You do realize that the Nazi regime, for example, had "zero" impact on most Germans. Yet here we are in a world that claims they were one of the worst. Let me put it another way... if VAST majority of hte people lost their rights, there would be a revolt overnight. So that never happens.
A common first right to go is the ability of private citizens to be armed... Since a revolt by unarmed people against a well armed army is unlikely to be sucessful.
Instead, totalitarians strip away a FEW rights for SOME people at a SLOW pace. If you understand anything about totalitarianism you would understand that. In other words, a typical person will not lose many rights.Combined with properganda that any rights lost by most people were valueless in the first place.
a lot of people here come from cultural monocultures of western democracies with strong central governments
Most European countries are quite varied both culturally and politically. Qne European political party recently announced it's intention to seek independence through democratic methods.
this is not the border of canada and the us, across which most people here on slashdot are posting, perhaps the most historically peaceful border in the world.
Actually the equivalent in US terms would be something more along the lines of part of California becoming an independent state. Whilst the US is quite diverse in terms of culture and geography when it comes to politics things are very much of a "monoculture".
I agree 100%. Other countries do not understand why we tolerate publications by neonazis and other hate groups. We tolerate them because we firmly believe in free speech for everyone. Not just the "good" stuff. Not just what is politically correct.
In practice there are "taboo" subjects in the USA. Problem is that the least popular/PC speach is the easiest to censor, since very few people are likely to object. With any who do being easily classified as "evil" or protecting "evil".
Free speech laws aren't there to protect popular speech. By its very nature, it doesn't need protection.
N.B. popular can easily include "hate speach" and advocating all sorts of attrocities.
It's to protect the unpopular view.
especially where this unpopular view goes against the interests of powerful corporations or individuals.
Before anyone jumps on me for this, realize that not long ago in the deep south the popular view was that blacks were not really human. The unpopular view was that blacks deserved to be treated as equals.
Subsitute "Middle Easten Arabs" for "South US Blacks" and you could easily wind up with a contempoary example...
But right now, people don't get that with Linux. From minute one, it's filled with programs that are badly-labelled at best, and downright deceptive at worst. (honestly, who would, not being already familiar, click on a program called "NetHack" and EXPECT a dungeon crawl RPG to come up? It sounds like a cracking tool.)
Similarly they could think "powerpoint" is advice on how to plug appliances in. Or "outlook" is a set of desktop wallpaper. How does "excel" translate to "spreadsheet". Yet little fuss is made about Windows applications having cryptic names, strange acronyms even bad puns as their names...
Volunteers write software for themselves. They don't write for other people.
Companies producing commercial off the shelf software write to make something they can sell. The result may or may not be what a specific (potential) user wants. In the end there is only one way to be sure of getting software which matches your requirments that is to either write it yourself or contract someone to write something to fit your specification. This is potentially eaiser to do with open source software than with proprietaryt software. Because there isn't any need to pay loads of lawyers to ensure that all the licencing is in agreememnt. It does not tend to be easy, cheap, even possible with proprietary mas market software. Thus the mentality of either expecting some third party vendor to provide what is needed (or trying to bend requirments to fit what a vendor is prepared to offer).
We still have some of the same Linux desktop problems as we had five years ago, and people are still complaining about them.
At the same time Windows still has issues going back at lwast 8 years.
Linux has zealots, trolls, and fanboys.
As does Windows, indeed some of them appear to be paid full time for such a role.
Meanwhile, in August of 2005, Longhorn is due out, with hardware acceleration, vector-scaled widgets for resolution-independent resizing, a yet-to-be-revealed photorealistic user interface, and even the ability to add and remove RAM without rebooting.
What can be more "fanboyish" than raving about vapourware.
A Tunguska-sized event should take place only about every thousand years on average, and would be similar in severity to a major natural disaster in a local area, like a volcanic eruption (although it would most likely be a complete surprise, so evacuation might not be possible).
A volcanic eruption is likely to be considerably more violent than a meteorite impact. It's only very recently that it has been possible to predict volcanic eruptions. The inhabitants of Santorini probably had no warning at all before their island blew itself to bits.
A meteorite of not much larger mass could have caused far more widespread destruction. I could be off on my facts here, but I remember reading about a similar event taking place in Russia, devastating several many acres of open forest.
The Tunguska object didn't actually hit the ground, instead it exploded in the atmosphere. Something like about 20-30kT equivalent, IIRC.
In the decades since the collapse of the studio system, moviemaking costs have been driven higher and higher for bad reasons - namely, sky-high star salaries and the desperate emphasis on blockbusters.
What can also be measured is how the majors make fewer movies involving fewer actors, and take fewer risks. Monoculture, thy name is Hollywood.
Which is actually a great risk. Since the fewer movies they make the fewer need to be "turkeys" in order for it to hit the bottom line. If only "star" actors/producers/directors tend to be getting work these people can ask for more and more money.
The frantic, eggs-in-one-basket hunt for opening weekend success - think of all the screeching hype that has replaced honest movie reviewing - also grows from this narrow-minded approach.
Also how unhappy the industry is when their customers are able to use modern technology to spead "word of mouth" reviews a lot more rapidly.
Also unless explictily restricted on most versions of windows unpriv'd users have access to NUMEROUS critical files
Since a fair few Windows applications require all sorts of privs to actually work it's easy for people to end up between a rock (being vulnerable to malware) and a hard place (not being able to use the tool at all).
There's a difference, however, when a software company sits on its hands and fails to fix known holes, as (ahem) "that" company has on more occasions than I am prepared to take the time to count.
Or play "It's a feature, not a bug". Let alone consider unstructured "sphagetti" code a good thing (whilst describing the result as "integration".)
A Microsoft Exchange mail server stores users' mail in a binary database, in a proprietary format. A Postfix or Qmail mail server stores users' mail in text files in a simple directory structure. We can make a reasonable (and correct!) prediction that in case of failure, it is easier to recover the content of mail from a Postfix or Qmail system than from Exchange. And, indeed, this is borne out by the experience of administrators: a maildir can get into an inconsistent state, but it's much easier to recover it than to recover an Exchange mail database.
Or at an even more basic level the difference between the Windows Registry which has everything from the critical to the trivial in one big binary lump and the "unix method" of having text config files.
Interesting that you think that a problem. I'd think that having drivers slow down because they see that the road is monitored would be a positive thing.
If the result is that they jam on the brakes as soon as they see a camera then accelerate once they have passed one the result is probably more dangerous than if they were just speeding.
Here, Intel is pushing against China abandoning the proprietary software market.
With the claim that it would be damaging to China's domestic industry. When it's more likely that it's the proprietary software market, especially that involving foreign companies, which is damaging to China's domestic industry.
The cesium atom is just like the ruby from a ruby laser.
Except that active part of a ruby laser are chromium ions.
There are other components, including, according to the article, at least two OTHER laseres, presumably of the multi-atom variety. So that begs the question: Is it really an accomplishment when you use two lasers to make a WEAKER laser?
The monochromatic light from a laser is the result of an electron moving to a lower energy state. In order for this to happen it first needs to have been moved to a higher energy state. This is presumably what the other 2 lasers are doing.
* it is preinstalled
* it runs more software esp games
* there are more/cheaper admins for it
* it runs more consumer peripherals
To sum it all up, the only advantage Windows has over Linux is being better established.
Of this list only the 3rd item is especially relevent to corporate usage. Numbers 2 and 4 are only relevent at all to home users. As is to a large extent is the first one.
'Imperial.' And that's quite apposite when you consider that practically noone except the Americans are using it nowadays, don't you think?
The system used in the US is similar to Imperial, but not quite the same. However the US hasn't quite got the hang of being an Imperial power even with over a century of practice. (You'd think that would be long enough to get over the shock of beating Spain...)
AFAIK beer is now sold in metric pints, that is exactly half a liter. It was invented because everyone realised pints would never fall out of use, and it has the added bonus of being a slightly larger beer..
Only compared with the American pint, which is 400 odd ml. The Imperial pint is 568ml. Though the term "liter" could refer to just about anything, since it isn't either a metric or an SI unit.
Okay, try it. Try author = Williiam Smith. LOC lists 25 authors by that name. How do you want to put those in order so people can distinguish one William Smith from another William Smith?
What's to stop one or more of these authors also having been published as "Bill Smith". Or maybe the the one you want was only ever known to his publishers as "Bill".
As well, if an 18 yr old can't drive well enough to be safe, we don't let them drive either. If a 16 yr old thinks it's ok to shoot someone because they did it in a game, then a) don't let them play games, b) don't let them have guns, or c) all of the above.
There's also d): "Place them in some sort of custody to protect members of the public." Since the risk here is just as much to innocent people minding their own business.
Actually, storing the shells longer is probably beneficial because they will dry, though perhaps you want wet shells so that the liquid water trapped in the shells will undergo a phase change as you burn the shells, which results in a great deal of energy being available due to the expansion of the water.
The water boiling dosn't release any energy. In order to get the water to boil a lot of energy went into the water. Both to raise it to boiling point and to change it from a liquid to a gas.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that the Nazi regime, for example, had "zero" impact on most Germans. Yet here we are in a world that claims they were one of the worst. Let me put it another way... if VAST majority of hte people lost their rights, there would be a revolt overnight. So that never happens.
A common first right to go is the ability of private citizens to be armed... Since a revolt by unarmed people against a well armed army is unlikely to be sucessful.
Instead, totalitarians strip away a FEW rights for SOME people at a SLOW pace. If you understand anything about totalitarianism you would understand that. In other words, a typical person will not lose many rights.Combined with properganda that any rights lost by most people were valueless in the first place.
a lot of people here come from cultural monocultures of western democracies with strong central governments
Most European countries are quite varied both culturally and politically. Qne European political party recently announced it's intention to seek independence through democratic methods.
this is not the border of canada and the us, across which most people here on slashdot are posting, perhaps the most historically peaceful border in the world.
Actually the equivalent in US terms would be something more along the lines of part of California becoming an independent state. Whilst the US is quite diverse in terms of culture and geography when it comes to politics things are very much of a "monoculture".
I agree 100%. Other countries do not understand why we tolerate publications by neonazis and other hate groups. We tolerate them because we firmly believe in free speech for everyone. Not just the "good" stuff. Not just what is politically correct.
In practice there are "taboo" subjects in the USA. Problem is that the least popular/PC speach is the easiest to censor, since very few people are likely to object. With any who do being easily classified as "evil" or protecting "evil".
Free speech laws aren't there to protect popular speech. By its very nature, it doesn't need protection.
N.B. popular can easily include "hate speach" and advocating all sorts of attrocities.
It's to protect the unpopular view.
especially where this unpopular view goes against the interests of powerful corporations or individuals.
Before anyone jumps on me for this, realize that not long ago in the deep south the popular view was that blacks were not really human. The unpopular view was that blacks deserved to be treated as equals.
Subsitute "Middle Easten Arabs" for "South US Blacks" and you could easily wind up with a contempoary example...
But right now, people don't get that with Linux. From minute one, it's filled with programs that are badly-labelled at best, and downright deceptive at worst. (honestly, who would, not being already familiar, click on a program called "NetHack" and EXPECT a dungeon crawl RPG to come up? It sounds like a cracking tool.)
Similarly they could think "powerpoint" is advice on how to plug appliances in. Or "outlook" is a set of desktop wallpaper. How does "excel" translate to "spreadsheet".
Yet little fuss is made about Windows applications having cryptic names, strange acronyms even bad puns as their names...
If you have a Linux build that works for you, and that's all you want, then great. Have fun.
The same applies to Windows. The difference is that in the Linux situation if it dosn't do what you want it to do then you can do something about it.
Volunteers write software for themselves. They don't write for other people.
Companies producing commercial off the shelf software write to make something they can sell. The result may or may not be what a specific (potential) user wants.
In the end there is only one way to be sure of getting software which matches your requirments that is to either write it yourself or contract someone to write something to fit your specification. This is potentially eaiser to do with open source software than with proprietaryt software. Because there isn't any need to pay loads of lawyers to ensure that all the licencing is in agreememnt.
It does not tend to be easy, cheap, even possible with proprietary mas market software. Thus the mentality of either expecting some third party vendor to provide what is needed (or trying to bend requirments to fit what a vendor is prepared to offer).
We still have some of the same Linux desktop problems as we had five years ago, and people are still complaining about them.
At the same time Windows still has issues going back at lwast 8 years.
Linux has zealots, trolls, and fanboys.
As does Windows, indeed some of them appear to be paid full time for such a role.
Meanwhile, in August of 2005, Longhorn is due out, with hardware acceleration, vector-scaled widgets for resolution-independent resizing, a yet-to-be-revealed photorealistic user interface, and even the ability to add and remove RAM without rebooting.
What can be more "fanboyish" than raving about vapourware.
A Tunguska-sized event should take place only about every thousand years on average, and would be similar in severity to a major natural disaster in a local area, like a volcanic eruption (although it would most likely be a complete surprise, so evacuation might not be possible).
A volcanic eruption is likely to be considerably more violent than a meteorite impact. It's only very recently that it has been possible to predict volcanic eruptions. The inhabitants of Santorini probably had no warning at all before their island blew itself to bits.
A meteorite of not much larger mass could have caused far more widespread destruction. I could be off on my facts here, but I remember reading about a similar event taking place in Russia, devastating several many acres of open forest.
The Tunguska object didn't actually hit the ground, instead it exploded in the atmosphere. Something like about 20-30kT equivalent, IIRC.
In the decades since the collapse of the studio system, moviemaking costs have been driven higher and higher for bad reasons - namely, sky-high star salaries and the desperate emphasis on blockbusters.
What can also be measured is how the majors make fewer movies involving fewer actors, and take fewer risks. Monoculture, thy name is Hollywood.
Which is actually a great risk. Since the fewer movies they make the fewer need to be "turkeys" in order for it to hit the bottom line. If only "star" actors/producers/directors tend to be getting work these people can ask for more and more money.
The frantic, eggs-in-one-basket hunt for opening weekend success - think of all the screeching hype that has replaced honest movie reviewing - also grows from this narrow-minded approach.
Also how unhappy the industry is when their customers are able to use modern technology to spead "word of mouth" reviews a lot more rapidly.
The Ukraine is WEAK!
So weak they can toss keyboards over 40 metres... Maybe computer destruction should be made an Olympic sport.
Also unless explictily restricted on most versions of windows unpriv'd users have access to NUMEROUS critical files
Since a fair few Windows applications require all sorts of privs to actually work it's easy for people to end up between a rock (being vulnerable to malware) and a hard place (not being able to use the tool at all).
There's a difference, however, when a software company sits on its hands and fails to fix known holes, as (ahem) "that" company has on more occasions than I am prepared to take the time to count.
Or play "It's a feature, not a bug". Let alone consider unstructured "sphagetti" code a good thing (whilst describing the result as "integration".)
A Microsoft Exchange mail server stores users' mail in a binary database, in a proprietary format. A Postfix or Qmail mail server stores users' mail in text files in a simple directory structure. We can make a reasonable (and correct!) prediction that in case of failure, it is easier to recover the content of mail from a Postfix or Qmail system than from Exchange. And, indeed, this is borne out by the experience of administrators: a maildir can get into an inconsistent state, but it's much easier to recover it than to recover an Exchange mail database.
Or at an even more basic level the difference between the Windows Registry which has everything from the critical to the trivial in one big binary lump and the "unix method" of having text config files.
Interesting that you think that a problem. I'd think that having drivers slow down because they see that the road is monitored would be a positive thing.
If the result is that they jam on the brakes as soon as they see a camera then accelerate once they have passed one the result is probably more dangerous than if they were just speeding.
Here, Intel is pushing against China abandoning the proprietary software market.
With the claim that it would be damaging to China's domestic industry. When it's more likely that it's the proprietary software market, especially that involving foreign companies, which is damaging to China's domestic industry.
The cesium atom is just like the ruby from a ruby laser.
Except that active part of a ruby laser are chromium ions.
There are other components, including, according to the article, at least two OTHER laseres, presumably of the multi-atom variety. So that begs the question: Is it really an accomplishment when you use two lasers to make a WEAKER laser?
The monochromatic light from a laser is the result of an electron moving to a lower energy state. In order for this to happen it first needs to have been moved to a higher energy state. This is presumably what the other 2 lasers are doing.
What does Windows really offer over Linux?
* it is preinstalled
* it runs more software esp games
* there are more/cheaper admins for it
* it runs more consumer peripherals
To sum it all up, the only advantage Windows has over Linux is being better established.
Of this list only the 3rd item is especially relevent to corporate usage. Numbers 2 and 4 are only relevent at all to home users. As is to a large extent is the first one.
'Imperial.' And that's quite apposite when you consider that practically noone except the Americans are using it nowadays, don't you think?
The system used in the US is similar to Imperial, but not quite the same. However the US hasn't quite got the hang of being an Imperial power even with over a century of practice. (You'd think that would be long enough to get over the shock of beating Spain...)
AFAIK beer is now sold in metric pints, that is exactly half a liter. It was invented because everyone realised pints would never fall out of use, and it has the added bonus of being a slightly larger beer..
Only compared with the American pint, which is 400 odd ml. The Imperial pint is 568ml. Though the term "liter" could refer to just about anything, since it isn't either a metric or an SI unit.
Okay, try it. Try author = Williiam Smith. LOC lists 25 authors by that name. How do you want to put those in order so people can distinguish one William Smith from another William Smith?
What's to stop one or more of these authors also having been published as "Bill Smith". Or maybe the the one you want was only ever known to his publishers as "Bill".
Shelving by author is fine, barely, for fiction, where a lot people tend to read every book by a particular author.
A couple of cases where it falls down are were you have books with multiple authors or books which are related written by different authors.
As well, if an 18 yr old can't drive well enough to be safe, we don't let them drive either. If a 16 yr old thinks it's ok to shoot someone because they did it in a game, then a) don't let them play games, b) don't let them have guns, or c) all of the above.
There's also d): "Place them in some sort of custody to protect members of the public." Since the risk here is just as much to innocent people minding their own business.
This is partly why there is an increasing interest in converting methane from dump sites into liquid natural gas or other types of convertible energy
Why liquify it? Petro-methane is usually transported as a gas. Just feed it into the existing distribution system...
Actually, storing the shells longer is probably beneficial because they will dry, though perhaps you want wet shells so that the liquid water trapped in the shells will undergo a phase change as you burn the shells, which results in a great deal of energy being available due to the expansion of the water.
The water boiling dosn't release any energy. In order to get the water to boil a lot of energy went into the water. Both to raise it to boiling point and to change it from a liquid to a gas.