"He never once describes the scientific culture that is the subject" - actually, he does, by saying several times that such a separate culture does not exist: "Pete Nanos ran his lab into the ground by insisting on the existence of a distinctive culture that was largely an artifact of his own imagination... Second, the organizational dysfunction at Los Alamos has been misdiagnosed as a problem of culture; it is more likely a problem of structure."
"Given that the civil liberties you speak about really comes from the legislative branch of Government and not the Executive" - that's wrong both philosophically and realistically. In the philosophy of law, civil liberties originate in natural law and are codified in the Constitution. That's the essential difference between a right and a privilege - a privilege can be revoked, a right cannot. It is your right not to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process, and the Constition says as much.
Now where Obama is concerned, during the 2008 campaign criticized the Bush administration for holding people without trial indefinitely and torturing them. But once elected, within weeks of taking office he secretely promised Bush administration officials that they would not be investigated by the Justice department (which is part of the executive branch). He said he would close Guantanamo Bay (which he could do with an executive order) and didn't. His administration done more to prosecutive whisteblowers than any previous administration (by far). And now he claims the right to have the military (also in the executive branch) kill an American citizen without due process just because he says they are involved in terrorism. Even Bush would never have done that.
So no, he absolutely does not deserve a free pass.
Obama's rhetoric on civil liberties during the 2008 campaign was spot on. Given how horrible his actual civil liberties track record has been - "Obama has proved a disaster not just for specific civil liberties but the civil liberties cause in the United States" is how Jonathan Turley described him in a recent LA Times opo-ed - I'd like to hear him or one of his spokespeople try to defend his record on this matter.
Krzysztof Penderecki's Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima is the most horrible "music" I've ever heard. (Intentionally so - Penderecki made it as dissonant and a-tonal and possible)
This sounds great if you're doing stuff like autotuning, but for the vast (vast, vast, vast) majority of programmers out there I don't really see how opening up the internals of the compiler is useful. Who cares if that loop gets fused or that function gets unrolled?
You could put two dozen copies of Ass Goblins of Auschwitz in every grocery store, book store, and magazine stand in American and I promise it would still not be a best seller.
The DOE categorizes their supercomputers into capacity machines and capability machines.
The capacity machines are the work horses - time-shared between lots of users doing a variety of applications (including material science, life science, nuclear simulation, etc). The spend pretty much their entire lives near maximum utilization.
The capability machines are the really big ones (Jaguar, Road Runner, etc) that are big enough to permit applications that are too large (require too much RAM or have absurdly long running times) to run on most systems. (Capability machines are also quite difficult to administer because none of the software they run has ever been tested at those scales)
"To not do so would be like attempting to teach mathematics without discussing multiplication, or chemistry without talking about the periodic table, or American history without mentioning the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence."
"It is a legitimate concern, but competitive mechanisms tend to weed this out.' - Yea, just look at how the market weeded out ValueJet. Oh wait, they killed 110 people, changed their name to AirTran to escape their tarnished brand, and are doing fine now.
I worked in Los Alamos a couple years ago and made it a point to get out to the black hole. I was *very* disappointed that they were sold out of Geiger counters, but I did manage to get a machete other small stuff on the cheap.
"maybe Congress approved the UN charter, which validates the security council resolution authorizing the action" - This is a non-sequitur if I've ever seen it. Just because a nation ratifies the United Nations charter does *not* mean that UN resolutions become the law of those nations. See Reid v. Covert, where the US Supreme Court said that treaties cannot overrule the Constitution, which exclusively gives war making powers to the United States Congress.
Apple has to have an actual legal basis to file a lawsuit. I'm saying they have none. It's rather hard to provide a citation to something that doesn't exist.
Trademark law protects against trademark infringement (which is using a competitor's trademark on your own product) or trademark dillution (which is using someone else's trademark on your own product in a different market that doesn't compete with the original). Both of these are illegal under numerous laws, starting with the 1946 Lanham act (15 U.S.C. 1051-1141) However, mentioning the name of someone else's product is not illegal - it happens on TV anytime any advertisement mentions any product except the one being advertised.
but they can stop you from using the word "iPad", the Myriad Set font, and any other Apple trademarks when advertising the give-away.
No, they can't. They can only assert their trademarks to prevent market confusion - specifically, against a competing product with a similar name or similar branding. If you are giving away a genuine Apple-made iPad, there is nothing they can do to prevent you from saying that you are giving away an Apple iPad.
The night before John F. Kennedy's inauguration in 1961, a snowstorm dumped 8 inches of snow on Washington DC. The Army Corps of Engineers worked franticly, using flamethrowers to clear the streets. Click here for the full story.
That's true to some extent (especially where aircraft are concerned), but the rifle analogy is not quite correct.
In Vietnam, American troops were armed with the recently-developed M-16, early versions of which frequently jammed. They jammed because the rifle was prototyped using ammunition packed with pellet-shaped nitrocellulose gunpowder (which worked fine in bad conditions), but mass-produced using stick-type nitrocellulose/nitrogylcerin gunpowder (which fouled the barrel if the weapon was not cleaned regularly). The lack of cleaning supplies and instructions for troops didn't help matters either.
Once this design flaw was identified, the powder was changed, the barrel was lined with chrome, and troops were given instructions and tools to clean the weapons. Afterward, they became much more reliable in jungle conditions.
There was a cartoon that someone taped to the wall where I worked at GSFC "back in the day" that showed a mouse in a lab coat poking a mouse trap. The caption was "One test is worth a thousand expert opinions."
Then don't call it a fine -- call it the standard rate for putting out the fires of non-subscribers.
In other words, if the fire department shows up at your house and puts out a fire there, they will charge you $0 if you paid your yearly $75 subscription fee. If you didn't, they will charge you a lot more. (Enough to cover the cost so that they don't go overbudget for non-subscribers) This is perfectly legal and would lead to the best outcome for all concerned.
The operating system manages the hardware, and provides an interface between the hardware and applications. Everything else is an application (including most libraries, since they're just reusable parts of applications). br/?
That's the definition of a microkernel. But that is irrelevant in a discussion about Windows, which is a monolithic kernel and does other things like incorporating a TCP/IP stack, file systems, virtual memory, etc -- none of which fit your definition of what an OS should do. So the GP's point is well taken - there is no single agreed-upon definition of what should be in the operating system, and what should be left to user-space; different operating systems do it differently.
Slashdot Mirror
"He never once describes the scientific culture that is the subject" - actually, he does, by saying several times that such a separate culture does not exist: "Pete Nanos ran his lab into the ground by insisting on the existence of a distinctive culture that was largely an artifact of his own imagination... Second, the organizational dysfunction at Los Alamos has been misdiagnosed as a problem of culture; it is more likely a problem of structure."
"Given that the civil liberties you speak about really comes from the legislative branch of Government and not the Executive" - that's wrong both philosophically and realistically. In the philosophy of law, civil liberties originate in natural law and are codified in the Constitution. That's the essential difference between a right and a privilege - a privilege can be revoked, a right cannot. It is your right not to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process, and the Constition says as much.
Now where Obama is concerned, during the 2008 campaign criticized the Bush administration for holding people without trial indefinitely and torturing them. But once elected, within weeks of taking office he secretely promised Bush administration officials that they would not be investigated by the Justice department (which is part of the executive branch). He said he would close Guantanamo Bay (which he could do with an executive order) and didn't. His administration done more to prosecutive whisteblowers than any previous administration (by far). And now he claims the right to have the military (also in the executive branch) kill an American citizen without due process just because he says they are involved in terrorism. Even Bush would never have done that.
So no, he absolutely does not deserve a free pass.
Obama's rhetoric on civil liberties during the 2008 campaign was spot on. Given how horrible his actual civil liberties track record has been - "Obama has proved a disaster not just for specific civil liberties but the civil liberties cause in the United States" is how Jonathan Turley described him in a recent LA Times opo-ed - I'd like to hear him or one of his spokespeople try to defend his record on this matter.
Krzysztof Penderecki's Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima is the most horrible "music" I've ever heard. (Intentionally so - Penderecki made it as dissonant and a-tonal and possible)
Don't believe me? Listen to it here
A catalyst is, by definition, not consumed in the catalyzed reaction. If they created a catalyst, then it will not bind to the hydrogen.
This sounds great if you're doing stuff like autotuning, but for the vast (vast, vast, vast) majority of programmers out there I don't really see how opening up the internals of the compiler is useful. Who cares if that loop gets fused or that function gets unrolled?
Amazon.com suggested it to me. I guess Amazon has decide that I'm weird. (And I guess they're right since I'm probably going to buy it at some point)
You could put two dozen copies of Ass Goblins of Auschwitz in
every grocery store, book store, and magazine stand in American and I promise it would still not be a best seller.
Whoops - swing and a miss.
It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out the identity of the woman. There are very, very few women who live to be 115, and Wikipedia has a comprehensive list of them. Since 2006, only three women have died at the age of 115. The BBC article says the women entered assisted living at the age of 105. I tried cross referencing that with their Wikipedia biographies, and bam - "She lived on her own until 1999 when she was 105 years old, and resided at the Western Convalescent Home in Jefferson Park, Los Angeles until her death." The identify of the woman is Gertrude Baines.
The DOE categorizes their supercomputers into capacity machines and capability machines.
The capacity machines are the work horses - time-shared between lots of users doing a variety of applications (including material science, life science, nuclear simulation, etc). The spend pretty much their entire lives near maximum utilization.
The capability machines are the really big ones (Jaguar, Road Runner, etc) that are big enough to permit applications that are too large (require too much RAM or have absurdly long running times) to run on most systems. (Capability machines are also quite difficult to administer because none of the software they run has ever been tested at those scales)
"To not do so would be like attempting to teach mathematics without discussing multiplication, or chemistry without talking about the periodic table, or American history without mentioning the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence."
It's even more profound than that. As Theodosius Dobzhansky titled his famous essay on the subject: Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution
Sounds like something Scalia would support
"It is a legitimate concern, but competitive mechanisms tend to weed this out.' - Yea, just look at how the market weeded out ValueJet. Oh wait, they killed 110 people, changed their name to AirTran to escape their tarnished brand, and are doing fine now.
I worked in Los Alamos a couple years ago and made it a point to get out to the black hole. I was *very* disappointed that they were sold out of Geiger counters, but I did manage to get a machete other small stuff on the cheap.
"maybe Congress approved the UN charter, which validates the security council resolution authorizing the action" - This is a non-sequitur if I've ever seen it. Just because a nation ratifies the United Nations charter does *not* mean that UN resolutions become the law of those nations. See Reid v. Covert, where the US Supreme Court said that treaties cannot overrule the Constitution, which exclusively gives war making powers to the United States Congress.
Apple has to have an actual legal basis to file a lawsuit. I'm saying they have none. It's rather hard to provide a citation to something that doesn't exist.
Trademark law protects against trademark infringement (which is using a competitor's trademark on your own product) or trademark dillution (which is using someone else's trademark on your own product in a different market that doesn't compete with the original). Both of these are illegal under numerous laws, starting with the 1946 Lanham act (15 U.S.C. 1051-1141) However, mentioning the name of someone else's product is not illegal - it happens on TV anytime any advertisement mentions any product except the one being advertised.
but they can stop you from using the word "iPad", the Myriad Set font, and any other Apple trademarks when advertising the give-away.
No, they can't. They can only assert their trademarks to prevent market confusion - specifically, against a competing product with a similar name or similar branding. If you are giving away a genuine Apple-made iPad, there is nothing they can do to prevent you from saying that you are giving away an Apple iPad.
The night before John F. Kennedy's inauguration in 1961, a snowstorm dumped 8 inches of snow on Washington DC. The Army Corps of Engineers worked franticly, using flamethrowers to clear the streets. Click here for the full story.
They didn't do so well in the tests you cite, but those tests were conducted in "extreme dust and sand" conditions designed to mimic a sandstorm so they are not exactly representative of their typical operating environment.
That's true to some extent (especially where aircraft are concerned), but the rifle analogy is not quite correct.
In Vietnam, American troops were armed with the recently-developed M-16, early versions of which frequently jammed. They jammed because the rifle was prototyped using ammunition packed with pellet-shaped nitrocellulose gunpowder (which worked fine in bad conditions), but mass-produced using stick-type nitrocellulose/nitrogylcerin gunpowder (which fouled the barrel if the weapon was not cleaned regularly). The lack of cleaning supplies and instructions for troops didn't help matters either.
Once this design flaw was identified, the powder was changed, the barrel was lined with chrome, and troops were given instructions and tools to clean the weapons. Afterward, they became much more reliable in jungle conditions.
There was a cartoon that someone taped to the wall where I worked at GSFC "back in the day" that showed a mouse in a lab coat poking a mouse trap. The caption was "One test is worth a thousand expert opinions."
I don't suppose you have a link for this?
That might be the oldest lolcat, but there are definitely older pictures of cats.
Then don't call it a fine -- call it the standard rate for putting out the fires of non-subscribers.
In other words, if the fire department shows up at your house and puts out a fire there, they will charge you $0 if you paid your yearly $75 subscription fee. If you didn't, they will charge you a lot more. (Enough to cover the cost so that they don't go overbudget for non-subscribers) This is perfectly legal and would lead to the best outcome for all concerned.
The operating system manages the hardware, and provides an interface between the hardware and applications. Everything else is an application (including most libraries, since they're just reusable parts of applications).
br/?
That's the definition of a microkernel. But that is irrelevant in a discussion about Windows, which is a monolithic kernel and does other things like incorporating a TCP/IP stack, file systems, virtual memory, etc -- none of which fit your definition of what an OS should do. So the GP's point is well taken - there is no single agreed-upon definition of what should be in the operating system, and what should be left to user-space; different operating systems do it differently.