really, I've been right underneath one of them and noticed absolutely nothing. If someonthing was a high amplitude infrasound, you'd be able to *feel* it, as it'd just be a vibration in the air. Felt nothing.
No. Its not NASA, its Boeing, Lockheed Martin, et al.
When people talk about the "privatization of space" I generally laugh. Spacecraft where always made by private industry, and always operated by the government, so far nothing has changed.
Why else did the space shuttler look like an airplane? Thats not a practicle design for space. Its because it was made by boeing.
by working a full day, you mean doing around 15 min of work, and then fucking off on the computer for 6 hours.
Americans spent longer at work, but get less done. Thats actually been proven.
As far as sit around bitcing "if I where king", I think Americans do that just as much as everyone else.
what the fuck are you talking about, someone only "sells out" if they give up their principles.
Of course capitalist rhetoric on the matter, is that principles don't really exist, and the only non-subjective value worth having is a massive pile of money, and or a submissive sex partner(s). They find the very notion of ethics disgusting.
As far as expenses go, they release a top tier competative browser that competes with commerical alternatives. Having full time developers, especially quality talent on such a critical open source component is critical.
So is the infrastructure needed to keep firefox going.(bandwith ain't free dude), Unless your looking at Moz's financial records, and actually understand how to run a non-profit, please shut the fuck up.
At least in my eyes, Mozilla is really successful without selling out. Unless you can provide how they comprosed their values.
We do?
Whatever happens, its going to create needlessly high barriers to entry to potential companies looking to make chips.(the threat of being sued), and the cost of the law suit, as well as funds saved in anticipation on the next law suit adding to the total price of doing business.
The only people who come out ahead are the lawyers, and mabey politicians.
Thats the problem in America. Its that government and regulation is done for the careers of the lawyers doing the regulating, not for the people its supposed to protect. Thats why people hate the government. Thats why people chose to be libertarians. Its not a hard sell the American public on the idea that any government program exists, does so to fuck you.
is unfortunately the basis of how we debate politics in the USA, and explains why there is a giant glaring gap between what constitutes "facts", "reality", and "rationale thinking" in politics, that wouldn't hold water in any other field.
The way you argue politics is make one point, and when the oponnent can't come back with a rebuttal in one sentance, start making noises, call them a looser, and accuse them of bullshitting. Thats what Americans expect out of politicians.
it looks like it wasn't saturating the connection until comcast wanted it to, thats what the charts show, because as soon as netflix payed the ransom, they mysterioulsy got unclogged.
I think the solution is a FOSS(Free Open Source Science) journal. Moderated by a community, for the benefit of the community.
After vicious attacks by the outside world against FOSS, I think its time we demand the new standard for all learned fields that describe scientific, engineered, and otherwise proccess oriented objective knowledge, to be Free.
We could have an organization like debian, that instead of publishing a distribution of other people's software, publishes an online journal, of other people's papers. Run, and reviewed in the same manner.
except systemd actually works.
look, you fucking luddite yahoos have been at it too long, and the whole collective bulk of you needs to die in a fire. I am starting to get sick of this. Despite being a vocal minority, the people in the GNU/Linux community, and who do work on major distributions seem to have no real problems with systemd. Its just a bunch of loudmouth yahoos with bigger mouths than brains that are stirring the pot.
Your the same bunch of luddite retards who can't imagine that "how things have always been done" isn't always the answer. You can't be bothered to try something new, so you hate it.
its the same when anyone, any company either, puts out a desktop that isn't an exact clone of what Microsoft had in 1995, despite the fact most of you hate microsoft. The fact you can't be bother to try something new has put most of the FOSS, and all of the x86/desktop scene behind the curve compared to cellphones, and we struggle to stay relivant, but you can't be bothered with anyone but yourself.
Leonart Poettering is the one man dragging GNU/Linux into the 21st century kicking and screaming, in spite of people like you. I made the mistake of letting the rabble talk shit, cause up until poor Leo couldn't roll with the punches. Its time to stick up for the man, for the sake of the future and all it holds.
You are the cancer eating the tech scene, please die in a fire.
I think I was going to bitch about the misrepresentations of plutonium powered flight. No nuclear reactions are going on, except the naturual decay of the plutonium used to generate heat used to generate electricity.
apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges. your comparing mass scale systems, vs small scale systems.
Enviromental damage does happen from one coal burning stove, but millions.
Special Exceptions for Special Cases, and Edge uses that can't be properly addressed, but they are so small in scope they don't make a diffrence.
I think its really that you don't feel like trying something new, out of habbit, rather than a good analysis of init systems.
sysvinit is antiquated, and has many issues that systemd solves. One is using shell scripts to start and stop programs. systemd greatly simplfies this into using much smaller, easier to read key=value configuration files that don't actually execute. The only code that is executed is systemd itself.
That solves a lot of problems onto itself. Especially since it catches PIDs automaticly and saves them in/var/run/pid, instead of expecting a crashing proccess to clean up after itself, which they often don't.
Its also been the virtual end of stuck proccesses, and reboots are far far far quicker.
All we need is one remote-root in systemd and people might start to think again.
there are remote roots in all kinds of software, and your putting systemd against unreasonable standards. you didn't ditch linux on the first remote root?
admit it, your a luddite who doesn't got a clue.
Still, I consider all water cooled nukes kludges for all their worth, but they are far safer than coal, natural gas or oil based sources of electricity.
quite a loaded answer, what about wind, solar, geothermal, biofuel, etc....????
Unless your assuming they will never price match fossiel fuels which in all likelyness they will in the next few years.
The reality is the anti nuclear power sentiment is rooted on pacifist people that are violently against nuclear weapons, and see each and every nuclear reactor a source of materials for nuclear weapons (which is mostly hogwash)
How is that hogwash?
Plus they ignore the simple fact that before the creation of nuclear weapons we had 2 world wars, in the 70 years since, zero world wars, in my view nuclear weapons avoided at least 2 world wars and 50-100 million of deaths.
Two additional world wars you say? surely you jest. You went from making a somewhat decent point about nuclear, to going flat out fucking crazy. If you know your history, you know we came very damn close to a nuclear WW3, with 100s of millions of dead more than once. The only saving graces being the good judgement of a handful of involved inviduals.
Nuclear weapons also did not stop the cold war, which ravaged accross Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and even into South America, killing millions in brush wars, and setting up despotic governments and a complex mess of problems that would take decades to fix. Nuclear weapons didn't stop that.
Your notion that there would have been two additional world wars without nuclear weapons is insane, and entirely unfounded, and pure speculation based soley on your strangelovian fetish for nuclear stuff, weaponry and otherwise.
How do you think the "libertarian" types existed in the first place?
Is it because "capitalism is good", or was it a mass effort, along with the re-branding of Anarchism/Invidualism to suit the needs of the system, and mass multi-level, push?
I've actually been right up and under wind turbines with no noticable affects.
It seems to me at least from the articles you've linked, the cause of such problems is "some people really don't like wind turbines", and think they are fucking ugly, and its all psychological.
In the rush to vilify various and sundry sources of energy vis-a-vis environmental impact, that all energy comes at an environmental cost.
did I say anything to the contrary? Of course, and even things like bicycles have carbon costs associated with them. But, in your rush to vilify various sources of energy, vis-a-vsa enviromental impact, you must consider that like all other costs in life, not all are the same.
It would be absolutely ludicris to say that solar, wind, or even hydro-electric has the same, similar, or in the same leauge enviromental costs any method of combustion to produce power.
One day, when the other grid-friendly options are all exploited, our offspring will enjoy ubiquitous clean and relatively safe nuclear power.
I feel as if you jumped straight to a conclusion without really making an argument. Why Nuclear?
Such a vacuous comment it's hard to know what to say.
Translation: My greater world views are not up for debate, or you can't comprehend the most basic critique that allows someone to aqquire large piles of cash on the backs of other people who did most of the real work, and then buy your reputation back, again, not by doing work, but by simply spending other people's earnings.
None of the people you listed can work for free all the time
never suggesting they would. After all its what they do for a living. I was curious why Gates gets all the credit, and the people who actually did all the real work do not. Reason: They get paid. Its nice to think that private philanthropers can save the world, but thats an an-cap daydream. Truth is, in both time and resources spent, No private program compares to publicly run programs.
So just writing checks would mean he gets a lot of the credit because he's making it happen.
What about the sole reason he has a large pile of money is because he got it in a system that swindles it from the people who did the hard work to make the products in the first place. Compare with public efforts, Gates still takes far more off the top personally than publicly lead efforts. Even after accounting for corruption.
Then we get to the obnoxious issue, in which people who do the work, and perhaps even the shadow managers and organizers don't get the credit for things they work with. The only way we measure "doing work" is "investing capital". Hence why we think the poor are lazy. They don't invest capital. Perfoming labor is not considered "real work" in our current system.
Yes, those other people deserve a lot of credit too but making sure billions of dollars are spent effectively is harder than it sounds and he will go down in history as someone who did a lot more good than bad with his time on earth.
It depends in who's history books. The scope of his or any other private effort pales in comparison to much larger public assistance programs, and government efforts.
Slashdot Mirror
really, I've been right underneath one of them and noticed absolutely nothing. If someonthing was a high amplitude infrasound, you'd be able to *feel* it, as it'd just be a vibration in the air. Felt nothing.
When people talk about the "privatization of space" I generally laugh. Spacecraft where always made by private industry, and always operated by the government, so far nothing has changed.
Why else did the space shuttler look like an airplane? Thats not a practicle design for space. Its because it was made by boeing.
Its just that SpaceX is not a defense contractor.
by working a full day, you mean doing around 15 min of work, and then fucking off on the computer for 6 hours. Americans spent longer at work, but get less done. Thats actually been proven. As far as sit around bitcing "if I where king", I think Americans do that just as much as everyone else.
It should be obvious:
Google obviously isn't paying mozilla anymore money, and Yahoo is probably paying them even more money that Google was.
Of course capitalist rhetoric on the matter, is that principles don't really exist, and the only non-subjective value worth having is a massive pile of money, and or a submissive sex partner(s). They find the very notion of ethics disgusting.
As far as expenses go, they release a top tier competative browser that competes with commerical alternatives. Having full time developers, especially quality talent on such a critical open source component is critical.
So is the infrastructure needed to keep firefox going.(bandwith ain't free dude), Unless your looking at Moz's financial records, and actually understand how to run a non-profit, please shut the fuck up.
At least in my eyes, Mozilla is really successful without selling out. Unless you can provide how they comprosed their values.
We do? Whatever happens, its going to create needlessly high barriers to entry to potential companies looking to make chips.(the threat of being sued), and the cost of the law suit, as well as funds saved in anticipation on the next law suit adding to the total price of doing business. The only people who come out ahead are the lawyers, and mabey politicians. Thats the problem in America. Its that government and regulation is done for the careers of the lawyers doing the regulating, not for the people its supposed to protect. Thats why people hate the government. Thats why people chose to be libertarians. Its not a hard sell the American public on the idea that any government program exists, does so to fuck you.
The way you argue politics is make one point, and when the oponnent can't come back with a rebuttal in one sentance, start making noises, call them a looser, and accuse them of bullshitting. Thats what Americans expect out of politicians.
and then sue the living shits out of anyone who gets caught with monsanto IP that didn't pay monsanto. Feudalism much?
it looks like it wasn't saturating the connection until comcast wanted it to, thats what the charts show, because as soon as netflix payed the ransom, they mysterioulsy got unclogged.
its going to be very useful for watching video, being you can do something else with the other half of the screen.
I am guessing finding 1x1 monitors was probably an issue.
so why do you get pissy when we give tax breaks and incentives to other industries?
After vicious attacks by the outside world against FOSS, I think its time we demand the new standard for all learned fields that describe scientific, engineered, and otherwise proccess oriented objective knowledge, to be Free.
We could have an organization like debian, that instead of publishing a distribution of other people's software, publishes an online journal, of other people's papers. Run, and reviewed in the same manner.
except systemd actually works. look, you fucking luddite yahoos have been at it too long, and the whole collective bulk of you needs to die in a fire. I am starting to get sick of this. Despite being a vocal minority, the people in the GNU/Linux community, and who do work on major distributions seem to have no real problems with systemd. Its just a bunch of loudmouth yahoos with bigger mouths than brains that are stirring the pot. Your the same bunch of luddite retards who can't imagine that "how things have always been done" isn't always the answer. You can't be bothered to try something new, so you hate it. its the same when anyone, any company either, puts out a desktop that isn't an exact clone of what Microsoft had in 1995, despite the fact most of you hate microsoft. The fact you can't be bother to try something new has put most of the FOSS, and all of the x86/desktop scene behind the curve compared to cellphones, and we struggle to stay relivant, but you can't be bothered with anyone but yourself. Leonart Poettering is the one man dragging GNU/Linux into the 21st century kicking and screaming, in spite of people like you. I made the mistake of letting the rabble talk shit, cause up until poor Leo couldn't roll with the punches. Its time to stick up for the man, for the sake of the future and all it holds. You are the cancer eating the tech scene, please die in a fire.
Poisoning of Alexander Litvineko
I think I was going to bitch about the misrepresentations of plutonium powered flight. No nuclear reactions are going on, except the naturual decay of the plutonium used to generate heat used to generate electricity.
apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges. your comparing mass scale systems, vs small scale systems. Enviromental damage does happen from one coal burning stove, but millions. Special Exceptions for Special Cases, and Edge uses that can't be properly addressed, but they are so small in scope they don't make a diffrence.
All we need is one remote-root in systemd and people might start to think again.
there are remote roots in all kinds of software, and your putting systemd against unreasonable standards. you didn't ditch linux on the first remote root? admit it, your a luddite who doesn't got a clue.
that farmer is going to make far more money from that turbine, than any bit of crop lost due to digging up his field.
Still, I consider all water cooled nukes kludges for all their worth, but they are far safer than coal, natural gas or oil based sources of electricity.
quite a loaded answer, what about wind, solar, geothermal, biofuel, etc....????
Unless your assuming they will never price match fossiel fuels which in all likelyness they will in the next few years.
The reality is the anti nuclear power sentiment is rooted on pacifist people that are violently against nuclear weapons, and see each and every nuclear reactor a source of materials for nuclear weapons (which is mostly hogwash)
How is that hogwash?
Plus they ignore the simple fact that before the creation of nuclear weapons we had 2 world wars, in the 70 years since, zero world wars, in my view nuclear weapons avoided at least 2 world wars and 50-100 million of deaths.
Two additional world wars you say? surely you jest. You went from making a somewhat decent point about nuclear, to going flat out fucking crazy. If you know your history, you know we came very damn close to a nuclear WW3, with 100s of millions of dead more than once. The only saving graces being the good judgement of a handful of involved inviduals.
Nuclear weapons also did not stop the cold war, which ravaged accross Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and even into South America, killing millions in brush wars, and setting up despotic governments and a complex mess of problems that would take decades to fix. Nuclear weapons didn't stop that.
Your notion that there would have been two additional world wars without nuclear weapons is insane, and entirely unfounded, and pure speculation based soley on your strangelovian fetish for nuclear stuff, weaponry and otherwise.
How do you think the "libertarian" types existed in the first place? Is it because "capitalism is good", or was it a mass effort, along with the re-branding of Anarchism/Invidualism to suit the needs of the system, and mass multi-level, push?
[citation please]
I've actually been right up and under wind turbines with no noticable affects. It seems to me at least from the articles you've linked, the cause of such problems is "some people really don't like wind turbines", and think they are fucking ugly, and its all psychological.
In the rush to vilify various and sundry sources of energy vis-a-vis environmental impact, that all energy comes at an environmental cost.
did I say anything to the contrary? Of course, and even things like bicycles have carbon costs associated with them. But, in your rush to vilify various sources of energy, vis-a-vsa enviromental impact, you must consider that like all other costs in life, not all are the same.
It would be absolutely ludicris to say that solar, wind, or even hydro-electric has the same, similar, or in the same leauge enviromental costs any method of combustion to produce power.
One day, when the other grid-friendly options are all exploited, our offspring will enjoy ubiquitous clean and relatively safe nuclear power.
I feel as if you jumped straight to a conclusion without really making an argument. Why Nuclear?
Such a vacuous comment it's hard to know what to say.
Translation: My greater world views are not up for debate, or you can't comprehend the most basic critique that allows someone to aqquire large piles of cash on the backs of other people who did most of the real work, and then buy your reputation back, again, not by doing work, but by simply spending other people's earnings.
None of the people you listed can work for free all the time
never suggesting they would. After all its what they do for a living. I was curious why Gates gets all the credit, and the people who actually did all the real work do not. Reason: They get paid. Its nice to think that private philanthropers can save the world, but thats an an-cap daydream. Truth is, in both time and resources spent, No private program compares to publicly run programs.
So just writing checks would mean he gets a lot of the credit because he's making it happen.
What about the sole reason he has a large pile of money is because he got it in a system that swindles it from the people who did the hard work to make the products in the first place. Compare with public efforts, Gates still takes far more off the top personally than publicly lead efforts. Even after accounting for corruption. Then we get to the obnoxious issue, in which people who do the work, and perhaps even the shadow managers and organizers don't get the credit for things they work with. The only way we measure "doing work" is "investing capital". Hence why we think the poor are lazy. They don't invest capital. Perfoming labor is not considered "real work" in our current system.
Yes, those other people deserve a lot of credit too but making sure billions of dollars are spent effectively is harder than it sounds and he will go down in history as someone who did a lot more good than bad with his time on earth.
It depends in who's history books. The scope of his or any other private effort pales in comparison to much larger public assistance programs, and government efforts.