I don't see why Apple doesn't just get AirPort's radio manufacture to sell them some radios that work on another frequency. GSM cell phones by default work at 900 Mhz (but they're also availble in 1800 Mhz), but as many Americans know, 900 Mhz has been allocated for wireless phones (the non-cellular kind). So digital cell phones use 1900 Mhz in the US.
Sure certain frequencies are better for something than others (You don't build cell phones to work on visible light. I mean you don't want to blind a 10 mile radius from the cell tower/strobe light now do you?:) (Oh yeah, and you wouldn't be able to use your phone during the day, but that might not be a bad thing.)). But I can't imagine that 2.4 Ghz is the only frequency you can use for wireless data in the home.
I used to be a dev lead on the a MSN team. Yes I worked for the evil empire and since I have run very fast from anything looking like M$ jobs. [...] Will [MSN] be a success? Yes, anyone can be brainwashed, just look at all the people that use Office.
Welcome to Salvation Brother! Can I get an "Amen"?:)
Linux MAY be more than Mom needs right now, but she certainly doesn't need $400 worth of Microsoft OS and programs just to email Junior, surf the web, and type up her resume.
I agree. Personally I don't see anything close to the Holy Grail of an "Information Appliance" yet. (Which is basically what we're talking about here.) Everything seems to be cheap PCs, or something that doesn't even come close to the versitility one needs. There doesn't seem to be a happy middle yet. You don't necessarily need majorly upgradeable hardware. (These things should be cheap enough for you not even really have to think about just going out and buying a new one.)
There needs to be the right kind of software too. I agree it needs to be inexpensive, but by the same token it doesn't really need to be "full featured" either. Just all the common stuff. (Gimp is good example of this. It's powerful enough for you use without feeling tied and gaged (i.e. Paintbrush or xpaint) but it's not something the CIA would use to doctor photos either.) And of course the Interface needs to be clean. Personally I like the PalmOS UI. (Except for the dedicated writing area. I like WinCE's way better.)
Of course any IA is doomed to fail if you can't share files with the rest of the world, but again this is a software issue.
DON'T YOU DARE DUMBDOWN THE TERMINOLOGY! Those are the words, new users have to learn it. Whenever you start something new, there's a learning curve. New terminology is part of it. UNIX is designed by a fundamentally different philosophy. If you want the M$-suck way, then stick with M$. (I really hate the concept behind fvwm95. The best way I've heard it described is as "methadone for windows users".)
Hell, even if you replaced "tarball" with "thingy" and "keyboard" with "doodad" you'd still have people saying "Ehhhh! That's too hard! `Thingy?' Why don't you just speak English!". ("tarball" is a perfect word. It's a ball of files and it ends in ".tar" what's so wrong with that?)
I've said it many times before (and people don't like it), but I don't think "Linux For The Masses" is a good idea. Does the person thinks "me too!" is being insightful really need (or should even have) a UNIX box sitting in their home? One of the major things that makes Linux great is the community, and the fact that the community as a whole doesn't just whine and complain, but is actually useful. Why is this? There's an entrance fee to be paid to get into the community, and you pay it by critticaly thinking. The Unwashed would do nothing but drown out the original community members with, "This is too hard!" (Don't believe me? Right now there's a Visa radio commercial running talking about online shopping that says, "Clicking is hard work." (And no, the don't say it in jest.)) These are the people I'm talking about. Give them a dreamcast-esqe device with email, a web browser, and a wordprocessor that's they all they need and really want. (I'm distinguishing between the "ignorant" and those that don't even try. It's the second group I don't think Linux should be marketed to.)
Personally I think the the people that spout that are either
Those that believe that Linux is the Be All and End All of OSs (Do you really need to be running Linux on your PalmPilot? I mean PalmOS doesn't seem that bad. (The need for an Free RTOS for embeded systems is different issue. Which I can see the need for. Personaly I'd like to see a comprable Free alternative in every important software catagory.))
People parrotting the zealots
Those motivated solely by the All-Mighty-Dollar. Linux is hip right now, and thus you can market it to the ignorant masses
The good intentioned, but misguided.
People ask now, "Yeah but can my mom use it?", but a more question would be, "Yeah but does my mom need this?" (You don't see particle accelerators being sold at Sears now do you?) </rant>
This is probably going to get moderated down as "flamebait" because it's a rant (and I don't deny that there's a viable reason for moderating it down), but Mr. Moderator, before you hit "Moderate" just think about what I'm saying. Which is basically this, "Linux is more OS than most people can handle. Sure they need something, just not this."
I wouldn't call this a cyberwar, it's more like simple vandalism to me. A true cyberwar would involve massive DOS, financial transactions going awry, key servers being compromised through out industry and government (I'm sorry but a webserver just isn't that important in the grand scheme of things.), maybe even EMP devices.
While a cyberwar is something to prepare for (both defensively and offensively), one shouldn't be losing sleep over webpage defacing. This kind of stuff goes on all the time. I'd expect that during a shooting war (or maybe even during a cold war to a lesser degree) that the script kiddies would be defacing everything they could get their hands on. Afterall, everyone must do his or her part during a time of national crisis. I can't imagine these acts being promoted by a government, but I don't think they'd actually prosecute or even search for who was attack the enemy's webserver.
The spectre of a cyberwar is greater for industrialized (or is it now "post-industrialized"?) countries. The United States for example simply can't function without an interconnected computer system anymore. It's now time for countries to start protecting networks just like other infrastructure. (Can you say "strong crypto"?)
Anyway cyberwars have been going since the beginning of time (remember "cyber-" actually means "information"). Secrets, misinformation, propaganda, it's all the same. It's just that now, governments aren't going to be the sole targets for this kind of war (but then again when was there a war where non-government entities weren't attacked too?).
The most commonly touted break up possibility is seperate applications and OS companies. Personally I think that's absurd. Instead of having one ultra-mega-monopoly, you would have two mega-monopolies. Sure monopolies aren't illegal, but you can't tell me that the M$ culture of bullying companies and consumers wouldn't continue in each of these Baby-Bills.
Personally I think that M$ needs to be broken up into several comapnies. Break up on a team/group level (50-200 people or so). Split all the concrete asests (equipment, finances, etc) n ways, and give each group a copy of all the intellectual property. Have a court order ruling that they can't remerge until after a period of time (We don't want a scene out of "Terminator 2" now do we?) and give them some sort of legal protection from being immediatly swallowed up by a competitor (i.e. Sun) for an equally long period of time.
Some of them will die off, some will survive. Eventually each of the Baby-Bill's would go they're own way. Some specialize in WinCE, others NT, others Win9x, still others Office. The key thing to remember is there are multiple Baby-Bills for each of these products, not just one.
(Personally I'd expect WinCE to die first. I can't imagine that piece of shit can survive without the Power of Lord Bill behind it.)
Of course that's just what I'd want to see. I bet they're just fined.
Don't forget he also recently gave $1 billion for poor kids to use windows. 1/50th of his fortune. To put this in perspective, that's like me giving away $1000. Less than a paycheck. Wow, he's all heart
I just don't see how the people that work for WhatWinWhere can live with themselves. This strikes me as very immoral. (And I tend to think of the industry being enlightened to things like privacy.)
"I always try to look on the bright sidem it's just that experience has taught me to expect the worst." -- Garak ST:DS9
Yes I have seen both the series and the movies. All the cats and dogs were killed off by a virus. Before they'd bring anything back to Earth, they'd send people there to study it. And then of course the lifeforms (both terran and europan) would be biologically isolated from each other, until it was safe for them to directly interact. (Afterall we wouldn't like a scene remincent of Homer's trip back to the dinosaur age on "The Simpsons" now would we? ("*AHHCHOOO!*" (Immediatly every dinosaur drops dead one by one) "This is going to cost me." *BZZZFFFT*)))
I'd like giant fish. Giant whale-like fish. That would be ultra-cool. Of course bacteria would be cool. In fact damn cool, but nothing gets the heart racing like a macroscopic multicellular organism. Even something like a guppie. They'd HAVE to bring one back. If they did, and they could get it to live here, you know people would be rushing to Europa to bring Buffy and Tad Europan Guppies. It could actually be a new gold gold rush and herald in mythical interplanetary travel.
Re:I'm raising my daughter to be a girl geek
on
Girls Like Linux Too
·
· Score: 2
I don't know about tech support, but I know that many men treat women quite different in topics of conversion where gender should not be an issue. A few years ago my e-mail name was "Helenize", and folks therefore assumed me female. I got replies that began "Listen here lady..." and were filled gender biased belittling remarks. (We'll ignore the dozens of pathetic pickup attempts.)
Now listen here lil' mama...:)
I teend to see sexism in tech support usually when male tech-support-lacky and has to deal with a female victim/luser. The man tends to talk down (not overtly like, "Now lil' mama, that wouldn't happen if you were at home barefoot and pregenant in the kitchen, like you belong." more subtle, like with they words they use.) Men tend to be less patient (i.e. "Here. *bang* *bang* *bang* Now it's fixed.") and they DEFINATLY don't explain what is going on behind the scenes to cause the problem.
P.S. Where I went to college, the CS sysadmin was a woman. She was quite cool.
Alot of points have been raised, there's the issue of the lack of women in the industry. (I loath the acronym "IT" sounds like suit-talk to me.), and the legendary Glass Ceiling(tm) issue.
I don't have alot to say about the second one. I'm a white male, glass ceilings don't effect me. They certainly used to exist. Do they today? Perhaps. I haven't actually seen anyone smack into it, but I'm just out of college. I tend to think of the high-tech industry as "enlightened" when it comes to that kind of shit. (Pulling stunts like enforcing a glass ceiling is shit, pure and simple.) That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, I'm just not "in the know" if it does. (I tend to think more about racism, instead of sexism.) Unequal pay certainly exists. It's a dispicable act, and I don't see how anyone could possibly justify it in their own minds so they could sleep at night.
As for the lack of women in the industry that's a totally seperate issue. (In fact I see it working against Glass Ceilings(tm). Afterall it's going to be INCREDIBLY obvious if the sole woman on the staff never gets promoted.) There's not alot of women in the the industry because there's not alot of women majoring in CS/Engineering. Why? I don't know; not alot of men major in elemetry education either. Why? I don't know. I'm sure a similar machanisms are at work in both of these phenomena.
There's not alot of blacks in CS either. Why? I don't know. There isn't though. I came across 2 in 4 years of college, and I can only think of 3 where I work (One of them is in project management and runs the change control meetings. That impressed me. (Well not necessarily "impressed", but it made my inner integrationalist/liberal happy.)).
Of course not all CS/engineering women are geeks, just like not all CS/engineering men are geeks, but I'm confident that the geek to non-geek ratio is the same for both groups. (No I have no data, just a feeling.) I don't think you can intentionally set out to make a geek like the one guy is trying to do. Geeks are born not made. All the geek girls I know played with dolls, had tea parties and did all that other "girl stuff". Sometimes it suprizes me ("You had a Cabbage Patch Kid?!?") but it only make sense when you think about it. A geek grrl is a girl first, and a geek second. Just like how a geek guy is a guy first, and geek second.
Just some random line noise I thought I'd throw down about this.
I agree with your comment about post XOR comment. The whole point of that was to keep someone from saying "R0b 4Nd H3m05 Suk dOnk3y b4l1s" and then spending all 5 points to moderate it up to "5 insightful" Why not just have it so that you can't moderate your own posts?
Sure it doesn't keep poeple from conspiring, but nothing in the current system prevents that either (In fact nothing can.) And it doesn't keep the l33t-d00d to post anonymously and then mod the post up to "4 interesting", but nothing in the current system prevents that either.
I REALLY don't like your idea of karma deciding who can have this "privlage". I feel it is incredibly eliteess.
Clyde Drexler was "Clyde the Glide" Why would someone named "Walt" have a nickname that hinged on the wrong name? That's like saying, "Linux ``Smokin' Joe'' Trovalds" It doesn't pass the sanity test.
This seems to be another thing that says, "Geeks are different. They need help." Yeah, we're different, but we don't need help. Sure there's probably some geeks out there are mildly autsitic or suffer from ADHD, but I can't belive the majority do. I have no problem with empathy, when someone is emotionally hurt, it really bothers me. Now that doesn't mean I make it my mission to make people happy. I don't, I don't like those people, they annoy me, but that doesn't mean I like to see someone in emotional pain.
Sure I occasionally have problems with social interaction. Small talk seems incredibly laborous unless I'm talking about some sort of geek topic, but then I just seem pathetic.
I do receive conversational signals, I'm just never sure if they mean what they mean, I'm always afraid I'm reading too much into them because I get mildly self-consious around new people. Usually the signals mean what I thought they did, but by the time I reallize that I've already barreled through them and emberessed myself.
I strongly believe that physicists have a reputation (well deserved IMHO) for being poorly dressed (atrocious prevalence of khakies/sneakers... ) because it's comfortable and they honestly have more important things to do than care. When they do choose to dress well they have no problems doing so..
CS Geeks are endearingly wierd. Physics geeks are scary-wierd. That's what I got out of my 3 physics classes in college.
I get what he's saying. I've seen_it/been_a_victim myself. I don't think the problem is moderates not seeing the posts, I think their unable to act on them. When I moderate it's not unusual for me to see much more than 5 posts that need to up/down graded in every forum I read (and I don't read all of them).
This has been discussed before, but I think each moderate needs either more points, or more moderators. Rob doesn't like the idea of more points, but I don't see any evidence of more moderators either. M2 is good idea, I like it, but that only addresses part of the issue. Perhaps 5 points a day for 3 days would be good.
(normally I'd expect this to be moded up to 2 (interesting) but this isn't the forum for this. However there really isn't a forum for this right now. So moderator, do what you want.)
The resurgance of Apple and the Linux explosion has no bearing on the case whatsoever. These developments are inadmissable as evidence for two reasons. First, the evidentiary period is over. Secondly, the government did not have an opportunity to rebut this statement. However, this hasn't stopped Microsft from trying to do just that, by asking Judge Jackson to take "judicary note" of these recent developments. Frankly I think it's a blatent ploy to cloud the issue that Micorsoft violated the Consent Decree.
As a previous post said, the government could argue that the only reason why linux is starting to get support from OEMs is because Lord Bill has to watch himself right now. As soon as the trial is over, Lord Bill's Army of Darkness will return en masse. But the government doesn't have to, afterall a trial intrinsically deals with the past, not the present.
FYI: The iMac was introduced LONG after the trial started.
I kind of wonder about compaq. Especially regarding their...ahem...lack of ties to microsoft. Of course my view is clouded due to my current fight with them regarding my win98 refund. That and all the buttons that don't do anything on my laptop.
(Yeah it's off topic, yeah win98 refunds are old news, but only now am I dealing with compaq and am able to fight for my refund ("I'm sorry the OEM EULA doesn't apply to pre-installed windows"))
NASA says they modeled it after the lightsaber training remote, but I can help but think that if you paint it black and stick a big ass hypodermic needle on it and you'd have the interrogator droid.
"Now we'll discuss yout the location of your secret rebel base."
I own a Compaq 1275 K6-366 running pure linux (AMD and Linux, the ultimate against the Wintel duopoly). I like it. In fact I use it more than I use my desktop. Sure it has a winmodem, but my Linksys 100baseTX/56k fax/modem takes care of that. (Oh and 40 feet of ethernet cable makes it effectively wireless) I had no problem getting linux up under it. The only things I can't get to work under it are:
The scroll buttons for the mouse. Those 4 "internet ready" buttons you find on compaqs Some of the "Fn" key's functions like CD playing. (As far as I can tell the "Fn" gets intercepted by the BIOS because it doesn't return a scan key.)
If anyone knows how to get them to work, I'd like to know, but it's not that big of a deal.
The one thing that does piss me off a bit is that my NeoMagic card can only be run at 800x600, which is just a bit too big.
FINALLY! It always pissed me off more than to see the GameBoy be sold for 13 years with little change (They made it thinner and gave it a color screen. Whoop-dee-do.) At least this is a step in right direction.
Reluctantly I get up off the probverbial couch and weigh in.
Sadly the posts to regarding this article are falling along predictable lines.
1. "FUD!!!" 2. "Linux is open-source. Java is closed-source. enough said."
Let me first address the FUD agrument, afterall I did list it first. The article is not FUD. With the exception of the SMP reference (which was a Microsoft quote, and should have been corrected) There is nothing wrong with this article. To denouce the whole thing as FUD is simply wrong. All the Java commentary is pretty much on the mark. Java was hyped as the thing to displace Windows. It failed, and relatively speaking, became marginalized. Linux is being hyped to knock off Windows, so the comparisons are begged to be made.
Yes, the reporter should have fact-checked the Microsoft quote; but in all fairness Microsoft's Fitzgerald would be considered an authority. The reporter may have thought that Microsoft would shade the truth, but to out and out lie, that's somthing you just don't do in the reporter's world. (Sadly the Boston Globe's mailserver probably already has crashed twice due to "fuck you" mailings.)
Now on about the "Open-Source vs. Closed-Source" argument. (Please light your torches now.)
I'm sorry, but open-source is not some sort of silver bullet. An open-source project can fail just like any other project. An open-source project probably will never truly die since there isn't anyone to pull the plug on it, but instead it will continue to exist in some sort of Amiga-esque living-death. (The Amiga analogy isn't just applicable because of the living-death reference, but also because of the Amiga-persecution-syndrome that the failed project's die-hards will suffer from. (Damn Microsoft FUD! This really is the best thing out there!))
This doesn't mean that some other open-source project won't come along and challenge/clone the dominate proprietary system. I'm just saying that publishing the source doesn't magically make your technology/design better/chosen by God.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see why Apple doesn't just get AirPort's radio manufacture to sell them some radios that work on another frequency. GSM cell phones by default work at 900 Mhz (but they're also availble in 1800 Mhz), but as many Americans know, 900 Mhz has been allocated for wireless phones (the non-cellular kind). So digital cell phones use 1900 Mhz in the US.
:) (Oh yeah, and you wouldn't be able to use your phone during the day, but that might not be a bad thing.)). But I can't imagine that 2.4 Ghz is the only frequency you can use for wireless data in the home.
Sure certain frequencies are better for something
than others (You don't build cell phones to work
on visible light. I mean you don't want to blind a 10 mile radius from the cell tower/strobe light now do you?
I used to be a dev lead on the a MSN team. Yes I worked for the evil empire and since I have run very fast from anything looking like M$ jobs.
:)
[...]
Will [MSN] be a success? Yes, anyone can be brainwashed, just look at all the people that use Office.
Welcome to Salvation Brother! Can I get an "Amen"?
Linux MAY be more than Mom needs right now, but she certainly doesn't need $400 worth of Microsoft OS and programs just to email Junior, surf the web, and type up her resume.
I agree. Personally I don't see anything close to the Holy Grail of an "Information Appliance" yet. (Which is basically what we're talking about here.) Everything seems to be cheap PCs, or something that doesn't even come close to the versitility one needs. There doesn't seem to be a happy middle yet. You don't necessarily need majorly upgradeable hardware. (These things should be cheap enough for you not even really have to think about just going out and buying a new one.)
There needs to be the right kind of software too.
I agree it needs to be inexpensive, but by the same token it doesn't really need to be "full featured" either. Just all the common stuff. (Gimp is good example of this. It's powerful enough for you use without feeling tied and gaged (i.e. Paintbrush or xpaint) but it's not something the CIA would use to doctor photos either.) And of course the Interface needs to be clean. Personally I like the PalmOS UI. (Except for the dedicated writing area. I like WinCE's way better.)
Of course any IA is doomed to fail if you can't share files with the rest of the world, but again this is a software issue.
DON'T YOU DARE DUMBDOWN THE TERMINOLOGY!
Those are the words, new users have to learn it. Whenever you start something new, there's a learning curve. New terminology is part of it. UNIX is designed by a fundamentally different philosophy. If you want the M$-suck way, then stick with M$. (I really hate the concept behind fvwm95. The best way I've heard it described is as "methadone for windows users".)
Hell, even if you replaced "tarball" with "thingy" and "keyboard" with "doodad" you'd still have people saying "Ehhhh! That's too hard! `Thingy?' Why don't you just speak English!". ("tarball" is a perfect word. It's a ball of files and it ends in ".tar" what's so wrong with that?)
I've said it many times before (and people don't like it), but I don't think "Linux For The Masses" is a good idea. Does the person thinks "me too!" is being insightful really need (or should even have) a UNIX box sitting in their home? One of the major things that makes Linux great is the community, and the fact that the community as a whole doesn't just whine and complain, but is actually useful. Why is this? There's an entrance fee to be paid to get into the community, and you pay it by critticaly thinking. The Unwashed would do nothing but drown out the original community members with, "This is too hard!" (Don't believe me? Right now there's a Visa radio commercial running talking about online shopping that says, "Clicking is hard work." (And no, the don't say it in jest.)) These are the people I'm talking about. Give them a dreamcast-esqe device with email, a web browser, and a wordprocessor that's they all they need and really want. (I'm distinguishing between the "ignorant" and those that don't even try. It's the second group I don't think Linux should be marketed to.)
Personally I think the the people that spout that are either
People ask now, "Yeah but can my mom use it?", but a more question would be, "Yeah but does my mom need this?" (You don't see particle accelerators being sold at Sears now do you?)
</rant>
This is probably going to get moderated down as "flamebait" because it's a rant (and I don't deny that there's a viable reason for moderating it down), but Mr. Moderator, before you hit "Moderate" just think about what I'm saying. Which is basically this, "Linux is more OS than most people can handle. Sure they need something, just not this."
I wouldn't call this a cyberwar, it's more like simple vandalism to me. A true cyberwar would
involve massive DOS, financial transactions going awry, key servers being compromised through out industry and government (I'm sorry but a webserver just isn't that important in the grand scheme of things.), maybe even EMP devices.
While a cyberwar is something to prepare for (both defensively and offensively), one shouldn't be losing sleep over webpage defacing. This kind of stuff goes on all the time. I'd expect that during a shooting war (or maybe even during a cold war to a lesser degree) that the script kiddies would be defacing everything they could get their hands on. Afterall, everyone must do his or her part during a time of national crisis. I can't imagine these acts being promoted by a government, but I don't think they'd actually prosecute or even search for who was attack the enemy's webserver.
The spectre of a cyberwar is greater for industrialized (or is it now "post-industrialized"?) countries. The United States for example simply can't function without an interconnected computer system anymore. It's now time for countries to start protecting networks just like other infrastructure. (Can you say "strong crypto"?)
Anyway cyberwars have been going since the beginning of time (remember "cyber-" actually means "information"). Secrets, misinformation, propaganda, it's all the same. It's just that now, governments aren't going to be the sole targets for this kind of war (but then again when was there a war where non-government entities weren't attacked too?).
The most commonly touted break up possibility is seperate applications and OS companies. Personally I think that's absurd. Instead of having one ultra-mega-monopoly, you would have two
mega-monopolies. Sure monopolies aren't illegal, but you can't tell me that the M$ culture of bullying companies and consumers wouldn't continue in each of these Baby-Bills.
Personally I think that M$ needs to be broken up into several comapnies. Break up on a team/group level (50-200 people or so). Split all the concrete asests (equipment, finances, etc) n ways, and give each group a copy of all the intellectual property. Have a court order ruling that they can't remerge until after a period of time (We don't want a scene out of "Terminator 2" now do we?) and give them some sort of legal protection from being immediatly swallowed up by a competitor (i.e. Sun) for an equally long period of time.
Some of them will die off, some will survive. Eventually each of the Baby-Bill's would go they're own way. Some specialize in WinCE, others NT, others Win9x, still others Office. The key thing to remember is there are multiple Baby-Bills for each of these products, not just one.
(Personally I'd expect WinCE to die first. I can't imagine that piece of shit can survive without the Power of Lord Bill behind it.)
Of course that's just what I'd want to see. I bet they're just fined.
Of course, one can never forget the Eric Conspiracy.
I found the game bloated, but those cards kicked ass. Disgruntled postal workers, Flat Earthers, Alien Abductees, hell even Eliza!
(It seems like everytime I mention Eliza, no one knows what I'm talking about, but this is
Don't forget he also recently gave $1 billion for poor kids to use windows. 1/50th of his fortune. To put this in perspective, that's like me giving away $1000. Less than a paycheck. Wow, he's all heart
I just don't see how the people that work for WhatWinWhere can live with themselves. This strikes me as very immoral. (And I tend to think of the industry being enlightened to things like privacy.)
"I always try to look on the bright sidem it's just that experience has taught me to expect the worst."
-- Garak
ST:DS9
Yes I have seen both the series and the movies. All the cats and dogs were killed off by a virus. Before they'd bring anything back to Earth, they'd send people there to study it. And then of course the lifeforms (both terran and europan) would be biologically isolated from each other, until it was safe for them to directly interact. (Afterall we wouldn't like a scene remincent of Homer's trip back to the dinosaur age on "The Simpsons" now would we? ("*AHHCHOOO!*" (Immediatly every dinosaur drops dead one by one) "This is going to cost me." *BZZZFFFT*)))
I'd like giant fish. Giant whale-like fish. That would be ultra-cool. Of course bacteria would be cool. In fact damn cool, but nothing gets the heart racing like a macroscopic multicellular organism. Even something like a guppie. They'd HAVE to bring one back. If they did, and they could get it to live here, you know people would be rushing to Europa to bring Buffy and Tad Europan Guppies. It could actually be a new gold gold rush and herald in mythical interplanetary travel.
I don't know about tech support, but I know that many men treat women quite different in topics of conversion where gender should not be an issue. A few years ago my e-mail name was "Helenize", and folks therefore assumed me female. I got replies that began "Listen here lady..." and were filled gender biased belittling remarks. (We'll ignore the dozens of pathetic pickup attempts.)
Now listen here lil' mama... :)
I teend to see sexism in tech support usually when male tech-support-lacky and has to deal with a female victim/luser. The man tends to talk down (not overtly like, "Now lil' mama, that wouldn't happen if you were at home barefoot and pregenant in the kitchen, like you belong." more subtle, like with they words they use.) Men tend to be less patient (i.e. "Here. *bang* *bang* *bang* Now it's fixed.") and they DEFINATLY don't explain what is going on behind the scenes to cause the problem.
P.S. Where I went to college, the CS sysadmin was a woman. She was quite cool.
Alot of points have been raised, there's the issue of the lack of women in the industry. (I loath the acronym "IT" sounds like suit-talk to me.), and the legendary Glass Ceiling(tm) issue.
I don't have alot to say about the second one. I'm a white male, glass ceilings don't effect me. They certainly used to exist. Do they today? Perhaps. I haven't actually seen anyone smack into it, but I'm just out of college. I tend to think of the high-tech industry as "enlightened" when it comes to that kind of shit. (Pulling stunts like enforcing a glass ceiling is shit, pure and simple.) That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, I'm just not "in the know" if it does. (I tend to think more about racism, instead of sexism.) Unequal pay certainly exists. It's a dispicable act, and I don't see how anyone could possibly justify it in their own minds so they could sleep at night.
As for the lack of women in the industry that's a totally seperate issue. (In fact I see it working against Glass Ceilings(tm). Afterall it's going to be INCREDIBLY obvious if the sole woman on the staff never gets promoted.) There's not alot of women in the the industry because there's not alot of women majoring in CS/Engineering. Why? I don't know; not alot of men major in elemetry education either. Why? I don't know. I'm sure a similar machanisms are at work in both of these phenomena.
There's not alot of blacks in CS either. Why? I don't know. There isn't though. I came across 2 in 4 years of college, and I can only think of 3 where I work (One of them is in project management and runs the change control meetings. That impressed me. (Well not necessarily "impressed", but it made my inner integrationalist/liberal happy.)).
Of course not all CS/engineering women are geeks, just like not all CS/engineering men are geeks, but I'm confident that the geek to non-geek ratio is the same for both groups. (No I have no data, just a feeling.) I don't think you can intentionally set out to make a geek like the one guy is trying to do. Geeks are born not made. All the geek girls I know played with dolls, had tea parties and did all that other "girl stuff". Sometimes it suprizes me ("You had a Cabbage Patch Kid?!?") but it only make sense when you think about it. A geek grrl is a girl first, and a geek second. Just like how a geek guy is a guy first, and geek second.
Just some random line noise I thought I'd throw down about this.
I agree with your comment about post XOR comment. The whole point of that was to keep someone from saying "R0b 4Nd H3m05 Suk dOnk3y b4l1s" and then spending all 5 points to moderate it up to "5 insightful" Why not just have it so that you can't moderate your own posts?
Sure it doesn't keep poeple from conspiring, but nothing in the current system prevents that either (In fact nothing can.) And it doesn't keep the l33t-d00d to post anonymously and then mod the post up to "4 interesting", but nothing in the current system prevents that either.
I REALLY don't like your idea of karma deciding who can have this "privlage". I feel it is incredibly eliteess.
Clyde Drexler was "Clyde the Glide" Why would someone named "Walt" have a nickname that hinged on the wrong name? That's like saying, "Linux ``Smokin' Joe'' Trovalds" It doesn't pass the sanity test.
This seems to be another thing that says, "Geeks are different. They need help." Yeah, we're different, but we don't need help. Sure there's probably some geeks out there are mildly autsitic or suffer from ADHD, but I can't belive the majority do. I have no problem with empathy, when someone is emotionally hurt, it really bothers me. Now that doesn't mean I make it my mission to make people happy. I don't, I don't like those people, they annoy me, but that doesn't mean I like to see someone in emotional pain.
Sure I occasionally have problems with social interaction. Small talk seems incredibly laborous unless I'm talking about some sort of geek topic, but then I just seem pathetic.
I do receive conversational signals, I'm just never sure if they mean what they mean, I'm always afraid I'm reading too much into them because I get mildly self-consious around new people. Usually the signals mean what I thought they did, but by the time I reallize that I've already barreled through them and emberessed myself.
I strongly believe that physicists have a reputation (well deserved IMHO) for being poorly dressed (atrocious prevalence of khakies/sneakers ... ) because it's comfortable and they honestly have more important things to do than care. When they do choose to dress well they have no problems doing so..
CS Geeks are endearingly wierd. Physics geeks are scary-wierd. That's what I got out of my 3 physics classes in college.
I get what he's saying. I've seen_it/been_a_victim myself. I don't think the problem is moderates not seeing the posts, I think their unable to act on them. When I moderate it's not unusual for me to see much more than 5 posts that need to up/down graded in every forum I read (and I don't read all of them).
This has been discussed before, but I think each moderate needs either more points, or more moderators. Rob doesn't like the idea of more points, but I don't see any evidence of more moderators either. M2 is good idea, I like it, but that only addresses part of the issue. Perhaps 5 points a day for 3 days would be good.
(normally I'd expect this to be moded up to 2 (interesting) but this isn't the forum for this. However there really isn't a forum for this right now. So moderator, do what you want.)
The resurgance of Apple and the Linux explosion has no bearing on the case whatsoever. These developments are inadmissable as evidence for two reasons. First, the evidentiary period is over. Secondly, the government did not have an opportunity to rebut this statement. However, this hasn't stopped Microsft from trying to do just that, by asking Judge Jackson to take "judicary note" of these recent developments. Frankly I think it's a blatent ploy to cloud the issue that Micorsoft violated the Consent Decree.
As a previous post said, the government could argue that the only reason why linux is starting to get support from OEMs is because Lord Bill has to watch himself right now. As soon as the trial is over, Lord Bill's Army of Darkness will return en masse. But the government doesn't have to, afterall a trial intrinsically deals with the past, not the present.
FYI: The iMac was introduced LONG after the trial started.
I follow the San Jose Mercury News's coverage of the trial. So should each and every one of you!
I kind of wonder about compaq. Especially regarding their...ahem...lack of ties to microsoft. Of course my view is clouded due to my current fight with them regarding my win98 refund. That and all the buttons that don't do anything on my laptop.
(Yeah it's off topic, yeah win98 refunds are old news, but only now am I dealing with compaq and am able to fight for my refund ("I'm sorry the OEM EULA doesn't apply to pre-installed windows"))
NASA says they modeled it after the lightsaber training remote, but I can help but think that if you paint it black and stick a big ass hypodermic needle on it and you'd have the interrogator droid.
"Now we'll discuss yout the location of your secret rebel base."
I own a Compaq 1275 K6-366 running pure linux (AMD and Linux, the ultimate against the Wintel duopoly). I like it. In fact I use it more than I use my desktop. Sure it has a winmodem, but my Linksys 100baseTX/56k fax/modem takes care of that. (Oh and 40 feet of ethernet cable makes it effectively wireless) I had no problem getting linux up under it. The only things I can't get to work under it are:
The scroll buttons for the mouse.
Those 4 "internet ready" buttons you find on compaqs
Some of the "Fn" key's functions like CD playing. (As far as I can tell the "Fn" gets intercepted by the BIOS because it doesn't return a scan key.)
If anyone knows how to get them to work, I'd like to know, but it's not that big of a deal.
The one thing that does piss me off a bit is that my NeoMagic card can only be run at 800x600, which is just a bit too big.
FINALLY! It always pissed me off more than to see the GameBoy be sold for 13 years with little change (They made it thinner and gave it a color screen. Whoop-dee-do.) At least this is a step in right direction.
Reluctantly I get up off the probverbial couch and weigh in.
Sadly the posts to regarding this article are falling along predictable lines.
1. "FUD!!!"
2. "Linux is open-source. Java is closed-source. enough said."
Let me first address the FUD agrument, afterall I did list it first. The article is not FUD. With the exception of the SMP reference (which was a Microsoft quote, and should have been corrected) There is nothing wrong with this article. To denouce the whole thing as FUD is simply wrong. All the Java commentary is pretty much on the mark. Java was hyped as the thing to displace Windows. It failed, and relatively speaking, became marginalized. Linux is being hyped to knock off Windows, so the comparisons are begged to be made.
Yes, the reporter should have fact-checked the Microsoft quote; but in all fairness Microsoft's Fitzgerald would be considered an authority. The reporter may have thought that Microsoft would shade the truth, but to out and out lie, that's somthing you just don't do in the reporter's world. (Sadly the Boston Globe's mailserver probably already has crashed twice due to "fuck you" mailings.)
Now on about the "Open-Source vs. Closed-Source" argument. (Please light your torches now.)
I'm sorry, but open-source is not some sort of silver bullet. An open-source project can fail just like any other project. An open-source project probably will never truly die since there isn't anyone to pull the plug on it, but instead it will continue to exist in some sort of Amiga-esque living-death. (The Amiga analogy isn't just applicable because of the living-death reference, but also because of the Amiga-persecution-syndrome that the failed project's die-hards will suffer from. (Damn Microsoft FUD! This really is the best thing out there!))
This doesn't mean that some other open-source project won't come along and challenge/clone the dominate proprietary system. I'm just saying that publishing the source doesn't magically make your technology/design better/chosen by God.