Probably not news many people here are aware of, but China, and in some cases Russia, have been claiming islands owned and even occupied by Japan are theirs. Most significantly, China claims Okinawa and asserts that Okinawans are genetically Chinese.... therefore... well you get the idea.
Well... yeah but no. Their being different enough to make everyone else think all the other browsers were broken worked. Only web deveopers knew differently. And the business apps only worked under MSIE thing ensured people wouldn't migrate their client machines from Windows.
I have to wonder what Microsoft will pull next. As their game ran its course and more and more things went the standards route, what's next?
"Sexism" means women are involved. Racism means black people are involved.
Sexist behavior means someone offended someone else and that it was a woman. Women can't be sexist. Black people can't be racist. It's a power struggle.
(If what I wrote up there sounds pretty ridiculous, I agree. If it still rings true somehow? Well... there you go.)
Perfect answer. She is the poison for events and employers and other women who actually want to make an honest living in the world.
Women have had this amazing free pass on their behavior for so long. I know women who are absolutely ashamed on behalf of these other women. We're afraid to complain about "these people."//What do you mean "these people"?!// You know what I mean and quit pretending to be semi-offended asking me to say something you can use against me.
"Money Shot" does not mean porn. Yes. Porn made the term famous, but the meaning isn't quite "semen being ejected." It's "this is what people came here to see!" Steve Jobs holding up a new iThing was "the money shot."
The woman has a serious problem in that she makes her problem a problem for everyone else.
Very enlightening.
She was not going to be re-trained. And the blogger demonstrated that she has a history of choosing the stir up trouble rather than trying to work things out. Clearly the company that fired her made the right choice.
I'm rather surprised she even attended PyCon. After all, pythons and snakes in general are often used to describe penises.
We know about race hustlers... people who like to twist any situation into a racist (against blacks) for their fame and profit. It's old news.
But we don't hear much about the more quiet problem... especially in the work place. The one quite a few of us in this demographic have suffered.
There are women out there who are equally prepared to play the sexism-card when it serves their interests. In this case, this woman is a pretty good example. People have been digging up her internet content everywhere exposing what she is and does. On one hand she has a clear history of sex related things. If she was so offended by sex related things, she has a weird way of showing it. So it wasn't the sex related things that bothered her. I have little doubt that she was harmed or offended by what she thought she heard.
She may have been annoyed by the cut-ups going on behind her. That's understandable. But instead of addressing the real problem, she made up a worse one. She created this drama. She got what she expected... at first. But then the community unexpectedly returned fire. Her employer couldn't afford to have her any longer. B'Bye bitch.
This is the unspoken reason there may be reservations about women in the workplace and especially in the tech fields. We're a BUNCH of immature geeks who care less about social crap and more about technical crap. When women enter the room, we're immediately terrified that our haven is being changed leaving us nowhere to go. The unspoken fear is that we know what women can and will bring. She is a perfect example of it. Once again, her self-documented history of sexy-flirty crap spins around in an instant to "I'm offended by this double entendre!!" And of course, everyone who seeks not to be branded "a part of the problem" is forced into doing whatever pleases her.
Nice play. For once it didn't work out quite as she expected. I wonder what she will advocate next? This geek crowd she offended? They are anonymous. They don't forget. They don't forgive. And she represents every woman in the workplace who has ever played that game. And I sincerely hope her hell will give other women cause to give a second thought about playing the sexism card like this.
Moron. Gun violence is lower in the US in places where CHLs are available and especially in places where gun ownership is encouraged.
When you have something nice, people will try to take it from you. This is true when the people are government or criminals... or both. They often do so at the point of a gun. They do it more easily and more often when the target has no way to defend themselves.
Guns don't CAUSE violence. People cause it. I *wish* the wrong people didn't have weapons available to them. But wishing and legislation will NOT stop it. What wishing and legislation does is guarantees you are ripe, low-hanging fruit when the wrong people come knocking at your door.
Go ahead, offer up the "bad neighborhood" argument. Harlem used to be a good neighborhood... in fact most of the bad neighborhoods used to be good neighborhoods. What happened? People didn't defend themselves and the neighborhoods went bad.
I get it. You're afraid of guns. But I'm willing to bet you're just as afraid of bad people with or without guns. So give it some serious thought. Even if in your wildest dreams, only police had access to weapons, police would go bad... we've seen it recently. Worse, police would become the targets and their guns taken! We're seeing that too! So how does gun control help that? You're living in a delusional world where you feel safe because you only see it on TV... until a neighborhood makes up its own anti-gun legislation and puts up signs saying "this is a gun-free neighborhood." Guess what will happen next?:)
That was true, theoretically, in the US as well. But you know what happened? The cost of adult labor went up as they were more scarce. Children, meanwhile had more fun, went to school and advanced intellectually and in potential.
That's what should happen in these other nations. It's what COULD happen if the right changes were made.
Worse is that in these child labor countries, parents are thereby encouraged to have more children [to exploit] so they can bring more money into the family. This is the same reason why agricultural families had tended to be so large. More family, more help.
There are ways around the tragic results of a sudden stop. But you know what happened when slavery ended in the US? A *LOT* of black suffering. It sucked for the freed black people. Many returned to the plantations as "share croppers" who rented the lands they worked and the homes they lived in for no profit and an existance that was, at times, worse than being slaves. But the long term results? Well... I have good and bad to say about it, but at the end of the day, if one person can legally be enslaved, we ALL can, so we're better off without it.
So change could be tragic. But the long term would not be. No change is a guaranteed persistence of the problem.
What it means is they continue their drain on larger economies. Consider that the money they spend goes more out of the countries and even their costs of being present in the lands their customers live in (because you know the people who are making their products can't afford them) is going DOWN! They OWN these power plants after all.
So more taking and less giving than ever before. So even this green initiative is pretty selfish when you think about it.
Seconded. And I'll add to that to say that a nation's laws should only extend to the borders of the nation. I am personally ashamed of my nation (the USA) for its trickery, manipulation and deceit in trying to extend and expand its laws (at the request of business) to other nations.
I hold that everyone who hates me is completely entitled to hate me. Call me names. Say what you like about my opinions and the things I do. (So long as they are the truth with evidence or are merely opinion.) As a US American, I believe in the constitution as it was written and that the freedom of speech [especially] covers unpopular speech. So screw the Jewish (leaders... I love the people actually) for attempting to trample and silence free speech.
We have seen concession after concession made on behalf of France by internet companies all over. It's about time someone brought this to a stop and fought back.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the first useful thing Twitter has done. I hope they prevail. Of course the court will likely be a French court and the liklihood that Twitter will even appear is, I'm guessing pretty low. How this all plays out will be very interesting. In previous cases which were similar in nature, Twitter rolled over. I hope this will end very differently.
Of course, I think this is Twitter realizing it is a major media entity now and should begin acting like one.
I appreciate the energy conscious choices being made. I appreciate the leadership value in it. There are lots of ways they can clean up their image and in my opinion, they aren't addressing the more serious concerns. All they are doing is better ensuring that when people come charging their offices with torches and pitchforks in hand, they will be able to stay in their buildings for a bit longer.
Making a legally hostile environment doesn't make a change. Even and especially the US military knows it's about changing hearts and minds.
As a society, forget about the workplace, we've come a long way accepting gays (why do I have to say lesbians too? it's the same thing and easier to type) and people of other sorts whether the sorting is about religion or whatever else. Changes of culture, of hearts and of minds are best managed naturally rather than through threat and force... ESPECIALLY in the workplace where people need to work together. Tollerance is key. Tollerance. It builds character.
And you don't know my grandmother or other female relatives. You seem to imply that because someone is female, they can't handle a bit of slang or color in their language and humor. That would be a sexist point of view wouldn't it?
Lately, I have seen some emotional growth in that I have seen indications that "the offended" aren't always in the right and "the offenders" aren't always guilty. This is still generally the case, but becoming less so... slowly... a little bit.
Already did. She got fired too! She still feels justified in her position which indicates she didn't learn anything through her experience. Meanwhile the guy that got fired? Yeah... apologized publically AFTER getting fired as well as before.
So seriously, if it's a question of conduct, I'd say the score was tied. But when it's a question of character? The lady loses and the man wins.
The tech/geek realm is primarily male to the point it is virtually male. Women join in knowing what it's like before they enter. It's like going to a bar and when you enter, you expect people to immediately put out their smokes and change the way they speak. Sorry miss priss, but this is how men relate to one another. We aren't saying you're not welcome in our world, but I am saying you'd better know what you're getting into and be prepared to accept it. Why do women think the world needs to change when they enter a room? And why do people reinforce this moronic and impractical notion?! It's a damned good thing I've never had this problem at a strip club... somehow a men's club would cease to exist if the women were offended by men acting like men.
But you know? It's just about time men started becoming more vocal about women and their offensive behaviors in the work place. A lot of gossip and rumor milling is rather forbidden and is typically unreported. And when women try to fit in when they make any form of sexual comment, we should discourage that in the same way. I had a female co-worker who made comments about getting wet and getting her juices flowing... and not a week or so later tried to get someone fired for "inappropriate comments" of a sexual nature.
As I read through related chatter about this incident, I read where she even made comments of a sexual nature herself... not at this event but in other places. Pot calling the kettle black much?
Want to end -isms? Want them to be a non-issue? It starts with TOLLERANCE and ends with public disapproval. Getting legal and jobless over it is pretty damned ridiculous when it comes to personalities and moments in time which are subject to interpretation to say the very least.
If sexism were to be defeated, it would mean hearts and minds would change and it would become a non-issue.
This is something very different. This is a chilling effect and a one-way weapon against males. The same would never happen if the roles were opposite. This is no different than the mentality we generally maintain that it's funny for women to hurt men but tragic and horrific for men to hurt women.
This doesn't "fight" sexism, it defines it. The worst thing is all of this harm is done without the benefit of a trial, a warning or any sense of fairness.
What if the first attack disabled banking services while the response disabled all power to all hospitals?
One is more likely to cost lives than another.
I think it's better to just say "yes" and be done with it. The fact is these rules are set to convey what an actor should expect in retaliation. If is is expected that a bombing attack or a sniper's bullet may be the return for engaging a target (because let's face it, the attack may have been enough to disable hacking options) then so be it.
But we can be guaranteed one thing. In a world where the US thinks copyrights are a national security concern, nothing will be understood or interpreted in any sensible manner.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. It was shown not only that they abused their monopoly position, but pulled numerous tricks to get there. You are either new to IT or you've been smoking something. Everyone should know Microsoft's history by now.
That YOUR instance works great is fine. My instance also works flawlessly. The problem is often blamed on "third party software." Great. While the actual cause may actually be third party software as is demonstrable by the removal of (or omission of in a system reload) that doesn't escape the fact that the OS itself is vulnerable to 3rd party software crashing the OS. This is a kind of important rule of a good OS not to be vulnerable to 3rd party software causing it to crash.
And here's a great example of what I mean: In the past, I have had my laptop running Linux fail. The video chip failed. But I had applications and processes running in the background which I didn't want interrupted. So what did I do?
I was able to SSH into the machine which was STILL RUNNING despite the fact that the video was completely out. I was able to monitor the progress of the software and shut it down without problem, then shut down the computer as well. I was hoping it was some sort of [proprietary] software glitch in the driver, but alas, the video chip had died and I could get no video from the display or from the VGA port. The machine had to be replaced.
Now I ask you this. If this were Windows, would a video driver failure, especially one which started as a hardware failure, do you think the machine would have continued running or do you think the whole machine would have been taken down with it? (Rhetorical question, we all know the answer.) So now I point out that if other OSes can withstand hardware failures by crashing only the affected components (in this case, my X session was killed and the applications running under X also killed) why doesn't Windows? And if the OS on common PC hardware is capable of this level of resilience, why is Windows not? I get that speed and power and blah-blah-blah are imporant... on DESKTOP machines. But the problem is that Microsoft took a desktop OS and uses it as a server OS. Arguably, you can say that's not true -- the NT kernel was intended to be used for servers and stuff like that. Okay great. It still falls short. Drivers live in ring-0 and they don't (all) need to be running there.
I have argued this point numerous times with the same failing arguments presented. At the end of the day x86 hardware, when running a properly engineered OS, can compartmentalize all peripheral devices to the point that a crash on any given controller or whatever, will not crash the whole OS. I have experienced this often enough in Linux to know this works nicely. (I once had a vmware guest running Linux and had the storage fail... the damned thing kept running and when I SSH'd into the machine, it showed me HDD controller failures and stuff. It was pretty awesome.) So once again, WHY NOT WINDOWS?! Why can 3rd party software, whether they are drivers or applications, crash the damned OS?!
Slashdot Mirror
Probably not news many people here are aware of, but China, and in some cases Russia, have been claiming islands owned and even occupied by Japan are theirs. Most significantly, China claims Okinawa and asserts that Okinawans are genetically Chinese.... therefore... well you get the idea.
Well... yeah but no. Their being different enough to make everyone else think all the other browsers were broken worked. Only web deveopers knew differently. And the business apps only worked under MSIE thing ensured people wouldn't migrate their client machines from Windows.
I have to wonder what Microsoft will pull next. As their game ran its course and more and more things went the standards route, what's next?
word games? Is it really?
You can't refute it or even attempt to argue against it. Instead you go after the source.
If it's wrong, tell me why it's wrong.
"Sexism" means women are involved. Racism means black people are involved.
Sexist behavior means someone offended someone else and that it was a woman. Women can't be sexist. Black people can't be racist. It's a power struggle.
(If what I wrote up there sounds pretty ridiculous, I agree. If it still rings true somehow? Well... there you go.)
Perfect answer. She is the poison for events and employers and other women who actually want to make an honest living in the world.
Women have had this amazing free pass on their behavior for so long. I know women who are absolutely ashamed on behalf of these other women. We're afraid to complain about "these people." //What do you mean "these people"?!// You know what I mean and quit pretending to be semi-offended asking me to say something you can use against me.
Informative link.
"Money Shot" does not mean porn. Yes. Porn made the term famous, but the meaning isn't quite "semen being ejected." It's "this is what people came here to see!" Steve Jobs holding up a new iThing was "the money shot."
The woman has a serious problem in that she makes her problem a problem for everyone else.
Very enlightening.
She was not going to be re-trained. And the blogger demonstrated that she has a history of choosing the stir up trouble rather than trying to work things out. Clearly the company that fired her made the right choice.
I'm rather surprised she even attended PyCon. After all, pythons and snakes in general are often used to describe penises.
It's a significant and relevant story.
We know about race hustlers... people who like to twist any situation into a racist (against blacks) for their fame and profit. It's old news.
But we don't hear much about the more quiet problem... especially in the work place. The one quite a few of us in this demographic have suffered.
There are women out there who are equally prepared to play the sexism-card when it serves their interests. In this case, this woman is a pretty good example. People have been digging up her internet content everywhere exposing what she is and does. On one hand she has a clear history of sex related things. If she was so offended by sex related things, she has a weird way of showing it. So it wasn't the sex related things that bothered her. I have little doubt that she was harmed or offended by what she thought she heard.
She may have been annoyed by the cut-ups going on behind her. That's understandable. But instead of addressing the real problem, she made up a worse one. She created this drama. She got what she expected... at first. But then the community unexpectedly returned fire. Her employer couldn't afford to have her any longer. B'Bye bitch.
This is the unspoken reason there may be reservations about women in the workplace and especially in the tech fields. We're a BUNCH of immature geeks who care less about social crap and more about technical crap. When women enter the room, we're immediately terrified that our haven is being changed leaving us nowhere to go. The unspoken fear is that we know what women can and will bring. She is a perfect example of it. Once again, her self-documented history of sexy-flirty crap spins around in an instant to "I'm offended by this double entendre!!" And of course, everyone who seeks not to be branded "a part of the problem" is forced into doing whatever pleases her.
Nice play. For once it didn't work out quite as she expected. I wonder what she will advocate next? This geek crowd she offended? They are anonymous. They don't forget. They don't forgive. And she represents every woman in the workplace who has ever played that game. And I sincerely hope her hell will give other women cause to give a second thought about playing the sexism card like this.
Moron. Gun violence is lower in the US in places where CHLs are available and especially in places where gun ownership is encouraged.
When you have something nice, people will try to take it from you. This is true when the people are government or criminals... or both. They often do so at the point of a gun. They do it more easily and more often when the target has no way to defend themselves.
Guns don't CAUSE violence. People cause it. I *wish* the wrong people didn't have weapons available to them. But wishing and legislation will NOT stop it. What wishing and legislation does is guarantees you are ripe, low-hanging fruit when the wrong people come knocking at your door.
Go ahead, offer up the "bad neighborhood" argument. Harlem used to be a good neighborhood... in fact most of the bad neighborhoods used to be good neighborhoods. What happened? People didn't defend themselves and the neighborhoods went bad.
I get it. You're afraid of guns. But I'm willing to bet you're just as afraid of bad people with or without guns. So give it some serious thought. Even if in your wildest dreams, only police had access to weapons, police would go bad... we've seen it recently. Worse, police would become the targets and their guns taken! We're seeing that too! So how does gun control help that? You're living in a delusional world where you feel safe because you only see it on TV... until a neighborhood makes up its own anti-gun legislation and puts up signs saying "this is a gun-free neighborhood." Guess what will happen next? :)
They could avoid the problem entirely and bring manufacturing and assembly to places where it would NEVER happen.
And as another commenter pointed out, the "higher price" argument is moot when it comes to Apple customers. They will buy Apple at any price.
That was true, theoretically, in the US as well. But you know what happened? The cost of adult labor went up as they were more scarce. Children, meanwhile had more fun, went to school and advanced intellectually and in potential.
That's what should happen in these other nations. It's what COULD happen if the right changes were made.
Worse is that in these child labor countries, parents are thereby encouraged to have more children [to exploit] so they can bring more money into the family. This is the same reason why agricultural families had tended to be so large. More family, more help.
There are ways around the tragic results of a sudden stop. But you know what happened when slavery ended in the US? A *LOT* of black suffering. It sucked for the freed black people. Many returned to the plantations as "share croppers" who rented the lands they worked and the homes they lived in for no profit and an existance that was, at times, worse than being slaves. But the long term results? Well... I have good and bad to say about it, but at the end of the day, if one person can legally be enslaved, we ALL can, so we're better off without it.
So change could be tragic. But the long term would not be. No change is a guaranteed persistence of the problem.
What it means is they continue their drain on larger economies. Consider that the money they spend goes more out of the countries and even their costs of being present in the lands their customers live in (because you know the people who are making their products can't afford them) is going DOWN! They OWN these power plants after all.
So more taking and less giving than ever before. So even this green initiative is pretty selfish when you think about it.
Seconded. And I'll add to that to say that a nation's laws should only extend to the borders of the nation. I am personally ashamed of my nation (the USA) for its trickery, manipulation and deceit in trying to extend and expand its laws (at the request of business) to other nations.
I hold that everyone who hates me is completely entitled to hate me. Call me names. Say what you like about my opinions and the things I do. (So long as they are the truth with evidence or are merely opinion.) As a US American, I believe in the constitution as it was written and that the freedom of speech [especially] covers unpopular speech. So screw the Jewish (leaders... I love the people actually) for attempting to trample and silence free speech.
We have seen concession after concession made on behalf of France by internet companies all over. It's about time someone brought this to a stop and fought back.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the first useful thing Twitter has done. I hope they prevail. Of course the court will likely be a French court and the liklihood that Twitter will even appear is, I'm guessing pretty low. How this all plays out will be very interesting. In previous cases which were similar in nature, Twitter rolled over. I hope this will end very differently.
Of course, I think this is Twitter realizing it is a major media entity now and should begin acting like one.
I was thinking along similar lines:
"Is child labor considered renewable energy?"
I appreciate the energy conscious choices being made. I appreciate the leadership value in it. There are lots of ways they can clean up their image and in my opinion, they aren't addressing the more serious concerns. All they are doing is better ensuring that when people come charging their offices with torches and pitchforks in hand, they will be able to stay in their buildings for a bit longer.
Oh there is still racism... just not the way it used to be. These days it's the pot calling the president not black enough.
Now you're preaching your own morality and idealism.
Let's just say this:
Making a legally hostile environment doesn't make a change. Even and especially the US military knows it's about changing hearts and minds.
As a society, forget about the workplace, we've come a long way accepting gays (why do I have to say lesbians too? it's the same thing and easier to type) and people of other sorts whether the sorting is about religion or whatever else. Changes of culture, of hearts and of minds are best managed naturally rather than through threat and force... ESPECIALLY in the workplace where people need to work together. Tollerance is key. Tollerance. It builds character.
And you don't know my grandmother or other female relatives. You seem to imply that because someone is female, they can't handle a bit of slang or color in their language and humor. That would be a sexist point of view wouldn't it?
Lately, I have seen some emotional growth in that I have seen indications that "the offended" aren't always in the right and "the offenders" aren't always guilty. This is still generally the case, but becoming less so... slowly... a little bit.
Already did. She got fired too! She still feels justified in her position which indicates she didn't learn anything through her experience. Meanwhile the guy that got fired? Yeah... apologized publically AFTER getting fired as well as before.
So seriously, if it's a question of conduct, I'd say the score was tied. But when it's a question of character? The lady loses and the man wins.
Here's some things that get to me.
The tech/geek realm is primarily male to the point it is virtually male. Women join in knowing what it's like before they enter. It's like going to a bar and when you enter, you expect people to immediately put out their smokes and change the way they speak. Sorry miss priss, but this is how men relate to one another. We aren't saying you're not welcome in our world, but I am saying you'd better know what you're getting into and be prepared to accept it. Why do women think the world needs to change when they enter a room? And why do people reinforce this moronic and impractical notion?! It's a damned good thing I've never had this problem at a strip club... somehow a men's club would cease to exist if the women were offended by men acting like men.
But you know? It's just about time men started becoming more vocal about women and their offensive behaviors in the work place. A lot of gossip and rumor milling is rather forbidden and is typically unreported. And when women try to fit in when they make any form of sexual comment, we should discourage that in the same way. I had a female co-worker who made comments about getting wet and getting her juices flowing... and not a week or so later tried to get someone fired for "inappropriate comments" of a sexual nature.
As I read through related chatter about this incident, I read where she even made comments of a sexual nature herself... not at this event but in other places. Pot calling the kettle black much?
Want to end -isms? Want them to be a non-issue? It starts with TOLLERANCE and ends with public disapproval. Getting legal and jobless over it is pretty damned ridiculous when it comes to personalities and moments in time which are subject to interpretation to say the very least.
If sexism were to be defeated, it would mean hearts and minds would change and it would become a non-issue.
This is something very different. This is a chilling effect and a one-way weapon against males. The same would never happen if the roles were opposite. This is no different than the mentality we generally maintain that it's funny for women to hurt men but tragic and horrific for men to hurt women.
This doesn't "fight" sexism, it defines it. The worst thing is all of this harm is done without the benefit of a trial, a warning or any sense of fairness.
I would but my "team" doesn't represent me. And I believe that is the case for most governments these days.
Fact is, the government and the people are far enough apart these days to be completely different species.
Sorry, but what's a proper counter-attack?
What if the first attack disabled banking services while the response disabled all power to all hospitals?
One is more likely to cost lives than another.
I think it's better to just say "yes" and be done with it. The fact is these rules are set to convey what an actor should expect in retaliation. If is is expected that a bombing attack or a sniper's bullet may be the return for engaging a target (because let's face it, the attack may have been enough to disable hacking options) then so be it.
But we can be guaranteed one thing. In a world where the US thinks copyrights are a national security concern, nothing will be understood or interpreted in any sensible manner.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. It was shown not only that they abused their monopoly position, but pulled numerous tricks to get there. You are either new to IT or you've been smoking something. Everyone should know Microsoft's history by now.
interesting you think their market share is due to sufficient quality.
I'll respond to this but not to the others.
That YOUR instance works great is fine. My instance also works flawlessly. The problem is often blamed on "third party software." Great. While the actual cause may actually be third party software as is demonstrable by the removal of (or omission of in a system reload) that doesn't escape the fact that the OS itself is vulnerable to 3rd party software crashing the OS. This is a kind of important rule of a good OS not to be vulnerable to 3rd party software causing it to crash.
And here's a great example of what I mean: In the past, I have had my laptop running Linux fail. The video chip failed. But I had applications and processes running in the background which I didn't want interrupted. So what did I do?
I was able to SSH into the machine which was STILL RUNNING despite the fact that the video was completely out. I was able to monitor the progress of the software and shut it down without problem, then shut down the computer as well. I was hoping it was some sort of [proprietary] software glitch in the driver, but alas, the video chip had died and I could get no video from the display or from the VGA port. The machine had to be replaced.
Now I ask you this. If this were Windows, would a video driver failure, especially one which started as a hardware failure, do you think the machine would have continued running or do you think the whole machine would have been taken down with it? (Rhetorical question, we all know the answer.) So now I point out that if other OSes can withstand hardware failures by crashing only the affected components (in this case, my X session was killed and the applications running under X also killed) why doesn't Windows? And if the OS on common PC hardware is capable of this level of resilience, why is Windows not? I get that speed and power and blah-blah-blah are imporant... on DESKTOP machines. But the problem is that Microsoft took a desktop OS and uses it as a server OS. Arguably, you can say that's not true -- the NT kernel was intended to be used for servers and stuff like that. Okay great. It still falls short. Drivers live in ring-0 and they don't (all) need to be running there.
I have argued this point numerous times with the same failing arguments presented. At the end of the day x86 hardware, when running a properly engineered OS, can compartmentalize all peripheral devices to the point that a crash on any given controller or whatever, will not crash the whole OS. I have experienced this often enough in Linux to know this works nicely. (I once had a vmware guest running Linux and had the storage fail... the damned thing kept running and when I SSH'd into the machine, it showed me HDD controller failures and stuff. It was pretty awesome.) So once again, WHY NOT WINDOWS?! Why can 3rd party software, whether they are drivers or applications, crash the damned OS?!