You seem to implying that we would all be bigots if the government wasn't carefully watching over our shoulder to make sure we met our quotas.
I think he's saying that without _laws_ to counteract discrimination, it would still be rampant. Regulations are just laws, after all.
Given the sheer amount of crazy that broke out amongst a non-trivial chunk of white America just because a black got guy elected, not to mention the ongoing laws against gay marriage (to pick but two examples), it's hard to argue otherwise.
Windows NT and OS/2 are more similar than Windows NT and VMS.
No they're not. At all. Indeed, you'd struggle to find many meaningful ways that OS/2 and NT are *similar* - even a cursory glance at their architectures show very different designs and capabilities (multiuser vs single user, just for starters).
NT supported OS/2 applications "out of the box".
And I can run Linux apps quite happily (and more comprehensively) on FreeBSD. That doesn't mean FreeBSD and Linux are 'similar'.
NT ran POSIX apps "out of the box", as well. Would you try and argue NT is similar to, say, Solaris ?
All the other distraction people like you like to go on about is irrelevant. Members were elected to the House of Reps. A large enough group of them aligned to form Government and decided Gillard was the leader.
It's amazing how when it's a "coalition" of Labor, The Greens and a few independents, it's some sort of illegitimate minority Government, but when it's The Coalition of Liberals, Nationals, Country Liberals, and whoever else, it's A-OK.
Australia has the Government it voted for. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm sure the Federal Police would be interested to hear about it.
I guess that's true. It's not like she was elected PM, after all - she only got there due to a particular back-stabbing independant.
She was elected exactly the same way every other PM was elected.
One thing the last few years of Australian news reporting has taught me, is that damn near the whole country has NFI how our political system works. Scary stuff.
It's not just a matter of work by the HR person, visas require approval. Even if you get approval, it usually takes months.
Some don't. As an Australian, I'm eligible (and have previously worked in America under) an E3 visa. An E3 is basically a rubber stamp, costs next to nothing to apply for, and is typically approved in a matter of weeks.
The US remains in the aftermath of a massive economic downturn due to a housing and credit bubble bursting, and the current administration's incompetent and often counter-productive attempts to deal with it. But if you actually look at US vs German economic growth over time, it isn't even close.
So it's reasonable to include the effects of the GFC on the USA but not, say, WW1 and WW2 on Germany ?
As Peter Schiff has said [slashdot.org], hiring someone in the United States is one of the most expensive and riskiest things a business owner can do.
When you're an employee in a country whose social support couldn't even be generously described as mediocre, getting fired because your boss didn't like the colour shoes you wore to work can be pretty catastrophic as well.
As someone who's arranged the correct visas and papers to work in foreign countries myself, I'm okay with someone asking me the same exact same question.
There is a substantial difference between asking that question as part of an interview, and asking it as part of a screening process to avoid an interview.
You talk about "dealing with the paperwork", but for some visas the paperwork is trivially simple and any random HR person could do it in half an hour. Since there's no significant burden on the employer, excluding people because of it is ridiculous.
Fellow Earthians is classic, utter nonsense. It's quasi-religous craziness. Just call people people. Say you want to improve the environment.
So the flowery language, then ? Nothing important ?
For substance. The Australian Greens desire to restrict free speech in the media is beyond the pail. It's totalitarian. It's the opposite of what the Pirate Party and Assange stand for.
Could you provider a pointer to their relevant policies about that ? There's a lot of philosophical overlap between the Greens, Assange and TPP.
There had to be some biological advantage to menopause - early humans had to be living beyond what we now consider mid-life in those 'early days' to see that advantage.
There doesn't need to be a specific advantage to menopause, there just needs to be no disadvantage.
The internet is quite different. The internet is made to be used by people all over the world.
The internet ? I thought we were talking about wifi access points ?
How are you supposed to know whose wifi is deliberately open and whose isn't?
You make a reasonable assumption. If you're being honest with yourself, it's rarely difficult to tell whether or not someone has setup their wifi point for open access.
Public areas (parks, etc) are usually clearly marked as such - it is pretty easy to tell the deifference between a park and someone's unfenced garden.
It's pretty east to tell which wifi hotspots are setup for "public use" as well - assuming you're being honest with yourself.
As an example, if you go for a coffee in "Bob's café" and you find an open access point called "bobs_wifi", are you to assume that this is intended to be used by the customers of the café, or should you assume that Bob lives above the café and this is his personal wifi that has been set up incorrectly? (And yes, it's pretty common for cafés to provide free wifi in the form of an open access point and not even bother to advertise the fact).
It would be _reasonable_ to assume it's only meant for customers. Just like it's _reasonable_ to assume those newspapers and magazines lying around are for customers and not random passers-by.
Another example: I have accidentally used someone's personal wifi in the past - it was an open access point that was broadcasting a pretty generic SSID (something like "BTOpenSpace"). BT provide internet connections to homes and businesses (with associated wifi kit), but they also provide public hotspots under a variety of names (BTOpenZone, BTFon and a few others). Without a good knowledge of all the hotspot providers and ISPs, it is impossible to know which ones are private and which are public without trusting that the ones that advertise themselves as public really are (as it turns out, the BTOpenSpace one was someone's home ADSL, but I didn't realise this until afterwards).
I've never seen an ISP-provided wifi kit that didn't uniquely identify itself somehow. Usually with a MAC address, or something other random-but-unique number in the SSID.
*Real* public hotspots, on the other hand nearly always have a completely generic name, often with "free" or "open" in it.
Like I said, it's rarely hard to tell the difference if you're being honest with yourself.
So sorry, since legitimate public hotspots are very common and there is no way to tell them apart from incorrectly configured private access points, I can't see how it can be considered a crime for someone to use a private hotspot that is advertising itself as being public.
Whoa there, champ. I didn't say it should be a crime, I applied your logic to the physical world.
This isn't like an obvious private garden not having fences, it's more like an unfenced garden with a bloody great sign outside it saying "please come in".
No, it's not. The lack of a "please stay out" sign is not the same as a "please come in" sign. Refer back to my original post.
On the other hand, I very much believe that it should _not_ be a crime to use an open network, because there is no reasonable way to know that it wasn't intended to be an open hotspot.
By your logic, it's reasonable to assume anyone without a fence and locked door is inviting me in for dinner.
I should have added in the post above, if you have any interest at all go and browse through the book "Living and Working in Switzerland" at your local bookstore or library. It's pretty much "the bible" for emigrating to Switzerland.
What's the difficulty level of emigrating to Switzerland?
If you're not a citizen of an EU nation, it's pretty standard stuff. You will (unless you're rich) need an employer to sponsor you for a residency and work permit (which will be tied to that specific job), and will need to spend (generally, there are some exemptions for certain nationalities) 10 years living there before being eligible to apply for citizenship (which is by no means a rubber-stamp affair - eg: have to demonstrate genuine integration into your local community and fluency in the local language and customs).
You are allowed to enter the country as a tourist to seek work (but obviously not commence employment). I'm not sure whether you need to leave and re-enter the country after you find a job like you do with some US Visas. Note that unless you're fluent in multiple languages including at least English and French or German, it will be quite difficult to find work unless you have specialist skills.
If you ARE an EU (or certain other countries, can't remember the list offhand) citizen - note that Switzerland is NOT a member of the EU - it's simple. You can get a residency permit without needing employer sponsorship, and while a work permit still needs to be applied for and is tied to a specific employer, it's essentially a rubber stamp (ie: it's easy to switch jobs) - most importantly you can begin working immediately (while your work permit is processed - can take months), whereas non-EU citizens must wait for their residency and work permits to be approved and issued before even entering the country.
Note that I'm using "residency" here in the "allowed to stay in the country for more than 90 days" sense, not the "last stage before citizenship" sense that the term is sometimes used for.
Swiss citizenship is NOT automatically conferred to locally-born children of non-citizens. They must also live there for 10 years (though it's calculated as accumulating at twice the normal rate for under-18s - so in real-time only 5).
I assume I'm going to need quite a bit asset-wise to do so (at least $1MM in assets).
Not really. If you're cash-rich you might be able to get a residency permit without a job and employer sponsorship. I imagine you'd need several million to qualify for that, however (these sorts of things are actually decided at a Canton - district - level rather than a federal level, so it can vary significantly depending on where you're trying to live).
Assuming you're just an average joe, so long as you have a job lined up, relocation costs wouldn't be exceptionally high. My wife and I probably only sank about $25k into our move (most of which, fortunately, was reimbursed by my employer) before local cashflow kicked in. With that said, we were EU citizens by virtue of my dual-citizenship (so I could get a credit card with a $20k limit from a local bank within only a month or so of arrival, renting was MUCH easier, etc) and moved with only ourselves and a few suitcases. Ie: we only had to cover flights, some furnished accommodation and basic living costs (food, transport, etc) for a few months, then a rental deposit on a more permanent place, before the local income became sufficient. We also didn't buy a car (and you don't really need one there unless you're living in the middle of nowhere). If you wanted to bring over a family, and/or move existing belongings, and/or have your first ~6 months worth of expenses on-hand as cash, then this figure would increase substantially (though probably still under $100k). If you wanted to buy a house fairly quickly (highly inadvisable no matter where you're moving between, IMHO) then you'd probably be wanting on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 of a million handy.
As the parent poster who is 29 and has travelled the world, yeah, I'm somewhat disheartened with my home country (US); I just haven't decided on a better place to move to yet (hopefully either somewhere in the EU or Australia/New Zealand).
Even as an Australian, I can't recommend Australia. Both major political parties are hell-bent on turning the country into America 2.0.
I've recently returned to Australia after ~5 years living abroad. Even though the direction the country was going appeared obvious when I left (thanks to a decade of right-wing Government), it was still disheartening to see just how much further down the path it gone.
My wife and I are aiming to move to Switzerland within 10 years. We spent nearly two living there during our ex-pat adventure and concluded it was one of the best places in the world.
In real life, it's nearly impossible to find anywhere that you can achieve a higher density with blades than you could with 1U rackmounts (even when you're only talking about using fractions of a rack).
There are plenty of other good reasons to buy blades, but density is rarely one of them. With that said, Blizzard are probably one of the few companies who could put in enough custom infrastructure to handle the power and cooling requirements of racks actually full of blades.
Because they're easier to manage, reduce complexity, require less infrastructure, are cheaper (once you've scaled past the break-even point, which depending on vendor can be up to an entire chassis full), have fewer points of failure, require less power and generate less heat per $METRIC and are exceptionally good for virtualisation.
Or to put it another way, pretty much everything you wrote up there is wrong. Outside of very specialist scenarios where you have the facilities in place to handle the density, you don't buy blades to save space, you buy them for all the other advantages they have over regular rackmount servers.
About the only reason to buy rackmount servers is one or more of: a) you only need a small number of them (thus making blades uneconomical), b) you have a need for lots of local disk, c) you have unusual physical IO requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
No it's not. There is no direct equivalent to root in Windows. The concept of a superuser simply doesn't exist in its security model.
This, kids, is why you should never underestimate the paranoid terror the average American lives with.
I think he's saying that without _laws_ to counteract discrimination, it would still be rampant. Regulations are just laws, after all.
Given the sheer amount of crazy that broke out amongst a non-trivial chunk of white America just because a black got guy elected, not to mention the ongoing laws against gay marriage (to pick but two examples), it's hard to argue otherwise.
No they're not. At all. Indeed, you'd struggle to find many meaningful ways that OS/2 and NT are *similar* - even a cursory glance at their architectures show very different designs and capabilities (multiuser vs single user, just for starters).
And I can run Linux apps quite happily (and more comprehensively) on FreeBSD. That doesn't mean FreeBSD and Linux are 'similar'.
NT ran POSIX apps "out of the box", as well. Would you try and argue NT is similar to, say, Solaris ?
Yes, really.
All the other distraction people like you like to go on about is irrelevant. Members were elected to the House of Reps. A large enough group of them aligned to form Government and decided Gillard was the leader.
It's amazing how when it's a "coalition" of Labor, The Greens and a few independents, it's some sort of illegitimate minority Government, but when it's The Coalition of Liberals, Nationals, Country Liberals, and whoever else, it's A-OK.
Australia has the Government it voted for. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm sure the Federal Police would be interested to hear about it.
She was elected exactly the same way every other PM was elected.
One thing the last few years of Australian news reporting has taught me, is that damn near the whole country has NFI how our political system works. Scary stuff.
Some don't. As an Australian, I'm eligible (and have previously worked in America under) an E3 visa. An E3 is basically a rubber stamp, costs next to nothing to apply for, and is typically approved in a matter of weeks.
So it's reasonable to include the effects of the GFC on the USA but not, say, WW1 and WW2 on Germany ?
When you're an employee in a country whose social support couldn't even be generously described as mediocre, getting fired because your boss didn't like the colour shoes you wore to work can be pretty catastrophic as well.
There is a substantial difference between asking that question as part of an interview, and asking it as part of a screening process to avoid an interview.
You talk about "dealing with the paperwork", but for some visas the paperwork is trivially simple and any random HR person could do it in half an hour. Since there's no significant burden on the employer, excluding people because of it is ridiculous.
So the flowery language, then ? Nothing important ?
Could you provider a pointer to their relevant policies about that ? There's a lot of philosophical overlap between the Greens, Assange and TPP.
Which part of it is bothering you ? The content, or the flowery writing style ?
Wow. It's been a while since someone made me feel that old. :)
From the Chinese perspective, a few billion to destroy local American industry and establish future dependence probably seems pretty cheap.
There doesn't need to be a specific advantage to menopause, there just needs to be no disadvantage.
The internet ? I thought we were talking about wifi access points ?
You make a reasonable assumption. If you're being honest with yourself, it's rarely difficult to tell whether or not someone has setup their wifi point for open access.
It's pretty east to tell which wifi hotspots are setup for "public use" as well - assuming you're being honest with yourself.
It would be _reasonable_ to assume it's only meant for customers. Just like it's _reasonable_ to assume those newspapers and magazines lying around are for customers and not random passers-by.
I've never seen an ISP-provided wifi kit that didn't uniquely identify itself somehow. Usually with a MAC address, or something other random-but-unique number in the SSID.
*Real* public hotspots, on the other hand nearly always have a completely generic name, often with "free" or "open" in it.
Like I said, it's rarely hard to tell the difference if you're being honest with yourself.
Whoa there, champ. I didn't say it should be a crime, I applied your logic to the physical world.
No, it's not. The lack of a "please stay out" sign is not the same as a "please come in" sign. Refer back to my original post.
By your logic, it's reasonable to assume anyone without a fence and locked door is inviting me in for dinner.
No worries.
I should have added in the post above, if you have any interest at all go and browse through the book "Living and Working in Switzerland" at your local bookstore or library. It's pretty much "the bible" for emigrating to Switzerland.
If you're not a citizen of an EU nation, it's pretty standard stuff. You will (unless you're rich) need an employer to sponsor you for a residency and work permit (which will be tied to that specific job), and will need to spend (generally, there are some exemptions for certain nationalities) 10 years living there before being eligible to apply for citizenship (which is by no means a rubber-stamp affair - eg: have to demonstrate genuine integration into your local community and fluency in the local language and customs).
You are allowed to enter the country as a tourist to seek work (but obviously not commence employment). I'm not sure whether you need to leave and re-enter the country after you find a job like you do with some US Visas. Note that unless you're fluent in multiple languages including at least English and French or German, it will be quite difficult to find work unless you have specialist skills.
If you ARE an EU (or certain other countries, can't remember the list offhand) citizen - note that Switzerland is NOT a member of the EU - it's simple. You can get a residency permit without needing employer sponsorship, and while a work permit still needs to be applied for and is tied to a specific employer, it's essentially a rubber stamp (ie: it's easy to switch jobs) - most importantly you can begin working immediately (while your work permit is processed - can take months), whereas non-EU citizens must wait for their residency and work permits to be approved and issued before even entering the country.
Note that I'm using "residency" here in the "allowed to stay in the country for more than 90 days" sense, not the "last stage before citizenship" sense that the term is sometimes used for.
Swiss citizenship is NOT automatically conferred to locally-born children of non-citizens. They must also live there for 10 years (though it's calculated as accumulating at twice the normal rate for under-18s - so in real-time only 5).
Not really. If you're cash-rich you might be able to get a residency permit without a job and employer sponsorship. I imagine you'd need several million to qualify for that, however (these sorts of things are actually decided at a Canton - district - level rather than a federal level, so it can vary significantly depending on where you're trying to live).
Assuming you're just an average joe, so long as you have a job lined up, relocation costs wouldn't be exceptionally high. My wife and I probably only sank about $25k into our move (most of which, fortunately, was reimbursed by my employer) before local cashflow kicked in. With that said, we were EU citizens by virtue of my dual-citizenship (so I could get a credit card with a $20k limit from a local bank within only a month or so of arrival, renting was MUCH easier, etc) and moved with only ourselves and a few suitcases. Ie: we only had to cover flights, some furnished accommodation and basic living costs (food, transport, etc) for a few months, then a rental deposit on a more permanent place, before the local income became sufficient. We also didn't buy a car (and you don't really need one there unless you're living in the middle of nowhere). If you wanted to bring over a family, and/or move existing belongings, and/or have your first ~6 months worth of expenses on-hand as cash, then this figure would increase substantially (though probably still under $100k). If you wanted to buy a house fairly quickly (highly inadvisable no matter where you're moving between, IMHO) then you'd probably be wanting on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 of a million handy.
Even as an Australian, I can't recommend Australia. Both major political parties are hell-bent on turning the country into America 2.0.
I've recently returned to Australia after ~5 years living abroad. Even though the direction the country was going appeared obvious when I left (thanks to a decade of right-wing Government), it was still disheartening to see just how much further down the path it gone.
My wife and I are aiming to move to Switzerland within 10 years. We spent nearly two living there during our ex-pat adventure and concluded it was one of the best places in the world.
Yet blades from major vendors are cheaper than their 1U servers. Your theory doesn't carry through to real-life.
Mostly only in the advertising blurb.
In real life, it's nearly impossible to find anywhere that you can achieve a higher density with blades than you could with 1U rackmounts (even when you're only talking about using fractions of a rack).
There are plenty of other good reasons to buy blades, but density is rarely one of them. With that said, Blizzard are probably one of the few companies who could put in enough custom infrastructure to handle the power and cooling requirements of racks actually full of blades.
VMware could handle hundreds of thousands of IOPS into a single host years ago. Pretty sure it's over a million now.
Outside of exceptionally unusual corner cases, if your storage system can handle it, VMware is not going to be a bottleneck.
Because they're easier to manage, reduce complexity, require less infrastructure, are cheaper (once you've scaled past the break-even point, which depending on vendor can be up to an entire chassis full), have fewer points of failure, require less power and generate less heat per $METRIC and are exceptionally good for virtualisation.
Or to put it another way, pretty much everything you wrote up there is wrong. Outside of very specialist scenarios where you have the facilities in place to handle the density, you don't buy blades to save space, you buy them for all the other advantages they have over regular rackmount servers.
About the only reason to buy rackmount servers is one or more of: a) you only need a small number of them (thus making blades uneconomical), b) you have a need for lots of local disk, c) you have unusual physical IO requirements.