I always tell my single friends that finding a spouse and marriage is more about being the right person than finding the right person.
Well, it's not entirely about 'being' the right person IMO. You are who you are, and that probably isn't going to change much, despite the old joke/observation to the contrary (*)
Being cynical, I don't disagree that people are unlikely to change, but I am still convinced that the secret to marital bliss is for each party to "be the right person" to the other. If you force yourself to change your nature and put your spouse first, and they do the same and put you first, I think you'll have a successful marriage. Hardly anybody's naturally selfless; it takes effort. The easiest way to have your needs met is to not withhold meeting your partner's needs until your needs are met.
I think if they had spent a little more time finding the right person, they wouldn't have to worry about being the right person.
It's true that some people are fundamentally incompatible, but every person has major flaws of one sort or another that living together will inevitably reveal. I've never heard of a perfect couple; even people who don't fight still have times when they disagree or don't get along. Every marriage of sufficient length encounters difficulty.
When I read blog entries like Yegge's I keep hoping to find good, solid criticism instead of a bunch of disjointed fallacies. "Agile" wasn't even defined, and when he talked about processes that do work, he specifically mentioned "lightweight". Well, guess what the main point of so-called "Agile" methodologies is? Being lightweight.
This entry seems to boil down to "Agile hasn't been scientifically proven to be superior, so it's not." That's not very good reasoning; in the absence of any process being scientifically proven to be superior, experience is the next best thing, and it seems pretty obvious that the central Agile themes of "don't do this too much" and "don't do that too much" are pretty good advice. (What constitutes "too much", according to what I've read, depends on your situation.)
I don't advocate a specific Agile methodology, but I do prefer lightweight processes, short time scales and "best practices", which seems to put me on the agile side of the fence. If there's something wrong with a specific agile methodology, or with all agile methodologies, I want to know about it so that I can avoid it.
The comment from Yegge's first blog entry about agile programming that I most hoped he would respond to said this: "What specific parts of the Agile Manifesto do you disagree with?"
And Mozilla made it clear that those sorts of modifications are fine, subject to review and approval. What's so hard about that?
Their review and approval process doesn't meet the DFSG, isn't fast enough to keep up with Debian (jinkies!) and doesn't cover older versions of the software that Debian has committed to supporting.
He said "gaming." what part of that word didn't you read?
What makes you think I didn't read it?
Have a couple free clues: some people (especially on slashdot) don't want to buy Windows with their computer. Some people (especially on slashdot) have access to existing or cheaper Windows licenses and don't want to pay for new ones.
In addition to this, it would be great if there were high-quality open source air traffic control software that anybody (with an airport) could use. Once such software achieves critical mass, overall safety would improve (or would be less expensive). This is the same reasoning that leads people who implement new network protocols to use the BSD license: they want their code to be in widespread use. Similarly, people who implement safety-related software want people to be safer.
You beat me to it; Sager sounds like what the submitter is looking for. I had a good experience buying a Sager from http://www.discountlaptops.com/ . Like lots of small online stores, their score on resellerratings.com is great and they don't force you to buy Windows.
Also to be fair, there was a link between Al-Qaida and Iraq: the attacks by Al-Qaida led to a more aggressive US foreign policy, which led to invading Iraq.
There seems to be a belief that the first draft of anything should be perfect.
You have an essay to write on a test? no problem, it should look like the finely crafted masterpiece someone else wrote over a period of days, months, or even years. And you have 10 minutes to do it.
I don't see that belief; in fact, I see essay tests as endorsing your view that it is extremely unlikely for the first draft of anything to be perfect. That's what makes essays good for tests (such as the SAT) that are designed to differentiate between test-takers: creating something in 25 minutes that looks like a finely crafted masterpiece is hard, and produces a range of results.
Now, whether or not that differentiation is significant to the purpose of the test (in this case, whether or not your ability to do well on a 25 minute essay has any correlation to your ability to do well in college) is a different question altogether.
The thing you have to remember about methodologies is they are all bullshit.
Not every methodology sucks all the time. A methodology is just a named collection of practices.
In my experience, the people who cling to methodologies are generally not clue-full.
Humans inherently crave religion. Convince someone that something works and they're likely to cling to it to the bitter end, be it Code Verification, atheism, voting Republican or whatever.
In my experience, the "good enough" that matters is "good enough to catch errors without forcing a developer to have to think." When it's click and drool, and yet still useful, it will be "good enough" for widespread adoption.
I bought a 3200+ Athlon a year or so ago, with the intention that sometime after upgrading my Graphics card (which I have done) I would upgrade my CPU. Now that AM2 has been released, and moreso that the 939 chips have been ceremonially dumped, I do not feel as inclined to upgrade a machine which I now know is a dead-end architecture.
I'm in a similar situation, but I feel very differently. I'll still benefit from getting a dual core CPU and another 2 GB RAM, and adding that to my socket 939 motherboard is still cheaper than getting a new AM2 board with equivalent CPU and RAM. In fact, if I did get a new AM2 board now, the same situation would likely replay itself in a couple years. Instead I'm going to go ahead with this upgrade, and when it becomes time for my next system something even better than AM2 will be available (AM2 4x4? Something not announced yet?)
c) 939 chips are no longer being made
Distributors can order them until Dec. 27, and they should be available until well into next year. The advantage from my p.o.v. is that the price won't drop again, so I may as well upgrade now instead of waiting a few more months.
Hundreds of people were arrested for simply belonging to the communist party or attending meetings.
As your sibling poster's link showed, the root problem was that belonging to the Communist Party was against the law. A secondary problem (to nitpickers like me) was that the law was enforced unequally; only some Communist Party members were prosecuted, instead of all. So, don't complain that people were arrested, complain that the law required you to be arrested for doing something that exercised your free speech rights (advocating the overthrow of the government, or belonging to an organization that did).
Much of the evidence was from people scared of the blacklist or jail who would fabricate testimony to satisfy their prosecutors.
The problem is that Al qaeda should have hundreds of surface to air missile launchers left from Afghanistan campaign... Al quaeda seems not willing to embarass the US by using the arms they got from them
Those missiles have a shelf life that has expired. Their fuel breaks down or something.
I'm not advcating the overthrow of the US government but look where all the tanks, planes and missiles is getting us in Iraq. Never underestimate the power of guerrila tactics.
Never underestimate the power of tanks, planes and missiles. There's a reason the surviving insurgents in Iraq prefer to target mosques.
You missed the Macarthy era? Lucky you. But I seem to recall some people were sent to prison during it.
Was anybody sent to prison during the McCarthy era for belonging to a Communist organization or for suspicion of belonging to a Communist organization? Cite, please.
He fails to understand that in the 40+ year history of AI research noone has demonstrated even the inklings or foundations upon which actual AI can be built upon.
How does he misunderstand that?
When he says "In ten years we'll have six hundred million androids running amok." (paraphrased)
I was making fun of the statement "what are you, some kind of communist?" made while endorsing communist/socialist principles (pay based on effort or time as opposed to quality or demand -- a mistake that unions have made for years). Just because you perform work doesn't mean that you have a right to be compensated for it. You have to first arrange for somebody to pay you, but that's not a right. You have the right to not be cheated, and you have the right to find yourself the best deal you can, but those don't guarantee anything. If nobody wants to pay you to work, then hopefully you have a safety net of some sort, because you're in for tough times.
Crooked elections offices don't need encryption keys to rig an election,
DRM isn't the *only* tool you should use to protect an election...of course. But, it's a useful safeguard for one threat. Dismissing it just because there are other attack vectors is silly.
I'm not dismissing DRM at all. I'm saying that the client needs to be in control, not the vendor. If anything, I'm relatively pro-DRM, under circumstances which I believe will never come about.
The elections office does have final say over what *version* of the software is installed, but they do not have personal and private control over what goes in that version.
It is essential that they do have public oversight and control over what goes in each version of the software running on voting machines. They are the ones certifying the software, after all.
That defeats the point of DRM in a voting system. The whole point of DRM'ing a voting machine is so that a crooked elections office can't put in their own version of the code. If you force the authors to release their signing keys, you make it impossible to address that threat. So GPLv3 voting machines will always be vulnerable to this sort of attack.
No, it ensures the point of DRM in a voting system. Crooked elections offices don't need encryption keys to rig an election, and having the keys gives an elections office (as opposed to a vendor) the final say over what software can be installed.
That's what the GPLv3 attempts to ensure: that for example the master keys controlling which programs can run on a computer are given to the owner of that computer, as opposed to preventing the owner from modifying the computer or its programs, or running other programs on the computer. It puts decision-making in the hands of the owner of the computer, where it belongs.
No it puts the power in to the hands of the FSF.
No doubt the FSF owns computers, yes, but if I am provided the master keys to my own computer, it puts that power in my hands, not the FSF's hands.
Again this is all ego as far as I can see.
The word is "principle". The FSF cares about certain things. It's ok if you don't; don't use GPLv3 in your software if you don't want to.
This might push people to BSD or OpenSolaris.
It might push corporations that way. To be honest, I'm not sure why corporations wanting the benefits of closed source software aren't already basing their products on *BSD.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, lots of immigrants got turned away. That's what Ellis Island was for.
Being cynical, I don't disagree that people are unlikely to change, but I am still convinced that the secret to marital bliss is for each party to "be the right person" to the other. If you force yourself to change your nature and put your spouse first, and they do the same and put you first, I think you'll have a successful marriage. Hardly anybody's naturally selfless; it takes effort. The easiest way to have your needs met is to not withhold meeting your partner's needs until your needs are met.
It's true that some people are fundamentally incompatible, but every person has major flaws of one sort or another that living together will inevitably reveal. I've never heard of a perfect couple; even people who don't fight still have times when they disagree or don't get along. Every marriage of sufficient length encounters difficulty.
When I read blog entries like Yegge's I keep hoping to find good, solid criticism instead of a bunch of disjointed fallacies. "Agile" wasn't even defined, and when he talked about processes that do work, he specifically mentioned "lightweight". Well, guess what the main point of so-called "Agile" methodologies is? Being lightweight.
This entry seems to boil down to "Agile hasn't been scientifically proven to be superior, so it's not." That's not very good reasoning; in the absence of any process being scientifically proven to be superior, experience is the next best thing, and it seems pretty obvious that the central Agile themes of "don't do this too much" and "don't do that too much" are pretty good advice. (What constitutes "too much", according to what I've read, depends on your situation.)
I don't advocate a specific Agile methodology, but I do prefer lightweight processes, short time scales and "best practices", which seems to put me on the agile side of the fence. If there's something wrong with a specific agile methodology, or with all agile methodologies, I want to know about it so that I can avoid it.
The comment from Yegge's first blog entry about agile programming that I most hoped he would respond to said this: "What specific parts of the Agile Manifesto do you disagree with?"
Their review and approval process doesn't meet the DFSG, isn't fast enough to keep up with Debian (jinkies!) and doesn't cover older versions of the software that Debian has committed to supporting.
Somebody should tell those guys that morals are old-fashioned. Kids these days are more into living for the moment.
Sager and (apparently) Asus are OEMs who use Clevo as their ODM. There are only a handful of laptop ODMs in the world that all the OEMs buy from.
I mostly like the Asus laptops I've seen, but when I was shopping for a new one, I couldn't find any Asus models with a 15.4" 1920x1200 screen.
What makes you think I didn't read it?
Have a couple free clues: some people (especially on slashdot) don't want to buy Windows with their computer. Some people (especially on slashdot) have access to existing or cheaper Windows licenses and don't want to pay for new ones.
In addition to this, it would be great if there were high-quality open source air traffic control software that anybody (with an airport) could use. Once such software achieves critical mass, overall safety would improve (or would be less expensive). This is the same reasoning that leads people who implement new network protocols to use the BSD license: they want their code to be in widespread use. Similarly, people who implement safety-related software want people to be safer.
You beat me to it; Sager sounds like what the submitter is looking for. I had a good experience buying a Sager from http://www.discountlaptops.com/ . Like lots of small online stores, their score on resellerratings.com is great and they don't force you to buy Windows.
Also to be fair, there was a link between Al-Qaida and Iraq: the attacks by Al-Qaida led to a more aggressive US foreign policy, which led to invading Iraq.
I don't see that belief; in fact, I see essay tests as endorsing your view that it is extremely unlikely for the first draft of anything to be perfect. That's what makes essays good for tests (such as the SAT) that are designed to differentiate between test-takers: creating something in 25 minutes that looks like a finely crafted masterpiece is hard, and produces a range of results.
Now, whether or not that differentiation is significant to the purpose of the test (in this case, whether or not your ability to do well on a 25 minute essay has any correlation to your ability to do well in college) is a different question altogether.
Not every methodology sucks all the time. A methodology is just a named collection of practices.
Humans inherently crave religion. Convince someone that something works and they're likely to cling to it to the bitter end, be it Code Verification, atheism, voting Republican or whatever.
In my experience, the "good enough" that matters is "good enough to catch errors without forcing a developer to have to think." When it's click and drool, and yet still useful, it will be "good enough" for widespread adoption.
I'm in a similar situation, but I feel very differently. I'll still benefit from getting a dual core CPU and another 2 GB RAM, and adding that to my socket 939 motherboard is still cheaper than getting a new AM2 board with equivalent CPU and RAM. In fact, if I did get a new AM2 board now, the same situation would likely replay itself in a couple years. Instead I'm going to go ahead with this upgrade, and when it becomes time for my next system something even better than AM2 will be available (AM2 4x4? Something not announced yet?)
Distributors can order them until Dec. 27, and they should be available until well into next year. The advantage from my p.o.v. is that the price won't drop again, so I may as well upgrade now instead of waiting a few more months.
As your sibling poster's link showed, the root problem was that belonging to the Communist Party was against the law. A secondary problem (to nitpickers like me) was that the law was enforced unequally; only some Communist Party members were prosecuted, instead of all. So, don't complain that people were arrested, complain that the law required you to be arrested for doing something that exercised your free speech rights (advocating the overthrow of the government, or belonging to an organization that did).
That's a huge problem too, in any era, of course.
Thanks for the link; I was aware of the blacklists and persecution, but not of the Smith Act of 1940.
Those missiles have a shelf life that has expired. Their fuel breaks down or something.
Never underestimate the power of tanks, planes and missiles. There's a reason the surviving insurgents in Iraq prefer to target mosques.
Was anybody sent to prison during the McCarthy era for belonging to a Communist organization or for suspicion of belonging to a Communist organization? Cite, please.
When he says "In ten years we'll have six hundred million androids running amok." (paraphrased)
I don't think anyone does. The natural expectation is that nobody will work for free, which makes is all the more valuable when someone chooses to.
I was making fun of the statement "what are you, some kind of communist?" made while endorsing communist/socialist principles (pay based on effort or time as opposed to quality or demand -- a mistake that unions have made for years). Just because you perform work doesn't mean that you have a right to be compensated for it. You have to first arrange for somebody to pay you, but that's not a right. You have the right to not be cheated, and you have the right to find yourself the best deal you can, but those don't guarantee anything. If nobody wants to pay you to work, then hopefully you have a safety net of some sort, because you're in for tough times.
I'm not dismissing DRM at all. I'm saying that the client needs to be in control, not the vendor. If anything, I'm relatively pro-DRM, under circumstances which I believe will never come about.
It is essential that they do have public oversight and control over what goes in each version of the software running on voting machines. They are the ones certifying the software, after all.
No, it ensures the point of DRM in a voting system. Crooked elections offices don't need encryption keys to rig an election, and having the keys gives an elections office (as opposed to a vendor) the final say over what software can be installed.
No doubt the FSF owns computers, yes, but if I am provided the master keys to my own computer, it puts that power in my hands, not the FSF's hands.
The word is "principle". The FSF cares about certain things. It's ok if you don't; don't use GPLv3 in your software if you don't want to.
It might push corporations that way. To be honest, I'm not sure why corporations wanting the benefits of closed source software aren't already basing their products on *BSD.