People who stole music through the use of Napster had no intention of paying for the music in the first place. People who sampled music through Napster, then went out and bought the cds for better-quality sound, probably *wouldn't* have bought the cds (else they would've made better rips from the cds in the first place w/out downloading the mp3s) but did so anyway because they decided they liked what they sampled. As a result, the number of people who sampled and bought so outweighed the number of people who stole that during the period that Napster was fully operational cd sales *increased* by 5%. As soon as Napster was gutted cd sales *fell* by 5%; the thieves still stole, but the honest folks had no easy way to sample anymore and thus stopped buying cds they discovered through sampling Napster.
Anyone who argues that people can and will steal if given the opportunity does so from a foundation of moral bankruptcy; i.e., since *they* would steal they insist that everyone else is bereft of principle as well. This simply isn't, and has never been, true.
Oh, and just think how all those people in Florida who agree with you felt after the last election... in some places, if even.01% more of the population had shown up, we'd have a different President.
no, we wouldn't - and that's precisely my point. There was no functional difference between voting for Gore and voting for Bush. It doesn't matter if the turnout was 100% - the choices were "sleazebag number one" and "sleazebag number two". Both were bought and paid for long before they announced they were running for president, and all the forces that move to place puppets in office made damn sure that no one else could make a showing, or even get mentioned by the national press.
This is what I mean by the system being broken. Those already in power don't care what the turnout is - they control who runs for office and who gets lost in anonymity.
You're assuming that parent x is working a job they hate in order to buy toys and be upwardly mobile. In the world I grew up in (not middle class, but what most Americans nowadays know) parent x works just to scrape by from month to month. Whether or not he/she likes the job is of no concern in comparison to getting a paycheck that allows you to (just barely) make it. The buying of tech goodies and so on never enters into the equation because there's never any money for such 'frivolous' purchases; you're too busy just trying to feed and clothe the kids.
A middle class perspective is hugely different than a lower class/working poor perspective. 'Choice' has nothing whatsoever to do with it; it's barely more than wage slavery, and this is the harsh reality of a large (and growing) number of Americans.
Which is why I made such a pointed distinction. If you're young and single and lucky enough to go to college, make those choices NOW before you have a family. Because afterwards you may not get the chance, especially if the economy goes more sour than it already has.
The sea level is low due to the extremely rare formation of two ice caps. There are a number of good textbooks which will give you a detailed analysis of 'average' sea levels over geologic time.
That is not to say that it hasn't been lower in the past. I know of several times when it's been lower than it is now (e.g., during an intensification of the current 'Ice Age' some 20,000 - 100,000 years ago).
What good is a vote if your choices are simply two sides of the same coin. Gore, Bush, who gives a shit? They're both corporate whores drunk on the smell of their own power with not a thought in their heads about the average American citizen.
This is the way it played out in the presidential election and in just about every House/Senate race I've had the misfortune to vote on. It isn't "good person, bad person", but "this sleazebag, that sleazebag".
One thing I've learned after voting religiously for nearly 20 years: MY VOTE DOESN'T COUNT FOR JACK. Cynical? Yeah, brutally so - but also true. Every alternative candidate in every election I've been able to vote in has been sidelined by the competition through campaign spending and by the press, who measure coverage in terms of dollar expenditures and how many hookers they're provided with on press junkets.
The system is broken. Beyond repair, I think. Voting just doesn't count anymore.
Maybe hanging a few of the bastards from the nearest lamppost would drive the point home....
Why on gods green earth would myself and my fellow Oregonians want to invade California? If anything, we'd fortify the border and shoot any of you silly yahoos who tried to come north.
Remember, Oregon has never tried to take anything from California. California, on the other hand, sued Oregon in federal court in an attempt to seize the Rogue River (yes, the *entire* river) because 'Oregon didn't need the water and southern California did'!
The idea of an independent California is not a happy one. An independent California might try to take little things like rivers from Oregon by force....
Which is great advice if you're young and single, but doesn't mean jackshit if you're older and have a family and your very first priority, above all other things (including personal happiness), is to put food on the table for your kids.
So if you're young figure it out NOW. If you don't and get angst later when you have a family, your family comes first and by then it may very well be too late to make a change (anyone who says otherwise and blathers on about how we 'all have a choice is a friggin' moron - the world isn't that kind). Unless, of course, you're a Boomer, in which case choosing your own personal happiness over the well-being of your children might actually seem like a viable option.
I'm perplexed over the issues with both ICANN and the W3C seemingly bending over and offering up their hindparts to commercial concerns. People rail, bitch and moan about this sorry state of affairs, acting all the while like something needs to be done to reform these organizations in order to 'repair' the damage they've done/are about to do in the process of whoring themselves out.
The solution is rather simple: ignore them and set up an open domain name scheme and http protocol immune from the efforts of these corporate sluts to sell off chunks of the internet. I've suggested this before and the primary objection is that 'most people' won't use the new http protocol or DNS system. I say, so what?
Yeah, that's right: so what? Most of the current DNS scheme is completely tied up by commercial interests warring over trademarks or anything remotely approaching a trademark, while the W3C is thinking of incorporating technology that requires royalties. I'd hazard to say that more than 99% of the web is utterly useless as it is, so an alternative system with a reputation of *not* being friendly to business and not being cluttered with endless amounts of porn or single-page geocities/yahoo home-brew pages is, I think, a *good* thing. Who gives a shit if the average Joe doesn't visit your site? If you aren't a business you're looking to have savvy folks with a keen personal interest in what you have to offer visiting, aren't you?
I'd use an alternative system for both items in a heartbeat, assuming it's completely open-sourced and GPL'd (to avoid another W3C or ICANN popping up). I'd wager that many scientific and academic interests would as well to avoid the 'clutter' of the regular web and to get domain names that aren't already handed out to business and squatters. Which means that when I use this alternate web it might be much easier to find something of practical value - and without goddamned adverts and popups! Tell me how this isn't a good thing.
I say let's stop bitching and start planning an alternative. Ignore the W3C and ICANN and just go our own way. What can they possibly do to stop us?
So who says your information has to be accurate? According to various sites around the internet I've lived at "123 Happy Place" for quite some time now....
This is true, but you're assuming that the Earth is warm right now, or that the sea level we currently have is the historic norm over geological time. It isn't; right now the Earth is in one of it's coldest periods in history, with the rare occurrence of *two* polar ice caps (there's generally only one).
Furthermore, because the ice caps are so large the sea levels are at some of the lowest points they've ever been. If the ice melts you will, in essence, get a 'return' to normal sea levels as well as in increase in surface temperature because (believe it or not) increased water vapor in the air is a greenhouse gas. This is also a normal event, as, for example, under normal temperatures southern Greenland has been home to extensive mangrove swamps and has seen average temperatures in the 70s-80s.
Your assumptions bear out when the Earth swings to the other extreme and becomes too hot, putting so much water vapor into the air that the reflected sunlight is greater than the heat trapped by the vapor in the first place. This will happen long after both caps have melted and Greenland becomes the tropical vacation spot of choice.
The system self-regulates, but the extremes are much greater than you might imagine. Especially since we're at the near end of the cold extreme, not in the middle. What we consider warm is actually pretty darned cold, and what we consider to be 'normal' sea levels are really very low.
Essentially, what it boils down to is my final line: you're an arrogant young fool who thinks that his own personal notions of 'how things should be' must be applied to every other human being on the planet. The notion is nothing but pure ego forwarded by a technical elitist who can't imagine just how silly he looks making these sorts of claims.
Funny, it's been my experience that management (in terms of suits, not the concept) is far more likely to bollix the process than to aid it. In fifteen years working in the industry I've yet to see the involvement of managers aid the project in any discernable way; usually they take a time estimate as calculated by the programming team and bloat it beyond belief with meetings, committees, useless PP presentations, and whatever other method they can dream up to justify why they get paid more than the programmers.
The projects I've been involved with that were closest to the mark in terms of time were those with the least amount of management interference, i.e., in those rare cases where the manager had the good sense to stay out of the way. But these sorts of suits are few and far between, alas.
I'm seeing this right now in a job that should've taken about a week, starting at the end of September. It's now November and we still aren't done. Why? Because the project is good PR and every suit under the sun wants a piece of it, even people from other departments who have no clue what we're doing. If we can't schedule accordingingly to allow all the management types to come and give their blessing, the project comes to a screeching halt.
I would agree with the 'planning' part of your statement, but in my experience any involvement by the upper echelons is bound to screw things up.
Ooooh, yet another article on how the much-cheaper AMD processor kickds the silicon ass of the latest that Intel has to offer. Mark my words, the Pentium fanboys will be all over this with "but what if your heatsink falls off/fan fails/aliens kidnap your processor?"
Really, is that the best you folks can do? I mean, "what if your fan fails?". Well, even in the extreme event the CPU fan does fail (and this is highly unlikely, no matter what idiots jump forward to claim that it isn't), the brand-new 1.4 ghz AMD Athlon I purchased cost me a whopping $149! And it's now down to $129, which is less than the price of my motherboard.
So if lightning strikes and the fan actually does fail, and my processor slags itself, I can still buy three AMD Athlon 1.4 ghz processors for the price of one P4 1.7 ghz processor - which the AMD Athlon outperforms.
So tell me again: why should I give a rat's ass about the off-chance that a one-in-a-million will happen and I'll lose my processor? I can buy a couple of more and *still* save money on what I'd pay for a comparable Pentium.
If you have no desire to learn the details of how something works, you shouldn't be using it.
You must be one hell of a Renaissance man. Rich, too, since it's obvious you don't work; you spend all your time learning how everything you ever lay your hands on works.
Just looking around my house here, you know the intimate details of:
- electrical lines and switchboxes, phone hookups, plumbing, heating elements and sewage. Otherwise you shouldn't be using a lightswitch, phone, water from the faucet, your oven, or your toilet.
- your computer (a given), as well as your speakers, stereo system, cable box, television, toaster, coffee pot, microwave oven, digital clock radio, refrigerator, hot water heater, vacuum cleaner, etc. etc. If you don't, you shouldn't be using any of these devices.
You also undoubedly understand the details of manufacturing your carpet, your clothes, your furniture, your towels, the soap you use when you bathe, the aspirin you take when you have a headache, and any and all medicines a doctor might prescribe to you. After all, if you don't you shouldn't be using any of these things.
And if you fly or use the train I'm sure you could give us a riveting lecture on the details of a locomotive or jet engine, as well as how quickly you could diagnose a problem, replace a broken part, or take the captain's chair in the cockpit should the pilot fall ill.
We passed the days when one could master the art of understanding/producing all of the appliances used in daily life about 10,000 years ago, right after the end of the Stone Age. I think just about everyone understands this, except young arrogant fools who fail to think through their absurd notions before posting them to a public forum.
I have some concern about how all these changes appear to businesses.
I don't, and Linus has made it abundantly clear on several occasions that he doesn't either. I doubt that most of those who use Linux care a whit what 'business' thinks about anything concerning Linux.
It's mostly the bandwagon types and the pundits who go on and on about these things, and why should we cater to them? After all, business could drop Linux altogether, decide to deal with MS until the end of time, and the folks who develop Linux as a hobby will still be plugging away. Works for me.
Linux is supposed to be a high-quality alternative to other operating systems.
Linux isn't 'supposed to be' anything other than what we say it is, especially those in development. This is pundit-speak; the spew that pundits commit to articles in order to make themselves appear far more important than they are.
This isn't going to impress, and it gives competitors valid ammunition.
Linux has no competitors. Red Hat, SuSe, etc., now they might have computers; but Linux does not. And as I said before, most of the developers don't care in the slightest about other operating systems, or what some PR lackey from another company or a self-appointed pundit has to say about the situation.
Almost all successful enterprises have to overcome a hurdle: how to transition from the "just for fun" start-up stage to the "managed with professionalism" stage.
It's clear you're missing the entire point. Linux is not an enterprise; the process that's used to produce Linux doesn't have to 'transition' to anything. You're confusing a bunch of volunteer developers hacking up an OS with an actual business. Apples and oranges.
Linux needs more professionalism in the management of releases, I believe.
Linux is doing just fine the way it is. If you want more 'professionalism' I'd suggest you 'transition' yourself to Windows XP. That OS is produced by a business which seems to be what you're looking for anyway.
This is precisely the case. Unlike Internet Explorer in the Windows Shell, you just can't pull out the VM with ease and still leave everything else intact. This is because Linux is a monolithic kernel with many things tightly interwoven for performance, the VM among them. You can't stick it into a module and choose it at compile time.
Or rather, you could but you'd have to rewrite large chunks of the kernel to do so. And debug it. And make some other things less efficient. Etc. But as someone said, this is Linux and that means that anyone is welcome to try....
If the highly paid IT staff is incapable of retraining *themselves* to a new OS and associated apps without a great deal of pain and suffering, then the IT staff is full of incompetent idiots that should be fired. Clearly such a staff has little, if any, native ability or talent.
I've never been 'trained'. It's always been assumed, in any job I held, that I would sink or swim on my own, and I'd better damn well get with the program if I wanted to keep the new job. I don't complain about this method; it separates the morons from the people who can actually do the job.
What all of these complaints about training tell me is that the IT staff in most organizations is just plain useless for anything other than a driver install or mucking about with the Control Panel. Christ. Talk about dead weight.
Where is the factual, empirical evidence that supporting Linux costs just as much as supporting Windows? All I ever hear on the subject amounts to a bunch of self-appointed 'experts' blowing hot air out of their collective asses.
Collect some empirical evidence, then report back.
My question: what the hell is the government doing 'negotiating' about anything? What bullshit is this? For crying out loud, you don't see our justice system 'negotiating' terms for convicted criminals when they're people - why do corporations get special treatment?
If our government had any goddamn balls whatsoever it'd simply hand over the judgement to MS and say "this is what you're going to do, criminal scumbags. If you don't like it your entire board of directors and senior management can rot in jail - and we'll STILL take over your company and enforce our edicts."
Our government is a bunch of pussies. And willing, cocksucking pussies at that.
Add this: what if part of the function of the object code is to provide the source code on demand? That is, if one of the inherent aspects of your cd ripper is to offer up the source code for said ripper as well as rip cds, isn't the object code a primary medium of communication? If one of it's essential functions is to communicate what is now called a form of free speech, doesn't that make the object code (a rendering of this free speech) also a vehicle for free speech, in this case self-description through both source AND functionality?
Simply amazing how many ignorant fuckwits come out of the woodwork when it comes to the travails of third world nations. Not willing to admit that just about every First World nation in existence has actively worked to create the current global disparity in economic wealth, apologists reigns supreme, heaping blame upon third world countries left and right.
First World = imports raw materials, exports expensive finished goods. Third World = source of cheap raw materials and ineffective enemies ready to invade when the people at home start questioning their government.
The third world isn't in the pickle that it's in because the people who populate it are stupid, sleazy, lazy, or whatever the hell else people are claiming. They're there because in order to sustain our own rush up the industrial ladder we needed cheap raw materials and the next best thing to slave labor to propel us into the future. Without the materials and labor it would've been more difficult to cover the same ground, and who doesn't take the lazy way out when it's offered?
If anyone can prove that the third world managed to dig itself into a hole - all 200+ countries - because of some innate character flaw that those in the First World don't possess, please, enlighten us! I'm dying to hear the argument that supports this view!
But for the amoral pragmatists who don't give a damn who starves so long as their own gluttonous needs are fulfilled, I'd say look at the situation pragmatically. Hunger and despair breed desperation, desperation breeds fanatics, and the fanatics are getting better and better at causing mass destruction. Out of simple self-preservation it would seem logical that the First World attempt to bring the Third World into the 20th century (forget the 21st, they're nowhere near that yet) simply to avoid things like having national landmarks blown to bits. Certainly it's less expensive and far more friendly than bombing the hell out of people whenever we get bored.
That depends on how you define socialism. It's possible to have a generally unregulated market while implementing other measures that we'd consider socialist:
- basic housing, clothing, and food
- free health care
- free higher education
The government in this case could provide the lowest common denominator to make sure that all of its people are taken care of, while allowing a free market to offer better alternatives at a price. For example, you could take government housing in a tiny apartment, or work to get a better apartment or a house offered privately. Or go to a 'better' school. Or whatever.
This isn't socialism, but I'd argue that it's far more socialist than capitalist considering the broad government interference in the free market system (by providing tax-supported services that would otherwise be vended through the market). Note, however, that no market regulation or 'price fixing' is required to implement these socialist measures.
True enough, but this is an attempt to allow the clueless newbie to install in the easiest fashion possible. For the rest of us we can use the RPM, find a tarball, or even compile the source if we so desire. I do all three depending on the package and what will require the least amount of effort with the lowest possibility of something going wrong.
That's what I like about SuSe: I can be utterly braindead if I want, or I can use any number of alternatives to the SuSe system. The more choices I have and the less work I have to do, the happier I am - even if the system is less than perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that your entire premise is false.
People who stole music through the use of Napster had no intention of paying for the music in the first place. People who sampled music through Napster, then went out and bought the cds for better-quality sound, probably *wouldn't* have bought the cds (else they would've made better rips from the cds in the first place w/out downloading the mp3s) but did so anyway because they decided they liked what they sampled. As a result, the number of people who sampled and bought so outweighed the number of people who stole that during the period that Napster was fully operational cd sales *increased* by 5%. As soon as Napster was gutted cd sales *fell* by 5%; the thieves still stole, but the honest folks had no easy way to sample anymore and thus stopped buying cds they discovered through sampling Napster.
Anyone who argues that people can and will steal if given the opportunity does so from a foundation of moral bankruptcy; i.e., since *they* would steal they insist that everyone else is bereft of principle as well. This simply isn't, and has never been, true.
Max
Oh, and just think how all those people in Florida who agree with you felt after the last election... in some places, if even .01% more of the population had shown up, we'd have a different President.
no, we wouldn't - and that's precisely my point. There was no functional difference between voting for Gore and voting for Bush. It doesn't matter if the turnout was 100% - the choices were "sleazebag number one" and "sleazebag number two". Both were bought and paid for long before they announced they were running for president, and all the forces that move to place puppets in office made damn sure that no one else could make a showing, or even get mentioned by the national press.
This is what I mean by the system being broken. Those already in power don't care what the turnout is - they control who runs for office and who gets lost in anonymity.
Max
You're assuming that parent x is working a job they hate in order to buy toys and be upwardly mobile. In the world I grew up in (not middle class, but what most Americans nowadays know) parent x works just to scrape by from month to month. Whether or not he/she likes the job is of no concern in comparison to getting a paycheck that allows you to (just barely) make it. The buying of tech goodies and so on never enters into the equation because there's never any money for such 'frivolous' purchases; you're too busy just trying to feed and clothe the kids.
A middle class perspective is hugely different than a lower class/working poor perspective. 'Choice' has nothing whatsoever to do with it; it's barely more than wage slavery, and this is the harsh reality of a large (and growing) number of Americans.
Which is why I made such a pointed distinction. If you're young and single and lucky enough to go to college, make those choices NOW before you have a family. Because afterwards you may not get the chance, especially if the economy goes more sour than it already has.
Max
The sea level is low due to the extremely rare formation of two ice caps. There are a number of good textbooks which will give you a detailed analysis of 'average' sea levels over geologic time.
That is not to say that it hasn't been lower in the past. I know of several times when it's been lower than it is now (e.g., during an intensification of the current 'Ice Age' some 20,000 - 100,000 years ago).
Max
What good is a vote if your choices are simply two sides of the same coin. Gore, Bush, who gives a shit? They're both corporate whores drunk on the smell of their own power with not a thought in their heads about the average American citizen.
This is the way it played out in the presidential election and in just about every House/Senate race I've had the misfortune to vote on. It isn't "good person, bad person", but "this sleazebag, that sleazebag".
One thing I've learned after voting religiously for nearly 20 years: MY VOTE DOESN'T COUNT FOR JACK. Cynical? Yeah, brutally so - but also true. Every alternative candidate in every election I've been able to vote in has been sidelined by the competition through campaign spending and by the press, who measure coverage in terms of dollar expenditures and how many hookers they're provided with on press junkets.
The system is broken. Beyond repair, I think. Voting just doesn't count anymore.
Maybe hanging a few of the bastards from the nearest lamppost would drive the point home....
Max
Why on gods green earth would myself and my fellow Oregonians want to invade California? If anything, we'd fortify the border and shoot any of you silly yahoos who tried to come north.
Remember, Oregon has never tried to take anything from California. California, on the other hand, sued Oregon in federal court in an attempt to seize the Rogue River (yes, the *entire* river) because 'Oregon didn't need the water and southern California did'!
The idea of an independent California is not a happy one. An independent California might try to take little things like rivers from Oregon by force....
Max
Which is great advice if you're young and single, but doesn't mean jackshit if you're older and have a family and your very first priority, above all other things (including personal happiness), is to put food on the table for your kids.
So if you're young figure it out NOW. If you don't and get angst later when you have a family, your family comes first and by then it may very well be too late to make a change (anyone who says otherwise and blathers on about how we 'all have a choice is a friggin' moron - the world isn't that kind). Unless, of course, you're a Boomer, in which case choosing your own personal happiness over the well-being of your children might actually seem like a viable option.
Max
I'm perplexed over the issues with both ICANN and the W3C seemingly bending over and offering up their hindparts to commercial concerns. People rail, bitch and moan about this sorry state of affairs, acting all the while like something needs to be done to reform these organizations in order to 'repair' the damage they've done/are about to do in the process of whoring themselves out.
The solution is rather simple: ignore them and set up an open domain name scheme and http protocol immune from the efforts of these corporate sluts to sell off chunks of the internet. I've suggested this before and the primary objection is that 'most people' won't use the new http protocol or DNS system. I say, so what?
Yeah, that's right: so what? Most of the current DNS scheme is completely tied up by commercial interests warring over trademarks or anything remotely approaching a trademark, while the W3C is thinking of incorporating technology that requires royalties. I'd hazard to say that more than 99% of the web is utterly useless as it is, so an alternative system with a reputation of *not* being friendly to business and not being cluttered with endless amounts of porn or single-page geocities/yahoo home-brew pages is, I think, a *good* thing. Who gives a shit if the average Joe doesn't visit your site? If you aren't a business you're looking to have savvy folks with a keen personal interest in what you have to offer visiting, aren't you?
I'd use an alternative system for both items in a heartbeat, assuming it's completely open-sourced and GPL'd (to avoid another W3C or ICANN popping up). I'd wager that many scientific and academic interests would as well to avoid the 'clutter' of the regular web and to get domain names that aren't already handed out to business and squatters. Which means that when I use this alternate web it might be much easier to find something of practical value - and without goddamned adverts and popups! Tell me how this isn't a good thing.
I say let's stop bitching and start planning an alternative. Ignore the W3C and ICANN and just go our own way. What can they possibly do to stop us?
Max
So who says your information has to be accurate? According to various sites around the internet I've lived at "123 Happy Place" for quite some time now....
Max
This is true, but you're assuming that the Earth is warm right now, or that the sea level we currently have is the historic norm over geological time. It isn't; right now the Earth is in one of it's coldest periods in history, with the rare occurrence of *two* polar ice caps (there's generally only one).
Furthermore, because the ice caps are so large the sea levels are at some of the lowest points they've ever been. If the ice melts you will, in essence, get a 'return' to normal sea levels as well as in increase in surface temperature because (believe it or not) increased water vapor in the air is a greenhouse gas. This is also a normal event, as, for example, under normal temperatures southern Greenland has been home to extensive mangrove swamps and has seen average temperatures in the 70s-80s.
Your assumptions bear out when the Earth swings to the other extreme and becomes too hot, putting so much water vapor into the air that the reflected sunlight is greater than the heat trapped by the vapor in the first place. This will happen long after both caps have melted and Greenland becomes the tropical vacation spot of choice.
The system self-regulates, but the extremes are much greater than you might imagine. Especially since we're at the near end of the cold extreme, not in the middle. What we consider warm is actually pretty darned cold, and what we consider to be 'normal' sea levels are really very low.
Max
Essentially, what it boils down to is my final line: you're an arrogant young fool who thinks that his own personal notions of 'how things should be' must be applied to every other human being on the planet. The notion is nothing but pure ego forwarded by a technical elitist who can't imagine just how silly he looks making these sorts of claims.
I'd laugh if it weren't so annoyingly pathetic.
Max
Um, if Natalie Portman were *my* sister....
Max
Funny, it's been my experience that management (in terms of suits, not the concept) is far more likely to bollix the process than to aid it. In fifteen years working in the industry I've yet to see the involvement of managers aid the project in any discernable way; usually they take a time estimate as calculated by the programming team and bloat it beyond belief with meetings, committees, useless PP presentations, and whatever other method they can dream up to justify why they get paid more than the programmers.
The projects I've been involved with that were closest to the mark in terms of time were those with the least amount of management interference, i.e., in those rare cases where the manager had the good sense to stay out of the way. But these sorts of suits are few and far between, alas.
I'm seeing this right now in a job that should've taken about a week, starting at the end of September. It's now November and we still aren't done. Why? Because the project is good PR and every suit under the sun wants a piece of it, even people from other departments who have no clue what we're doing. If we can't schedule accordingingly to allow all the management types to come and give their blessing, the project comes to a screeching halt.
I would agree with the 'planning' part of your statement, but in my experience any involvement by the upper echelons is bound to screw things up.
Max
Ooooh, yet another article on how the much-cheaper AMD processor kickds the silicon ass of the latest that Intel has to offer. Mark my words, the Pentium fanboys will be all over this with "but what if your heatsink falls off/fan fails/aliens kidnap your processor?"
Really, is that the best you folks can do? I mean, "what if your fan fails?". Well, even in the extreme event the CPU fan does fail (and this is highly unlikely, no matter what idiots jump forward to claim that it isn't), the brand-new 1.4 ghz AMD Athlon I purchased cost me a whopping $149! And it's now down to $129, which is less than the price of my motherboard.
So if lightning strikes and the fan actually does fail, and my processor slags itself, I can still buy three AMD Athlon 1.4 ghz processors for the price of one P4 1.7 ghz processor - which the AMD Athlon outperforms.
So tell me again: why should I give a rat's ass about the off-chance that a one-in-a-million will happen and I'll lose my processor? I can buy a couple of more and *still* save money on what I'd pay for a comparable Pentium.
You lose, fanboys.
Max
argh, that should be 'competitors' and not 'computers'. I sure hope to hell that wherever Linux resides, it's on a computer.
Max
If you have no desire to learn the details of how something works, you shouldn't be using it.
You must be one hell of a Renaissance man. Rich, too, since it's obvious you don't work; you spend all your time learning how everything you ever lay your hands on works.
Just looking around my house here, you know the intimate details of:
- electrical lines and switchboxes, phone hookups, plumbing, heating elements and sewage. Otherwise you shouldn't be using a lightswitch, phone, water from the faucet, your oven, or your toilet.
- your computer (a given), as well as your speakers, stereo system, cable box, television, toaster, coffee pot, microwave oven, digital clock radio, refrigerator, hot water heater, vacuum cleaner, etc. etc. If you don't, you shouldn't be using any of these devices.
You also undoubedly understand the details of manufacturing your carpet, your clothes, your furniture, your towels, the soap you use when you bathe, the aspirin you take when you have a headache, and any and all medicines a doctor might prescribe to you. After all, if you don't you shouldn't be using any of these things.
And if you fly or use the train I'm sure you could give us a riveting lecture on the details of a locomotive or jet engine, as well as how quickly you could diagnose a problem, replace a broken part, or take the captain's chair in the cockpit should the pilot fall ill.
We passed the days when one could master the art of understanding/producing all of the appliances used in daily life about 10,000 years ago, right after the end of the Stone Age. I think just about everyone understands this, except young arrogant fools who fail to think through their absurd notions before posting them to a public forum.
Max
I have some concern about how all these changes appear to businesses.
I don't, and Linus has made it abundantly clear on several occasions that he doesn't either. I doubt that most of those who use Linux care a whit what 'business' thinks about anything concerning Linux.
It's mostly the bandwagon types and the pundits who go on and on about these things, and why should we cater to them? After all, business could drop Linux altogether, decide to deal with MS until the end of time, and the folks who develop Linux as a hobby will still be plugging away. Works for me.
Linux is supposed to be a high-quality alternative to other operating systems.
Linux isn't 'supposed to be' anything other than what we say it is, especially those in development. This is pundit-speak; the spew that pundits commit to articles in order to make themselves appear far more important than they are.
This isn't going to impress, and it gives competitors valid ammunition.
Linux has no competitors. Red Hat, SuSe, etc., now they might have computers; but Linux does not. And as I said before, most of the developers don't care in the slightest about other operating systems, or what some PR lackey from another company or a self-appointed pundit has to say about the situation.
Almost all successful enterprises have to overcome a hurdle: how to transition from the "just for fun" start-up stage to the "managed with professionalism" stage.
It's clear you're missing the entire point. Linux is not an enterprise; the process that's used to produce Linux doesn't have to 'transition' to anything. You're confusing a bunch of volunteer developers hacking up an OS with an actual business. Apples and oranges.
Linux needs more professionalism in the management of releases, I believe.
Linux is doing just fine the way it is. If you want more 'professionalism' I'd suggest you 'transition' yourself to Windows XP. That OS is produced by a business which seems to be what you're looking for anyway.
Max
This is precisely the case. Unlike Internet Explorer in the Windows Shell, you just can't pull out the VM with ease and still leave everything else intact. This is because Linux is a monolithic kernel with many things tightly interwoven for performance, the VM among them. You can't stick it into a module and choose it at compile time.
Or rather, you could but you'd have to rewrite large chunks of the kernel to do so. And debug it. And make some other things less efficient. Etc. But as someone said, this is Linux and that means that anyone is welcome to try....
Max
If the highly paid IT staff is incapable of retraining *themselves* to a new OS and associated apps without a great deal of pain and suffering, then the IT staff is full of incompetent idiots that should be fired. Clearly such a staff has little, if any, native ability or talent.
I've never been 'trained'. It's always been assumed, in any job I held, that I would sink or swim on my own, and I'd better damn well get with the program if I wanted to keep the new job. I don't complain about this method; it separates the morons from the people who can actually do the job.
What all of these complaints about training tell me is that the IT staff in most organizations is just plain useless for anything other than a driver install or mucking about with the Control Panel. Christ. Talk about dead weight.
Max
Where is the factual, empirical evidence that supporting Linux costs just as much as supporting Windows? All I ever hear on the subject amounts to a bunch of self-appointed 'experts' blowing hot air out of their collective asses.
Collect some empirical evidence, then report back.
Max
My question: what the hell is the government doing 'negotiating' about anything? What bullshit is this? For crying out loud, you don't see our justice system 'negotiating' terms for convicted criminals when they're people - why do corporations get special treatment?
If our government had any goddamn balls whatsoever it'd simply hand over the judgement to MS and say "this is what you're going to do, criminal scumbags. If you don't like it your entire board of directors and senior management can rot in jail - and we'll STILL take over your company and enforce our edicts."
Our government is a bunch of pussies. And willing, cocksucking pussies at that.
Max
Add this: what if part of the function of the object code is to provide the source code on demand? That is, if one of the inherent aspects of your cd ripper is to offer up the source code for said ripper as well as rip cds, isn't the object code a primary medium of communication? If one of it's essential functions is to communicate what is now called a form of free speech, doesn't that make the object code (a rendering of this free speech) also a vehicle for free speech, in this case self-description through both source AND functionality?
Max
Simply amazing how many ignorant fuckwits come out of the woodwork when it comes to the travails of third world nations. Not willing to admit that just about every First World nation in existence has actively worked to create the current global disparity in economic wealth, apologists reigns supreme, heaping blame upon third world countries left and right.
First World = imports raw materials, exports expensive finished goods. Third World = source of cheap raw materials and ineffective enemies ready to invade when the people at home start questioning their government.
The third world isn't in the pickle that it's in because the people who populate it are stupid, sleazy, lazy, or whatever the hell else people are claiming. They're there because in order to sustain our own rush up the industrial ladder we needed cheap raw materials and the next best thing to slave labor to propel us into the future. Without the materials and labor it would've been more difficult to cover the same ground, and who doesn't take the lazy way out when it's offered?
If anyone can prove that the third world managed to dig itself into a hole - all 200+ countries - because of some innate character flaw that those in the First World don't possess, please, enlighten us! I'm dying to hear the argument that supports this view!
But for the amoral pragmatists who don't give a damn who starves so long as their own gluttonous needs are fulfilled, I'd say look at the situation pragmatically. Hunger and despair breed desperation, desperation breeds fanatics, and the fanatics are getting better and better at causing mass destruction. Out of simple self-preservation it would seem logical that the First World attempt to bring the Third World into the 20th century (forget the 21st, they're nowhere near that yet) simply to avoid things like having national landmarks blown to bits. Certainly it's less expensive and far more friendly than bombing the hell out of people whenever we get bored.
Max
That depends on how you define socialism. It's possible to have a generally unregulated market while implementing other measures that we'd consider socialist:
- basic housing, clothing, and food
- free health care
- free higher education
The government in this case could provide the lowest common denominator to make sure that all of its people are taken care of, while allowing a free market to offer better alternatives at a price. For example, you could take government housing in a tiny apartment, or work to get a better apartment or a house offered privately. Or go to a 'better' school. Or whatever.
This isn't socialism, but I'd argue that it's far more socialist than capitalist considering the broad government interference in the free market system (by providing tax-supported services that would otherwise be vended through the market). Note, however, that no market regulation or 'price fixing' is required to implement these socialist measures.
Max
True enough, but this is an attempt to allow the clueless newbie to install in the easiest fashion possible. For the rest of us we can use the RPM, find a tarball, or even compile the source if we so desire. I do all three depending on the package and what will require the least amount of effort with the lowest possibility of something going wrong.
That's what I like about SuSe: I can be utterly braindead if I want, or I can use any number of alternatives to the SuSe system. The more choices I have and the less work I have to do, the happier I am - even if the system is less than perfect.
Max