This is the Official Statement of the Open Source Community: The Open Source community is amorphous, and follows no leader. Thus, nobody is capable of making an Official Statement for the Open Source Community. This has been an Official Statement of the Open Source Comunity.
The Open Source Community may know and understand that, but I don't think you can count on the outside world to give a damn how the Open Source Community is or is not organized.
Splash damage accrues to those with even the most tenuous relationship. When you bring subjects like politics or religion into it people react with emotion, not rational thought. The trailer to a badly produced, obnoxious movie is released and Americans who clearly had nothing to do with it are killed.
Like it or not, what Linus said will splash onto all of us in The Open Source Community (typing this on my Fedora box).
what you bought actually only has a 2 year shelf life, I don't care what their marketing department tells you.
The other day I opened a 14-year old can of tuna. It was just fine, tasted great. As a youngster I remember my grandmother serving me peaches her brother had canned 40 years earlier during the Great Depression. They'd lost color and turned grey but tasted good.
Food can keep for a long time if prepared properly. I also remember my grandmother saying she had lost about half of that batch of peaches over the years to spoilage. Over long periods there will be losses from spoilage and rodents and such, but some food will survive.
"Good artists copy, great artists steal" - Steve Jobs, 1994
This is a misattributed quote. It should more correctly be attributed to either Pablo Picasso (an overrated artist) or Igor Stravinsky (an excellent composer).
Both of you are correct, pretty much. Pablo Picasso said "Good artists borrow, great artists steal" in 1934. And here is a link of Steve Jobs saying "Good artists copy, great artists steal" in 1996.
Funny how the profit motive so strongly affects the moral belief system.
By current definitions, Reagan was a tax and Spend liberal.
True, Republicans today would accuse Reagan of being a RINO, but the data do not support your statement. Reagan spent money like a drunk sailor, but that money was borrowed, not taxed. He was the first of the Borrow and Spend Republicans.
At least when you Tax and Spend you have a balanced budget (see Clinton's last few years). That simple concept seems to escape the current crop of Republicans.
Because people selling "things of interest" anonymously on the net using an untraceable monetary system might have reason to avoid attention from the authorities?
There's a difference between opposing the actions of your country, playing corporate tax games, trying to change things, and a whole range of other activity, and--- explicitly renouncing your nation. Bill Gates has never held up his right hand and under oath renounced America. Most Americans wouldn't either, not even very wealthy, very libertarian ones.
I certainly agree with this, but you also have to account for the fact that it's an incredibly, incredibly bad idea to renounce citizenship when you only have citizenship in one country. If you run afoul of the law in a country you're not a citizen of, even for trivial things, you can easily end up in jail in permanent limbo when they try to deport you to your native country.
In most countries it's very difficult to obtain citizenship for a foreigner. Other countries simply forbid dual citizenships, and treat an oath of citizenship in a second country as a de facto renunciation of citizenship in the first country.
Saverin held dual citizenships, one U.S. and one Brazilian. Now he only has Brazilian citizenship. I believe Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg only have (had) U.S. citizenships. It's simply not an option for most "wealthy libertarians" to renounce citizenship.
It was a horrid sight but I imagine a no-expenses-spared frame-up restoration could recover that car. If an unprotected car comes out good enough to be restored I imagine a protected aircraft might come out in better shape even though its been 65 years.
I'm sorry. He signed the bill into law. Had he truly been opposed to it, he could have vetoed it. Sure, his veto could have been overruled, but at least he'd be officially on the record that he didn't support it.
The president can only amend a law with a signing statement if he signs the law.
Insurance companies have a financial incentive to overestimate risk. This is obvious. The disincentive is supposed to be that if they do it too much they will lose business. What conspiracy are you talking about?
I believe that most if not all the insurance companies are organized as mutual companies which means the company is owned by the policy holders and excess profits are returned to them. State Farm for example is a mutual insurance company and they've sent me checks twice in the past 20 years returning excess profits due to fewer claims than predicted. They are also allowed to raise rates when claims are higher than predicted.
So there is not really any financial incentive for insurance companies to skew their risk models.
I often get confused when people talk about "liberal" this and "conservative" that. From my non-American perspective, I see so little difference between the two that I can't bring myself to acknowledge that there is a substantive difference.
American "liberal": authoritarian, pro-abortion rights, some limits on guns, thinks taxes are too low. Wants corporations to fill out paperwork before spewing pollution.
American "conservative": authoritarian, anti-abortion, no limits on guns ever, can't think of a good reason to tax anybody. Doesn't want corporations to fill out paperwork, period.
For perspective, the above was filtered through an anti-authoritarian American cynic and a beer or two.
I do not believe the "Independence Day" explanation for $40,000 toliet seats - that this money isn't being spent there but is instead being syphoned off to black programs.
There's plenty to complain about when talking about an organization as large as the United States Government, but I swear, this one has really gotten out of hand. The government has never spent $40,000 for a toilet seat, not even close. You're off by two orders of magnitude.
The actual number is $600 per seat, and they were for P3C Orion anti-sub aircraft. Items around the crew in any aircraft, civilian or military, is required to withstand a 20g crash load while staying within a strict weight budget. You can't just swing by your local hardware store for something like that. And the Navy only bought 54 of them, hardly an opportunity for economies of scale. Under the circumstances I think they got a hell of a deal for only $600 apiece.
Here's a good link (it also gives some pointers to actual government waste):
NCDC reports there were 14 billion dollar weather/climate disasters in 2011, compared to 4-5 the previous 15 years, and compared to 1-2 per year before that. The '80s had 4 years with no $billion disasters; the 2000's didn't have any.
I'm not sure you understand that the Science letter was NOT a rebuttal; it pre-dated the WSJ article. In fact, the WSJ saw the Science letter (and rejected publishing it) before they published their editorial, so in effect the editorial was a quasi-rebuttal of the Science letter.
Here is the full list of authors. A disappointing lack of practising climate scientists:
Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris
J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting
Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University
Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society
Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences
William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton
Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.
William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT
James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University
Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences
Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne
Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator
Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service
Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva
And today people think that you're a hacker if you look at Google's second search result page.
And how did we ever lose track of the fact that it's ALWAYS been that way? To the vast majority of people out there even Linux is a walled garden because they don't have a clue how to modify it and they don't want a clue, they don't have time for it.
"Value equivalence" of thorium has no meaning in this context.
All that matters is the total system cost per mile over the lifetime of the vehicle. The original cost of the reactor container, laser, turbines, batteries and electric motors and the cost to maintain it all per year will determine whether this is cheaper than the equivalent systems on current vehicles.
The complexity of all that equipment leads me to believe the cars will be much more expensive than current hybrid cars. But if the pipe dreams they are promising turn out to be true some people will certainly be willing to pay the price.
Every single voter with easy access to an internet connection, that is.
Plus every botnet that 'decides' to participate. Since they get more than one vote they might just lend a helping hand to some of those folks without access to the internet. It would be great if they helped my grandparents vote. They've been dead a long time so that would really pick up their spirits.
Almost makes you wish for a stockholder lawsuit claiming a dereliction of fiduciary duty by management. It can't be in any companies' best interest to continually and very publicly sue their best customers.
Arguably (that is to say, using the argument that the Shuttle programme cost considerably more to operate than expected), the Shuttle programme is the reason we've never been back to the moon, or on to Mars or a NEA. If so, it has done more to disenchant the public with spaceflight than any other NASA programme.
Hmmm... U.K. spelling of the word "program" coupled with a "we've never been back to the moon". Curious, but I'm guessing you're an English ex-pat living in the US? Or is it "we" as in "humanity"?
Either way I agree with you (with my super-accurate 20-20 hindsight). Most Americans think we spend as much money on Space as we do on Defense. If we actually were, the Shuttle would only be small part of a true "Space Transportation System" and no one would be all that concerned about the cost.
Holy fucking shit people. Half a dozen replies to this guy and more than half of you are READING COMPREHENSION FAIL. Read the post again. Here, I'll bold the part you missed:
I don't want to spend the night in jail, so I take a cab instead.
Slashdot Mirror
The Open Source Community may know and understand that, but I don't think you can count on the outside world to give a damn how the Open Source Community is or is not organized.
Splash damage accrues to those with even the most tenuous relationship. When you bring subjects like politics or religion into it people react with emotion, not rational thought. The trailer to a badly produced, obnoxious movie is released and Americans who clearly had nothing to do with it are killed.
Like it or not, what Linus said will splash onto all of us in The Open Source Community (typing this on my Fedora box).
The other day I opened a 14-year old can of tuna. It was just fine, tasted great. As a youngster I remember my grandmother serving me peaches her brother had canned 40 years earlier during the Great Depression. They'd lost color and turned grey but tasted good.
Food can keep for a long time if prepared properly. I also remember my grandmother saying she had lost about half of that batch of peaches over the years to spoilage. Over long periods there will be losses from spoilage and rodents and such, but some food will survive.
Both of you are correct, pretty much. Pablo Picasso said "Good artists borrow, great artists steal" in 1934. And here is a link of Steve Jobs saying "Good artists copy, great artists steal" in 1996.
Funny how the profit motive so strongly affects the moral belief system.
You're either being ironic or are more sheltered than most:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/more-americans-chinese-t-put-food-table-132752601.html
True, Republicans today would accuse Reagan of being a RINO, but the data do not support your statement. Reagan spent money like a drunk sailor, but that money was borrowed, not taxed. He was the first of the Borrow and Spend Republicans.
At least when you Tax and Spend you have a balanced budget (see Clinton's last few years). That simple concept seems to escape the current crop of Republicans.
Because people selling "things of interest" anonymously on the net using an untraceable monetary system might have reason to avoid attention from the authorities?
I certainly agree with this, but you also have to account for the fact that it's an incredibly, incredibly bad idea to renounce citizenship when you only have citizenship in one country. If you run afoul of the law in a country you're not a citizen of, even for trivial things, you can easily end up in jail in permanent limbo when they try to deport you to your native country.
In most countries it's very difficult to obtain citizenship for a foreigner. Other countries simply forbid dual citizenships, and treat an oath of citizenship in a second country as a de facto renunciation of citizenship in the first country.
Saverin held dual citizenships, one U.S. and one Brazilian. Now he only has Brazilian citizenship. I believe Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg only have (had) U.S. citizenships. It's simply not an option for most "wealthy libertarians" to renounce citizenship.
In 1957 they put a brand new unprotected 1957 Plymouth Belvedere into an underground concrete time capsule and 50 years later in 2007 unearthed it:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19249855/ns/us_news-life/t/auto-time-capsule-unearthed-after-years/
It was a horrid sight but I imagine a no-expenses-spared frame-up restoration could recover that car. If an unprotected car comes out good enough to be restored I imagine a protected aircraft might come out in better shape even though its been 65 years.
I can't wait to see them unearthed.
The president can only amend a law with a signing statement if he signs the law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement
If the president vetoes it and gets overruled then the law doesn't pass his desk again. Obama did the best thing he could under the circumstances.
I believe that most if not all the insurance companies are organized as mutual companies which means the company is owned by the policy holders and excess profits are returned to them. State Farm for example is a mutual insurance company and they've sent me checks twice in the past 20 years returning excess profits due to fewer claims than predicted. They are also allowed to raise rates when claims are higher than predicted.
So there is not really any financial incentive for insurance companies to skew their risk models.
American "liberal": authoritarian, pro-abortion rights, some limits on guns, thinks taxes are too low. Wants corporations to fill out paperwork before spewing pollution.
American "conservative": authoritarian, anti-abortion, no limits on guns ever, can't think of a good reason to tax anybody. Doesn't want corporations to fill out paperwork, period.
For perspective, the above was filtered through an anti-authoritarian American cynic and a beer or two.
HTH.
There's plenty to complain about when talking about an organization as large as the United States Government, but I swear, this one has really gotten out of hand. The government has never spent $40,000 for a toilet seat, not even close. You're off by two orders of magnitude.
The actual number is $600 per seat, and they were for P3C Orion anti-sub aircraft. Items around the crew in any aircraft, civilian or military, is required to withstand a 20g crash load while staying within a strict weight budget. You can't just swing by your local hardware store for something like that. And the Navy only bought 54 of them, hardly an opportunity for economies of scale. Under the circumstances I think they got a hell of a deal for only $600 apiece.
Here's a good link (it also gives some pointers to actual government waste):
http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2011/apr/11/600-toilet-seat-nothing-ar-968018/
Ok, I will. Napoleon wasn't French. He was born on Corsica which is to France what Puerto Rico is to the US.
Actual statistics don't seem to agree with you:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/reports/billionz.html
NCDC reports there were 14 billion dollar weather/climate disasters in 2011, compared to 4-5 the previous 15 years, and compared to 1-2 per year before that. The '80s had 4 years with no $billion disasters; the 2000's didn't have any.
I'm not sure you understand that the Science letter was NOT a rebuttal; it pre-dated the WSJ article. In fact, the WSJ saw the Science letter (and rejected publishing it) before they published their editorial, so in effect the editorial was a quasi-rebuttal of the Science letter.
The first one on the list, Claude Allegre, has been caught misrepresenting and making up data before:
http://brutishandshort.com/2012/01/27/shock-news-global-warming-denialists-are-dishonest-pt-1/
Here is the full list of authors. A disappointing lack of practising climate scientists:
Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris
J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting
Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University
Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society
Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences
William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton
Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.
William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT
James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University
Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences
Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne
Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator
Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service
Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva
Take your pick:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Jackson_(American_football)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Jackson_(cricketer)
And how did we ever lose track of the fact that it's ALWAYS been that way? To the vast majority of people out there even Linux is a walled garden because they don't have a clue how to modify it and they don't want a clue, they don't have time for it.
I really hope they don't get signed up for a bunch of useless catalogs. That would be mean.
"Value equivalence" of thorium has no meaning in this context.
All that matters is the total system cost per mile over the lifetime of the vehicle. The original cost of the reactor container, laser, turbines, batteries and electric motors and the cost to maintain it all per year will determine whether this is cheaper than the equivalent systems on current vehicles.
The complexity of all that equipment leads me to believe the cars will be much more expensive than current hybrid cars. But if the pipe dreams they are promising turn out to be true some people will certainly be willing to pay the price.
Plus every botnet that 'decides' to participate. Since they get more than one vote they might just lend a helping hand to some of those folks without access to the internet. It would be great if they helped my grandparents vote. They've been dead a long time so that would really pick up their spirits.
Almost makes you wish for a stockholder lawsuit claiming a dereliction of fiduciary duty by management. It can't be in any companies' best interest to continually and very publicly sue their best customers.
Hmmm... U.K. spelling of the word "program" coupled with a "we've never been back to the moon". Curious, but I'm guessing you're an English ex-pat living in the US? Or is it "we" as in "humanity"?
Either way I agree with you (with my super-accurate 20-20 hindsight). Most Americans think we spend as much money on Space as we do on Defense. If we actually were, the Shuttle would only be small part of a true "Space Transportation System" and no one would be all that concerned about the cost.
To answer your question, here is the first sentence from the page you linked to (emphasis mine):
In other words, they don't exist.
Holy fucking shit people. Half a dozen replies to this guy and more than half of you are READING COMPREHENSION FAIL. Read the post again. Here, I'll bold the part you missed:
I think you owe screwzloos an apology.