It's too bad we didn't have cameras focused on FDR when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. I wonder if it took him more than seven minutes to react. Or what did President Clinton do when the WTC was bombed the first time? What he do in the first seven minutes?
Dear boy, your argument is perfectly right, with one small detail missing.
Many people in the command 'structure' KNEW that 4 planes have been hijacked, so when the first plane hit the tower, at least some people (related to govt) knew it was a terrorist attack.
If you're working for govt, get a news that 4 planes have been hijacked, see one of them hit the tower... would you still think it was an accident?
Don't look at his reactions from your perspective - think from intelligence perspective (you don't have the same level of input as govt officials do).
And what is the appropriate response? If he did excuse himself, what could he have possibly done? Probably nothing that wasn't already being done. You cannot know exactly what he was thinking while he was "just sitting there". As President, he is to make decisions. He did not need to be jumping, running and doing backflips to make a decision on what he was going to do next.
Imagine that you're reading something out-loud, and someone comes and whispers in your ear "Your family just died in a car accident, and your house is on fire".
I guarantee that much stronger (intelectually) people would halt. Yet, we have a person with questionable intelligence (and focus) going on as if nothing has happened.
At the end, there is a chance that he kept on reading calmly, while his brain (erm...) kept on panically working, but chance of this are extremely slim, I'd say...
I've been through lot of shit (was living in ex-Yugoslavia, and went through 10 years of wars and sanctions - basically, got used to anything), but I still get disctracted if door ring bells, let alone if someone tells me bad news in the middle of some activity.
You simply can not react calmly, except if you are not prepared for it (whatever "it" might be).
I know I am probibly going to get modded down for this, but there are serious mistakes in this movie, and they were willfully made. For a comprehensive list of the problems with this movie, check out this [davekopel.com]. Mod me down if you are afraid of the truth, but this needs to be mentioned.
I started reading that document, but document does what most of the politicians usually do - pick small details which are not important for big picture, and word it in such a way to present it as a 'mistake'.
However, even if one assumes that 56 details were wrong, how do they compare to "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction", "can launch it against UK in 45 minutes" remarks which "justified" the WAR against sovereign country?
Even if there were 56,000 details (which could be discussed), they mean f*ck-all in comparison with lies which Bush/Blair presented to the public.
Sorry, but Moore not showing poll sources is (much) less dangerous than Bush/Blair not showing sources for their major claims...
"Actually, if I get the "cheap" version of SUSE, it's $30. If I get Windows XP Home Edition with a piece of hardware, it's $90.
Isn't that $60?"
No, it's not, because I can take SuSE from a friend and install it, while I am breaking the law if I borrow WinXP from a friend and install it.
Interestingly enough, you make comparations based on $30/$90 values (you couldn't get anything lower, could you?). Maybe you would like to make this same comparations for network with 10 servers and 100 clients?
"If the main advantage of Linux is based on price, it's starting to become less and less of an advantage. Perhaps you guys should start working on usability and driver coverage. But don't take my word for it, I'm just 90% of the market."
If you don't mind, could you supply me with specs for Realtek and Broadcom wireless chipset (for starter), so that we can extend the driver coverage? That would be much appreciated.
Obviously, you've never been close to a driver development, so you have no idea what is required in order to increase "driver coverage".
I've yet to find an open source tool that can show a "matrix" graph of source and destination talkers by MAC/IP/IPX name in realtime as found in Sniffer.
Do you want a network monitoring system, or a sniffer?
Even if I needed such a feature, I'd never expect it to be in Ethereal (and I use tcpdump/Ethereal daily, but not for graphs).
If I needed (offline) graphs, I'd use netflow probes and collector. If I needed realtime stats, I'd use iptraf (well, I do use both of those anyway).
However, I never needed to have a realtime graph within a sniffer, and even if I am Ethereal developer, I'd tell you something nasty if you requested such feature, considering how many more things come before 'graph' in a sniffer.
In 1998, I've used ShopSite software to run an e-commerce site (which was accepting international orders, calculated shipping costs for DHL/etc, and done many other things). It was a software that was developed before 1998, and as much as I can see DT morons filled for their patent on December 29th, 1997.
I'm also sure Intershop might be able to give some dates in relation to their software, since I've used Intershop in 1999, and it was also developed before 1998 (probably even before 1997).
I really don't find this too big a company. Sure, it was formed on the good financing of the dot-com boom, but 54K servers, 100K... 261K... must be about $1m of capital here.
I will be VERY happy if you explain me how to get 54,000 servers, 100,000 CPUs and 261,000 hard disks for million dollars.
You assume that each of these components cost appx 2.5$?
1) Saddam Husain has used weapons of mass destruction( WMDs) such as nerve gas against Iraqi kurdish civilians.
No, he didn't. You would know that, if you bothered to check very straightforward answers from generals, not check the CNN.
2) He ejected U.N. inspectors who were making sure he complied with the peace terms stating he wouldn't continue to develop WMDs including the Iraqi nuclear program.
If you bothered to check, you would notice that he didn't eject UN inspectors, but few individuals who were caught planting radio transmitters/interceptors in sensitive areas. Whole team later decided to withdraw from Iraq. What's even more funny is that fact that all the details were VERY WELL explain by the leader of that mission, who happens to be an American. But you wouldn't know that, of course.
3) He has launched strikes on civilian populations in Israel during the Gulf War even though Israel was not part of the military coalition. He did this in the hopes invoking an Israeli response which would gain him the support of other Arab nations.
Right. The twat also invaded Kuwait, which was much worse offense than launching 'strikes' (one only got through). But of course, what is invasion of Kuwait comparing to SCUD in Israel? First he should be hanging because of what he's done in war with Iran, then for Kuwait, and last for the SCUD. But of course, as a 'humanitarian', you wouldn't care about Kuwait people.
If allowed to develope a nuke, he's likely to use it against a civilian target. Possibly in a pre-emptive strike.
You consider yourself to be 'knowledgeable'? You have absolutelly no clue, my boy...
Comments like this is just plain stupid...Plus, I don't believe it's going to happen. The current administration is using "other means necessary" to stop any type of terrorist activity there. I don't think terrorism has a statute of limitations.
Which terrorism, and what are those 'other means'? Might they, very well, be similar to terrorism? I've lived through one of those 'means' few years ago, and can tell you that it's worst terror you can imagine.
I realize that michael may think that all slashdotters agree with his bias, whatever it may be, but I assure you there are many who do not.. In other words, michael, keep your opinions to yourself if you want to pass this off as a news site!
If the title was "US to build Moon base", 90% of the discussions would be related to technical issues, and similar things.
When the title is "China to build Moon base", 90% of the discussions are related to 'communists', 'stealing technology', 'human rights'. I presume, most of the people have never been to China.
Couldn't people stop 'stealing technology' stories for a moment (think US would have nukes if they haven't *stolen* German scientist and research?), and talk about feasibility of this project, no matter who does it.
There are so many sites dealing with politics - don't turn Slashdot into another one.
Re:Chinese have vision, but vision doesn't cut it.
on
China Plans Moonbase
·
· Score: 1
The Chinese couldn't successfully launch a rocket into orbit before their spies stole US technology that gave them a 10+ year boost.
Hold on - is there anyone on this planet that didn't steal a technology from the US in order to achieve some goal? I mean, it looks impossible that anyone else than US could think of something...
One has to think that China has their priorities mixed up here. Considering that this is a country that in which not everyone gets enough to eat, and innocent children are murdered for violating population guidelines. I mean, people die in un-humane conditions in sweatshops in this country, and they are spending a mass amount of money to go to the moon? I fail to see the point.
Oh God, I'm tired of these hypocrites. I fail to see how this is different than spending 390 BILLION dollars (or so) A YEAR on a military budget. Last I checked, there were a lot of hungry/homeless/poor people in the USA, and it still doesn't prevent military from having budget increased every year.
Re:"For the benefit of humanity"
on
China Plans Moonbase
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
They should switch to democracy instead!
So that they can go around the world, making wars and killing people, and calling it "war against terrorism", and justifying all that with "we are democracy" phrase?
I like them more as they are now. In their own yard.
Gattaca is one of the best SF movies ever made. Acting was fantastic, artistic value is great, it is simply fantastic movie in every aspect.
I was PLEASANTLY surprised to see "Blade Runner" at #1 place. It is exactly where it belongs, and this list looks much more credible than most of the "top lists" I've ever seen.
One of our Sun servers here has *28* UltraSparcs and 28 GB of RAM. How many CPUs can Linux support, 4?
DEC guys ran Linux on 32 CPUs, on GS320. Check linux-kernel mailing lists.
LinuxCare guys ran Linux on E10000 with 24 CPUs.
How much RAM, 4 GB?
DEC guys used 256GB. LinuxCare (on E10000) used 24GB.
Not to mention that Solaris has NFS support that actually works well. And what do you mean "filesystem support"? Are you saying that being able to read/write FAT32 is something to crow about?
No, but vxfs is probably one of the slowest filesystems on the planet. Now, don't tell me you use something else than vxfs on that 28 CPU box...
Nothing, in comparison to 2 E10K's I've played with last week. And you know what? That is nothing to GS320 with 256GB RAM and 32 CPUs, which had Linux running on it (check linux-kernel mailing lists).
Bottom line is - Linux runs on big hardware. It's just that you never tried it.
You just wait until the technology is widely deployed, and then start to enforce patents. Unlike trademarks, patents do not become invalid if they are not enforced.
I mean, is there anyone in here that actually WORKS in a bloody bank, for example?! Don't people realize that banks and other huge corporations are VERY slow in adopting new technologies. Want to guess a reason?!
Let's close this with question - why SET didn't make it, although it was such a perfect solution, and backed by VISA/MC and many others!?
However a significant portion of buisnesses will not consider using either a home grown or open source solution... instead opting for the 'security' that technology produced by a 'well established company' brings.
I presume you've been working in big banks when you make such statements!?
All online apps I've worked on so far were Perl or Java. Some were running on Apache/Tomcat.
How, exactly, is that not home-grown? You think that banks BUY their internet banking or corporate banking applications by vendors?!
If they do decide to try to get royalties, they will find out that a lot of people are jumping to other technologies.
I am about to start a new contract for a bank, and I'll be involved in deciding what technologies will be used for new online application.
I am sure that SOAP/WSDL will not be considered, until we're sure what the real story is.
If someone decides that everyone has to stop using SSH, we'd have temporary solution tomorrow, and a permanent one few weeks/months ago.
The same will happen with this.
Re:Google doesn't accept money, but accepts cheate
on
Search Engine Payola
·
· Score: 1
All our sites have excellent scoring because fake sites are referring other fake sites.
Right. You should keep in mind that you might have good scoring for queries YOU type. I don't remember seeing any pr0n sites in my search results on Google, and I use it every day, at least 50-100 queries per day.
They did have problems a year ago, when 'cheaters' did get ranking on most queries, but I'd say that time is gone...
Slashdot Mirror
It's too bad we didn't have cameras focused on FDR when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. I wonder if it took him more than seven minutes to react. Or what did President Clinton do when the WTC was bombed the first time? What he do in the first seven minutes?
Dear boy, your argument is perfectly right, with one small detail missing.
Many people in the command 'structure' KNEW that 4 planes have been hijacked, so when the first plane hit the tower, at least some people (related to govt) knew it was a terrorist attack.
If you're working for govt, get a news that 4 planes have been hijacked, see one of them hit the tower... would you still think it was an accident?
Don't look at his reactions from your perspective - think from intelligence perspective (you don't have the same level of input as govt officials do).
And what is the appropriate response? If he did excuse himself, what could he have possibly done? Probably nothing that wasn't already being done. You cannot know exactly what he was thinking while he was "just sitting there". As President, he is to make decisions. He did not need to be jumping, running and doing backflips to make a decision on what he was going to do next.
Imagine that you're reading something out-loud, and someone comes and whispers in your ear "Your family just died in a car accident, and your house is on fire".
I guarantee that much stronger (intelectually) people would halt. Yet, we have a person with questionable intelligence (and focus) going on as if nothing has happened.
At the end, there is a chance that he kept on reading calmly, while his brain (erm...) kept on panically working, but chance of this are extremely slim, I'd say...
I've been through lot of shit (was living in ex-Yugoslavia, and went through 10 years of wars and sanctions - basically, got used to anything), but I still get disctracted if door ring bells, let alone if someone tells me bad news in the middle of some activity.
You simply can not react calmly, except if you are not prepared for it (whatever "it" might be).
I know I am probibly going to get modded down for this, but there are serious mistakes in this movie, and they were willfully made. For a comprehensive list of the problems with this movie, check out this [davekopel.com]. Mod me down if you are afraid of the truth, but this needs to be mentioned.
I started reading that document, but document does what most of the politicians usually do - pick small details which are not important for big picture, and word it in such a way to present it as a 'mistake'.
However, even if one assumes that 56 details were wrong, how do they compare to "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction", "can launch it against UK in 45 minutes" remarks which "justified" the WAR against sovereign country?
Even if there were 56,000 details (which could be discussed), they mean f*ck-all in comparison with lies which Bush/Blair presented to the public.
Sorry, but Moore not showing poll sources is (much) less dangerous than Bush/Blair not showing sources for their major claims...
"Actually, if I get the "cheap" version of SUSE, it's $30. If I get Windows XP Home Edition with a piece of hardware, it's $90.
Isn't that $60?"
No, it's not, because I can take SuSE from a friend and install it, while I am breaking the law if I borrow WinXP from a friend and install it.
Interestingly enough, you make comparations based on $30/$90 values (you couldn't get anything lower, could you?). Maybe you would like to make this same comparations for network with 10 servers and 100 clients?
"If the main advantage of Linux is based on price, it's starting to become less and less of an advantage. Perhaps you guys should start working on usability and driver coverage. But don't take my word for it, I'm just 90% of the market."
If you don't mind, could you supply me with specs for Realtek and Broadcom wireless chipset (for starter), so that we can extend the driver coverage? That would be much appreciated.
Obviously, you've never been close to a driver development, so you have no idea what is required in order to increase "driver coverage".
Well, "Satan" is a NATO designation, it was not named "Satan" by Russians.
;)
NATO probably knew why they named it "Satan", I'd say
I've yet to find an open source tool that can show a "matrix" graph of source and destination talkers by MAC/IP/IPX name in realtime as found in Sniffer.
Do you want a network monitoring system, or a sniffer?
Even if I needed such a feature, I'd never expect it to be in Ethereal (and I use tcpdump/Ethereal daily, but not for graphs).
If I needed (offline) graphs, I'd use netflow probes and collector. If I needed realtime stats, I'd use iptraf (well, I do use both of those anyway).
However, I never needed to have a realtime graph within a sniffer, and even if I am Ethereal developer, I'd tell you something nasty if you requested such feature, considering how many more things come before 'graph' in a sniffer.
Missing opensource security stuff - realtime graphs?
Sad...
In 1998, I've used ShopSite software to run an e-commerce site (which was accepting international orders, calculated shipping costs for DHL/etc, and done many other things). It was a software that was developed before 1998, and as much as I can see DT morons filled for their patent on December 29th, 1997.
I'm also sure Intershop might be able to give some dates in relation to their software, since I've used Intershop in 1999, and it was also developed before 1998 (probably even before 1997).
I really don't find this too big a company. Sure, it was formed on the good financing of the dot-com boom, but 54K servers, 100K... 261K... must be about $1m of capital here.
I will be VERY happy if you explain me how to get 54,000 servers, 100,000 CPUs and 261,000 hard disks for million dollars.
You assume that each of these components cost appx 2.5$?
Or you thought K stands for 'thousand dollars'?
Ah, no. That should be:
"Sim Invading Iraq So The Psychopath Doesn't Eventually Build Nuclear Weapons"
Jesus, brainwashing over there reached really scary limits. Fantastic results, really. Wonder what will be the next step...
1) Saddam Husain has used weapons of mass destruction( WMDs) such as nerve gas against Iraqi kurdish civilians.
No, he didn't. You would know that, if you bothered to check very straightforward answers from generals, not check the CNN.
2) He ejected U.N. inspectors who were making sure he complied with the peace terms stating he wouldn't continue to develop WMDs including the Iraqi nuclear program.
If you bothered to check, you would notice that he didn't eject UN inspectors, but few individuals who were caught planting radio transmitters/interceptors in sensitive areas. Whole team later decided to withdraw from Iraq. What's even more funny is that fact that all the details were VERY WELL explain by the leader of that mission, who happens to be an American. But you wouldn't know that, of course.
3) He has launched strikes on civilian populations in Israel during the Gulf War even though Israel was not part of the military coalition. He did this in the hopes invoking an Israeli response which would gain him the support of other Arab nations.
Right. The twat also invaded Kuwait, which was much worse offense than launching 'strikes' (one only got through). But of course, what is invasion of Kuwait comparing to SCUD in Israel? First he should be hanging because of what he's done in war with Iran, then for Kuwait, and last for the SCUD. But of course, as a 'humanitarian', you wouldn't care about Kuwait people.
If allowed to develope a nuke, he's likely to use it against a civilian target. Possibly in a pre-emptive strike.
You consider yourself to be 'knowledgeable'? You have absolutelly no clue, my boy...
Comments like this is just plain stupid...Plus, I don't believe it's going to happen. The current administration is using "other means necessary" to stop any type of terrorist activity there. I don't think terrorism has a statute of limitations.
Which terrorism, and what are those 'other means'? Might they, very well, be similar to terrorism? I've lived through one of those 'means' few years ago, and can tell you that it's worst terror you can imagine.
I realize that michael may think that all slashdotters agree with his bias, whatever it may be, but I assure you there are many who do not.. In other words, michael, keep your opinions to yourself if you want to pass this off as a news site!
And I assure you there are many who do.
If the title was "US to build Moon base", 90% of the discussions would be related to technical issues, and similar things.
When the title is "China to build Moon base", 90% of the discussions are related to 'communists', 'stealing technology', 'human rights'. I presume, most of the people have never been to China.
Couldn't people stop 'stealing technology' stories for a moment (think US would have nukes if they haven't *stolen* German scientist and research?), and talk about feasibility of this project, no matter who does it.
There are so many sites dealing with politics - don't turn Slashdot into another one.
The Chinese couldn't successfully launch a rocket into orbit before their spies stole US technology that gave them a 10+ year boost.
Hold on - is there anyone on this planet that didn't steal a technology from the US in order to achieve some goal? I mean, it looks impossible that anyone else than US could think of something...
One has to think that China has their priorities mixed up here. Considering that this is a country that in which not everyone gets enough to eat, and innocent children are murdered for violating population guidelines. I mean, people die in un-humane conditions in sweatshops in this country, and they are spending a mass amount of money to go to the moon? I fail to see the point.
Oh God, I'm tired of these hypocrites. I fail to see how this is different than spending 390 BILLION dollars (or so) A YEAR on a military budget. Last I checked, there were a lot of hungry/homeless/poor people in the USA, and it still doesn't prevent military from having budget increased every year.
They should switch to democracy instead!
So that they can go around the world, making wars and killing people, and calling it "war against terrorism", and justifying all that with "we are democracy" phrase?
I like them more as they are now. In their own yard.
Forgot to mention that Gattaca had probably the best music ever heard in an SF movie.
Gattaca is one of the best SF movies ever made. Acting was fantastic, artistic value is great, it is simply fantastic movie in every aspect.
I was PLEASANTLY surprised to see "Blade Runner" at #1 place. It is exactly where it belongs, and this list looks much more credible than most of the "top lists" I've ever seen.
One of our Sun servers here has *28* UltraSparcs and 28 GB of RAM. How many CPUs can Linux support, 4?
DEC guys ran Linux on 32 CPUs, on GS320. Check linux-kernel mailing lists.
LinuxCare guys ran Linux on E10000 with 24 CPUs.
How much RAM, 4 GB?
DEC guys used 256GB. LinuxCare (on E10000) used 24GB.
Not to mention that Solaris has NFS support that actually works well. And what do you mean "filesystem support"? Are you saying that being able to read/write FAT32 is something to crow about?
No, but vxfs is probably one of the slowest filesystems on the planet. Now, don't tell me you use something else than vxfs on that 28 CPU box...
Here's the configuration for our largest server:
HOSTNAME: grande, OS: SOLARIS 5.8, MACHINE TYPE: E6500 , USER: Server
MEMORY: 28GB, SWAP: 9GB, PROCESSORS: 28 400MHZ, DISK: Fibre Channel Raid 136GB
Nothing, in comparison to 2 E10K's I've played with last week. And you know what? That is nothing to GS320 with 256GB RAM and 32 CPUs, which had Linux running on it (check linux-kernel mailing lists).
Bottom line is - Linux runs on big hardware. It's just that you never tried it.
You just wait until the technology is widely deployed, and then start to enforce patents. Unlike trademarks, patents do not become invalid if they are not enforced.
I mean, is there anyone in here that actually WORKS in a bloody bank, for example?! Don't people realize that banks and other huge corporations are VERY slow in adopting new technologies. Want to guess a reason?!
Let's close this with question - why SET didn't make it, although it was such a perfect solution, and backed by VISA/MC and many others!?
However a significant portion of buisnesses will not consider using either a home grown or open source solution... instead opting for the 'security' that technology produced by a 'well established company' brings.
I presume you've been working in big banks when you make such statements!?
All online apps I've worked on so far were Perl or Java. Some were running on Apache/Tomcat.
How, exactly, is that not home-grown? You think that banks BUY their internet banking or corporate banking applications by vendors?!
Silly.
I don't mean to be negative, but you have to grant me that "inteligence and comon sense will prevail" doesn't work in real life.
Hold on - you are comparing desktop user and Office with a bank that rolls out production system?!
Why do you think so may banks use Java/Perl for their online applications?!
If they do decide to try to get royalties, they will find out that a lot of people are jumping to other technologies.
I am about to start a new contract for a bank, and I'll be involved in deciding what technologies will be used for new online application.
I am sure that SOAP/WSDL will not be considered, until we're sure what the real story is.
If someone decides that everyone has to stop using SSH, we'd have temporary solution tomorrow, and a permanent one few weeks/months ago.
The same will happen with this.
All our sites have excellent scoring because fake sites are referring other fake sites.
Right. You should keep in mind that you might have good scoring for queries YOU type. I don't remember seeing any pr0n sites in my search results on Google, and I use it every day, at least 50-100 queries per day.
They did have problems a year ago, when 'cheaters' did get ranking on most queries, but I'd say that time is gone...