There is only "good enough for now". Rewriting software is good from several standpoints:
1. It may be possible optimize slower areas of the code 2. It may be possible to take umpteen patches and merge them into the regular code flow 3. It may be possible to move modules outside the main code base 4. etc., ad infinitum X. it may be billable as a new product (for commercial software only)
Anyone who sits back and says a given codebase is "good enough for now" needs to be consigned to the scrapheap of history and quickly. You should always keep an eye out fot a better way.
For however much money was spent, that portion did not go toward blowing someone up, or foisting stupid policy on the rest of the world, lying about it, and then saying we won. I'm not going to argue it one bit.
that those innovations on older systems would have to be pretty much reinvented anyway, since the older machines were developed with closed or copyrighted codebases. Not to mention which, most of those "innovative" features have been superseded by the better features available on more modern systems.
Seriously, what features from the Atari systems are so great, yet have been overlooked in modern systems?
What's wrong with ambition? Without it, Linux wouldn't be everywhere that it is today. Personally, I think they should set their sights on making sure that they're better and faster than everyone else out there (Oracle included). At least it's something to shoot for, rather than deciding that what they produce is "good enough".
Just a reminder to those Debian users in Niue, the mirror.debian.nu apt-get server will be down until further notice. It seems we were prepare for the Slashdot effect, but not a big fucking cyclone effect. Thank you, Local Debian Mirror Administrator
I'm sure both of them will be quite alright with that.
I use NAT for one simple reason - NOT doing it would be one more opportunity for some twerp to try and break into my network. Until it becomes possible to narrow the source of an attack down to a single person or persons, the chance of losing control over my own networks is not worth the risk.
I'm guessing it's to prove to ourselves that we are in some way superior to the next guy. It seems, to me anyway, that is at the root of most arguments about computer hardware and software that are not based solely on empirical data.
I could go into justifications about the various software and hardware choices I've made, but really, if anyone doesn't like it, they can fsck themselves.
Personally, I'm tired of hearing the arguments - most of them consist of regurgitating the last argument heard in favor of their particular views.
Seriously, you have to take the bad with the good - so he sent our troops out and pounded on the world, and we won (well, sort of). Isn't that what you wanted? Of course, he's lied about just about everything about the war in Iraq, but, hey, no big deal because we won.
He's seriously overreaching whatever mandate he feels the people have given him, in my opinion. Congress, you voted them in, too, doesn't seem too concerned as long as they get their pay raises and can say that they're fighting the "War on Terror" and that all of this is in the interest of "National Security".
Yep, use Walmart and support a company that provides minimum wage jobs, low benefits, and drives out local competition. Also, check what percentage of the goods they sell are actually "Made in America".
That's all very well and good, but if I paid money for software, then I expect some support from the company or person providing it. I'm not interested in "community", I'm interested in getting on with my business. I don't buy software to interact with people, I buy software to do work.
That, I think, is probably the attitude of most users.
Most of the features the telco's add are things that are just not well suited to the small form factor of a cellphone (Text messaging is fine on the receiving end, but I don't want sega-thumb from having to push all the damn buttons to enter a reply).
Whatever happened to the cellphone equivalent of the plain black telephone (occasionally available in hotline-red, ghastly-green, or jesus-what-shade-is-that-gray)?
By his own admission, he once produced more than 70 million messages a day from domains registered with fake names, largely by way of foreign countries--or sometimes even by way of hijacked computers...
Does this make him liable for criminal charges if anyone can find one of those hijacked computers? IANAL, but even admitting to a crime without any evidence should still have a prosecutor sniffing around, shouldn't it?
Hmm, Truth by Democracy... sounds like a rather dubious value at best. Admittedly, the other examples you mentioned are flawed, but allowing people to vote on what is the truth evades the problem of determining The Real Truth. It's missing empirical fact.
Example - many people believe in Bigfoot, so by that definition, he exists, even though reliable scientific evidence is very clearly lacking in this area. Believing in something despite evidence to the contrary is faith; it does not make it true or factual.
Like UrbanDictionary, I find Wikipedia to be occasionally interesting or perhaps entertaining, but as for providing a basis for solid fact, give me a more acadmically rigorous source. At least I won't get laughed at for quoting it as solid fact.
Well, considering that there's nothing that prevents one from using GCC to create commercial software, this is probably a non-issue. The libraries are LGPL so unless those are modified (or there are unknown issues), these guys are free and clear to create all the non-open software they want.
This arrangement is a good thing - it allows everyone to use GCC as they see fit with a minimum of restrictions.
You're right, in one sense - the US is not and never will be Argentina, but the parallels are definitely there. What happened in Argentina should be a warning to us here that it is all too easy to head down that road, which we are clearly doing under Bush/Cheney and Ashcroft.
It is also useful to note that our government SUPPORTED what was happening in Argentina under Allende while it was politically useful, not because it was the right thing to do. Our government under the current administration is fighting to exactly the same thing here: handing more power over to powerful corporations and removing those same powers from the populace.
No, we don't have widows and mothers holding silent protests for the disappeared, mainly because the "disappeared" so far are the ones we'd be uncomfortable with even without September 11. But even the possibility (and it definitely exists under our existing legal framework) should be horrifying to us and it clearly isn't.
So how much farther down the slippery slope are we willing to go?
You make a good point about GNUStep - by selecting it, you open up the work of Mac software as well. Some not-so-drastic changes to the code and a recompile later, you've got an x86 version of PPC application.
Perhaps GNUSteppers should start THEIR own distro.
Heck, with the licensing options, all the major desktops should have a distro. Let the market decide!
Sorry to burst your little bubble of optimism, but as it stands right now, we've give the henhouse to the fox. Between the credit card companies, the supermarket price-break/loyalty programs, most of our data is out there, with our names on it. We've gotten used to it - so when someone comes along with a great idea, I cynically assume that it will be co-opted by corporate America in an attempt to further collect reams of marketing data.
You seem to assume that anonymity is a given, I assume things are going to get worse.
Which is not to say that your idea is wrong or bad, I guess. Someone out there will willingly snap it up and be perfectly happy.
Sure, badly implemented this thing could give out more information than you want it to, but you can't say that something that doesn't even exist yet has a designflaw.
Most of us here have the good sense to realize that such a thing will be badly implemented because we live in a free country where commercial interests are the driving force behind most of the products we get on the market. Paid placement, tie-ins, cross-promotions, etc. will enable merchants to gather more and more information about us, which a large number of us feel that they are not entitled to, regardless of intent.
But will that really prevent family from trying to sue later?
Yep, because the contract has the full backing of the Russian government (and military, if it came to that). You can sue foreign governments, but it's pretty difficult to collect, and the cost is probably way more than the money you would lose.
Plus, do you really want to see Vladimir Putin get mad? How would you tell?
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I use a Mac ...
... wait ... dang.
oh
There is only "good enough for now". Rewriting software is good from several standpoints:
1. It may be possible optimize slower areas of the code
2. It may be possible to take umpteen patches and merge them into the regular code flow
3. It may be possible to move modules outside the main code base
4. etc., ad infinitum
X. it may be billable as a new product (for commercial software only)
Anyone who sits back and says a given codebase is "good enough for now" needs to be consigned to the scrapheap of history and quickly. You should always keep an eye out fot a better way.
For however much money was spent, that portion did not go toward blowing someone up, or foisting stupid policy on the rest of the world, lying about it, and then saying we won. I'm not going to argue it one bit.
that those innovations on older systems would have to be pretty much reinvented anyway, since the older machines were developed with closed or copyrighted codebases. Not to mention which, most of those "innovative" features have been superseded by the better features available on more modern systems.
Seriously, what features from the Atari systems are so great, yet have been overlooked in modern systems?
What's wrong with ambition? Without it, Linux wouldn't be everywhere that it is today. Personally, I think they should set their sights on making sure that they're better and faster than everyone else out there (Oracle included). At least it's something to shoot for, rather than deciding that what they produce is "good enough".
Just a reminder to those Debian users in Niue, the mirror.debian.nu apt-get server will be down until further notice. It seems we were prepare for the Slashdot effect, but not a big fucking cyclone effect. Thank you, Local Debian Mirror Administrator
... I couldn't resist.
I'm sure both of them will be quite alright with that.
Sorry
I use NAT for one simple reason - NOT doing it would be one more opportunity for some twerp to try and break into my network. Until it becomes possible to narrow the source of an attack down to a single person or persons, the chance of losing control over my own networks is not worth the risk.
I'm guessing it's to prove to ourselves that we are in some way superior to the next guy. It seems, to me anyway, that is at the root of most arguments about computer hardware and software that are not based solely on empirical data.
I could go into justifications about the various software and hardware choices I've made, but really, if anyone doesn't like it, they can fsck themselves.
Personally, I'm tired of hearing the arguments - most of them consist of regurgitating the last argument heard in favor of their particular views.
Now live with it.
Seriously, you have to take the bad with the good - so he sent our troops out and pounded on the world, and we won (well, sort of). Isn't that what you wanted? Of course, he's lied about just about everything about the war in Iraq, but, hey, no big deal because we won.
He's seriously overreaching whatever mandate he feels the people have given him, in my opinion. Congress, you voted them in, too, doesn't seem too concerned as long as they get their pay raises and can say that they're fighting the "War on Terror" and that all of this is in the interest of "National Security".
Sorry. No thank you.
Yep, use Walmart and support a company that provides minimum wage jobs, low benefits, and drives out local competition. Also, check what percentage of the goods they sell are actually "Made in America".
That's all very well and good, but if I paid money for software, then I expect some support from the company or person providing it. I'm not interested in "community", I'm interested in getting on with my business. I don't buy software to interact with people, I buy software to do work.
That, I think, is probably the attitude of most users.
Most of the features the telco's add are things that are just not well suited to the small form factor of a cellphone (Text messaging is fine on the receiving end, but I don't want sega-thumb from having to push all the damn buttons to enter a reply).
Whatever happened to the cellphone equivalent of the plain black telephone (occasionally available in hotline-red, ghastly-green, or jesus-what-shade-is-that-gray)?
By his own admission, he once produced more than 70 million messages a day from domains registered with fake names, largely by way of foreign countries--or sometimes even by way of hijacked computers ...
Does this make him liable for criminal charges if anyone can find one of those hijacked computers? IANAL, but even admitting to a crime without any evidence should still have a prosecutor sniffing around, shouldn't it?
Hmm, Truth by Democracy ... sounds like a rather dubious value at best. Admittedly, the other examples you mentioned are flawed, but allowing people to vote on what is the truth evades the problem of determining The Real Truth. It's missing empirical fact.
Example - many people believe in Bigfoot, so by that definition, he exists, even though reliable scientific evidence is very clearly lacking in this area. Believing in something despite evidence to the contrary is faith; it does not make it true or factual.
Like UrbanDictionary, I find Wikipedia to be occasionally interesting or perhaps entertaining, but as for providing a basis for solid fact, give me a more acadmically rigorous source. At least I won't get laughed at for quoting it as solid fact.
And why should the government not be allowed to support projects that benefit their own interests? At least they would be supporting someone.
where do I send it? You're email is not public shown.
Well, considering that there's nothing that prevents one from using GCC to create commercial software, this is probably a non-issue. The libraries are LGPL so unless those are modified (or there are unknown issues), these guys are free and clear to create all the non-open software they want.
This arrangement is a good thing - it allows everyone to use GCC as they see fit with a minimum of restrictions.
I'm willing to discuss the possibility of such a thing.
You're right, in one sense - the US is not and never will be Argentina, but the parallels are definitely there. What happened in Argentina should be a warning to us here that it is all too easy to head down that road, which we are clearly doing under Bush/Cheney and Ashcroft.
It is also useful to note that our government SUPPORTED what was happening in Argentina under Allende while it was politically useful, not because it was the right thing to do. Our government under the current administration is fighting to exactly the same thing here: handing more power over to powerful corporations and removing those same powers from the populace.
No, we don't have widows and mothers holding silent protests for the disappeared, mainly because the "disappeared" so far are the ones we'd be uncomfortable with even without September 11. But even the possibility (and it definitely exists under our existing legal framework) should be horrifying to us and it clearly isn't.
So how much farther down the slippery slope are we willing to go?
You make a good point about GNUStep - by selecting it, you open up the work of Mac software as well. Some not-so-drastic changes to the code and a recompile later, you've got an x86 version of PPC application.
Perhaps GNUSteppers should start THEIR own distro.
Heck, with the licensing options, all the major desktops should have a distro. Let the market decide!
I'm not kidding.
Sorry to burst your little bubble of optimism, but as it stands right now, we've give the henhouse to the fox. Between the credit card companies, the supermarket price-break/loyalty programs, most of our data is out there, with our names on it. We've gotten used to it - so when someone comes along with a great idea, I cynically assume that it will be co-opted by corporate America in an attempt to further collect reams of marketing data.
You seem to assume that anonymity is a given, I assume things are going to get worse.
Which is not to say that your idea is wrong or bad, I guess. Someone out there will willingly snap it up and be perfectly happy.
Sure, badly implemented this thing could give out more information than you want it to, but you can't say that something that doesn't even exist yet has a designflaw.
Most of us here have the good sense to realize that such a thing will be badly implemented because we live in a free country where commercial interests are the driving force behind most of the products we get on the market. Paid placement, tie-ins, cross-promotions, etc. will enable merchants to gather more and more information about us, which a large number of us feel that they are not entitled to, regardless of intent.
couldn't an airplane mistake his house for a runway?
We can only hope.
-- The Grinch
START VENT
/.'ers hate Microsoft.
Now I HAVE to learn Java to stay relevant. Dammit, I hate Sun way more than most
To hell with Scott McNealy and anything he ever touched!
To hell with his bloated, overused, overhyped language.
To hell with his buying out Cobalt and cancelling the only usable out of the box, webserver platform.
To hell with his whiny-ass piss and moan about Microsoft and everything else (yeah, yeah, irony).
Dammit! To hell with Scott McNealy!
END VENT
OK, sorry. Just had to get that out of my system. But I still hate Sun.
But will that really prevent family from trying to sue later?
Yep, because the contract has the full backing of the Russian government (and military, if it came to that). You can sue foreign governments, but it's pretty difficult to collect, and the cost is probably way more than the money you would lose.
Plus, do you really want to see Vladimir Putin get mad? How would you tell?