the percentace of whites who are white supremecists remains constant, there will be more white supremecists at Microsoft than in the general population.
Therefore, the racial mix DOES affect the mix of attitudes. By your own admission, the racial mix at Microsoft differs from that of the general population.
And therefore the cross section of attitudes at Microsoft is different from the cross section of attitudes in the general population.
But if "you'll get the same kind of cross section of people there that you get anywhere", then you should get the same proportion of blacks that you'll get anywhere. And that doesn't appear to be the case.
Not only is the link bad, but there's no evidence on Linux Today's home page that they ever posted such a story. It doesn't appear on their story search either.
And what did he mean by "finally"? He doesn't like FreeType?
IANAL, but I doubt anyone will ever be sued for "violating the GPL". Instead, people who violate the GPL will be sued for copyright infringement. The defendant will then have to argue
1) that the GPL is valid but flawed ("yes, I'm bound by the GPL, but I found this loophole")
or
2) code released under GPL is actually public domain, despite prominent copyright notices.
I know device drivers aren't as sexy as filesystems or memory architechtures. But when IBM got their Thinkpad "Red hat certified" and then had to admit the modem was incompatible, they looked pretty dumb.
IBM makes a lot of hardware. Certainly and important way they could help out would be to make sure it all works with Linux
Yeah, when I pointed this out to an AOL Canada guy at a computer show when they were just starting to promote AOL Canada, he said "Yeah, well, we're not really calling ourselves America Online anymore. Just AOL."
Yes, I agree that the quote is ambiguious. I wish I had a better source, but I wanted to quickly contradict this internet-90%-English figure that the first poster apparently made up.
If he'd said the web was 90% English, I might not disagree, but there's a lot more to the Internet than the Web. Email, for example, is probably a lot closer to that 50% figure.
By your arguments, English should never have survived. Back when the Normans ruled England, English was the "local tongue" (they called it the vulgar tongue), and French was the language of the "cultural/technical/administrative elite".
But it turned out to be a Conan thing. Norman occupation of England didn't kill English, it made it stronger. The peasants who used the vulgar tongue weren't too proud to borrow terms from French and Latin, and the variety of synonyms in English is partly because of that.
So history does NOT say that English will kill Spanish.
Re:Unlicensed Golden Waves of Grain.
on
Golden Rice
·
· Score: 2
Some things are counterintuitive.
Would you be surprised to hear that fertilizer is destructive?
You know phosphates are bad for the environment? They're bad because they're fertilizers. Plant nutrients are bad for the environment. They cause more algae to grow in bodies of water. They can cover the surface, and make it hard for plants to grow under water. And then fish die.
So if plant nutrients are bad for the environment, what about human nutrients? Let's imagine there was a bacterium that used beta-carrotene as its main source of nutrition. With limited supplies of beta-carrotene in the wild, it would not be a seriou threat. But with the golden rice windfall, the bacteria could multiply and make some people very sick.
Slashdot Mirror
I know what you meant, but you can't have it both ways. Either the population of Microsoft is just like the general population, or it's not.
In general, your attitudes can be influenced by your background, including economic status, religion, and race. Therefore, if there are fewer blacks at Microsoft, the mix of attitudes will be different too.
For example, very few blacks are white supremecists. If there are more whites at Microsoft than in the general population, and the percentace of whites who are white supremecists remains constant, there will be more white supremecists at Microsoft than in the general population.
Therefore, the racial mix DOES affect the mix of attitudes. By your own admission, the racial mix at Microsoft differs from that of the general population.
And therefore the cross section of attitudes at Microsoft is different from the cross section of attitudes in the general population.
But if "you'll get the same kind of cross section of people there that you get anywhere", then you should get the same proportion of blacks that you'll get anywhere. And that doesn't appear to be the case.
They're not mutually exclusive.
If it was your fake fish and you reprogrammed it cleverly, it was hacked.
If it was someone else's fake fish, and you reprogrammed it cleverly, it was hacked and cracked.
If it was someone else's fake fish, and you reprogrammed it stupidly, it was cracked. (And you're a script kiddie.)
And there's no such thing as defacing junk like a Boogie Bass.
Not only is the link bad, but there's no evidence on Linux Today's home page that they ever posted such a story. It doesn't appear on their story search either.
And what did he mean by "finally"? He doesn't like FreeType?
IANAL, but I doubt anyone will ever be sued for "violating the GPL". Instead, people who violate the GPL will be sued for copyright infringement. The defendant will then have to argue
1) that the GPL is valid but flawed ("yes, I'm bound by the GPL, but I found this loophole")
or
2) code released under GPL is actually public domain, despite prominent copyright notices.
Simply restrict discussion of the material
So you want to repeal the First Amendment then?
Not true. Microsoft needs third-party developers. That means they're symbiotes, not parasites.
I know device drivers aren't as sexy as filesystems or memory architechtures. But when IBM got their Thinkpad "Red hat certified" and then had to admit the modem was incompatible, they looked pretty dumb.
IBM makes a lot of hardware. Certainly and important way they could help out would be to make sure it all works with Linux
'Cause if it's not hot, you get it free!
When your entertainment centre gets hacked, Britney Spears will start singing and NEVER STOP. . .
AMD chips are
This is bad engineering? Our Durons are running smooth as silk, thanks.
Tomb Raider is a lot more like Indiana Jones than most adventure movies, you freak!
Yeah, when I pointed this out to an AOL Canada guy at a computer show when they were just starting to promote AOL Canada, he said "Yeah, well, we're not really calling ourselves America Online anymore. Just AOL."
Kinda like ESSO (S.O. or Standard Oil)
It's a new Instruction Set Architecture. IA-64 has only ever been available on one chip, and that's Merced--I mean Itanium.
Interesting take. My sense though is that the survival of languages is based more on politics than the merits of the language.
English is prevalent today because the English founded so many colonies, not because it was superior.
Hebrew was brought back from the dead because one guy made it his quest to do so.
On the other hand, only "dead" languages rigidly adhere to a standard.
Yes, I agree that the quote is ambiguious. I wish I had a better source, but I wanted to quickly contradict this internet-90%-English figure that the first poster apparently made up.
If he'd said the web was 90% English, I might not disagree, but there's a lot more to the Internet than the Web. Email, for example, is probably a lot closer to that 50% figure.
By your arguments, English should never have survived. Back when the Normans ruled England, English was the "local tongue" (they called it the vulgar tongue), and French was the language of the "cultural/technical/administrative elite".
But it turned out to be a Conan thing. Norman occupation of England didn't kill English, it made it stronger. The peasants who used the vulgar tongue weren't too proud to borrow terms from French and Latin, and the variety of synonyms in English is partly because of that.
So history does NOT say that English will kill Spanish.
It might. But it might make it stronger.
Your figures are wrong. While English is still the most-used language on the internet, ". . .the Internet IS becoming increasingly multinational, with English-speaking surfers dwindling below the 50% mark".
The numbers vary. Lots.
38% of the hits to our site come from Netscape.
A few?
But AMD DID inspire the 1.13 GHz PIII bug. Without such hot competition, Intel would never have rushed the 1.13 PIII out. . .
And where does the "trusted vendor" get compilers and linkers that aren't backdoored?
It seems unlikely that GCC is backdoored, but can you prove it is not?
Actually, right now, modellers first create the model they want, and then do their best to reduce the polygon count.
And you can kill a lot of polygons just modelling a realistic telephone. Which you can then reuse everywhere you need a telephone.
Not to mention rabbits. . .
Some things are counterintuitive.
Would you be surprised to hear that fertilizer is destructive?
You know phosphates are bad for the environment? They're bad because they're fertilizers. Plant nutrients are bad for the environment. They cause more algae to grow in bodies of water. They can cover the surface, and make it hard for plants to grow under water. And then fish die.
So if plant nutrients are bad for the environment, what about human nutrients? Let's imagine there was a bacterium that used beta-carrotene as its main source of nutrition. With limited supplies of beta-carrotene in the wild, it would not be a seriou threat. But with the golden rice windfall, the bacteria could multiply and make some people very sick.