The native Americans were here, but they weren't forced into labor to construct our skyscrapers.
No. They were just exterminated wholesale, or driven off their land with huge death tolls (Trail of Tears ring any bells for you?).
There's not much objective difference between the treatment of Native Americans by the US government and the treatment of, say, Ukranians by the USSR.
And that's before considering the role of slavery in the US.
Furthermore, two wrongs don't make a right
True. So? We should pretend that the history of the US is squeaky clean because the history of "Communist" China and the USSR is full of appalling barbarity?
I'm all for the Chinese entering space, but like the Soviets before and after the Second World War and the reconstruction of Germany in the 30s these technological and engineering feats have been accomplished through social and political changes which lead to the deaths of millions and the destruction of cultural identities for millions more.
The US imported a bunch of Nazis and let them off any appearances at Nuremburg to bootstrap their space program. Don't assume NASAs hands are any cleaner than their Soviet or Chinese counterparts.
Success in Russian or Chinese space programs seems to bring out the worst in US xenophobia and misplaced arrogance for some reasn I don't quite understand. So many of them start foaming at the mouth.
Of course, most Americans are still in denial about their Nazi driven space program. Does this mean the Russians are doing better in the honesty stakes?
The lawsuit potential is phenominal. First time the recog software gets it wrong, I'd be lining up with my lawyer and a defamation and emotional distress suit. Payday!
If you want to get rid of Mormons, just explain that you'd prefer not to be visited. Seriously, the missions (the people that come bug you) are supposed to maintain a list of people/houses that don't want to be visited.
Unlike the Seventh Day Adventists and such, the Mormons actually have manners.
"When an elderly and distinguished scientist says something is possible, he is almost certainly correct. When an elderly and distinguished scientist says something is impossible, he is almost certainly wrong."
Because corporations are a legal fiction. They no more have rights that your television does.
Moreover, corporations do no enjoy the same responsibilities you and I do. The limited liability bit in a corporation effectively prevents either the corporation or the owners thereof from suffering the same sanctions as a real person. Why, then, should they enoy all the rights?
This is so wrong in so many ways, I can't even begin to describe.
Suffice to say, you're wrong. And there are plenty of PAL DVDs. Perhaps you should provide others with explanations only when you have the slightest clue what you're on about.
Part of their argument has been that they own anything that looks like Linux so that, say, IBM's JFS code, developed entirely by them as an AIX extension, belongs to SCO because it's bundled with a Unix.
So SCO own Linux, because it's like Unix. In SCO world, anyway.
Never heard of open source luminary Dick Hardt, either, I take it.
Email him at dick@activestate.com
Re:Itanium will suffer if Intel implements AMD64
on
Athlon 64 Debuts
·
· Score: 1
Nope. Intel look stupid.
Here's the story: HP want to do HP-PA 3.0. They get into bed with Intel. The joint engineering team puts Intel compatibility into the basic architecture proposed by HP-PA. So what we end up with is Intel paying the bulk of the costs of HP's new chipsets.
HP have done well out of the deal because the worst they end up with is a specialist procfessor that meets all their needs, that Intel paid for. Which is what they had anyway.
You need to realise that the key to Microsoft's success is driving the users down the path of using the tools Microsoft prefer by leveraging the desktop.
If you think Microsoft won't take advantage of that desktop by doing everything they can to make it as easy as possible to use their search and as hard as possible to use anyone else's, you're deluded.
This isn't about whose product is the easiest and nicest to use. This will be about how hard it is to choose anthing but Microsoft's.
Other way around, son. US business is so hopelessly dependent on cheap Chinese labour and just in time manufacturing that there'd be chaos if China was embargoed.
The logical inference would be that any BSD code Microsoft ship is illegal (since the agument against the GPL holds for BSDL), and that most of Microsoft's enterprise licenses are potentially illegal (since they involve more than the 1+1 scheme SCO are asserting).
This has long been a problem for the UNIX world: all the vendors would rather everyone be arse-raped together than see another UNIX vendor succeed in the market.
SCO and SUN would rather ceede the market to Microsoft than see Linux win.
A better comparison would be bringing the car back in for a recall because the manufacturer discovered a problem that could make you lose control and career into another vehicle.
Slashdot Mirror
No. They were just exterminated wholesale, or driven off their land with huge death tolls (Trail of Tears ring any bells for you?).
There's not much objective difference between the treatment of Native Americans by the US government and the treatment of, say, Ukranians by the USSR.
And that's before considering the role of slavery in the US.
True. So? We should pretend that the history of the US is squeaky clean because the history of "Communist" China and the USSR is full of appalling barbarity?
The US imported a bunch of Nazis and let them off any appearances at Nuremburg to bootstrap their space program. Don't assume NASAs hands are any cleaner than their Soviet or Chinese counterparts.
Success in Russian or Chinese space programs seems to bring out the worst in US xenophobia and misplaced arrogance for some reasn I don't quite understand. So many of them start foaming at the mouth.
Of course, most Americans are still in denial about their Nazi driven space program. Does this mean the Russians are doing better in the honesty stakes?
The lawsuit potential is phenominal. First time the recog software gets it wrong, I'd be lining up with my lawyer and a defamation and emotional distress suit. Payday!
If you want to get rid of Mormons, just explain that you'd prefer not to be visited. Seriously, the missions (the people that come bug you) are supposed to maintain a list of people/houses that don't want to be visited.
Unlike the Seventh Day Adventists and such, the Mormons actually have manners.
If he wants Windows, why doesn't he just use it?
"When an elderly and distinguished scientist says something is possible, he is almost certainly correct. When an elderly and distinguished scientist says something is impossible, he is almost certainly wrong."
(Apologies to Asimov for the misrendering).
Because corporations are a legal fiction. They no more have rights that your television does.
Moreover, corporations do no enjoy the same responsibilities you and I do. The limited liability bit in a corporation effectively prevents either the corporation or the owners thereof from suffering the same sanctions as a real person. Why, then, should they enoy all the rights?
Spammers are campaign contributers. Like Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
This is so wrong in so many ways, I can't even begin to describe.
Suffice to say, you're wrong. And there are plenty of PAL DVDs. Perhaps you should provide others with explanations only when you have the slightest clue what you're on about.
"IBMs lawyers are a disease. The move into an area and they multiply until all of the resources are consumed."
If someone comes at me with a knife, I'd be happy to see them gunned down.
In this case, IBM is the guy who can defy physics and unload a minigun while walking.
Part of their argument has been that they own anything that looks like Linux so that, say, IBM's JFS code, developed entirely by them as an AIX extension, belongs to SCO because it's bundled with a Unix.
So SCO own Linux, because it's like Unix. In SCO world, anyway.
Never heard of open source luminary Dick Hardt, either, I take it.
Email him at dick@activestate.com
Nope. Intel look stupid.
Here's the story: HP want to do HP-PA 3.0. They get into bed with Intel. The joint engineering team puts Intel compatibility into the basic architecture proposed by HP-PA. So what we end up with is Intel paying the bulk of the costs of HP's new chipsets.
HP have done well out of the deal because the worst they end up with is a specialist procfessor that meets all their needs, that Intel paid for. Which is what they had anyway.
Poor game performance. The image quality and multihead are superb.
You need to realise that the key to Microsoft's success is driving the users down the path of using the tools Microsoft prefer by leveraging the desktop.
If you think Microsoft won't take advantage of that desktop by doing everything they can to make it as easy as possible to use their search and as hard as possible to use anyone else's, you're deluded.
This isn't about whose product is the easiest and nicest to use. This will be about how hard it is to choose anthing but Microsoft's.
Other way around, son. US business is so hopelessly dependent on cheap Chinese labour and just in time manufacturing that there'd be chaos if China was embargoed.
Without a government, there is no money. Money is a social construct.
The logical inference would be that any BSD code Microsoft ship is illegal (since the agument against the GPL holds for BSDL), and that most of Microsoft's enterprise licenses are potentially illegal (since they involve more than the 1+1 scheme SCO are asserting).
I doubt this is something Sun, Microsoft, or IBM are keen to see happening.
This has long been a problem for the UNIX world: all the vendors would rather everyone be arse-raped together than see another UNIX vendor succeed in the market.
SCO and SUN would rather ceede the market to Microsoft than see Linux win.
A better comparison would be bringing the car back in for a recall because the manufacturer discovered a problem that could make you lose control and career into another vehicle.
Ever given anyone a laptop, remote, access, etc.