I would just like to say that I am so glad we went to war in Iraq when all the other problems in the world are so distant. I mean, none of it is Bush's responsibility, of course -- of course -- but I'm just glad things in Iraq have turned out so peachy keen. Insane fascist dictators in southeast Asia? Hey, no problem. Now that we're done in Iraq AND Afghanistan, we can take care of this tinpot dictator post haste!
Where all da Marines at? Maybe after we take out Kim we can move on to problems that aren't manufactured or risk plunging the nation into fascism and theocracy, and that actually HELP people! Nutbag liberal notion, helping people, I know. But hey, I have a good heart. What can I say.
Funny, I don't recall anybody characterizing the majority as tyrannical when it tried to enact the platform upon which it ran during the elections when that majority was the Democratic party.
So what? Have you looked? I just about guarantee you that you kind find Democrats being called tyranical by Limbaugh and his ilk back when they had solid majorities. That changes absolutely nothing: Limbaugh is still a liar, and the Republicans are still fascists.
I went the same route you did but switched from Linux to OS X once the latter hit 10.3. I got tired of the tinkering necessary to keep the machine at a point where it was actually usable. I have nothing for respect for the various Linux distros and the BSD community, but the need to screw with the innards is something that just failed to interest me after a while.
For me, Windows machines are nothing more than gaming boxes. If you want HL2, there's no other choice. But for real work and day-to-day use, I prefer OS X.
It seems that you are saying that your problems with Linux and OSS are mostly about the people in the community. How about ignoring them? Use the better product, and ignore the zealots. They don't really matter for your daily activities. Unless you are a developer on one of these projects it doesn't affect you, unless you choose to let it affect you.
The company I work at uses an absolute ton of OSS libraries and tools. They work quite well, the developers are (mostly) happy with them, and everyone is professional about it. We don't care about the zealots, and we don't have to. We have contributed patches to many of those products, and don't involve ourselves in fanboyism. We're just interested in getting the job done.
Point is: every group has zealots. There are as many Windows zealots as there are Linux zealots. (In fact now that I think about it I would imagine Windows has far more from a purely numerical standpoint simply because of their vastly larger user base. But that's just conjecture.) Remember the Amiga? Holy crap. Amiga users made Southern Baptists look like beacons of moderation. Did that mean the Amiga wasn't a great computer? Hell no. It was kick ass. Still remembered fondly.
Anyhoo. If the tool works better, use it. Screw the evangelicals. I'm an OS X user at work, but I actually switched back to Windows because our in-house (non-OSS) source control system only works on that platform, so it was too painful to develop on the Mac. I was having to Remote Desktop into my PC, and the lag was substantial enough that it affected my productivity. Right tool, right job, so Windows it is for coding, however much it sucks in comparison.:)
[Intelligent, coherent argument snipped..] And if you want to spend more than that, well, you have the entire rest of the current Apple lineup.
I agree.
But (and you knew that was coming, dincha) there are people out there who enjoy spending their time putting nitrox afterburners and onboard computers on '76 El Caminos. Some people enjoy taking less technically advanced machines and making them perform better than the original designers imagined.
Now, I personally don't do this, but I can see how someone could enjoy doing that with their time. Not my thing, but, ok.
Apple sells hardware.
KDE is a developer-first focus. They profit stricly on developer sales. Not hardware, sales, as Apple..
I'm not 100% certain, but I *think* Apple sells software, too. Stuff like OS X, iWork, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, iLife, WebObjects, Shake. From all evidence that I can see, that's software.
That's like saying that because a Corvette will do 160mph (or whatever) you can blame Chevrolet for your speeding tickets.
That would be interesting except that it is completely misapplied. I would be willing to bet that the higher the top speed of the car, the higher number of speeding tickets the drivers of those cars get as a group.
Similarly, as a group Perl coders produce code that is more difficult to maintain compared with coders of similar skill levels who use different languages. Given the same amount of time and skill given to a project, Perl code tends to be more obfuscated.
Perl is useful, and powerful, but you can't wholly blame individuals for fundamental characteristics of the language.
However, please remember that the zealots weren't all religious zealots, and many of the religous weren't even zealots.
I very much recognize that. I'm a Unitarian, but I named my youngest son after Benjamin Franklin. He was a Christian (and a scientist!) of great virtue whom I hold worthy of the greatest respect. Unfortunately his kind hold very little sway in the modern context; I sincerely hope that changes. Christianity is not my enemy. Zealous evangelism that seeks tyranny over mankind is.
No field is completely immune, and I think religion in general is getting a bit of a bad rap. Not many modern movements in religion (other than "Islam's bloody borders" and all that) are deadly, ofr example.
One that is based upon solid history. I personally believe that a large reason that we don't have internecine conflicts within this nation is because there is a systemic bias against it: the Constitution. And now we have religious theocrats who by all evidence want to abolish it. Religion is frequently and demonstrably a dangerous thing, especially when it mixes with politics. Religion, I believe, is at its most noble when it is at its most distant from the political realm.
But some tools are inherently crappier than others. Perl, while not crappy, does lend itself to crappy code. The "there's more than one way to do it" philosophy that is so prevalent in that language makes life more difficult over time. This is a fundamental problem with Perl, not the coders.
That was in the era when, e.g., duels to restore "offended honor" were commonplace and often resulted in deaths for both.
To even attempt to brush under the carpet the untold millions who died as a part of religious zealotry, from the Crusades to the Inquisition, as merely "more barbaric times" is insulting and borders on being an outright lie. Millions died because religious zealots were too stupid and immoral to even contemplate the destructiveness and wickedness of their actions. That is a Truth you cannot hide, no matter how distasteful you may find it.
What's all this about Albert Einstein encouraging Roosevelt to develop the atomic bomb? Even if you argue this was solely for defense against Germany, a) America is the only country so far to have used atomic/nuclear weapons in war, and b) it was the "revolution in physics," as you said, that gave government scientists in both Germany and America the foundation to build atomic weapons.
But it was not competing scientific worldviews that was the underlying foundation of the conflict; it was fascism vs. secular liberalism. Science provided the tools, rightly or wrongly, which were used to fight the conflict, not the impetus.
The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been impossible without the physics developed at the beginning of the 20th century. Compare that, please, to the number of people killed in the Protestant reformation...which probably numbers in the thousands, but definitely not in the millions.
In a heartbeat. And do you really doubt that if the bomb had been available at the time that those who were pushing for the Crusades would not have used it?
Evangelical zeal is the enemy of science and good men everywhere, and it is energetically eschewed by scientists therefore. Religion finds reasons to justify murder and tyranny. Science, as a philosophy, tends to oppose such justifications.
Where do you think the word "Protestant" came from?
And how many people died as a direct result of the Protestant reformation? Compare, please, to the number of people who died as a part of the revolution in physics at the advent of quantum mechanics and general relativity.
Why do you care, and why should I? I try to be sympathetic to all the format wars -- Real v. WMV v. QuickTime, OpenOffice v. MS Office, etc. -- and pick the side that is best for the community, but honestly on this one I just do NOT see a reason to give a crap. MP3 and M4A do everything I want. I have yet to see reasons compelling enough to justify caring about this battle.
They "knew" that the cosmos was perfect and unchanging, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
The main difference being, of course, was once the evidence became irrefutable that such notions were incorrect, scientists changed the theories to fit the data. Religions have a tendency to kill people when challenged.
Great. More evidence for the fundamentalist Republicans to loudly ignore. "The universe isn't that old. God just put black holes in place to test our faith. Black holes are really a tool of Satan." They're in charge, though. Maybe they can change the definition of "black hole" to something more forgiving to creationism.
Have you READ any of the "Left Behind" series? I only *wish* there weren't people out there like that. Holy moly.
As a shareholder, I am pissed that Microsoft would take a position either way. This is a 50-50 nation right now, and why the hell would they do anything to potentially alienate half of their potential customers?
Because it's the right thing to do.
They never should have taken a public position one way or the other, and because they did, they lose one audience or another in the process. This is stupid corporate policy at best.
Taking a stand for justice and liberty is never stupid.
How does sexual-orientational diversity help a software company to produce better software?
For many, spending their profits towards increasing liberty, justice, and democracy in the world is the highest good those profits can achieve. Microsoft already has a huge R&D budget. Spending their cash in areas that improve society is a noble thing, worthy of great praise.
Companies, businesses etc. should not be involved in any political arena unless it's directly or indirectly involving of their business products, laws regarding their products (IP, etc.) and such.
And just why the hell not? What possible better use can profits be used for than increasing justice and freedom in the world?
Don't be a fool. The GLB community needs all the support it can get. I don't know if you've noticed it or not, but the United States is currently being overrun by religious zealots who hold gays in about the same regard as Adolf Hitler held the Jews, and use many of the same justifications for their hatred.
Oh, and BTW: Godwin's law has been suspended until further notice.
Yes, the support for the bill is to appease those very loud liberals who believe that corporations should be meddling in public policy.
Yeah, those crazy liberals who want a society based on equal justice for all, and where hate and intolerance are eschewed.
I actually gained more respect when MS stood up and said, "it's not our place, but we're still standing behind our hiring policys regardless of the law".
This is completely untrue. What possible use for profits is better than dedicating them to justice and freedom? If a company can do so, it should, without question, every time.
Slashdot Mirror
Where all da Marines at? Maybe after we take out Kim we can move on to problems that aren't manufactured or risk plunging the nation into fascism and theocracy, and that actually HELP people! Nutbag liberal notion, helping people, I know. But hey, I have a good heart. What can I say.
(I'm assuming you're either a P.C. blowhard, or a homo. See, wasn't that funny?)
No. Breaking out stereotypes is banal and easy. For something to be funny it needs to at least be moderately clever.
Funny, I don't recall anybody characterizing the majority as tyrannical when it tried to enact the platform upon which it ran during the elections when that majority was the Democratic party.
So what? Have you looked? I just about guarantee you that you kind find Democrats being called tyranical by Limbaugh and his ilk back when they had solid majorities. That changes absolutely nothing: Limbaugh is still a liar, and the Republicans are still fascists.
For me, Windows machines are nothing more than gaming boxes. If you want HL2, there's no other choice. But for real work and day-to-day use, I prefer OS X.
The company I work at uses an absolute ton of OSS libraries and tools. They work quite well, the developers are (mostly) happy with them, and everyone is professional about it. We don't care about the zealots, and we don't have to. We have contributed patches to many of those products, and don't involve ourselves in fanboyism. We're just interested in getting the job done. Point is: every group has zealots. There are as many Windows zealots as there are Linux zealots. (In fact now that I think about it I would imagine Windows has far more from a purely numerical standpoint simply because of their vastly larger user base. But that's just conjecture.) Remember the Amiga? Holy crap. Amiga users made Southern Baptists look like beacons of moderation. Did that mean the Amiga wasn't a great computer? Hell no. It was kick ass. Still remembered fondly.
Anyhoo. If the tool works better, use it. Screw the evangelicals. I'm an OS X user at work, but I actually switched back to Windows because our in-house (non-OSS) source control system only works on that platform, so it was too painful to develop on the Mac. I was having to Remote Desktop into my PC, and the lag was substantial enough that it affected my productivity. Right tool, right job, so Windows it is for coding, however much it sucks in comparison. :)
[Intelligent, coherent argument snipped..] And if you want to spend more than that, well, you have the entire rest of the current Apple lineup.
I agree.
But (and you knew that was coming, dincha) there are people out there who enjoy spending their time putting nitrox afterburners and onboard computers on '76 El Caminos. Some people enjoy taking less technically advanced machines and making them perform better than the original designers imagined.
Now, I personally don't do this, but I can see how someone could enjoy doing that with their time. Not my thing, but, ok.
Apple sells hardware. KDE is a developer-first focus. They profit stricly on developer sales. Not hardware, sales, as Apple ..
I'm not 100% certain, but I *think* Apple sells software, too. Stuff like OS X, iWork, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, iLife, WebObjects, Shake. From all evidence that I can see, that's software.
That's like saying that because a Corvette will do 160mph (or whatever) you can blame Chevrolet for your speeding tickets.
That would be interesting except that it is completely misapplied. I would be willing to bet that the higher the top speed of the car, the higher number of speeding tickets the drivers of those cars get as a group.
Similarly, as a group Perl coders produce code that is more difficult to maintain compared with coders of similar skill levels who use different languages. Given the same amount of time and skill given to a project, Perl code tends to be more obfuscated.
Perl is useful, and powerful, but you can't wholly blame individuals for fundamental characteristics of the language.
However, please remember that the zealots weren't all religious zealots, and many of the religous weren't even zealots.
I very much recognize that. I'm a Unitarian, but I named my youngest son after Benjamin Franklin. He was a Christian (and a scientist!) of great virtue whom I hold worthy of the greatest respect. Unfortunately his kind hold very little sway in the modern context; I sincerely hope that changes. Christianity is not my enemy. Zealous evangelism that seeks tyranny over mankind is.
No field is completely immune, and I think religion in general is getting a bit of a bad rap. Not many modern movements in religion (other than "Islam's bloody borders" and all that) are deadly, ofr example.
One that is based upon solid history. I personally believe that a large reason that we don't have internecine conflicts within this nation is because there is a systemic bias against it: the Constitution. And now we have religious theocrats who by all evidence want to abolish it. Religion is frequently and demonstrably a dangerous thing, especially when it mixes with politics. Religion, I believe, is at its most noble when it is at its most distant from the political realm.
But some tools are inherently crappier than others. Perl, while not crappy, does lend itself to crappy code. The "there's more than one way to do it" philosophy that is so prevalent in that language makes life more difficult over time. This is a fundamental problem with Perl, not the coders.
What's his name? That's awesome. I want to forward that to some people, but without a name they'll just think I wrote it.
BTW - Who was the 1 who voted against the Patriot Act?
Sen. Russ Feingold, D-WI.
Blah, blah, blah. That cliche is so tired it's not even remotely funny.
That was in the era when, e.g., duels to restore "offended honor" were commonplace and often resulted in deaths for both.
To even attempt to brush under the carpet the untold millions who died as a part of religious zealotry, from the Crusades to the Inquisition, as merely "more barbaric times" is insulting and borders on being an outright lie. Millions died because religious zealots were too stupid and immoral to even contemplate the destructiveness and wickedness of their actions. That is a Truth you cannot hide, no matter how distasteful you may find it.
What's all this about Albert Einstein encouraging Roosevelt to develop the atomic bomb? Even if you argue this was solely for defense against Germany, a) America is the only country so far to have used atomic /nuclear weapons in war, and b) it was the "revolution in physics," as you said, that gave government scientists in both Germany and America the foundation to build atomic weapons.
But it was not competing scientific worldviews that was the underlying foundation of the conflict; it was fascism vs. secular liberalism. Science provided the tools, rightly or wrongly, which were used to fight the conflict, not the impetus.
The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been impossible without the physics developed at the beginning of the 20th century. Compare that, please, to the number of people killed in the Protestant reformation...which probably numbers in the thousands, but definitely not in the millions.
In a heartbeat. And do you really doubt that if the bomb had been available at the time that those who were pushing for the Crusades would not have used it?
Evangelical zeal is the enemy of science and good men everywhere, and it is energetically eschewed by scientists therefore. Religion finds reasons to justify murder and tyranny. Science, as a philosophy, tends to oppose such justifications.
Funny, I thought it was politicians and militaries that made those decisions.
Where do you think the word "Protestant" came from?
And how many people died as a direct result of the Protestant reformation? Compare, please, to the number of people who died as a part of the revolution in physics at the advent of quantum mechanics and general relativity.
Why do you care, and why should I? I try to be sympathetic to all the format wars -- Real v. WMV v. QuickTime, OpenOffice v. MS Office, etc. -- and pick the side that is best for the community, but honestly on this one I just do NOT see a reason to give a crap. MP3 and M4A do everything I want. I have yet to see reasons compelling enough to justify caring about this battle.
They "knew" that the cosmos was perfect and unchanging, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
The main difference being, of course, was once the evidence became irrefutable that such notions were incorrect, scientists changed the theories to fit the data. Religions have a tendency to kill people when challenged.
Have you READ any of the "Left Behind" series? I only *wish* there weren't people out there like that. Holy moly.
Man, I wish that thing were available for OS X. That WOULD confuse the inmates.
As a shareholder, I am pissed that Microsoft would take a position either way. This is a 50-50 nation right now, and why the hell would they do anything to potentially alienate half of their potential customers?
Because it's the right thing to do.
They never should have taken a public position one way or the other, and because they did, they lose one audience or another in the process. This is stupid corporate policy at best.
Taking a stand for justice and liberty is never stupid.
How does sexual-orientational diversity help a software company to produce better software?
For many, spending their profits towards increasing liberty, justice, and democracy in the world is the highest good those profits can achieve. Microsoft already has a huge R&D budget. Spending their cash in areas that improve society is a noble thing, worthy of great praise.
Companies, businesses etc. should not be involved in any political arena unless it's directly or indirectly involving of their business products, laws regarding their products (IP, etc.) and such.
And just why the hell not? What possible better use can profits be used for than increasing justice and freedom in the world?
We don't exactly *need* Microsoft's support.
Don't be a fool. The GLB community needs all the support it can get. I don't know if you've noticed it or not, but the United States is currently being overrun by religious zealots who hold gays in about the same regard as Adolf Hitler held the Jews, and use many of the same justifications for their hatred.
Oh, and BTW: Godwin's law has been suspended until further notice.
No, I'm not kidding.
Yes, the support for the bill is to appease those very loud liberals who believe that corporations should be meddling in public policy.
Yeah, those crazy liberals who want a society based on equal justice for all, and where hate and intolerance are eschewed.
I actually gained more respect when MS stood up and said, "it's not our place, but we're still standing behind our hiring policys regardless of the law".
This is completely untrue. What possible use for profits is better than dedicating them to justice and freedom? If a company can do so, it should, without question, every time.