I live way outside the US and do not really know what is going on there, but thought that there was something called PBC which filled that role. The current administration likes controlling all news sources (I suppose they all do) and may well be denigrating the organisation, but when I was visitinf the US 10 years ago, it had a good reputation. The negative example is Italy. Berlusconi is a sort of Italian Rupert Murdoch. He owns the biggest TV company there and is now - as head of government - subverting the state TV company.
When the UN asked Iraq to disarm, Iraq disarmed. Then Iraq got invaded anyway.
I was wondering at the time why the N Koreans were being so belligerent and thought that it was total stupidity. Now it certainly does not look like that - they had already decided that Iraq was going to be attacked no matter what and so they raised the stakes as high as they could by screaming WE HAVE NUKES at the top of their voices. This essentially means that S Korea is being held hostage to make sure the US does nothing rash.
The problem is, I think they are bluffing. Their claim to have nukes was made solely to make the US keep it's distance. Of course, they will try and develop them soon. This is collateral damage from the Iraq war. Iran may well have learnt the same lesson, they are now more interested in nukes than ever.
I can't imagine that comment was meant very seriously, and where it got it's 'insightful' from I cannot imagine.
As to Israel, they are in the West Bank as an occupying power and are simultaneously trying to 'colonise' it. This is an unpleasant policy which is (in Sharon's case, deliberately) asking for trouble. Sharon came to power in the wake of Barak's failure and the unrest generated by his walk on the Temple Mount. Since he came to power, the Israeli military has tended to attack something whenever Palestinian militancy looked like dying down. If peace broke out, Israel would not need him so peace has to be avoided.
All this is very off-topic and also is not at all comparable with the way the Nazis behaved, more like how the Germans behaved in what they had previously taken from Poland in the years leading up to WW1.
So why does the EU feel the need to maintain this sort of technology independently of the US? I suppose it is *never* a bad idea to be independent, if you can afford it. There are also sound reasons based on recent history which indicate that total reliance on another country is a dangerous course:
Back in the 80's, West Germany started buying Gas (Methane I think, not Benzine) from the Soviet Union. Reagan was appalled. US Govt sources started claiming that the pipelines were being built using slave-labour from the Gulags, and the US started imposing trade sanctions on certain related essential products needed by the Germans and their suppliers. One of the side-effects of this was to make the Europeans push Airbus Industries that much harder. The pipeline was built anyway. This US Govt. sees itself as the successor to the Reagan administration so Iraq did not need to be a direct cause of this decision, the mere ideological similarity would enough to set the alarm bells ringing.
Well, it takes over 90 minutes to drive right around Berlin on the Autobahn, assuming no traffic jams. Munich does not have a ring-road, but is far smaller. Hamburg is 50% larger than M but around half the size of B.
Now I see where you are -.ee did not originally ring a bell. Going off-topic here and sort of cross-posting, was this accurate? Not the -ac posting of course:-)
There is a form of Chicken Plague (sorry, don't know the real english name) currently causing havoc in Holland, it has also spread to the border areas of Germany.
Apparently humans can also get it, although the effects are pretty mild. To Humans.
Various forms of Influenza are also alleged to originate with Chickens (in China). Body temperature seems to be an important factor, but I have not seen a http://www.bushorchicken.com site so far so would suspect that the birds are not that closely related to us.
IANAB (Biologist) but that seems just as likely as the 'SARS is from Mars, Aids is from Venus theory'.
SARS has pretty good resistance, it can exist outside of the human body for 3 or 4 days if the temperature is in the right band (which does not explain Toronto). A virus like this one would have to survive around 70 years at below freezing and then be able to cause havoc at 'normal' temperatures. A virus that powerful would either be pretty unstoppable anyway, or we would have adapted to it as in the Common Cold. Apart from that, why would a virus want to hide in a glacier anyway?
Firstly, it turns out those figures of mine are slightly wrong. The Communists and Social Democrats had 17.1% and 20.7% of the seats respectively and the DNVP + Nazis had 8.9% + 33.6%. Now to the rest:
Actually, it were the Communists (I think they merged with Social Democrats) who formed the government with NSDAP.
Either my history-book is telling enormous whoppers on that front, or both assertions are without foundation.
Some time later, when the Reichstag burned down, Hitler accused Communists for setting it on fire and got rid of them. That is accurate.
As for reasons why the Communists went in the same boat with NSDAP, Viktor Suvorov speculates that Stalin ordered the Communists to help Hitler gain power (so that there would be someone to liberate Europe from...). Or maybe the Communists were just stupid. Or something else.
Where do you get this from? I had never heard of Viktor Suvorov, but he seems to have been born in Russia in 1947 and to have defected to the west in 1978. One of the google links I followed indicated that a 'legend he propagates' (that the Red Army was totally unprepared for war when Hitler attacked) is fiction (my information was that the Red Army was prepared but Stalin was not and delayed giving the order to start fighting for too long). Unless all I know about this era is wrong, the German Communists never cooperated with Hitler.
There was a strike by Berlin Tram Drivers in 1932 which the Communists set up and the Nazis backed, but that got the Nazis nowhere so they abandoned that experiment.
Very interesting - I had been looking at the 2 elections preceding that one, my reasoning being that the Nazis were already in power by then and that the elections were no longer free. The first link of yours is pretty explicit in that case.
The figures I have are based on the number of seats each party had in the Reichstag - not the votes. My percent figures are actually higher than yours in each case - the Nazis had 44.5 % of the seats with (your links say) 43.9 % of the vote.
Yes - I should have looked one election further, but I am still not sure that the 1933 election should be considered valid when the press had been muzzled and political opponents were routinely being beaten up (the ministers responsible for the Police were Nazis).
Not really. No party had a majority, governments kept collapsing for that reason and the economy was totally up the Swannee. The President (powers pretty much symbolic, but he could ask a party to try and form a government) thought he could work with Hitler.
With the economy in that mess, some of the other parties also thought that they could, and even went along with emergency legislation to kick the Communists (16.4 %) and the Social Democrats (19.9 %) out.
Now the extreme right had the majority. Game over.
this gets claimed regularly here (Slashdot), it is not true.
I just tried to put the results up here, but the Slashdot Lameness Filter killed every attempt, tables are not accepted and an unordered list contained too many spaces.
In the critical election, the Nazis got 32.2 %, down from 37.8 % (a loss of around 2 Million votes). Another extreme right party rose from 6.1 % to 8.6 %. Forget the.sig on this one, those facts are accurate.
My impression (partially garnered from Michael Moore's 'stupid white men', a biased source) is that the recounting was stopped. either by court-order or by Al Gore's request - can't remember which.
Society in Russia has been conditioned to the response that anything not explicitly allowed is forbidden. Try travelling between northern russia and any of the baltic states - you'll soon see this as a fact.
The movement-restrictions between these areas were initiated by the EU, not the Russians. The Baltic states have been lined up for EU membership, and a part of the rules there is that the outside borders have to be 'secure' against 'economic migrants'. This is pretty mild on the Swiss borders or the Norway/Sweden border, but a lot less so in this case.
As to the rest of your post, a friend of mine is currently travelling the world and she was also there (Russia) last summer. She would be able to comment on your assertions, I can not.
IBM used this strategy for decades. btw., what 'lofty principles' was M$ based on?
yup, but the US and USSR were forced into a partnership by Hitler and Tojo (Pearl Harbor), no parallels there.
yup. That 'petty wars' also sounds a bit like the Iraq war, but that is irrelevant here.
IBM suffered that fate in the late 1980s. They were reduced to bringing Lou Gerster in from outside (not really an option for the USA or USSR) to get going again. All large (and many smaller ones) companies run that risk. The US could well be going that way now. M$'s business-plan is based on growth. That is getting increasingly different and they might have to cut their losses and try to hold what they have.
But your original suggestion was that SCO is acting as a pawn for M$. More likely is that SCO screwed this up themselves and M$ saw some advantages for them in getting surrepticiously (sp?) involved.
Unix versions has a learning-curve which is quite steep at the bottom. If you have no reason to get involved, most people simply do not bother. That is not a value-judgement, I am entirely self-taught in linux/unix and it really is a different world.
In my previous job, I had a couple of people ahead of me in the learning-curve and that got me going. Now I have to do it myself.
The 50-year-old programmer will want more money. Not so much a problem for us as it is for the company in question. Correct. Will not 'work for food'.
The 50-year-old programmer will probably want to retire soon (as has been mentioned), meaning your pool of candidates is increasingly younger - and less likely to have any mainframe skills. That seems not to be the case where I am, but several of the older ones are not exactly interested in working more than a minimum
snip . ..I've read a statistic that in 15 years, 25% of the COBOL programmers in the world will be retired or dead. The two are not equivalent, but anyone above 50 will have retired in 15 years so that will be broadly correct
The 50-year-old programmer isn't usually interested in innovation and tends to shun such things as this "web crap" - they just want to clock in their time and go home. In some cases this is fine, but in others it's a big issue. Unwillingness to learn (new) skills has little to do with age. I know people that applies to, I know people where that could not be further from the truth
Again, the answer to the problem today is "hire the 50-year-old programmer" but ten years from now it may be "where are all the programmers?" or "do we dare hire this 60-year-old programmer?". Outsourcing these guys to India may be seen in the same light as sweatshops for Nike - sure it sucks but can you find Americans willing to do the work for the money? Just out of interest, how many Indians can do this job well? Some people I know have just been replaced by a team in India so I will probably be getting some feedback on that one soon.
I started of programming them in Cobol, Fortran and Assembler and then gravitated to the systems-side of things. I first took over a site back in the late 80's (with around 10 years of experience back then) which tells you my age.
It is a lot of work, keeping on top of developments but it is possible.
The mainframe I work on does not run under unix, it runs under a proprietary OS which originally predates unix by at least a decade. The only thing it has in common with unix is that it uses a command-line interface.
NFS, AFS, Apache, X11, sendmail/postfix, ssh/rsh have no counterparts on this mainframe - if we need something like that then we interface to a linux/NT machine. Samba does have an equivalent, but it looks totally different. The machine can act as a Telnet server, if you allow that. The normal connection software is via software that emulates their old terminals, several companies sell different emulators.
Some of your TCP/IP knowledge could be of use, but that is all. You obviously have no idea how the thing works or what it can do (just as I have very little idea of kernel internals, for example) and an employer would see that immediately.
I worked on these beasts for almost 20 years before being confronted with linux. I can write primitive bash and perl scripts, and configure+administer a server. This makes me the only person in the group who can and makes me a 'linux expert' (!), they are that different.
That 'problem' is part of my medium-term job security - it is getting very hard to acquire the necessary skills. The other aspect is that the number of Mainframes is steadily diminishing, as are the numbers of people who can work them. Up until around 2000, my impression was that there were more jobs than people. With the slowdown (recession?) that has set in since, this is no longer the case.
At the moment, good Cobol programmers are out of work or working for peanuts. It only makes sense to learn the language if there is a good chance that this will change. If the company you work for offers you the chance, they think that they will need it so consider going for it. If not . . .
I work on non-IBM mainframes, the discs are from EMC. They offer the same service and have done so for a few years now. It is not rocket-science, the disc cabinet has a modem which they dial into every couple of days. With that and mirrored cabinets - both with Raid-5 - no problem.
The fun one was when a cabinet died completely with some sort of power failure which no-one could explain and was apparently impossible. Well, with mirrored cabinets, the only symptom was a major slowdown when we re-established mirroring that evening.
I thought at first you were joking, but found a couple of links from back in 2001 where the Esther appeared in their roadmap beyond the Nehemiah. Nehemiah was then planned for Q4 of 2001, and Esther H2 of 2002.
Reminds me a bit of the slippage with the 2.2 and 2.4 kernels.
Getting more serious now - and wandering off-topic - real or (even better) imagined experts can be bought in by either side. They will then be expected to testify according to who paid them.
There was that recent case before a NYC court where relatives of 9/11 victims were suing a collection of absent 'defendants' for compensation. One of those defendants was Saddam Hussein (another was Osama bin Laden, there were more). A couple of points on that judgement:
What 'expert' claimed that Saddam had anything whatsoever to do with 9/11? The previous Iraqi government was secular and as such, even worse than the infidels for religous nuts like bin Laden
By the time the judgement came out, he was probably dead anyway. If any money ever comes out of this, the Iraqis will be coming up with it. That contradicts *all* stated and implied aims of that war.
That was a court in the US. I have seen courts in Europe reaching verdicts that defied belief. German courts were in denial for years when it came to Asbestos, they were still denying compensation even after it became illegal to use the stuff in buildings. 'Experts' paid by large companies were responsible for that.
If you have a large amount of money available, then you have a better chance with the courts, we all know that.For the likes of us, the rule is: keep well away.
My 'main machine' (this one) is a C3/866 with lots of DDR memory, I built it back at the start of last year. It takes very serious load to make it feel slow, and it dissipates very little heat. I think you could get away with passive cooling with an 800, but not with mine.
I suppose something running at that speed was state-of-the-art back around 2001. I have no need or plans to upgrade for at least a year, maybe longer.
Do you think a judge would be able to tell the difference? - Well your honor, the searching is only done sequentially in attempt to weasel around this patent, and urls are the names which are resolved by DNS. - don't like weasels. guilty.
I must however confess, the second half of that previous post was not meant all too seriously.
Slashdot Mirror
I live way outside the US and do not really know what is going on there, but thought that there was something called PBC which filled that role.
The current administration likes controlling all news sources (I suppose they all do) and may well be denigrating the organisation, but when I was visitinf the US 10 years ago, it had a good reputation.
The negative example is Italy. Berlusconi is a sort of Italian Rupert Murdoch. He owns the biggest TV company there and is now - as head of government - subverting the state TV company.
When the UN asked Iraq to disarm, Iraq disarmed. Then Iraq got invaded anyway.
I was wondering at the time why the N Koreans were being so belligerent and thought that it was total stupidity. Now it certainly does not look like that - they had already decided that Iraq was going to be attacked no matter what and so they raised the stakes as high as they could by screaming WE HAVE NUKES at the top of their voices. This essentially means that S Korea is being held hostage to make sure the US does nothing rash.
The problem is, I think they are bluffing. Their claim to have nukes was made solely to make the US keep it's distance. Of course, they will try and develop them soon.
This is collateral damage from the Iraq war. Iran may well have learnt the same lesson, they are now more interested in nukes than ever.
I can't imagine that comment was meant very seriously, and where it got it's 'insightful' from I cannot imagine.
As to Israel, they are in the West Bank as an occupying power and are simultaneously trying to 'colonise' it. This is an unpleasant policy which is (in Sharon's case, deliberately) asking for trouble.
Sharon came to power in the wake of Barak's failure and the unrest generated by his walk on the Temple Mount. Since he came to power, the Israeli military has tended to attack something whenever Palestinian militancy looked like dying down. If peace broke out, Israel would not need him so peace has to be avoided.
All this is very off-topic and also is not at all comparable with the way the Nazis behaved, more like how the Germans behaved in what they had previously taken from Poland in the years leading up to WW1.
So why does the EU feel the need to maintain this sort of technology independently of the US? I suppose it is *never* a bad idea to be independent, if you can afford it. There are also sound reasons based on recent history which indicate that total reliance on another country is a dangerous course:
Back in the 80's, West Germany started buying Gas (Methane I think, not Benzine) from the Soviet Union. Reagan was appalled. US Govt sources started claiming that the pipelines were being built using slave-labour from the Gulags, and the US started imposing trade sanctions on certain related essential products needed by the Germans and their suppliers. One of the side-effects of this was to make the Europeans push Airbus Industries that much harder. The pipeline was built anyway.
This US Govt. sees itself as the successor to the Reagan administration so Iraq did not need to be a direct cause of this decision, the mere ideological similarity would enough to set the alarm bells ringing.
Well, it takes over 90 minutes to drive right around Berlin on the Autobahn, assuming no traffic jams. Munich does not have a ring-road, but is far smaller. Hamburg is 50% larger than M but around half the size of B.
Now I see where you are - .ee did not originally ring a bell. Going off-topic here and sort of cross-posting, was this accurate? Not the -ac posting of course :-)
There is a form of Chicken Plague (sorry, don't know the real english name) currently causing havoc in Holland, it has also spread to the border areas of Germany.
Apparently humans can also get it, although the effects are pretty mild. To Humans.
Various forms of Influenza are also alleged to originate with Chickens (in China). Body temperature seems to be an important factor, but I have not seen a http://www.bushorchicken.com site so far so would suspect that the birds are not that closely related to us.
IANAB (Biologist) but that seems just as likely as the 'SARS is from Mars, Aids is from Venus theory'.
SARS has pretty good resistance, it can exist outside of the human body for 3 or 4 days if the temperature is in the right band (which does not explain Toronto). A virus like this one would have to survive around 70 years at below freezing and then be able to cause havoc at 'normal' temperatures. A virus that powerful would either be pretty unstoppable anyway, or we would have adapted to it as in the Common Cold. Apart from that, why would a virus want to hide in a glacier anyway?
'Al Gore shoots himself in foot' shock
So what's new?
Firstly, it turns out those figures of mine are slightly wrong. The Communists and Social Democrats had 17.1% and 20.7% of the seats respectively and the DNVP + Nazis had 8.9% + 33.6%. Now to the rest:
Actually, it were the Communists (I think they merged with Social Democrats) who formed the government with NSDAP.
Either my history-book is telling enormous whoppers on that front, or both assertions are without foundation.
Some time later, when the Reichstag burned down, Hitler accused Communists for setting it on fire and got rid of them.
That is accurate.
As for reasons why the Communists went in the same boat with NSDAP, Viktor Suvorov speculates that Stalin ordered the Communists to help Hitler gain power (so that there would be someone to liberate Europe from...). Or maybe the Communists were just stupid. Or something else.
Where do you get this from? I had never heard of Viktor Suvorov, but he seems to have been born in Russia in 1947 and to have defected to the west in 1978. One of the google links I followed indicated that a 'legend he propagates' (that the Red Army was totally unprepared for war when Hitler attacked) is fiction (my information was that the Red Army was prepared but Stalin was not and delayed giving the order to start fighting for too long). Unless all I know about this era is wrong, the German Communists never cooperated with Hitler.
There was a strike by Berlin Tram Drivers in 1932 which the Communists set up and the Nazis backed, but that got the Nazis nowhere so they abandoned that experiment.
Very interesting - I had been looking at the 2 elections preceding that one, my reasoning being that the Nazis were already in power by then and that the elections were no longer free. The first link of yours is pretty explicit in that case.
The figures I have are based on the number of seats each party had in the Reichstag - not the votes. My percent figures are actually higher than yours in each case - the Nazis had 44.5 % of the seats with (your links say) 43.9 % of the vote.
Yes - I should have looked one election further, but I am still not sure that the 1933 election should be considered valid when the press had been muzzled and political opponents were routinely being beaten up (the ministers responsible for the Police were Nazis).
Not really. No party had a majority, governments kept collapsing for that reason and the economy was totally up the Swannee.
The President (powers pretty much symbolic, but he could ask a party to try and form a government) thought he could work with Hitler.
With the economy in that mess, some of the other parties also thought that they could, and even went along with emergency legislation to kick the Communists (16.4 %) and the Social Democrats (19.9 %) out.
Now the extreme right had the majority. Game over.
Troll.
.sig on this one, those facts are accurate.
this gets claimed regularly here (Slashdot), it is not true.
I just tried to put the results up here, but the Slashdot Lameness Filter killed every attempt, tables are not accepted and an unordered list contained too many spaces.
In the critical election, the Nazis got 32.2 %, down from 37.8 % (a loss of around 2 Million votes). Another extreme right party rose from 6.1 % to 8.6 %. Forget the
Are you sure about Florida?
My impression (partially garnered from Michael Moore's 'stupid white men', a biased source) is that the recounting was stopped. either by court-order or by Al Gore's request - can't remember which.
Society in Russia has been conditioned to the response that anything not explicitly allowed is forbidden. Try travelling between northern russia and any of the baltic states - you'll soon see this as a fact.
The movement-restrictions between these areas were initiated by the EU, not the Russians. The Baltic states have been lined up for EU membership, and a part of the rules there is that the outside borders have to be 'secure' against 'economic migrants'. This is pretty mild on the Swiss borders or the Norway/Sweden border, but a lot less so in this case.
As to the rest of your post, a friend of mine is currently travelling the world and she was also there (Russia) last summer. She would be able to comment on your assertions, I can not.
- maybe
- IBM used this strategy for decades. btw., what 'lofty principles' was M$ based on?
- yup, but the US and USSR were forced into a partnership by Hitler and Tojo (Pearl Harbor), no parallels there.
- yup. That 'petty wars' also sounds a bit like the Iraq war, but that is irrelevant here.
- IBM suffered that fate in the late 1980s. They were reduced to bringing Lou Gerster in from outside (not really an option for the USA or USSR) to get going again. All large (and many smaller ones) companies run that risk. The US could well be going that way now.
But your original suggestion was that SCO is acting as a pawn for M$. More likely is that SCO screwed this up themselves and M$ saw some advantages for them in getting surrepticiously (sp?) involved.M$'s business-plan is based on growth. That is getting increasingly different and they might have to cut their losses and try to hold what they have.
Unix versions has a learning-curve which is quite steep at the bottom. If you have no reason to get involved, most people simply do not bother. That is not a value-judgement, I am entirely self-taught in linux/unix and it really is a different world.
In my previous job, I had a couple of people ahead of me in the learning-curve and that got me going. Now I have to do it myself.
- The 50-year-old programmer will want more money. Not so much a problem for us as it is for the company in question.
- The 50-year-old programmer will probably want to retire soon (as has been mentioned), meaning your pool of candidates is increasingly younger - and less likely to have any mainframe skills.
- snip . .
.I've read a statistic that in 15 years, 25% of the COBOL programmers in the world will be retired or dead. - The 50-year-old programmer isn't usually interested in innovation and tends to shun such things as this "web crap" - they just want to clock in their time and go home. In some cases this is fine, but in others it's a big issue.
Again, the answer to the problem today is "hire the 50-year-old programmer" but ten years from now it may be "where are all the programmers?" or "do we dare hire this 60-year-old programmer?". Outsourcing these guys to India may be seen in the same light as sweatshops for Nike - sure it sucks but can you find Americans willing to do the work for the money?Correct. Will not 'work for food'.
That seems not to be the case where I am, but several of the older ones are not exactly interested in working more than a minimum
The two are not equivalent, but anyone above 50 will have retired in 15 years so that will be broadly correct
Unwillingness to learn (new) skills has little to do with age. I know people that applies to, I know people where that could not be further from the truth
Just out of interest, how many Indians can do this job well? Some people I know have just been replaced by a team in India so I will probably be getting some feedback on that one soon.
I consider myself to be a mainframe SysAdmin :-)
I started of programming them in Cobol, Fortran and Assembler and then gravitated to the systems-side of things. I first took over a site back in the late 80's (with around 10 years of experience back then) which tells you my age.
It is a lot of work, keeping on top of developments but it is possible.
The mainframe I work on does not run under unix, it runs under a proprietary OS which originally predates unix by at least a decade. The only thing it has in common with unix is that it uses a command-line interface.
NFS, AFS, Apache, X11, sendmail/postfix, ssh/rsh have no counterparts on this mainframe - if we need something like that then we interface to a linux/NT machine.
Samba does have an equivalent, but it looks totally different.
The machine can act as a Telnet server, if you allow that.
The normal connection software is via software that emulates their old terminals, several companies sell different emulators.
Some of your TCP/IP knowledge could be of use, but that is all. You obviously have no idea how the thing works or what it can do (just as I have very little idea of kernel internals, for example) and an employer would see that immediately.
I worked on these beasts for almost 20 years before being confronted with linux. I can write primitive bash and perl scripts, and configure+administer a server. This makes me the only person in the group who can and makes me a 'linux expert' (!), they are that different.
That 'problem' is part of my medium-term job security - it is getting very hard to acquire the necessary skills.
The other aspect is that the number of Mainframes is steadily diminishing, as are the numbers of people who can work them. Up until around 2000, my impression was that there were more jobs than people. With the slowdown (recession?) that has set in since, this is no longer the case.
At the moment, good Cobol programmers are out of work or working for peanuts. It only makes sense to learn the language if there is a good chance that this will change. If the company you work for offers you the chance, they think that they will need it so consider going for it. If not . . .
I work on non-IBM mainframes, the discs are from EMC. They offer the same service and have done so for a few years now. It is not rocket-science, the disc cabinet has a modem which they dial into every couple of days. With that and mirrored cabinets - both with Raid-5 - no problem.
The fun one was when a cabinet died completely with some sort of power failure which no-one could explain and was apparently impossible. Well, with mirrored cabinets, the only symptom was a major slowdown when we re-established mirroring that evening.
I thought at first you were joking, but found a couple of links from back in 2001 where the Esther appeared in their roadmap beyond the Nehemiah. Nehemiah was then planned for Q4 of 2001, and Esther H2 of 2002.
Reminds me a bit of the slippage with the 2.2 and 2.4 kernels.
There was that recent case before a NYC court where relatives of 9/11 victims were suing a collection of absent 'defendants' for compensation. One of those defendants was Saddam Hussein (another was Osama bin Laden, there were more). A couple of points on that judgement:
- What 'expert' claimed that Saddam had anything whatsoever to do with 9/11? The previous Iraqi government was secular and as such, even worse than the infidels for religous nuts like bin Laden
- By the time the judgement came out, he was probably dead anyway. If any money ever comes out of this, the Iraqis will be coming up with it. That contradicts *all* stated and implied aims of that war.
That was a court in the US. I have seen courts in Europe reaching verdicts that defied belief. German courts were in denial for years when it came to Asbestos, they were still denying compensation even after it became illegal to use the stuff in buildings. 'Experts' paid by large companies were responsible for that.If you have a large amount of money available, then you have a better chance with the courts, we all know that.For the likes of us, the rule is: keep well away.
My 'main machine' (this one) is a C3/866 with lots of DDR memory, I built it back at the start of last year. It takes very serious load to make it feel slow, and it dissipates very little heat. I think you could get away with passive cooling with an 800, but not with mine.
I suppose something running at that speed was state-of-the-art back around 2001. I have no need or plans to upgrade for at least a year, maybe longer.
obvious disclaimer - I do not game.
Do you think a judge would be able to tell the difference?
- Well your honor, the searching is only done sequentially in attempt to weasel around this patent, and urls are the names which are resolved by DNS.
- don't like weasels. guilty.
I must however confess, the second half of that previous post was not meant all too seriously.