I know it's all the rage to bash Monsanto as the big, evil corporation that causes all the misery in the world. But I feel obligated to point out that it's the research work that companies like Monsanto and ADM do that have given us the crop yields to support 7 billion people on a planet where most people aren't even farmers anymore. Do you really think we could sustain this planet as it is with a bunch of organic backyard gardens and fields of non-GM crops?
So unless a significant portion of the population is willing to commit suicide and another large portion willing to go back to being semi-starving sustenance farmers, we kind of need that evil Monsanto and its ilk.
In a similar vein, sure it's easy to bash big pharma too. But would you rather go back to life before the vaccines that have eradicated childhood diseases that used to kill millions each year? It's easy to talk big when you don't have to watch your child die of whooping cough, of course.
If a charity is worth running, it is worth running well as a business, otherwise the gravy train stops.
Why was this modded troll?!? It's true. Every charitable foundation uses this principle to remain solvent. It's the whole point of having a foundation (instead of just making a one-time big donation to some charity).
Us meat-popsicles can read text, read captchas, write prose, and do a lot of other shit that gives computers major headaches. Do you really want a computer driving your car, trying to recognize the road, when it can't even reliably recognize handwriting?
Define "being a whore" in this scenario. They make a good game. We wish to play it. We hate Windows. Dilemma. Nothing about being a whore in there.
Yeah, except for the part where you buy their game for Windows, sending them the message "You don't need to make a separate Linux client. We whores will happily still buy it for Windows and run it crippled in Wine."
Linux users who crawl to Blizzard remind me of an cousin of mine who kept going back to her abusive boyfriend.
Yeah, maybe they've changed this time. Maybe they really love Linux now. Why, I bet after 8 years they're going to release a WoW Linux client too, any day now! This time it's going to be different!
Hey, here's an idea, why not support the studios that really *DO* support Linux instead of studios that treat it like a red-headed stepchild? Just a thought.
I mean, if you're going to be a whore to studios who clearly have no intention of supporting Linux, you had may as well set up a Windows dual-boot and play your game software in Windows.
That Europe hasn't always been so enlightened. And that even when it has, the potential for very un-enlightened movements is always there. Germany was, in fact, one of the leaders in modern academia just prior to the rise of the Nazis (with probably the best University system in the world at the time). So I guess education doesn't help either.
You do know that there are a limited number of geometries that are optimal for re-entry, right?
Yes, I understand that. But the summary was full of laughable hyperbole, making it sound like this was some amazing accomplishment. In reality, NASA just spent $3 billion reinventing spam-in-a-can from the Mercury era.
So, I agree that "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." But I would supplement this with "If it ain't broke, don't give Lockheed Martin $3 billion to reinvent it."
When I read the summary, I was expecting something a little more impressive than the picture in the article.
Okay, they did add some more windows. That's nice...I guess. But I'm pretty sure going to an asteroid or Mars is going to take something a little more substantial.
How come all the oil and gas companies keep expanding like this and all the solar companies keep going bankrupt? Wasn't it supposed to be the other way around? Damned hippies lied to me again.
While you may have a point about Cuba, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of third-world countries aren't under any economic sanctions from the the first-world.
There is nothing stopping governments from doing the R&D themselves. But you can't very well let a private company foot the bill and then turn around, after the company spent all the money on the tech and are looking to sell products based on it, and tell them "We're taking it and giving it away." That's just glorified theft.
Again, the governments could pay for the research *themselves*, you know.
The IPO has no interest in helping developing countries transition to a more sustainable economy if it means sacrificing valuable IPR.
In other stunning news, the rich still have it better than the poor, politicians don't have the best interests of their citizens at heart, and 2013 won't be the "Year of Linux."
Since when has anyone WITH that much valuable IP ever given it up freely? Oh sure, here and there, a token gesture. But does anyone really expect Monsanto or Intel to give up their *entire business model* and *everything that makes them money* tomorrow because some third-world country is poor? Not likely.
And to be brutally honest, how is it really fair to ask them to? If they paid for the R&D, why should someone else be entitled to it without paying a cent? Is it some first-world tech company's fault that your country is poor, that your government is too corrupt to invest in its infrastructure instead of padding El-Presidente's pockets, that your education system is a joke? Sure it would be a great charitable gesture for them to give it to you at a big discount, but that hardly gives you the right to *demand* it. You're certainly not entitled to it just because you're poor. And it probably wouldn't even do you any good, in the long term anyway, unless you deal with the underlying problems in your country that put you in poverty to begin with (El Presidente will just stuff his pockets deeper with any new money too).
Citizen, you have advocated criminal violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Please place your hands in the yellow circles and await a police action.
Thin client computing is like cold fusion. Every so often it's going to be the next big thing...then everyone forgets about it for a while....then it's going to be the next big thing....then everyone forgets about it for a while...rinse....wash...repeat.
Journalists tend to toss the word "historian" around rather loosely. It can mean anything from "Some local-yokel kook who calls himself a historian" to a university-affiliated Ph.D. in history with serious academic credentials.
Slashdot Mirror
I know it's all the rage to bash Monsanto as the big, evil corporation that causes all the misery in the world. But I feel obligated to point out that it's the research work that companies like Monsanto and ADM do that have given us the crop yields to support 7 billion people on a planet where most people aren't even farmers anymore. Do you really think we could sustain this planet as it is with a bunch of organic backyard gardens and fields of non-GM crops?
So unless a significant portion of the population is willing to commit suicide and another large portion willing to go back to being semi-starving sustenance farmers, we kind of need that evil Monsanto and its ilk.
In a similar vein, sure it's easy to bash big pharma too. But would you rather go back to life before the vaccines that have eradicated childhood diseases that used to kill millions each year? It's easy to talk big when you don't have to watch your child die of whooping cough, of course.
If a charity is worth running, it is worth running well as a business, otherwise the gravy train stops.
Why was this modded troll?!? It's true. Every charitable foundation uses this principle to remain solvent. It's the whole point of having a foundation (instead of just making a one-time big donation to some charity).
Should have known better than to try to save that ungrateful environment. I'm buying an SUV.
Suck my balls, you lying hippies!
Us meat-popsicles can read text, read captchas, write prose, and do a lot of other shit that gives computers major headaches. Do you really want a computer driving your car, trying to recognize the road, when it can't even reliably recognize handwriting?
Typical Ford, lagging behind. People have been predicting that autonomous cars are 5 years away for decades now.
Define "being a whore" in this scenario. They make a good game. We wish to play it. We hate Windows. Dilemma. Nothing about being a whore in there.
Yeah, except for the part where you buy their game for Windows, sending them the message "You don't need to make a separate Linux client. We whores will happily still buy it for Windows and run it crippled in Wine."
Linux users who crawl to Blizzard remind me of an cousin of mine who kept going back to her abusive boyfriend.
Yeah, maybe they've changed this time. Maybe they really love Linux now. Why, I bet after 8 years they're going to release a WoW Linux client too, any day now! This time it's going to be different!
Hey, here's an idea, why not support the studios that really *DO* support Linux instead of studios that treat it like a red-headed stepchild? Just a thought.
I mean, if you're going to be a whore to studios who clearly have no intention of supporting Linux, you had may as well set up a Windows dual-boot and play your game software in Windows.
The UK is run by politicians who only care about about their personal money and power.
You just described every politician in every country in the world.
So much for frauds being caught by peer-review, huh?
Goddamn, napping on a man lift next to a downed livewire?!?! Who DOES that?!?!?
Your point being?
That Europe hasn't always been so enlightened. And that even when it has, the potential for very un-enlightened movements is always there. Germany was, in fact, one of the leaders in modern academia just prior to the rise of the Nazis (with probably the best University system in the world at the time). So I guess education doesn't help either.
It's telling that you limit it to the last twenty years - thus neatly hiding Soyuz's two fatal accidents
Soyuz hasn't had a fatal accident since 1971. That's over *40* years, not 20.
You do know that there are a limited number of geometries that are optimal for re-entry, right?
Yes, I understand that. But the summary was full of laughable hyperbole, making it sound like this was some amazing accomplishment. In reality, NASA just spent $3 billion reinventing spam-in-a-can from the Mercury era.
So, I agree that "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." But I would supplement this with "If it ain't broke, don't give Lockheed Martin $3 billion to reinvent it."
Hasn't this pretty much been the case always?
Well, there was that whole "Nazi" era in Germany.
You mean the U.S., whose Congress is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of corporate America?
When I read the summary, I was expecting something a little more impressive than the picture in the article.
Okay, they did add some more windows. That's nice...I guess. But I'm pretty sure going to an asteroid or Mars is going to take something a little more substantial.
How come all the oil and gas companies keep expanding like this and all the solar companies keep going bankrupt? Wasn't it supposed to be the other way around? Damned hippies lied to me again.
While you may have a point about Cuba, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of third-world countries aren't under any economic sanctions from the the first-world.
There is nothing stopping governments from doing the R&D themselves. But you can't very well let a private company foot the bill and then turn around, after the company spent all the money on the tech and are looking to sell products based on it, and tell them "We're taking it and giving it away." That's just glorified theft.
Again, the governments could pay for the research *themselves*, you know.
The IPO has no interest in helping developing countries transition to a more sustainable economy if it means sacrificing valuable IPR.
In other stunning news, the rich still have it better than the poor, politicians don't have the best interests of their citizens at heart, and 2013 won't be the "Year of Linux."
Since when has anyone WITH that much valuable IP ever given it up freely? Oh sure, here and there, a token gesture. But does anyone really expect Monsanto or Intel to give up their *entire business model* and *everything that makes them money* tomorrow because some third-world country is poor? Not likely.
And to be brutally honest, how is it really fair to ask them to? If they paid for the R&D, why should someone else be entitled to it without paying a cent? Is it some first-world tech company's fault that your country is poor, that your government is too corrupt to invest in its infrastructure instead of padding El-Presidente's pockets, that your education system is a joke? Sure it would be a great charitable gesture for them to give it to you at a big discount, but that hardly gives you the right to *demand* it. You're certainly not entitled to it just because you're poor. And it probably wouldn't even do you any good, in the long term anyway, unless you deal with the underlying problems in your country that put you in poverty to begin with (El Presidente will just stuff his pockets deeper with any new money too).
WTF do I care if it's the state government or federal government?!? I still have to pay it.
hack the secure boot BIOS
Citizen, you have advocated criminal violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Please place your hands in the yellow circles and await a police action.
I would like to refer every single person who henceforth asks the question "Why hasn't Linux ever gone mainstream?" to the parent post.
Thin client computing is like cold fusion. Every so often it's going to be the next big thing...then everyone forgets about it for a while....then it's going to be the next big thing....then everyone forgets about it for a while...rinse....wash...repeat.
Journalists tend to toss the word "historian" around rather loosely. It can mean anything from "Some local-yokel kook who calls himself a historian" to a university-affiliated Ph.D. in history with serious academic credentials.