A lot of people are bitching about C++ here; whether it's sour grapes over its success, a lack of understanding of the language, a lack of discipline to work in such a low level language, or honest criticisms, one thing has to be remembered: C++ was created to solve problems because its creator thought he could make a better language. One of my favorite ways to compare languages is What Languages Fix. It's a good, short read, but I'll spoil you and let you know that C++ was created to fix the problem of C being too low level. This implies many things, not the least of which is that Stroustrup wanted to leverage C's popularity, and of course that limited his options when designing C++. You'll also notice in that essay that Java was created to fix the problem of C++ being a kludge. And of course, C# was created for no other reason than Microsoft doesn't control Java;)
This article sounds like more FUD, probably from some Apple paid astroturf shill. I'm still a big fan of "Fragmentation? More like Fragmentawesome", an article from a developer with experience developing Android software and a decent sized userbase. If a freaking *game* works that well on a variety of Android devices without any tweaking whatsoever, I have to wonder how bad the programmers in the article are to have trouble with something as simple as twitter.
Yes, but did you know that besides being horrible for the environment, shopping online is also bad for male potency and kills cute kittens?
This message brought to you by the Chamber of Commerce.
I'm all for buying as locally as possible, both for environmental and for political reasons. Environmentally, it usually does involve less gas burned (especially since I can ride my bicycle to a lot of the local shops). Politically, it means more of my money stays locally (local sales taxes, wages paid to local employees, etc), and I have more control over my local politicians than I do those in some other state or country.
All this being said, there are many things I cannot buy in town; and I hate driving just to shop (which I also hate). Plus it's also more efficient to batch my purchases with others on a UPS or FedEx big rig than for me and four of my closest friends to go on a buying spree in a car.
This whole article does reek of brick and mortars (who usually run the Chamber's of Commerce) whining about the inevitable downsizing that is a secondary effect of a highly connected (both information and shipping wise) planet.
So in the summary they mention that if it is shipped more than 50km it negates the argument. I know, I know, I should RTFA. But I have to ask: did they take into account people who order things online because they can't buy those things down the street? In my small town (approx 30k residents), we lack a lot of things. When Mervyn's closed here, all we had left for clothing stores were the local fashion botiques, K-Mart and Wal-Mart. Don't even get me started on places to buy computer equipment or things for other hobbies (we've got Staples for computer supplies, and they don't seem to understand the meaning of "will this work with Linux?").
I hate shopping at brick and mortars. Nine times out of ten, I know exactly what I want. I don't want to have to talk to someone who's trying to sell me a warranty, nor deal with someone who says "we're out of stock for (hardware that works with Linux), but we have this great (windows only piece of shit)!". My actions are better for the environment, because the shipping companies will naturally try to batch more packages into less shipments to increase profits, instead of me and everyone else in my town driving 90 minutes to buy something. Even if you carpool with five people per car and stuff the car to the gills with things you buy, you still won't beat a UPS van full of packages. And that's assuming they used the smaller vans on the highways instead of the big rigs I've seen. Plus, my commute to work is 4 miles; 15 minutes by car, 18 by bicycle. So overall, I would say that small towns are better for the environment.
I haven't posted this question to the Netflix folks yet, but I can't believe no one has asked for it. If you are a Netflix person, please take this as a minor request from a customer who just wants to see you do better.
Million dollar prizes for nifty relational search algorithms are neat and all, but how about one simple thing that shouldn't cost more than two weeks developer time and would be a really nice feature: be able to sort a queue, specifically, be able to sort based on date released. Other sorting factors could be useful, but date released would be the best, especially for those of us MST3K fans for whom the series isn't numbered on the DVDs . . .
Unfortunately, what PowerPoint slides (and presentations) are being used for is a substitute for every other form of communication. Instead of specs, essays, helpful diagrams, and properly organized data, we have slides, slides, slides, and slides. Usually the slides are explained once in one meeting or conference call and then passed around, giving the illusion that information is written down in a usable form. In reality, if you really want to know what's going on you have to call the author (if they even bother to write their name), wasting your time and theirs.
Yes, yes, yes! How many times are we going to have to go through people too lazy to write up better documentation, who only later realize that they have to explain it, and sometimes re-explain it to multiple people, wasting both their and others' time?
Your options for presenting information to a crowd: --vocal: just talking for an hour, which is popular in many religions, and we all remember what the sermon was about last Sunday, right? --visual text: just endless paragraphs so they can read along which, as far as I can tell, no one does --multimedia: pictures, audio and video that attempts to explain in a manner easily digestible, hence Powerpoint
You missed one: email. I mean, seriously, why don't people get that interrupting everyone's day just so you can ramble on while pretty pictures fly from the overhead is a waste of everyone's time? There's a reason I fall asleep during meetings: lack of intellectual stimulation. Just email me the slides and I'll read them at my own convenience in 5 minutes while staying awake and absorbing more information. Not all the information is in the slides? Then write a report and email it to me! How hard is this people?
There are three things I demand from a meeting:
An agenda - otherwise you're just wasting time talking about the boss's favorite sports team.
Ten participants or less - because more than ten, and not everyone can participate, and if they are not participating, why are they there?
Less than an hour - if you can't decide something in an hour, you need to break it down and have submeetings.
Notice how none of these involve dissemination of information which can be done much more quickly and efficiently via email. If you want to have a meeting for all those people that learn much better from lecture style engagements, fine, just leave me off the invite list and email me the slides and/or report.
The government has no business restricting speech, even if it weren't written into our consitution. To all those who cry "think of the children", let's just list a few glaring problems with that argument, any one of which would invalidate it:
There are more than children living in this country.
Since when are images of the human body and messages of love harmful? "Sin" is a harmful, destructive idea that should be abolished.
Children will find out about these things sooner or later. Parents: if you have a problem with this, take responsibility and teach them so they will be prepared. Don't have time? Don't have kids.
Children grow up. How are they going to handle things as adults if they've never encountered them before? You think there's some magic switch that happens when they turn 18? Sure, you shouldn't just bombard them from the get go, but cutting them off completely will be worse in the long run.
I recently watched the "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" episode on sex/virginity and it's really obvious but needs to be restated: ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION DOESN'T FUCKING WORK. Get a clue and get a grip: sex is not bad, and people (including children) should not be punished for being curious or having sexual impulses. Factual, scientific, rational education is the answer.
Of course, it's not like in the old days everyone planned ahead and knew where they were and where they were going at all times. My family was big on planning routes, always having maps, and knowing how to read them. This is clearly not the case for many people I have met. I still think technology isn't helping.
Hah! You really think that's the case? The average intelligence of the human species hasn't changed over the last couple of thousand years; the major difference is that now we hear about every "dumb person". It used to be that local news never spread very far, or worse, you never even knew something bad happened because someone disappeared and was never heard from again. If you went hiking in the mountains alone and no one else came across you when you had an accident, you would probably be labeled a missing person permanently instead of being rescued.
Some of us technology is a big boon for (radios, pulse oximeters, GPS's, etc), but there has been and will always be people who abuse the gifts of science and civilization. Should we exclude them from help or care? If you say yes to the last question, let me ask you this: how do you tell the difference between the incompetent and the merely unfortunate? Especially when time is a factor? This is why emergency rooms don't ask for proof of insurance before treating victims.
This is not a new problem. In the area I live, there are plenty of mountains that, while looking outwardly benign, kill a number of people (experienced or not) each year. Because of their proximity to a number of major cities, relatively short hikes to the summit (day trips), and extremely changeable weather (70 F and sunny to zero visibility, freezing temperatures, and gale-force winds in an hour), lots of inexperienced hikers get way in over their heads.
This describes so many wilderness areas. Granted, some have more potential to be dangerous than others, but I think that the improvement of human tools (aka technology) has lead some people to become more blase about wilderness, when it is called that for a reason.
It's one thing if you take a fall due to dumb luck, it's another thing to get soaked, freezing, and lost due to, well, being dumb.
"Dumb luck" is more common than you think. Sure, these stories about "stupid" people get trumpeted when they happen, but they really aren't that common (take it from someone who is on a SAR team). We just remember them better. Sort of like tech support that thinks all users are dumb (because that's all they ever deal with) and cops who think everyone is a suspect (because that's all they deal with). The truth is that an accident can happen to anyone, regardless of experience or preparation. Most of the time, the only thing preparation gets you is a better survival rate.
Yes, that's correct. Travel in a group, be prepared to carry out an injured member. Bring rope if you're climbing something, so you can retrieve injured members.
This is good general advice anyway. In fact, this is precisely what we tell people in our mountaineering safety course (I am a member of a SAR group).
So your $300/hr rental makes sense. But we can see by this how quickly the costs can quickly escalate to thousands of dollars per hour.
I'm a member of a volunteer search and rescue unit, and I can tell you second hand from the mouth of a National Guard pilot who flew us in a Chinook that it costs roughly $11k/hour. Of course, that's for a Chinook that can carry 30 troops. Where does this money come from? Your taxes of course, but not in the way most people think of. You see, most pilots have to spend a certain number of hours in the air every month, doubly so for military pilots. Normally this would just be simulated training missions, but when a call comes out to fly 25 searchers (plus gear) into the mountains, that definitely counts for training hours. In case you don't think this is applicable to military ops, just consider where the marines train to be prepared for Afghanistan.
To all those who tagged this article "dontdostupidstuff", for what definition of stupid are you talking about? Do you mean "stupid stuff" like shoot your mouth off online? Or how about the "stupid stuff" of being a member of a political party that is later rounded up and harrassed? How about being a member of *any* group (non-religious, sexual, intellectual, ethnic . . . ) that is later legislated to be "dangerous" or "stupid", or is just plain discriminated against?
The fact of the matter remains that until human society is tolerant enough to accept people for being innocuously different (where "innocuous" means "not harmful to others"), then privacy will still be necessary. In other words, privacy will be necessary for the foreseeable future. "dontdostupidstuff" indeed.
Publish details about the bug as soon as you find it; publish an exploit as soon as possible. If every discoverer of security flaws did this, software devs would learn very quickly to have second thoughts about releasing unchecked code. I say that as a software dev.
Seriously, you think you're smarter than everyone else? That you're the only one who discovered a flaw? Puh-lease. The Chinese government alone is probably throwing more manpower at finding flaws in US software than there are developers in the US. By releasing the info, you're doing the world a favor. If the vendor doesn't fix it, the customers will move to something better. End of problem.
So many people, including my wife, said they just didn't get it. I must really be in the minority, because I thought that it had a similar "wow" factor as "The Matrix", only with plot instead of special effects.
I'm with you on this one, although what cinched it for me (besides the well done plot) was the music and the subplot of Cobb and Mal's relationship (movies in a similar vein which I love: "Memento", "The Fountain", "Chasing Amy", "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", "Moulin Rouge"). I am kind of scratching my head at all the people that say it's such a mindbender. Sure, it leaves you with interesting questions, but it's not like it's "Primer" or a David Lynch film.
Granted, it wasn't a perfect movie, and it was probably too long, but I really think it had an innovative depth that hasn't been seen in movies in a long time.
I'll second that: we need more movies like this (and "Primer"). Given the accolades this movie is getting, I have high hopes we might see more on the horizon. I'm especially looking forward to "The End of Eternity".
Whether the reality we, as an audience, left him in was "real" or not is completely immaterial. Home != reality, necessarily; he ended up where he needed to be.
I would say he ended up where he wanted to be, which, given how hard it is to find true happiness in life, is no mean feat. Was Saito doing him a favor, either by helping Cobb get home in reality or possibly incepting the idea that Cobb would get home? Or was Mal still alive and trying to bring Cobb home to reality? The movie was pretty straightforward to me, but it does leave a lot of questions unanswered. Interesting article on some of the possibilities: "Inception" ending theories.
Interestingly, humble but smart people would end up in the same situation : they know that arrogant and power-hungry people are there and want power for the sake of their ego. I don't know if Linus is humble or arrogant, but he gave up power a long time ago when he put his OS under an open-source licence. He has never hidden the fact that he was a "benevolent dictator" (some even say the expression comes from his second surname : Benedict). If Linus is a bottleneck and slows down kernel development, there will be a fork. Right now, as much as people say he is a problem, he is still the only solution available.
I firmly believe that Linus is in the "humble but smart" camp. In the time I spent doing kernel work and on LKML, he was nothing if gregarious and insightful. Sure, he would call people idiots, but he did that to everyone, with a smirk, and generally only when they deserved it. These people that claim Linus is some Machiavellian Bill Gates or Steve Jobs clone don't know WTF they are talking about. They probably had some hare-brained idea that they posted to LKML and someone (not necessarily Linus) told them it was stupid and why it was stupid, but all they heard was the part that bruised their fragile little feelings.
What is good about open-source is that you can say to power-hungry people "Want to be the boss of a team ? Well go find a team that will respect your work !".
This is the second part most of the haters don't get, and why I firmly believe Linus is still doing a good job: people still listen to Linus and track his repo. If he was truly the asshole people make him out to be, people would stop working with him
He seems to function well enough, but do not pretend he is perfect.
He may not be perfect, but he is by far the best "leader" (whether project or corporate) that I've *ever* seen. He may be insulting, but he does it to everyone to scare off the timid and to make people reconsider their ideas. He is extremely technically competent and humble, two traits which are invaluable in a technical manager. Something you may want to read: Linux Kernel Management Style.
As for taking ideas and giving them to "favored" developers: 1) at least he admits when he is wrong and 2) why do you think those developers are favored? Ideas are a dime a dozen; implementing them well (and in a way that fits in with the Linux kernel) is the hard part.
Possibly "I should..." statements are more appropriate.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! This is what we open sourcers have been saying for *years*. To those who kneejerkily say "I don't have the time" or "I don't have the skills", well, sorry. You can pay someone else (ala Microsoft or Apple), or pay a consultant to mod Linux and other open source software to your needs. Either way, you're paying your time or your money; TANSTAAFL.
No, they don't. Brother offers drivers for Linux on i386. Much as I love my Brother multifunction laser, I couldn't switch my print server to an NSLUG because of Brother's proprietary closed source i386 only drivers.
And yes, Brother explicitly offers drivers for Linux.
No, they don't. They offer drivers for Linux on i386. Much as I love my Brother multifunction laser, I couldn't switch my print server to an NSLUG because of Brother's proprietary closed source i386 only drivers.
Right off the bat I can tell you this entire possibility is being posited by someone who never spent a day in uniform. The waistband is the worst possible place for this, from a practical perspective.
Well then I'm sure they'll hear about it real quick. I'm willing to bet, though, that the reason they chose the waist is that measuring BP is easier there; commercially available HRMs go across the chest and don't do BP. But I'm willing to bet it's fairly easy to relocate the sensor, if only they can get readings (say, the upper arm? I'm no doctor). Don't be such a naysayer; this kind of thing could save lives. It sounds like it's still in development anyway, not like all soldiers are going to be required to wear them tomorrow.
1) Who says they can't change it to be a removable system?
2) See 1)
3) Which is why they could have an extension tube.
4) Again, technology will improve; either "injection" will become possible without being "stuck with a needle" or development of implantable devices that only have to be refilled periodically will happen, or possibly both!
"not possible", "stupid", "won't ever work". That's all I seem to hear from you. Things don't get accomplished with that kind of mindset. It may not be perfect, it may still be in development, but you can be sure that if it really *is* a stupid idea, it will never survive field use. The military is one place where the "end user" doesn't put up with bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of people are bitching about C++ here; whether it's sour grapes over its success, a lack of understanding of the language, a lack of discipline to work in such a low level language, or honest criticisms, one thing has to be remembered: C++ was created to solve problems because its creator thought he could make a better language. One of my favorite ways to compare languages is What Languages Fix. It's a good, short read, but I'll spoil you and let you know that C++ was created to fix the problem of C being too low level. This implies many things, not the least of which is that Stroustrup wanted to leverage C's popularity, and of course that limited his options when designing C++. You'll also notice in that essay that Java was created to fix the problem of C++ being a kludge. And of course, C# was created for no other reason than Microsoft doesn't control Java ;)
This article sounds like more FUD, probably from some Apple paid astroturf shill. I'm still a big fan of "Fragmentation? More like Fragmentawesome", an article from a developer with experience developing Android software and a decent sized userbase. If a freaking *game* works that well on a variety of Android devices without any tweaking whatsoever, I have to wonder how bad the programmers in the article are to have trouble with something as simple as twitter.
I'm all for buying as locally as possible, both for environmental and for political reasons. Environmentally, it usually does involve less gas burned (especially since I can ride my bicycle to a lot of the local shops). Politically, it means more of my money stays locally (local sales taxes, wages paid to local employees, etc), and I have more control over my local politicians than I do those in some other state or country.
All this being said, there are many things I cannot buy in town; and I hate driving just to shop (which I also hate). Plus it's also more efficient to batch my purchases with others on a UPS or FedEx big rig than for me and four of my closest friends to go on a buying spree in a car.
This whole article does reek of brick and mortars (who usually run the Chamber's of Commerce) whining about the inevitable downsizing that is a secondary effect of a highly connected (both information and shipping wise) planet.
So in the summary they mention that if it is shipped more than 50km it negates the argument. I know, I know, I should RTFA. But I have to ask: did they take into account people who order things online because they can't buy those things down the street? In my small town (approx 30k residents), we lack a lot of things. When Mervyn's closed here, all we had left for clothing stores were the local fashion botiques, K-Mart and Wal-Mart. Don't even get me started on places to buy computer equipment or things for other hobbies (we've got Staples for computer supplies, and they don't seem to understand the meaning of "will this work with Linux?").
I hate shopping at brick and mortars. Nine times out of ten, I know exactly what I want. I don't want to have to talk to someone who's trying to sell me a warranty, nor deal with someone who says "we're out of stock for (hardware that works with Linux), but we have this great (windows only piece of shit)!". My actions are better for the environment, because the shipping companies will naturally try to batch more packages into less shipments to increase profits, instead of me and everyone else in my town driving 90 minutes to buy something. Even if you carpool with five people per car and stuff the car to the gills with things you buy, you still won't beat a UPS van full of packages. And that's assuming they used the smaller vans on the highways instead of the big rigs I've seen. Plus, my commute to work is 4 miles; 15 minutes by car, 18 by bicycle. So overall, I would say that small towns are better for the environment.
I don't know; why does the IEEE endorse software patents?
Slightly off-topic:
I haven't posted this question to the Netflix folks yet, but I can't believe no one has asked for it. If you are a Netflix person, please take this as a minor request from a customer who just wants to see you do better.
Million dollar prizes for nifty relational search algorithms are neat and all, but how about one simple thing that shouldn't cost more than two weeks developer time and would be a really nice feature: be able to sort a queue, specifically, be able to sort based on date released. Other sorting factors could be useful, but date released would be the best, especially for those of us MST3K fans for whom the series isn't numbered on the DVDs . . .
Yes, yes, yes! How many times are we going to have to go through people too lazy to write up better documentation, who only later realize that they have to explain it, and sometimes re-explain it to multiple people, wasting both their and others' time?
You missed one: email. I mean, seriously, why don't people get that interrupting everyone's day just so you can ramble on while pretty pictures fly from the overhead is a waste of everyone's time? There's a reason I fall asleep during meetings: lack of intellectual stimulation. Just email me the slides and I'll read them at my own convenience in 5 minutes while staying awake and absorbing more information. Not all the information is in the slides? Then write a report and email it to me! How hard is this people?
There are three things I demand from a meeting:
Notice how none of these involve dissemination of information which can be done much more quickly and efficiently via email. If you want to have a meeting for all those people that learn much better from lecture style engagements, fine, just leave me off the invite list and email me the slides and/or report.
The government has no business restricting speech, even if it weren't written into our consitution. To all those who cry "think of the children", let's just list a few glaring problems with that argument, any one of which would invalidate it:
I recently watched the "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" episode on sex/virginity and it's really obvious but needs to be restated: ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION DOESN'T FUCKING WORK. Get a clue and get a grip: sex is not bad, and people (including children) should not be punished for being curious or having sexual impulses. Factual, scientific, rational education is the answer.
Hah! You really think that's the case? The average intelligence of the human species hasn't changed over the last couple of thousand years; the major difference is that now we hear about every "dumb person". It used to be that local news never spread very far, or worse, you never even knew something bad happened because someone disappeared and was never heard from again. If you went hiking in the mountains alone and no one else came across you when you had an accident, you would probably be labeled a missing person permanently instead of being rescued.
Some of us technology is a big boon for (radios, pulse oximeters, GPS's, etc), but there has been and will always be people who abuse the gifts of science and civilization. Should we exclude them from help or care? If you say yes to the last question, let me ask you this: how do you tell the difference between the incompetent and the merely unfortunate? Especially when time is a factor? This is why emergency rooms don't ask for proof of insurance before treating victims.
This describes so many wilderness areas. Granted, some have more potential to be dangerous than others, but I think that the improvement of human tools (aka technology) has lead some people to become more blase about wilderness, when it is called that for a reason.
"Dumb luck" is more common than you think. Sure, these stories about "stupid" people get trumpeted when they happen, but they really aren't that common (take it from someone who is on a SAR team). We just remember them better. Sort of like tech support that thinks all users are dumb (because that's all they ever deal with) and cops who think everyone is a suspect (because that's all they deal with). The truth is that an accident can happen to anyone, regardless of experience or preparation. Most of the time, the only thing preparation gets you is a better survival rate.
This is good general advice anyway. In fact, this is precisely what we tell people in our mountaineering safety course (I am a member of a SAR group).
I'm a member of a volunteer search and rescue unit, and I can tell you second hand from the mouth of a National Guard pilot who flew us in a Chinook that it costs roughly $11k/hour. Of course, that's for a Chinook that can carry 30 troops. Where does this money come from? Your taxes of course, but not in the way most people think of. You see, most pilots have to spend a certain number of hours in the air every month, doubly so for military pilots. Normally this would just be simulated training missions, but when a call comes out to fly 25 searchers (plus gear) into the mountains, that definitely counts for training hours. In case you don't think this is applicable to military ops, just consider where the marines train to be prepared for Afghanistan.
To all those who tagged this article "dontdostupidstuff", for what definition of stupid are you talking about? Do you mean "stupid stuff" like shoot your mouth off online? Or how about the "stupid stuff" of being a member of a political party that is later rounded up and harrassed? How about being a member of *any* group (non-religious, sexual, intellectual, ethnic . . . ) that is later legislated to be "dangerous" or "stupid", or is just plain discriminated against?
The fact of the matter remains that until human society is tolerant enough to accept people for being innocuously different (where "innocuous" means "not harmful to others"), then privacy will still be necessary. In other words, privacy will be necessary for the foreseeable future. "dontdostupidstuff" indeed.
Publish details about the bug as soon as you find it; publish an exploit as soon as possible. If every discoverer of security flaws did this, software devs would learn very quickly to have second thoughts about releasing unchecked code. I say that as a software dev.
Seriously, you think you're smarter than everyone else? That you're the only one who discovered a flaw? Puh-lease. The Chinese government alone is probably throwing more manpower at finding flaws in US software than there are developers in the US. By releasing the info, you're doing the world a favor. If the vendor doesn't fix it, the customers will move to something better. End of problem.
I'm with you on this one, although what cinched it for me (besides the well done plot) was the music and the subplot of Cobb and Mal's relationship (movies in a similar vein which I love: "Memento", "The Fountain", "Chasing Amy", "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", "Moulin Rouge"). I am kind of scratching my head at all the people that say it's such a mindbender. Sure, it leaves you with interesting questions, but it's not like it's "Primer" or a David Lynch film.
I'll second that: we need more movies like this (and "Primer"). Given the accolades this movie is getting, I have high hopes we might see more on the horizon. I'm especially looking forward to "The End of Eternity".
I would say he ended up where he wanted to be, which, given how hard it is to find true happiness in life, is no mean feat. Was Saito doing him a favor, either by helping Cobb get home in reality or possibly incepting the idea that Cobb would get home? Or was Mal still alive and trying to bring Cobb home to reality? The movie was pretty straightforward to me, but it does leave a lot of questions unanswered. Interesting article on some of the possibilities: "Inception" ending theories.
I firmly believe that Linus is in the "humble but smart" camp. In the time I spent doing kernel work and on LKML, he was nothing if gregarious and insightful. Sure, he would call people idiots, but he did that to everyone, with a smirk, and generally only when they deserved it. These people that claim Linus is some Machiavellian Bill Gates or Steve Jobs clone don't know WTF they are talking about. They probably had some hare-brained idea that they posted to LKML and someone (not necessarily Linus) told them it was stupid and why it was stupid, but all they heard was the part that bruised their fragile little feelings.
This is the second part most of the haters don't get, and why I firmly believe Linus is still doing a good job: people still listen to Linus and track his repo. If he was truly the asshole people make him out to be, people would stop working with him
He may not be perfect, but he is by far the best "leader" (whether project or corporate) that I've *ever* seen. He may be insulting, but he does it to everyone to scare off the timid and to make people reconsider their ideas. He is extremely technically competent and humble, two traits which are invaluable in a technical manager. Something you may want to read: Linux Kernel Management Style.
As for taking ideas and giving them to "favored" developers: 1) at least he admits when he is wrong and 2) why do you think those developers are favored? Ideas are a dime a dozen; implementing them well (and in a way that fits in with the Linux kernel) is the hard part.
As compared to some other egos? At least Linus is humble for what he has achieved, and he earned it.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! This is what we open sourcers have been saying for *years*. To those who kneejerkily say "I don't have the time" or "I don't have the skills", well, sorry. You can pay someone else (ala Microsoft or Apple), or pay a consultant to mod Linux and other open source software to your needs. Either way, you're paying your time or your money; TANSTAAFL.
No, they don't. Brother offers drivers for Linux on i386. Much as I love my Brother multifunction laser, I couldn't switch my print server to an NSLUG because of Brother's proprietary closed source i386 only drivers.
No, they don't. They offer drivers for Linux on i386. Much as I love my Brother multifunction laser, I couldn't switch my print server to an NSLUG because of Brother's proprietary closed source i386 only drivers.
Well then I'm sure they'll hear about it real quick. I'm willing to bet, though, that the reason they chose the waist is that measuring BP is easier there; commercially available HRMs go across the chest and don't do BP. But I'm willing to bet it's fairly easy to relocate the sensor, if only they can get readings (say, the upper arm? I'm no doctor). Don't be such a naysayer; this kind of thing could save lives. It sounds like it's still in development anyway, not like all soldiers are going to be required to wear them tomorrow.
"not possible", "stupid", "won't ever work". That's all I seem to hear from you. Things don't get accomplished with that kind of mindset. It may not be perfect, it may still be in development, but you can be sure that if it really *is* a stupid idea, it will never survive field use. The military is one place where the "end user" doesn't put up with bullshit.