But wouldn't it be awesome if we did actually get a viable space tourism market for a good 10-15 years? Watching chucklehead millionaires ride around in their spiffily-named speedboats as the rest of us here on planet earth continue getting fucked over?
Your comment could be read in a few different ways. I hope you're not suggesting that access to outer space is a human right or something. Even if you were, millionaires flying about space is much closer to that end than needing to be a military test pilot.
Human spaceflight is now where the Internet was in 1994 when the Governments stopped trying to run it. Buckle up.
Considering that CentOS already has a significant amount of the Linux marketshare I think it's safe to say that the competition has been "helped" significantly as-is.
To be clear, the understood quid-pro-quo seems to be that CentOS doesn't come out before Unbreakable Linux does, or at least Oracle doesn't get any help from the CentOS process (which is to figure out Redhat's convoluted, probably intentionally so, build process). It's implied that CentOS gets some unofficial support from Redhat but the first rule of CentOS is that they don't talk about Redhat.
Granted it's understandable why Red Hat would not appreciate "freeloaders" who use CentOS, but really Red Hat's business model of repackaging OSS doesn't give it much recourse to stop it.
Some percentage of CentOS users tend to trade-up to RHEL as their businesses grow. This is beneficial to Redhat, and CentOS's existence is mutually beneficial. Oracle users typically don't trade up, so their nature is seen as more parasitic (Redhat must have a business model to fund all the great work they do). I don't find myself disagreeing, while still believing that an open process is ultimately better for all.
Thanks - I found this blog post essential for understanding the project(s).
To summarize in one phrase: ClearOS Core ~= CentOS, but with an open development process. There are then additional add-ons also available for functionality that does not exist in RHEL or CentOS, under the ClearOS umbrella.
It wasn't until CentOS 6.0 was delayed beyond reasonable expectation did I find out CentOS was managed by a very small, closed group. The closed part was a little unnerving considering the open source nature of the project.
As I understand the common team and community positions, from the long debates on the -devel list:
1) The source is open, the project is not. 1a) After saying this, much of the build information has been dribbled out on the list anyway, but only after heated encouragement. 1b) There is no interest in codifying this build information (ala a B(uild)RPM file to automate the process). See also: 3b. 2) The C in CentOS (community) refers to the target of the product, not the process. 3) Many people on the list would like to see an open project, run by the community, more like Fedora. 3a) This would lead to faster releases. 3b) It is assumed this would create friction with Redhat by helping its competition, and thus cool relations with the CentOS team or cause Redhat to discontinue its fully-open strategy for software it writes. 3c) There has been talk that after 6.1 is out the door that the team will look into addressing some of these concerns. 3d) Nobody has talked seriously about fork, yet. There's probably no RHEL 7 on the horizon, so there's a long time to prepare if it ultimately becomes necessary. Whitebox Linux to CentOS in a way proved the viability of this option, but almost nobody would prefer it.
Spoken like someone who has never tried to successfuly stabilize a chaotic system with over ten-thousand input variables to the dynamics model equations.
C'mon, just slap an arduino in there with an i2c bus and hack up a control algorithm.
lost all credibility on the topic of launch vehicles.
Space X recently did an approximately $300M build/launch. The NASA estimates for that project were about $7B in-house, or $1.2B if NASA managed a team of contractors to do it.
That is why spaceflight is stagnant. Big government isn't the answer.
I no longer expect to see boot prints on Mars during my lifetime, nor do I expect that whoever eventually makes those boot prints will be drawing a paycheck from NASA, or even speaking English.
Elon Musk wants to retire on Mars. He has billions and billions of dollars and a dream.
So far, he's hiring in the US. I imagine he's smart enough to hire the most efficient employees.
Whether his first words on Mars are English or Russian, I care not.
The [project] could have been significantly cheaper but contractors, congress, and [agency] itself got in the way.
Oh, it was a government project?
Public apathy too.
Yeah, well if the weekly-launch idea that was sold actually came to fruition, three things would be true: the public would have loved it, it would have been profitable, and by now it would have already been replaced with a better model as the profits could have funded the next generation in a self-sustaining way.
In a way, though, this is good - that's exactly what the private companies are going to do and subsidized government programs aren't going to artificially compete against them.
I'm not going to bet against a billionaire and his dream.
Then it would be the same as posting on your Facebook wall how good your breakfast was
Not in all situations. Correlate it with FourSquare check-ins, or similar, especially when they become automatic eventually, especially within a circle of friends, and things people do suddenly become public when they would otherwise have remained private.
12:04PM Bob checked-in at the Ramada Downtown via FourSquare 12:07PM Alice checked-in at the Ramada Downtown via FourSquare 12:43PM Bob had a 20 minute workout. Great job, Bob! via FitBit 12:43PM Alice had a 20 minute workout. Great job, Alice! via FitBit 12:57PM Bob checked in at Megalocorp via FourSquare 12:59PM Alice checked in at Megalocorp via FourSquare 9:45PM Bob is now single 3 10:15PM Alice is now It's Complicated 3
So, from my point of view at least, the value of learning languages you'll never use again can be quite large indeed -- depending on your specific circumstances.
Same goes for computer languages - the first three or four all seem unique and puzzling. Languages 18 through 23 are simply a matter of which concepts apply and what the preferred code patterns and syntax are.
The 'dropbox' term is something I adopted from an employer before that and I'm sure we weren't the only places to use the term.
That was the standard term for a write-only folder on Appleshare. I'm pretty sure it had a dedicated icon too.
The ironic thing is that Dropbox.com breaks both the physical and AppleShare metaphors, at least for common usage patterns (perhaps there is a way to setup a dropbox.com account as a dropbox, but most people don't do that).
Be sure to use the GPLv3 license if your primary goal is to perpetuate the openness of the patentable attributes of the work you release and its derivatives.
Is there a legal reason that SOME PORTIONS OF A TOS/EULA/FINEPRINT ARE IN ALL CAPS? Like, are there laws that require them to make those portions all caps? Or is it just the lawyers screwing with us?
I recently asked a recovering attorney this question. He said there are precedents that effectively require certain sections of contracts to be 'plainly obvious' and that all-caps was a typewriter way to accomplish that, or at least to say that the attempt was made. Thank goodness these precedents weren't set while the <blink> tag was in vogue.
This really isn't much of a surprise. The Steam-punk genre is quite popular with the 20-40 crowd.
I'm 37. I've had combo analog/digital watches almost continuously since I was about 10. I source them from exotic boutiques like K-Mart where they sell obscure brands like Timex.
If the NYT article wasn't behind a registration screen... maybe something the summary didn't cover would make some sense here.
Stop giving your email address out to every bozo website that wants it and spam will virtually disappear.
No it won't. I give unique addresses to every website and still get lost of spam to my personal address. Compromised Windows machines of friends, I assume.
Explain to me why "App Store" shouldn't be a trade mark?
Because the term "app store" was in use as a generic at least as far back as 2000. I posted a link here a while back to a usenet thread bemoaning the fact that Electronics Boutique had just become an "app store" at the mall.
Slashdot Mirror
But wouldn't it be awesome if we did actually get a viable space tourism market for a good 10-15 years? Watching chucklehead millionaires ride around in their spiffily-named speedboats as the rest of us here on planet earth continue getting fucked over?
Your comment could be read in a few different ways. I hope you're not suggesting that access to outer space is a human right or something. Even if you were, millionaires flying about space is much closer to that end than needing to be a military test pilot.
Human spaceflight is now where the Internet was in 1994 when the Governments stopped trying to run it. Buckle up.
Considering that CentOS already has a significant amount of the Linux marketshare I think it's safe to say that the competition has been "helped" significantly as-is.
To be clear, the understood quid-pro-quo seems to be that CentOS doesn't come out before Unbreakable Linux does, or at least Oracle doesn't get any help from the CentOS process (which is to figure out Redhat's convoluted, probably intentionally so, build process). It's implied that CentOS gets some unofficial support from Redhat but the first rule of CentOS is that they don't talk about Redhat.
Granted it's understandable why Red Hat would not appreciate "freeloaders" who use CentOS, but really Red Hat's business model of repackaging OSS doesn't give it much recourse to stop it.
Some percentage of CentOS users tend to trade-up to RHEL as their businesses grow. This is beneficial to Redhat, and CentOS's existence is mutually beneficial. Oracle users typically don't trade up, so their nature is seen as more parasitic (Redhat must have a business model to fund all the great work they do). I don't find myself disagreeing, while still believing that an open process is ultimately better for all.
Thanks - I found this blog post essential for understanding the project(s).
To summarize in one phrase: ClearOS Core ~= CentOS, but with an open development process. There are then additional add-ons also available for functionality that does not exist in RHEL or CentOS, under the ClearOS umbrella.
(correct me if that's wrong)
It wasn't until CentOS 6.0 was delayed beyond reasonable expectation did I find out CentOS was managed by a very small, closed group. The closed part was a little unnerving considering the open source nature of the project.
As I understand the common team and community positions, from the long debates on the -devel list:
1) The source is open, the project is not.
1a) After saying this, much of the build information has been dribbled out on the list anyway, but only after heated encouragement.
1b) There is no interest in codifying this build information (ala a B(uild)RPM file to automate the process). See also: 3b.
2) The C in CentOS (community) refers to the target of the product, not the process.
3) Many people on the list would like to see an open project, run by the community, more like Fedora.
3a) This would lead to faster releases.
3b) It is assumed this would create friction with Redhat by helping its competition, and thus cool relations with the CentOS team or cause Redhat to discontinue its fully-open strategy for software it writes.
3c) There has been talk that after 6.1 is out the door that the team will look into addressing some of these concerns.
3d) Nobody has talked seriously about fork, yet. There's probably no RHEL 7 on the horizon, so there's a long time to prepare if it ultimately becomes necessary. Whitebox Linux to CentOS in a way proved the viability of this option, but almost nobody would prefer it.
Can you take out a life insurance policy on a person without the person agreeing to it?
Prediction markets let you sort-of do this. A subset of them is called 'assassination markets'.
Spoken like someone who has never tried to successfuly stabilize a chaotic system with over ten-thousand input variables to the dynamics model equations.
C'mon, just slap an arduino in there with an i2c bus and hack up a control algorithm.
lost all credibility on the topic of launch vehicles.
Oh... that.
It's expensive, but not hard.
It's hard to not be expensive.
Space X recently did an approximately $300M build/launch. The NASA estimates for that project were about $7B in-house, or $1.2B if NASA managed a team of contractors to do it.
That is why spaceflight is stagnant. Big government isn't the answer.
If you remain one of these people who doesn't think today is depressing as fuck, I'd like some of what you're having.
Today I'm drinking to the free market.
I no longer expect to see boot prints on Mars during my lifetime, nor do I expect that whoever eventually makes those boot prints will be drawing a paycheck from NASA, or even speaking English.
Elon Musk wants to retire on Mars. He has billions and billions of dollars and a dream.
So far, he's hiring in the US. I imagine he's smart enough to hire the most efficient employees.
Whether his first words on Mars are English or Russian, I care not.
Flamebait? Hardly. It's dead on.
Ironic in light of the GGP's sig.
The [project] could have been significantly cheaper but contractors, congress, and [agency] itself got in the way.
Oh, it was a government project?
Public apathy too.
Yeah, well if the weekly-launch idea that was sold actually came to fruition, three things would be true: the public would have loved it, it would have been profitable, and by now it would have already been replaced with a better model as the profits could have funded the next generation in a self-sustaining way.
In a way, though, this is good - that's exactly what the private companies are going to do and subsidized government programs aren't going to artificially compete against them.
I'm not going to bet against a billionaire and his dream.
Then it would be the same as posting on your Facebook wall how good your breakfast was
Not in all situations. Correlate it with FourSquare check-ins, or similar, especially when they become automatic eventually, especially within a circle of friends, and things people do suddenly become public when they would otherwise have remained private.
12:04PM Bob checked-in at the Ramada Downtown via FourSquare
12:07PM Alice checked-in at the Ramada Downtown via FourSquare
12:43PM Bob had a 20 minute workout. Great job, Bob! via FitBit
12:43PM Alice had a 20 minute workout. Great job, Alice! via FitBit
12:57PM Bob checked in at Megalocorp via FourSquare
12:59PM Alice checked in at Megalocorp via FourSquare
9:45PM Bob is now single 3
10:15PM Alice is now It's Complicated 3
and assuring that everyone who now has PSTN service has access to either a broadband or cellular communication alternative.
I'd rather they work on making sure we have multiple broadband and communication options. I don't like the words "a" and "or" being used here.
Really, you'd rather they focus on you having multiple choices before everybody has at least one choice?
So, from my point of view at least, the value of learning languages you'll never use again can be quite large indeed -- depending on your specific circumstances.
Same goes for computer languages - the first three or four all seem unique and puzzling. Languages 18 through 23 are simply a matter of which concepts apply and what the preferred code patterns and syntax are.
The 'dropbox' term is something I adopted from an employer before that and I'm sure we weren't the only places to use the term.
That was the standard term for a write-only folder on Appleshare. I'm pretty sure it had a dedicated icon too.
The ironic thing is that Dropbox.com breaks both the physical and AppleShare metaphors, at least for common usage patterns (perhaps there is a way to setup a dropbox.com account as a dropbox, but most people don't do that).
Be sure to use the GPLv3 license if your primary goal is to perpetuate the openness of the patentable attributes of the work you release and its derivatives.
American Names? so they have names like Pocahontas or XÃchitl
Sounds like the Asian colonialists.
Is there a legal reason that SOME PORTIONS OF A TOS/EULA/FINEPRINT ARE IN ALL CAPS? Like, are there laws that require them to make those portions all caps? Or is it just the lawyers screwing with us?
I recently asked a recovering attorney this question. He said there are precedents that effectively require certain sections of contracts to be 'plainly obvious' and that all-caps was a typewriter way to accomplish that, or at least to say that the attempt was made. Thank goodness these precedents weren't set while the <blink> tag was in vogue.
Maybe I've been under the yoke of HIPAA too long but if you have sensitive information why are you trusting a third party with it?
That's easy - the cost of having the data compromised is less than the cost of running your own infrastructure (properly).
Though I doubt many make this choice so conscientiously.
I used talk recently when stuck in an odd situation. The guy on the other end and I usually use IM.
His comment to me, "christ, Bill, you type like shit."
This really isn't much of a surprise. The Steam-punk genre is quite popular with the 20-40 crowd.
I'm 37. I've had combo analog/digital watches almost continuously since I was about 10. I source them from exotic boutiques like K-Mart where they sell obscure brands like Timex.
If the NYT article wasn't behind a registration screen ... maybe something the summary didn't cover would make some sense here.
Stop giving your email address out to every bozo website that wants it and spam will virtually disappear.
No it won't. I give unique addresses to every website and still get lost of spam to my personal address. Compromised Windows machines of friends, I assume.
DON'T run Linux under Windows. Just don't.
Stolen analogy: it's like wearing a seatbelt when your seat is strapped to the top of your car.
As I know the youth of today will never close any video chat, ever!
Bits aren't metered, so they have no disincentive to not cost you extra money.
That, and NO civilians except Robert Gates know fuck all about military reform.
What, do veterans just forget everything when they retire?
Explain to me why "App Store" shouldn't be a trade mark?
Because the term "app store" was in use as a generic at least as far back as 2000. I posted a link here a while back to a usenet thread bemoaning the fact that Electronics Boutique had just become an "app store" at the mall.
The "Apple App Store" would be fine.