Yes, I regard an individual's lifespan aka likelyhood to survive as a statement of the organism's fitness. Any self-reproducing organism by definition has the ability to pass on it's genes, but only those that survive long enough because they are fit are actually able to. I think you are confusing things when you say an organism's fitness _is defined by_ the amount of offspring they have, rather an organism's fitness _defines_ how many offspring they _may_ have.
"In the context of evolution, number of decendants is the definition of fitness."
Just what do you mean "context of evolution". Excuse me but the ability to survive is the "definition of fitness". Those that survive are fit, those that do not, die! That is the basic tautology of "survival of the fittest".
Yes, having offspring might change the parent's probability for survival such as when the offspring kills the parents. However, this is of course not guaranteed. What I was arguing was that the ability to have many children does not define how fit a person is. In fact, in the vast majority of cases it would have no impact whatsoever. Having children does not (in general) make people survive longer, just that people who have many children most likely are good at surviving.
"We did not evolve according to an improving fitness function, but rather through a messy series of brutal conflicts with other organisms and the forces of nature, those organisms most able to contribute genetic material to future generations being the most fit."
Excuse me, and how do you know this? And how does having offspring make an individual organism fit? This is a common tautology with naive ideas of evolution. An organism that has many offspring might very well be fit, but having offspring does not _make_ an organism fit. The problem with fitness functions is a mathematical one and appealing to naive philosophical views of our common evolution does not render it any less of a problem.
Sorry, that is _not_ a fitness function for humans... The number of offspring any given human has does not affect there probability of survival rather it speaks to the probability of there descendants survival. Again, a _fit_ person may have many kids, but having many kids does not make a person _fit_!
That's not what I see. Here is what I think will happen.
1. Home user buys Lindows, Xandros, Ximian.
2. Home user installs loads of MS Software on Lindows including MS Office, but he also installs things like KOffice.
3. Home user sees his MS Office bug out and crash, but it doesn't take down the OS aka BSOD!
4. Home user is presently suprised with KOffice, it's speed and features and notices that it does not crash or take down the OS aka BSOD!
5. Home user decides to uninstall MS Office and stick with native apps because they just work and the features he requires are all there.
6. Linux gains another MS convert.
I _do_ see this as a way to make people like linux for being linux.
People won't switch because they are stuck trying to read other peoples documents encoded in MicroShaft's proprietary lock-in file format.
People won't switch because hardware manufacturers won't release drivers for other platforms because MicroShaft has a monopoly so why should they.
People won't switch because they have no choice when buying consumer grade, pre-built computers in all major retail outlets.
People won't switch because MicroShaft has a monopoly on Intel compatible desktop operating systems, not because of 'superior' microshaft crap software.
You can decry my analogy all you want, but it _IS_ relevant. Sure you must keep your system up to date no matter which system it is, but that is no excuse for the shoddy craftsmanship of Microsoft's offerings. For anyone with a major need to keep there systems secure, Microsoft is the fools option.
To say that the choice of Operating System does not matter in system security is a joke and flies in the face of established practices. Why do you think the NSA absolutely refuses to use Microsoft's software? By your reasoning the NSA should have no qualms with Microsoft because the only important thing is keeping up with security patches. Give me a break.
Another case in point, why do you think the insurance industry has higher premiums for covering Microsoft Software. They have no interest other than monetary and there experience is that Microsoft Software breaks more often than other options. Either it is the software or the administrators or both. No more excuses please.
Your little hole in the boat analogy does not change the fact that the person with the larger hole is going to go down faster, by your own admission. I would add that if any experienced sailor were to go to sea for any length of time they, it would be a wise decision to take the most seaworthy boat, ie the boat least likely to develop holes!
You see I actually picked apart your little analogy without just dismissing it as not appropriate or silly. You are not fooling anyone.
I understand that you are trying to stress the need for good system administration, and I am telling you that _choice of software_ is absolutely one of the primary factors.
Myth: "It doesn't matter what system you are running, if you don't keep up to date you will be hit."
Fact: "That's not very smart. It's like saying that it doesn't matter whether you buy a Toyota Camry or a Russian Lada, because you will eventually have to service it. Excuse me, but I'd rather own the Camry, thank you very much, because the probability of trouble is lower for the Camry. Of course I need to get both cars inspected regularly. The name of the game is risk management, and every manager has the responsibility to minimize risks.
Using software of doubtful quality is irresponsible."
Security _IS_ determined in large part by choice of Operating System/Software. Period.
dumbass. try reading the quoted comment again. one does not have to be a troll to have one's comments labeled as flamebait. one's comment can even be considered legit and flamebait at the same time.
It is an attack on creativity and free speech because they are attempting to copyright the color blue the notion of transperancy. It is ridiculous , what if Van Gogh had copyrighted his 'trademark' paint textures or Picasso his 'trademark' cubes. The Aqua theme is simply too general to be copyrighted. Therefore someone using similar candy colored transperancies for a computer GUI should not be considered plagiarism.
I am sorry, but what you are saying sounds like so much crap. I do not doubt that you believe what you spout, but think about the way you awnsered.
"Robust infrastructures for moving your business online."
If this is what you and so many marketroids are describing as "Web Services" then ppheewww. No doubt that there are business with highly complicated and immersive business applications and no doubt that J2EE and XML are sometimes usefull tools, but this is highly specialized big business technology not everyday pervasive killer app technology. The complexity and details ivolved in designing such apps require very generalized abstract infrastructures, nothing nearly sexy enough to warrant this huge mega blitz marketing campaign that is.NYET! No, I can't believe Microsoft bet the barn on such stock.
I have to believe that when Microsoft uses the term "Web Services" they are talking about cheesy app interfaces to popular websites all using Passport for there authentication. And this is what we are balking at. PHP, apache, and other opensource apps are plenty powerful enough to build such toys. The only thing these opensource apps lack is the marketing muscle to turn these trivial apps into "The Next Great Thing".
As far as I can tell "Web Services" is just another corporate buzzword. I don't see these services as meaningful. My guess is that Microsoft, some financial institutions, and the likes of Ebay/Amazon, are the only early adopters of this tech. If something more comes of it then so be it, but I don't see any reason to hit the panic button.
For all you pervaders of FUD and BUZZ, please take a step back and look at our recent experience with the fallout of the dotcoms. Please wait until the next killer app appears before you BUZZ it or create just so much FUD.
As far as EJBs, I can not figure out what possible reason one would have to build the "enterprise, scalable, distributed, load balanced" part of the project into the application layer instead of using hardware/OS solutions such as clustering.
Anyone concerned with dotGNU or Mono sapping the energy from J2EE need not be concerned. Mono is not the same kind of beast as J2EE. AFAIK, Miguel's primary intent is a new runtime environment for Gnome. If anyone ever figures out how to make money with these "Web Services" I'm sure Ximian wouldn't mind, but that does not appear to be Mono's primary purpose. It is way, way, way to early to flesh out the purpose of dotGNU since the people involved don't seem to clear. This is a project created as a reaction to Microsoft and judging from the traffic on the mailing list dotGNU's purpose or Modis Operandi seems to be changing daily.
So, when you originally are challenging the reader to think of something "intelligent" before replying, we are to presume that you put your full intelligence into the question?
He fucked up. However, you also fucked up which makes you a fucking hypocrite. Cluge wins. You lose.
What the hell are you talking about. Yes, they have different goals, but DotGNU/Portable.NET do not want to make things harder for anyone. AND, there are very valid uses for a Csharp compiler written in C, namely to compile Mono's compiler written in Csharp. I for one do not want to work with any binary compiler which was compiled from Microsoft's closed source compiler. It is insecure and also presents licensing issues.
Apperently it is very important to MicroSoft because they are trying to hide the fact that it was ever there. They have erased the page and taken the program off there FTP server. They have also erased all mention of gpl and fnord from there pages. unfortunately, there search engine needs to be reindexed because you can still search on fnord or gpl and turn up pages, but the pages themselves contain no mention. HAH HAH HAH Check out the cached pages on google and you can see what they took out. Can't wait for Mundie or one of the other idiots to open there big mouths again, there own developers who are responsible for new "innovations" are using GPL'd software. They can't even convince there own developers with there FUD. How embarrasing.
I have had limited success running Dreamweaver with Wine. The only problem is the first screen which does not display properly. Perhaps, someone could contact Allaire/Macromedia and see if they might help us fix this problem in Wine... Also, since Allaire and Macromedia have just merged, Jeremy Allaire is the CTO, ColdFusion has been ported to Linux, and Allaire is based in Boston right next to Ximian, perhaps they might release a linux addition. Would anyone buy?
Bullshit! If musicians are the real victims then why did Alanis Morrisette and Don Henly stand up in front of congress with their bald faces hanging out and support Napster. The RIAA wants to turn around and have congress pass a law to allow them to do the same thing as Napster without paying your beloved musicians one extra cent.
Where was this "very rigorous" testing in this episode... Not only have they blown the patch but, as the update states, they have known about this since February and they still don't have this available on Windows Update!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I regard an individual's lifespan aka likelyhood to survive as a statement of the organism's fitness. Any self-reproducing organism by definition has the ability to pass on it's genes, but only those that survive long enough because they are fit are actually able to. I think you are confusing things when you say an organism's fitness _is defined by_ the amount of offspring they have, rather an organism's fitness _defines_ how many offspring they _may_ have.
"In the context of evolution, number of decendants is the definition of fitness."
Just what do you mean "context of evolution". Excuse me but the ability to survive is the "definition of fitness". Those that survive are fit, those that do not, die! That is the basic tautology of "survival of the fittest".
Yes, having offspring might change the parent's probability for survival such as when the offspring kills the parents. However, this is of course not guaranteed. What I was arguing was that the ability to have many children does not define how fit a person is. In fact, in the vast majority of cases it would have no impact whatsoever. Having children does not (in general) make people survive longer, just that people who have many children most likely are good at surviving.
"We did not evolve according to an improving fitness function, but rather through a messy series of brutal conflicts with other organisms and the forces of nature, those organisms most able to contribute genetic material to future generations being the most fit."
Excuse me, and how do you know this? And how does having offspring make an individual organism fit? This is a common tautology with naive ideas of evolution. An organism that has many offspring might very well be fit, but having offspring does not _make_ an organism fit. The problem with fitness functions is a mathematical one and appealing to naive philosophical views of our common evolution does not render it any less of a problem.
Sorry, that is _not_ a fitness function for humans... The number of offspring any given human has does not affect there probability of survival rather it speaks to the probability of there descendants survival. Again, a _fit_ person may have many kids, but having many kids does not make a person _fit_!
That's not what I see. Here is what I think will happen.
1. Home user buys Lindows, Xandros, Ximian.
2. Home user installs loads of MS Software on Lindows including MS Office, but he also installs things like KOffice.
3. Home user sees his MS Office bug out and crash, but it doesn't take down the OS aka BSOD!
4. Home user is presently suprised with KOffice, it's speed and features and notices that it does not crash or take down the OS aka BSOD!
5. Home user decides to uninstall MS Office and stick with native apps because they just work and the features he requires are all there.
6. Linux gains another MS convert.
I _do_ see this as a way to make people like linux for being linux.
People won't switch because they are stuck trying to read other peoples documents encoded in MicroShaft's proprietary lock-in file format.
People won't switch because hardware manufacturers won't release drivers for other platforms because MicroShaft has a monopoly so why should they.
People won't switch because they have no choice when buying consumer grade, pre-built computers in all major retail outlets.
People won't switch because MicroShaft has a monopoly on Intel compatible desktop operating systems, not because of 'superior' microshaft crap software.
Try this link. It is the developers website.
Not much there yet, but I imagine it will heat up after people get their hands on this device.
You like to talk a hell of a lot.
You can decry my analogy all you want, but it _IS_ relevant. Sure you must keep your system up to date no matter which system it is, but that is no excuse for the shoddy craftsmanship of Microsoft's offerings. For anyone with a major need to keep there systems secure, Microsoft is the fools option.
To say that the choice of Operating System does not matter in system security is a joke and flies in the face of established practices. Why do you think the NSA absolutely refuses to use Microsoft's software? By your reasoning the NSA should have no qualms with Microsoft because the only important thing is keeping up with security patches. Give me a break.
Another case in point, why do you think the insurance industry has higher premiums for covering Microsoft Software. They have no interest other than monetary and there experience is that Microsoft Software breaks more often than other options. Either it is the software or the administrators or both. No more excuses please.
Your little hole in the boat analogy does not change the fact that the person with the larger hole is going to go down faster, by your own admission. I would add that if any experienced sailor were to go to sea for any length of time they, it would be a wise decision to take the most seaworthy boat, ie the boat least likely to develop holes!
You see I actually picked apart your little analogy without just dismissing it as not appropriate or silly. You are not fooling anyone.
I understand that you are trying to stress the need for good system administration, and I am telling you that _choice of software_ is absolutely one of the primary factors.
I am so tired of this lame argument.
Myth: "It doesn't matter what system you are running, if you don't keep up to date you will be hit."
Fact: "That's not very smart. It's like saying that it doesn't matter whether you buy a Toyota Camry or a Russian Lada, because you will eventually have to service it. Excuse me, but I'd rather own the Camry, thank you very much, because the probability of trouble is lower for the Camry. Of course I need to get both cars inspected regularly. The name of the game is risk management, and every manager has the responsibility to minimize risks.
Using software of doubtful quality is irresponsible."
Security _IS_ determined in large part by choice of Operating System/Software. Period.
dumbass. see above. it is flamebait because the post generated a huge flame war. the comment might be legit, but it is still flamebait.
dumbass. see above.
dumbass. try reading the quoted comment again. one does not have to be a troll to have one's comments labeled as flamebait. one's comment can even be considered legit and flamebait at the same time.
It is an attack on creativity and free speech because they are attempting to copyright the color blue the notion of transperancy. It is ridiculous , what if Van Gogh had copyrighted his 'trademark' paint textures or Picasso his 'trademark' cubes. The Aqua theme is simply too general to be copyrighted. Therefore someone using similar candy colored transperancies for a computer GUI should not be considered plagiarism.
I am sorry, but what you are saying sounds like so much crap. I do not doubt that you believe what you spout, but think about the way you awnsered.
.NYET! No, I can't believe Microsoft bet the barn on such stock.
"Robust infrastructures for moving your business online."
If this is what you and so many marketroids are describing as "Web Services" then ppheewww. No doubt that there are business with highly complicated and immersive business applications and no doubt that J2EE and XML are sometimes usefull tools, but this is highly specialized big business technology not everyday pervasive killer app technology. The complexity and details ivolved in designing such apps require very generalized abstract infrastructures, nothing nearly sexy enough to warrant this huge mega blitz marketing campaign that is
I have to believe that when Microsoft uses the term "Web Services" they are talking about cheesy app interfaces to popular websites all using Passport for there authentication. And this is what we are balking at. PHP, apache, and other opensource apps are plenty powerful enough to build such toys. The only thing these opensource apps lack is the marketing muscle to turn these trivial apps into "The Next Great Thing".
As far as I can tell "Web Services" is just another corporate buzzword. I don't see these services as meaningful. My guess is that Microsoft, some financial institutions, and the likes of Ebay/Amazon, are the only early adopters of this tech. If something more comes of it then so be it, but I don't see any reason to hit the panic button.
For all you pervaders of FUD and BUZZ, please take a step back and look at our recent experience with the fallout of the dotcoms. Please wait until the next killer app appears before you BUZZ it or create just so much FUD.
As far as EJBs, I can not figure out what possible reason one would have to build the "enterprise, scalable, distributed, load balanced" part of the project into the application layer instead of using hardware/OS solutions such as clustering.
Anyone concerned with dotGNU or Mono sapping the energy from J2EE need not be concerned. Mono is not the same kind of beast as J2EE. AFAIK, Miguel's primary intent is a new runtime environment for Gnome. If anyone ever figures out how to make money with these "Web Services" I'm sure Ximian wouldn't mind, but that does not appear to be Mono's primary purpose. It is way, way, way to early to flesh out the purpose of dotGNU since the people involved don't seem to clear. This is a project created as a reaction to Microsoft and judging from the traffic on the mailing list dotGNU's purpose or Modis Operandi seems to be changing daily.
So, when you originally are challenging the reader to think of something "intelligent" before replying, we are to presume that you put your full intelligence into the question?
He fucked up. However, you also fucked up which makes you a fucking hypocrite. Cluge wins. You lose.
What the hell are you talking about. Yes, they have different goals, but DotGNU/Portable.NET do not want to make things harder for anyone. AND, there are very valid uses for a Csharp compiler written in C, namely to compile Mono's compiler written in Csharp. I for one do not want to work with any binary compiler which was compiled from Microsoft's closed source compiler. It is insecure and also presents licensing issues.
Apperently it is very important to MicroSoft because they are trying to hide the fact that it was ever there. They have erased the page and taken the program off there FTP server. They have also erased all mention of gpl and fnord from there pages. unfortunately, there search engine needs to be reindexed because you can still search on fnord or gpl and turn up pages, but the pages themselves contain no mention. HAH HAH HAH Check out the cached pages on google and you can see what they took out. Can't wait for Mundie or one of the other idiots to open there big mouths again, there own developers who are responsible for new "innovations" are using GPL'd software. They can't even convince there own developers with there FUD. How embarrasing.
Yes, my bank does this. However, you can fool them by having your browser report a different useragent string... ;)
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/space/solarsy stem/solarsystemjava.html
I have had limited success running Dreamweaver with Wine. The only problem is the first screen which does not display properly. Perhaps, someone could contact Allaire/Macromedia and see if they might help us fix this problem in Wine... Also, since Allaire and Macromedia have just merged, Jeremy Allaire is the CTO, ColdFusion has been ported to Linux, and Allaire is based in Boston right next to Ximian, perhaps they might release a linux addition. Would anyone buy?
"The people most harmed are the musicians."
Bullshit! If musicians are the real victims then why did Alanis Morrisette and Don Henly stand up in front of congress with their bald faces hanging out and support Napster. The RIAA wants to turn around and have congress pass a law to allow them to do the same thing as Napster without paying your beloved musicians one extra cent.
FYI Actually he is not interested in Baseball... He is the owner of the Portland Trailblazers (basketball) and the Seattle Seahawks (football ;).
Where was this "very rigorous" testing in this episode... Not only have they blown the patch but, as the update states, they have known about this since February and they still don't have this available on Windows Update!