They could drop the second 'g' and have the file format simply be.og, (8.3 naming conventions aside). Instant street cred, O.G.
I don't think 'ahg' is too funny sounding, and 'oh gee gee' isn't that bad, either. Ogg isn't a bad name at all. I always thought mp3 was kinda hinky, actually, perhaps because I thought that using a number in a file extension was bad form.
I hope you do too. You don't have to be a 'super knowledgeable, and fashionably environmentalist' person to do that.
Or, do you refuse to do something like that just to prove that you're not one of those types?
I really hope you posted that because you wish everybody did that, not because you wouldn't just to prove that you reject the 'get hip' environmentalists.
If you do get modded down, it'll be because you're not smart enough to realize that Polar Bears don't live in Antarctica, they live in the regions near the North Pole, and that just because you don't perceive a change in the weather climate change can't be happening.
Gordon Moore ( not sure about the name ) one of the former heads of Green Peace regretted recently that the whole env. movement has been hijacked by anti-corporate and other political interests.
Yeah, that's the one. He has not, however, recanted much of his views. I agree with him, in that a great deal of environmental activists are less interested in what works in terms of environmental issues and more interested in ramming their lifestyles down our throats.
I consider myself a strong environmentalist, but I eat meat, wear leather, hunt, fish and generally love and enjoy the earth. Not everyone who is part of the Green movement is a waspafarian vegan who gets off on telling other people how to live their lives. I just believe that it's completely within our power to pollute less, derive fuels from sources other than petroleum, and generate power more effectively. I am absolutely in favor of building newer, more efficient and less polluting power plants, and believe that by installing solar cells on the roofs of houses and office buildings, we can solve a lot of our energy worries ( I know Enron and Duke energy claim it's pointless, but hey, they would, wouldn't they?)
Fires are part of the ecology in California, and many other places as well. Some species of plants rely on fires to trigger their fertilization. Other plants, Poison Oak being my favorite example, are 'fire proofed', in that their roots go deep and spread wide, so that when the above ground portion of the plant burns, the roots stay alive. If you take a walk through a fire-scorched area a few weeks afterwards, you'll see dozens of shoots popping up out of where the plant burned to the ground. Fires return various nutrients back to the soil, and like I said, all species of plants that grow in areas where brushfires are common have evolved to utilize this naturally occurring event.
Fires are supposed to happen here, and it's like building your house on a flood plain. If you have to live in an area where brush fires are part of the ecosystem, for god's sake, don't build your house out of wood, and cut back all the brush around your house. Also, we should eradicate all the Eucalyptus. It's a pest, not supposed to be here, and it's full of oil. One of the reasons why the Bay Area firestorms where so devastating is that the Oakland/Berkeley hills are covered with Eucalyptus, which contributes to the firestorm effect, and magnifies the damage by orders of magnitude.
Fires are part of the ecosystem, and their occurence is totally normal. In fact, our constant attempts to limit them only increases the damage that they do when they happen, which is inevitable.
The term "Global Warming" is something of a misnomer. The process is like this: over a shorter period of time than normal, the average temperature of the planet goes up more than normal. It's normal for the average temperatures to vary a few degrees over time. Climatologists don't dispute that. What the issue is here is that the planet may warm up by as much as 10 degress C over a relatively short period of time, say 30 years or so. This would be bad. It would result in temperature fluctuations, both warm and cold, all over the planet. The polar ice caps would melt at faster rates, the Gulf Stream may stop or reverse, ocean currents may change. Agriculture would be impacted, and not for the better.
The impact could be disastrous, resulting in droughts and floods, less snow in the mountains that places like California rely upon for their water supplies, etc. El Nino is a phenomenon that happens every four years. You can set your watch by it. Imagine if every year there was some kind of El Nino-like phenomenon, or it just became unpredictable. Ecosystems like the temperate rainforests in the Pacific Northwest or the deserts in the Southwest could be severly impacted. Ocean currents, if disturbed, could throw fisheries off kilter. It's subtle, but like coins in the jar on your dresser, it adds up.
That being said, regardless of whether or not you "believe" in global warming, isn't it just generally a good thing to pollute less? If anything, at least it will help keep your property values intact. I suppose we could spend forever spinning our wheels on whether or not it's happening, but the true issue is that we pollute. We have the technology to pollute less, we have the ability to live better than we do, but people would rather pretend that there isn't a problem. I don't know why, but there it is. I sort my garbage, I don't drive unless I have to. I'd like to do it less, but since it's so declasse to use public transportation, no one wants to increase it's availability.
There are so many things that we could do as a nation ( the U.S.) but don't. That's the true issue at hand.
This should transcend political ideologies, but the right claims that cutting pollution will destroy our economy, and the left seems to want us all to live in grass huts. They're both wrong, and they are both missing the point.
Not if you didn't build the installer that way. If you're using InstallShield, for instance, you can totally blow away the file associations without prompting. The considerate thing to do is prompt the user, but not everyone thinks it's necessarily a good thing. As anyone who's done web content heavy duty knows, just as you've got it so that you open HTML with your favorite editor, MS releases a point release for Exploder that wipes out your associations...
The difference is that the images taken by the cameras are compared to images of criminals. A cop on the street corner can't set up a checkpoint a la Johannesburg or Belfast, these security cameras are basically passive checkpoints. Considering that 'sobriety checkpoints' aren't kosher, how can these be?
I'm curious as to what the possible health effects might be from eating something that has been genetically modified.
It's not as though we take on traits of something just because we ate it. We don't become more strawberry-like if we eat strawberries, do we?
Suppose you ate some corn that had a jellyfish protein in it. Wouldn't that be somewhat akin to eating corn with jellyfish on it?
There are legitimate concerns over what Monsanto/DuPont etc. do with their products and how they market them, but really, what is the concern here? I'm curious to know what the perceived health threats are. Cancer? How? From what?
"We don't know" isn't a good enough answer. I want specifics. I want to know in what possible ways a genetically engineered strawberry designed to resist frost can hurt me.
Just because it's organic, doesn't mean it's not treated with pesticides/herbicides. BT is commonly used, and I think that's pretty much a pesticide.
Organic farms use commercial seeds, and sometimes use genetically modified variants. Organic producers pledge that they won't use non-organic pesticides and fertilizers, but they definitely manipulate the environment.
Just a reality check in case you thought an organic farm was something like your back garden.
I'm not at all surprised that they didn't consider it art. It seems that there are some very narrow definitions of what 'art' is.
"Good Art", meaning the kind that sells in trendy galleries and gets written up in Art rags is invariably Abstract Expressionism, and it doesn't hurt to have a social commentary, preferably one that seeks to raise consciousness WRT one or more marginalized sub-groups (subalterns) in a given society. You can also go with the "Art for art's sake" approach, which will result in sales, but lessens the likelihood that your work will live on.
"Good Art" doesn't have to have this, but it helps. You can also make your art "good" by utilizing controversial themes (people having to step on the flag to sign the guestbook, etc.) and/or materials (feces, urine, etc.)
However, just because you follow those guidelines, it does not guarantee success, nor does it mean that you are an artist. Robert Mapplethorpe *is* an artist, some of his work was controversial at one point, but his work lives on. Robert Kostabi was a flash in the pan, and who's heard of him?
Art is subjective, true. It is also a business, and artists are encouraged to make the meaning of their work obscure or, better yet, inscrutable, so wealthy people will furnish their homes and offices with intriguing yet non-confrontational pieces, and the buyers buy it because it's an investment, generally not because they grokked what the artist was trying to say.
"Edgier" art, like performance art, installations, and video/film work is not really hangable on a wall, so you may get props for your cutting-edge one person performance complete with plenty of references to sexual organs and alternative lifestyles, you probably won't be considered "Good Art" because you can't sell that.
MySQL is nice, for 'pet' database type things, or a small to mid-range non-OLTP type system, but there no freaking way that its an enterprise quality database. It just ain't there. I know that there are people out there who would claim otherwise, but I'd say they didn't know what they were talking about.
Red Hat probably wants to occupy the space that someone like Filemaker or maybe Foxpro would have previously occupied. Considering that Oracle and IBM have Linux implementations, that class of database stuff is already covered.
Postgres is usually included in most distros, but if Red Hat can manage to dress it up, perhaps slap a GUI on it, then they'll be cooking with gas, and definitely in a position to fool around with small, light load utility typw databases for non-mission critical and no heavy transactions (like Filemaker or Foxpro or even that abomination known as Access...)
Apple reminds me of Q-Bert. A funny little creature that jumps from place to place to avoid the bad guys, and periodically transforms into a creature with extra powers, only to eventually become the little creature hopping from place to place again.
Well, it's certainly either metabolized by the fungus, or the fungus secretes a substance that 'destroys' the aluminum the same way it might be if exposed to some type of corrosive agent, so yes, functionally the aluminum is destroyed. So there, Mr. Smarty.
Seeing as how I wasn't a CS major, I never had to write any code or do any programming for college.
That being said, at my college, papers and theses were yours, but many people left theses and papers behind for use as sources for other papers/theses (you had to quote them like you would any other source, you were on your honor not to plagiarize, they were kept in a library and you couldn't check them out, plagiarism would get you booted out.)
As far as I know, Harvey Mudd (across the street) had a pretty hands off policy toward student work, it was yours to with what you wanted, I don't think they laid claim to anybody's schoolwork unless they wanted to contribute it. I know for sure that if you took a CS class at Mudd or Pomona, your home college's policies where in effect regarding IP for any class, this applied to pretty much all class work, regardless of the department.
For an educational institution to try to lay claim to a student's work in any field would be in pretty bad form, although it's not unheard of for profs to swipe undergrad work and try to push it off as their own. I've never known of any instances where I went to school, but I'm sure it happens. There wasn't a big push for profs to publish either, but this might be a different situation at a larger University where it's "publish or perish"
I started working in IT in 1995, for a start-up that made web-based applications for HR systems, and we did well, well enough to get bought and for all our stock to be worth something.
So I took some time off and started with another start-up last fall, which went bust because nobody would fund them.
I tried going independent, but all the companies that I could have had jobs with earlier had ceased all web development (mainly intranet type stuff). Everyone I talked to was either in a hiring freeze or was actively laying people off.
I have five recruiters out there working on my behalf, and went on one interview.
I have all the right skills, I'm a great writer, can do analysis, work with clients, all the good stuff that might make me a standout candidate, but I get nowhere out in California. Seriously thinking about moving the hell out of here.
Fortunately, things seem to be picking up again, as companies begin to realize "Hey! That internet stuff does work!". A few months ago, lots of companies irrationally slashed their web-based development efforts because they heard something on the news about the "Dot-com bust", figuring it had something to do with the technology behind it, not investment bankers getting ahead of themselves. Now that it's over, larger vendors in this area like PeopleSoft, who five years ago said "This internet thing will never work" are now claiming to have a "total internet" platform, and IT managers will be scrambling to get their staffing back up.
The days of the hot startup are over, and I'm glad to see them go, but finding work has been really exasperating, as I have heard the same thing over and over again "We'd love to hire you, but we don't have any openings." or, "I'd love to hire you, but I have to lay off three people next week." Ugh. I'm moving.
Society is built on exchange. One particular form of exchange that we're genetically wired for is reciprocal altruism: speculative generosity with expectation of future payoff.
I have to dispute this. We are not genetically wired for this kind of behavior. We're genetically wired for some things, but this is not one of them. We see such trust and altruism in societies both modern and primitive, as a survival strategy (strength in numbers), but I don't think we're wired for it.
I agree with the points of the article, but altruism stems from an ethical doctrine that, while fairly widespread, is socialized in to people. We're not born with that value, notice how you have to teach children to share. People are taught that it's ethically virtuous to act in an altruistic fashion, but we learn that, not born with it.
I have been reading Salon for years now, and am aware of their leftist tilt, and that's fine for me since you don't get a lot of that from the other news sources.
Salon's main thrust has always been commentary, and that follows a pretty wide spectrum, with David Horowitz, Camille Paglia, and Arianna Huffington to name a few. They defy easy compartmentalization in terms right/left.
If I want headlines, I got to a news site, the BBC has a good one. When I want commentary, I go to sites like Salon, which strive to provide analysis.
That being said, I don't like it enough to subscribe, since most of the good stuff is available for free there.
Salon's comics are also great, I'd miss my Monday dose of Tom Tomorrow.
Slashdot Mirror
They could drop the second 'g' and have the file format simply be .og, (8.3 naming conventions aside). Instant street cred, O.G.
I don't think 'ahg' is too funny sounding, and 'oh gee gee' isn't that bad, either. Ogg isn't a bad name at all. I always thought mp3 was kinda hinky, actually, perhaps because I thought that using a number in a file extension was bad form.
Hey, if the Stones can change the words to "Let's spend the Night Together" for Ed Sullivan...
I hope you do too. You don't have to be a 'super knowledgeable, and fashionably environmentalist' person to do that.
Or, do you refuse to do something like that just to prove that you're not one of those types?
I really hope you posted that because you wish everybody did that, not because you wouldn't just to prove that you reject the 'get hip' environmentalists.
If you do get modded down, it'll be because you're not smart enough to realize that Polar Bears don't live in Antarctica, they live in the regions near the North Pole, and that just because you don't perceive a change in the weather climate change can't be happening.
Yeah, that's the one. He has not, however, recanted much of his views. I agree with him, in that a great deal of environmental activists are less interested in what works in terms of environmental issues and more interested in ramming their lifestyles down our throats.
I consider myself a strong environmentalist, but I eat meat, wear leather, hunt, fish and generally love and enjoy the earth. Not everyone who is part of the Green movement is a waspafarian vegan who gets off on telling other people how to live their lives. I just believe that it's completely within our power to pollute less, derive fuels from sources other than petroleum, and generate power more effectively. I am absolutely in favor of building newer, more efficient and less polluting power plants, and believe that by installing solar cells on the roofs of houses and office buildings, we can solve a lot of our energy worries ( I know Enron and Duke energy claim it's pointless, but hey, they would, wouldn't they?)
Fires are supposed to happen here, and it's like building your house on a flood plain. If you have to live in an area where brush fires are part of the ecosystem, for god's sake, don't build your house out of wood, and cut back all the brush around your house. Also, we should eradicate all the Eucalyptus. It's a pest, not supposed to be here, and it's full of oil. One of the reasons why the Bay Area firestorms where so devastating is that the Oakland/Berkeley hills are covered with Eucalyptus, which contributes to the firestorm effect, and magnifies the damage by orders of magnitude.
Fires are part of the ecosystem, and their occurence is totally normal. In fact, our constant attempts to limit them only increases the damage that they do when they happen, which is inevitable.
The term "Global Warming" is something of a misnomer. The process is like this: over a shorter period of time than normal, the average temperature of the planet goes up more than normal. It's normal for the average temperatures to vary a few degrees over time. Climatologists don't dispute that. What the issue is here is that the planet may warm up by as much as 10 degress C over a relatively short period of time, say 30 years or so. This would be bad. It would result in temperature fluctuations, both warm and cold, all over the planet. The polar ice caps would melt at faster rates, the Gulf Stream may stop or reverse, ocean currents may change. Agriculture would be impacted, and not for the better.
The impact could be disastrous, resulting in droughts and floods, less snow in the mountains that places like California rely upon for their water supplies, etc. El Nino is a phenomenon that happens every four years. You can set your watch by it. Imagine if every year there was some kind of El Nino-like phenomenon, or it just became unpredictable. Ecosystems like the temperate rainforests in the Pacific Northwest or the deserts in the Southwest could be severly impacted. Ocean currents, if disturbed, could throw fisheries off kilter. It's subtle, but like coins in the jar on your dresser, it adds up.
That being said, regardless of whether or not you "believe" in global warming, isn't it just generally a good thing to pollute less? If anything, at least it will help keep your property values intact. I suppose we could spend forever spinning our wheels on whether or not it's happening, but the true issue is that we pollute. We have the technology to pollute less, we have the ability to live better than we do, but people would rather pretend that there isn't a problem. I don't know why, but there it is. I sort my garbage, I don't drive unless I have to. I'd like to do it less, but since it's so declasse to use public transportation, no one wants to increase it's availability.
There are so many things that we could do as a nation ( the U.S.) but don't. That's the true issue at hand.
This should transcend political ideologies, but the right claims that cutting pollution will destroy our economy, and the left seems to want us all to live in grass huts. They're both wrong, and they are both missing the point.
I *hate* that...
The difference is that the images taken by the cameras are compared to images of criminals. A cop on the street corner can't set up a checkpoint a la Johannesburg or Belfast, these security cameras are basically passive checkpoints. Considering that 'sobriety checkpoints' aren't kosher, how can these be?
It would be worth the drive to go to Nellis...
Nessie has nothing on Lake Tahoe's singing fish.
It's not as though we take on traits of something just because we ate it. We don't become more strawberry-like if we eat strawberries, do we?
Suppose you ate some corn that had a jellyfish protein in it. Wouldn't that be somewhat akin to eating corn with jellyfish on it?
There are legitimate concerns over what Monsanto/DuPont etc. do with their products and how they market them, but really, what is the concern here? I'm curious to know what the perceived health threats are. Cancer? How? From what?
"We don't know" isn't a good enough answer. I want specifics. I want to know in what possible ways a genetically engineered strawberry designed to resist frost can hurt me.
Organic farms use commercial seeds, and sometimes use genetically modified variants. Organic producers pledge that they won't use non-organic pesticides and fertilizers, but they definitely manipulate the environment.
Just a reality check in case you thought an organic farm was something like your back garden.
"Good Art", meaning the kind that sells in trendy galleries and gets written up in Art rags is invariably Abstract Expressionism, and it doesn't hurt to have a social commentary, preferably one that seeks to raise consciousness WRT one or more marginalized sub-groups (subalterns) in a given society. You can also go with the "Art for art's sake" approach, which will result in sales, but lessens the likelihood that your work will live on.
"Good Art" doesn't have to have this, but it helps. You can also make your art "good" by utilizing controversial themes (people having to step on the flag to sign the guestbook, etc.) and/or materials (feces, urine, etc.)
However, just because you follow those guidelines, it does not guarantee success, nor does it mean that you are an artist. Robert Mapplethorpe *is* an artist, some of his work was controversial at one point, but his work lives on. Robert Kostabi was a flash in the pan, and who's heard of him?
Art is subjective, true. It is also a business, and artists are encouraged to make the meaning of their work obscure or, better yet, inscrutable, so wealthy people will furnish their homes and offices with intriguing yet non-confrontational pieces, and the buyers buy it because it's an investment, generally not because they grokked what the artist was trying to say.
"Edgier" art, like performance art, installations, and video/film work is not really hangable on a wall, so you may get props for your cutting-edge one person performance complete with plenty of references to sexual organs and alternative lifestyles, you probably won't be considered "Good Art" because you can't sell that.
Red Hat probably wants to occupy the space that someone like Filemaker or maybe Foxpro would have previously occupied. Considering that Oracle and IBM have Linux implementations, that class of database stuff is already covered.
Postgres is usually included in most distros, but if Red Hat can manage to dress it up, perhaps slap a GUI on it, then they'll be cooking with gas, and definitely in a position to fool around with small, light load utility typw databases for non-mission critical and no heavy transactions (like Filemaker or Foxpro or even that abomination known as Access...)
Jupitor orbits gigantor, which is located in the crab nebula.
Red- Oracle
Blue - IBM
Orange - Sun
Pink - GNU (Pinko Communists!)
The power pellets are technologies MS can steal to temporarily overpower and consume the ghosts...
Apple reminds me of Q-Bert. A funny little creature that jumps from place to place to avoid the bad guys, and periodically transforms into a creature with extra powers, only to eventually become the little creature hopping from place to place again.
Well, it's certainly either metabolized by the fungus, or the fungus secretes a substance that 'destroys' the aluminum the same way it might be if exposed to some type of corrosive agent, so yes, functionally the aluminum is destroyed. So there, Mr. Smarty.
Hmm. Looks like U of M needs to have some more English/Composition requirements for CS.
That being said, at my college, papers and theses were yours, but many people left theses and papers behind for use as sources for other papers/theses (you had to quote them like you would any other source, you were on your honor not to plagiarize, they were kept in a library and you couldn't check them out, plagiarism would get you booted out.)
As far as I know, Harvey Mudd (across the street) had a pretty hands off policy toward student work, it was yours to with what you wanted, I don't think they laid claim to anybody's schoolwork unless they wanted to contribute it. I know for sure that if you took a CS class at Mudd or Pomona, your home college's policies where in effect regarding IP for any class, this applied to pretty much all class work, regardless of the department.
For an educational institution to try to lay claim to a student's work in any field would be in pretty bad form, although it's not unheard of for profs to swipe undergrad work and try to push it off as their own. I've never known of any instances where I went to school, but I'm sure it happens. There wasn't a big push for profs to publish either, but this might be a different situation at a larger University where it's "publish or perish"
So I took some time off and started with another start-up last fall, which went bust because nobody would fund them.
I tried going independent, but all the companies that I could have had jobs with earlier had ceased all web development (mainly intranet type stuff). Everyone I talked to was either in a hiring freeze or was actively laying people off.
I have five recruiters out there working on my behalf, and went on one interview.
I have all the right skills, I'm a great writer, can do analysis, work with clients, all the good stuff that might make me a standout candidate, but I get nowhere out in California. Seriously thinking about moving the hell out of here.
Fortunately, things seem to be picking up again, as companies begin to realize "Hey! That internet stuff does work!". A few months ago, lots of companies irrationally slashed their web-based development efforts because they heard something on the news about the "Dot-com bust", figuring it had something to do with the technology behind it, not investment bankers getting ahead of themselves. Now that it's over, larger vendors in this area like PeopleSoft, who five years ago said "This internet thing will never work" are now claiming to have a "total internet" platform, and IT managers will be scrambling to get their staffing back up.
The days of the hot startup are over, and I'm glad to see them go, but finding work has been really exasperating, as I have heard the same thing over and over again "We'd love to hire you, but we don't have any openings." or, "I'd love to hire you, but I have to lay off three people next week." Ugh. I'm moving.
What about 'Teighlor', or all the other stuff mentioned at the misanthropic bitch?
I have to dispute this. We are not genetically wired for this kind of behavior. We're genetically wired for some things, but this is not one of them. We see such trust and altruism in societies both modern and primitive, as a survival strategy (strength in numbers), but I don't think we're wired for it.
I agree with the points of the article, but altruism stems from an ethical doctrine that, while fairly widespread, is socialized in to people. We're not born with that value, notice how you have to teach children to share. People are taught that it's ethically virtuous to act in an altruistic fashion, but we learn that, not born with it.
Salon's main thrust has always been commentary, and that follows a pretty wide spectrum, with David Horowitz, Camille Paglia, and Arianna Huffington to name a few. They defy easy compartmentalization in terms right/left.
If I want headlines, I got to a news site, the BBC has a good one. When I want commentary, I go to sites like Salon, which strive to provide analysis.
That being said, I don't like it enough to subscribe, since most of the good stuff is available for free there.
Salon's comics are also great, I'd miss my Monday dose of Tom Tomorrow.