The Wright Borthers patents on warping wing design, and all the me-too patents that followed it, have finally expired. These guys are just trying to avoid all the modern aviation patents by going back to expired patent technology.
It's all about saving money on patent licenses, don' 'cha know.
You are right in that abstainence is a good policy. It is healthfull, it is "moral" for what that's worth. It is beneficial socially.
For the most part, the people who object to "Abstainence Only" are not objecting to the "abstainence" so much as the "only". The abstainence only proponents are doing everything they can to prevent good education on the nature of human sexuality, the benefits of good health, and all the possible ways to express these things safely. They are causing dammage to usefull clinics who are trying to teach ALL types of health because the clinics are also teaching some types of health that are not "abstainence only". That's the problem.
If the abstainence only proponents drop the "only" from their view and try to accomadate alternative views, then everyone would get along much better. In the end, it would be better to fully educate the people and allow them to make a fully informed decision for themselves, than to simply state "Do what I say, you don't need to know anything else". I'd bet a lot of people would choose appropriate abstainence given the opportunity to make a well informed choice.
The same could probably be argued for many religious tennats. Educate the people and allow them to make an informed decision. Don't just say "Do what I say. No questions. No alternatives." It's the approach, not the message, that turns people off.
That is all correct. My lash to the original post was that religion is not all bad just because of a few bad examples. And not everyone who is religious is automatically a loser.
All of those church schools that were put all over the world for centuries were on the leading edge of knowledge and science when they were set up by the Catholic church. For centuries, these were the place to go for modern education. It is only recently that they have fallen behind other institutions. I probably didn't stress that all those church schools were actually a very good thing to have around. And the church spent a ton of money setting them all up and maintaining them for centuries. To attempt the same scale of education reform today would be a monumental task. I have to respect them for that much at least.
If the people use religion as a framework to structure their society and maintain tradition and education, more power to them. Use whatever you want, but do something to maintain knowledge and structure. That's what's important.
When I was young, ignorant and closed minded, I used to believe the same as you. Then I grew up and learned how people really work.
So what is Weak Minded? It's this:
1. The inability to accept that other people have valid motivations, ideals or valuable knowledge that that are different from your own.
2. The inability to differentiate between what one person or one group do in the name of a cause, and the core purpose of that cause.
There are a lot of people who wrap themselves in religion who are weak minded. There are a lot more that are not. There are a lot of people who wrap themselves in science who are weak minded. There are a lot more who are not. There are a lot of people who live in many different countries, societies, cultures who are weak minded. There are a lot more who are not. And out of all of these, many among the weak minded also tend to be the most vocal, so that is a lot of what you hear from them.
Different people accept religion for different reasons. And different people abuse the name of religion for different reasons. David Koresh claimed to be Jesus. Few Christians believe or supported him. Osama claims to work in the name of Islam. Few Muslims believe or support him. Some Catholic priests have sexually assaulted children. Few Catholics support them. There have certainly been bad things done in the name of religion, but that does not mean the religion was the cause. Most often the cause was dangerious people doing bad things, and claiming religion as their cover.
As for why people believe what religion teaches them rather than "modern science". That is probably because modern science is not taught as widely as you would like. It takes money, knowledge, political support, lots of people power, and strong social support to spread new knowledge. Churches have been around for centuries. They already have the structures in place to teach their docterine. Church schools exist in almost every town and country around the world teaching religion. Modern educational institutes in remote places are few and far between. This is not the fault of the people who live there. They learn what is available to them. And for many centuries, that was from the local church.
Knowledge is relative. With all your great scientific knowledge, If you were dropped naked into the middle of the Amazon rain forest, you'd probably die of poison or starvation inside a week. All the while those stupid savages who worship their sun gods have been surviving there for generations just fine.
We all learn and accept what our society and parents teach us. If your parents and society teach you science, great for you. If you are too ignorant or weak minded to accept that other people have different educational backgrounds, different social and physical needs, or different ideas about the unknown, AND THAT THESE DIFFERENCES ARE NOT EVIL, STUPID OR WRONG, then that's too bad for you.
RedHat should request a temporary restraining order until the outcome of the IBM case.
Since the purpose of the RedHat case was to make SCO shut up, and the case has been delayed pending the IBM case, then RedHat is being denied justice pending another case. Since SCO started the IBM case, they are effectively in the drivers seat on both. That denies RedHat justice, under the control of SCO. RedHat should get something, like some type of temporary restraining order against SCO at least until SCO clears up their IBM case.
I am still programming, but the tech I work with is getting old, and I feel the need to keep current and learn new tech. Between work and family, it's hard to find time for new projects. But even a few hours a week can get you going on something.
I'd say the best way to ease back into programming is to:
1. Pick a tech topic of interest, only one. (things like Web, Database, 3D Graphics, Networking, UI, etc.)
2. Pick one API/format set supporting your topic. (If you picked Web, you probably need HTML and JS. If DB, then probably pick SQL, a DB and its scripting language. If graphics, maybe pick OpenGL, DirectX, or other API. Others as you see fit.)
3. Pick one general programming language that is modern, widely used, and supports your topic well.
4. Get tutorials on the language and the API. Walk through them. They can be simplistic, but they cover the bases. If you have lots more time/money, get books and go through them.
5. Pick a few simple tasks to excercise the language and API until you get some good results, and spend a lot of of time adding small features to it until you've excercised most of the features of the language and the topic. It doesn't have to be something that is particularly usefull, just excercise as many features as possible.
At this point, you're in good shape to try a bigger project. I've had problems trying to pick a big project too soon as a "learning" project because there is too much needed too soon. With the limited time available to me, it can become aggrivating dealing with lots of minutae before you get anything even resembling usefull results. Start small.
There are a lot of people who say "Go grab some big project from sourceforge and learn it." I'd say no to that, at least at first. You need the tech first before getting to a complex project. After you have the tech down, then examining a big project might help you learn how to use it more effectively.
With all the bitching and moaning going on about electronic voting systems, one would think that this would have been the first idea to mind, but, apparently, the average citizen can only complain and deliver shit for alternate ideas.
You make it sound like this thing just popped up out of nowhere overnight.
It probably was the first thing to pop into some peoples minds when they saw what was happening. It takes a long time, even with OSS, to make a project like this. People have been working on this since the problems first surfaced, probably even before.
So, yes, the "average" citizen might complain because they probably don't have the resources/access/5ki1lZ to do it themselves. But ones who can have been all along.
Just curious, but what have you been doing all along, besides bitching and moaning?
THG did exactly what they were supposed to do: Give you the reader enough information to make an informed decision. You apparently got enough information to believe Michaels was a fraud, so that means THD was successful.
It is not necessary for them to actually come out and scream "They are a Fraud!" or even "Beware". If you can come to that conclusion for yourself based on what THG does tell you, that is enough. And if you can't, then declaring it in the article probably wouldn't do much for you either.
It seems to me that this type of criticism is common in many areas, be it tech, history, politics or whatever. Someone covers "Just the facts" and leaves the almost obvious interpretation up to the reader. They are then blasted as biased the other way because they didn't actually come out and scream "Fraud". NO! They aren't biased. If they had screamed "Fraud" then they would be biased. The center allways appears biased when viewed from either side, sort of a poor mans "If you're not for us, then you're against us" attitude.
Dispite the similarity in name, that was not the same SCO we are facing now.
The old SCO sold their properties to Caldera and went bye-bye. Later, Caldera renamed themselves SCO and continued on with the old products. BTW, It was Caldera that licensed Unix from Novell, before the name change.
The name change is confusing, but don't let it spoil the original SCO company or products. The old Caldera is the litigeous beast, not the old SCO.
Microsoft might certainly have a call to make. I suspect that they were not really aware of how SCO was playing them. Microsoft is diverse, as the memo says. The MS executives at the top may not have been fully concious of how much they were paying SCO, and how SCO was playing them. This memo highlights SCOs attitude and approach to MS and MS may now decide to take a consolidated approach to SCO.
Rather than deal with department after department, SCO may find itself facing a unified corporate front, and MS may demand a lot more from SCO or pull out. I'm sure MS doesn't like being played by anyone, whether its OSS or SCO.
But even better, if he had run tubing all around the case, he could water cool it. The outer surface would make a great radiator even without a fan. Nice and silent.
It's been a while since I read the specs on these processors, but I seem to remenber that X86 has had code vs. data protection as far back as the 286. In that case, it was the code segment and the data segment designation that protected the data from being executed. This was in the segment tables in 286 and up, but not in the page tables on the 386 and up.
Of course, since most OSs went to the 32-bit flat model, every segment just pointed to the same place thereby killing any protection advantage you had. I would presume this modification allows the code vs data protection to be specified in the page table entry so pages are protected individually within the flat address space.
It's a good move, but it is not entirely new, and the processors did have protection before. It was just in a place where the feature wasn't used much.
What might make a real difference, according to US Senator Conrad Burns, co-author of the bill, is international standards and enforcement
What might make a real difference, according to any intelligent person not tied monitarily to the spammers, is a bill that isn't so forking full of holes, exceptions, and limitations that it does more dammage than good.
I suspect you couldn't be more wrong if you tried:-)
Yes I could.
If I was really trying to be wrong, the first thing I would do is predict a narrow and radical view of the future whereby my favorite project overcomes all odds and takes over the world.
The next thing I would do is predict that any project that I don't like would collapse dispite widespread use.
And the last thing I would do is declare anyone wrong who disagreed with my prediction.
But don't worry. I'm not trying that hard to be wrong.:-)
It's not like one version of XFree86 of another will fall off the face of the earth. If the distributions dont package version 4.4, instead putting in version 4.3, there is nothing preventing the end user from going and getting 4.4 for themselves.
Someone will even come up with clever packaging schemes that let you drop a 4.4 package directly into a clean (or not so clean) new install of most of the major distributors. I wouldn't be surprised if the distributors themselves don't put up some help info on how to better integrate the 4.4 install with their system, should you go get it yourself. Their only problem with it is actually distributing it themselves. It's not as as if they don't want you to use it.
If gaming in Linux is that important, then it will happen. Just because RedHat or others don't package 4.4 by default doesn't mean the end user can't use it. It's just a little less convenient.
PCI Express is an Intel design bus. Win64 is an Athlon64 OS. It could be a while before we see AMD processors on PCI-Express boards.
Of course, the specs are out for HyperTransport 2.0, which is supposed to be compatible with PCI-Express. But we still need AMD to make a next generation processor with HT2. It hasn't been anounced, but 2H04 maybe.
You can take virtual flyovers of Mars now. A neat website hosts virtual, controlable Mars flyovers of famous sites, including the lander sites. MarsQuestOnline has several Mars virtual flyovers, and lots of other good Mars stuff. check it out.
The original request was to replace the actor who played the Emperor in Empire Strikes Back. That was Clive Revill. You are probably pointing back to Ian because he played the emperor in Return of the Jedi. Just a little mix up there.
Try BattleZone2.
It is first person shooter plus strategy. It has several play modes for local and online. The easiest is Deathmatch. You get a variety of hovertanks, rolling units and walkers and an even wider range of weapons. And if you do happen to get blown out of your ship, your pilot can snipe another and take it over;). There is also a lively modder community around it, and they have created missions and maps that really enhance the original game.
The mix of strategy can be used when you are more involved. You can build bases, take territory, gather resources, and make an army. Strategy player vs player or player vs machine are also available in multiplayer.
One of the nicest parts is that the community is dedicated. They help new users and play cooperatively for training and learning. Go check the forums and screenshots. It' a little old (2000) but it still looks great, and playes nicely on older hardware (a 300-500 P3 will work, wants 16Mb+ graphics, 32 better). Some original developers are keeping the code up so bug fixes are available and improvements are on the way.
Slashdot Mirror
The Wright Borthers patents on warping wing design, and all the me-too patents that followed it, have finally expired. These guys are just trying to avoid all the modern aviation patents by going back to expired patent technology.
It's all about saving money on patent licenses, don' 'cha know.
Slashdot two weeks ago.
For the most part, the people who object to "Abstainence Only" are not objecting to the "abstainence" so much as the "only". The abstainence only proponents are doing everything they can to prevent good education on the nature of human sexuality, the benefits of good health, and all the possible ways to express these things safely. They are causing dammage to usefull clinics who are trying to teach ALL types of health because the clinics are also teaching some types of health that are not "abstainence only". That's the problem.
If the abstainence only proponents drop the "only" from their view and try to accomadate alternative views, then everyone would get along much better. In the end, it would be better to fully educate the people and allow them to make a fully informed decision for themselves, than to simply state "Do what I say, you don't need to know anything else". I'd bet a lot of people would choose appropriate abstainence given the opportunity to make a well informed choice.
The same could probably be argued for many religious tennats. Educate the people and allow them to make an informed decision. Don't just say "Do what I say. No questions. No alternatives." It's the approach, not the message, that turns people off.
All of those church schools that were put all over the world for centuries were on the leading edge of knowledge and science when they were set up by the Catholic church. For centuries, these were the place to go for modern education. It is only recently that they have fallen behind other institutions. I probably didn't stress that all those church schools were actually a very good thing to have around. And the church spent a ton of money setting them all up and maintaining them for centuries. To attempt the same scale of education reform today would be a monumental task. I have to respect them for that much at least.
If the people use religion as a framework to structure their society and maintain tradition and education, more power to them. Use whatever you want, but do something to maintain knowledge and structure. That's what's important.
So what is Weak Minded? It's this:
1. The inability to accept that other people have valid motivations, ideals or valuable knowledge that that are different from your own.
2. The inability to differentiate between what one person or one group do in the name of a cause, and the core purpose of that cause.
There are a lot of people who wrap themselves in religion who are weak minded. There are a lot more that are not. There are a lot of people who wrap themselves in science who are weak minded. There are a lot more who are not. There are a lot of people who live in many different countries, societies, cultures who are weak minded. There are a lot more who are not. And out of all of these, many among the weak minded also tend to be the most vocal, so that is a lot of what you hear from them.
Different people accept religion for different reasons. And different people abuse the name of religion for different reasons. David Koresh claimed to be Jesus. Few Christians believe or supported him. Osama claims to work in the name of Islam. Few Muslims believe or support him. Some Catholic priests have sexually assaulted children. Few Catholics support them. There have certainly been bad things done in the name of religion, but that does not mean the religion was the cause. Most often the cause was dangerious people doing bad things, and claiming religion as their cover.
As for why people believe what religion teaches them rather than "modern science". That is probably because modern science is not taught as widely as you would like. It takes money, knowledge, political support, lots of people power, and strong social support to spread new knowledge. Churches have been around for centuries. They already have the structures in place to teach their docterine. Church schools exist in almost every town and country around the world teaching religion. Modern educational institutes in remote places are few and far between. This is not the fault of the people who live there. They learn what is available to them. And for many centuries, that was from the local church.
Knowledge is relative. With all your great scientific knowledge, If you were dropped naked into the middle of the Amazon rain forest, you'd probably die of poison or starvation inside a week. All the while those stupid savages who worship their sun gods have been surviving there for generations just fine.
We all learn and accept what our society and parents teach us. If your parents and society teach you science, great for you. If you are too ignorant or weak minded to accept that other people have different educational backgrounds, different social and physical needs, or different ideas about the unknown, AND THAT THESE DIFFERENCES ARE NOT EVIL, STUPID OR WRONG, then that's too bad for you.
Since the purpose of the RedHat case was to make SCO shut up, and the case has been delayed pending the IBM case, then RedHat is being denied justice pending another case. Since SCO started the IBM case, they are effectively in the drivers seat on both. That denies RedHat justice, under the control of SCO. RedHat should get something, like some type of temporary restraining order against SCO at least until SCO clears up their IBM case.
There's a similar ship here for those who feel a strong Bond for these sort of ships.
I'd say the best way to ease back into programming is to:
1. Pick a tech topic of interest, only one. (things like Web, Database, 3D Graphics, Networking, UI, etc.)
2. Pick one API/format set supporting your topic. (If you picked Web, you probably need HTML and JS. If DB, then probably pick SQL, a DB and its scripting language. If graphics, maybe pick OpenGL, DirectX, or other API. Others as you see fit.)
3. Pick one general programming language that is modern, widely used, and supports your topic well.
4. Get tutorials on the language and the API. Walk through them. They can be simplistic, but they cover the bases. If you have lots more time/money, get books and go through them.
5. Pick a few simple tasks to excercise the language and API until you get some good results, and spend a lot of of time adding small features to it until you've excercised most of the features of the language and the topic. It doesn't have to be something that is particularly usefull, just excercise as many features as possible.
At this point, you're in good shape to try a bigger project. I've had problems trying to pick a big project too soon as a "learning" project because there is too much needed too soon. With the limited time available to me, it can become aggrivating dealing with lots of minutae before you get anything even resembling usefull results. Start small.
There are a lot of people who say "Go grab some big project from sourceforge and learn it." I'd say no to that, at least at first. You need the tech first before getting to a complex project. After you have the tech down, then examining a big project might help you learn how to use it more effectively.
Good luck.
Was that by any chance Prime computers?
Am I the only one who saw that and thought Thirdspace. It sounds a little dangerous to me.
You make it sound like this thing just popped up out of nowhere overnight.
It probably was the first thing to pop into some peoples minds when they saw what was happening. It takes a long time, even with OSS, to make a project like this. People have been working on this since the problems first surfaced, probably even before.
So, yes, the "average" citizen might complain because they probably don't have the resources/access/5ki1lZ to do it themselves. But ones who can have been all along.
Just curious, but what have you been doing all along, besides bitching and moaning?
It is not necessary for them to actually come out and scream "They are a Fraud!" or even "Beware". If you can come to that conclusion for yourself based on what THG does tell you, that is enough. And if you can't, then declaring it in the article probably wouldn't do much for you either.
It seems to me that this type of criticism is common in many areas, be it tech, history, politics or whatever. Someone covers "Just the facts" and leaves the almost obvious interpretation up to the reader. They are then blasted as biased the other way because they didn't actually come out and scream "Fraud". NO! They aren't biased. If they had screamed "Fraud" then they would be biased. The center allways appears biased when viewed from either side, sort of a poor mans "If you're not for us, then you're against us" attitude.
The old SCO sold their properties to Caldera and went bye-bye. Later, Caldera renamed themselves SCO and continued on with the old products. BTW, It was Caldera that licensed Unix from Novell, before the name change.
The name change is confusing, but don't let it spoil the original SCO company or products. The old Caldera is the litigeous beast, not the old SCO.
Rather than deal with department after department, SCO may find itself facing a unified corporate front, and MS may demand a lot more from SCO or pull out. I'm sure MS doesn't like being played by anyone, whether its OSS or SCO.
But even better, if he had run tubing all around the case, he could water cool it. The outer surface would make a great radiator even without a fan. Nice and silent.
Of course, since most OSs went to the 32-bit flat model, every segment just pointed to the same place thereby killing any protection advantage you had. I would presume this modification allows the code vs data protection to be specified in the page table entry so pages are protected individually within the flat address space.
It's a good move, but it is not entirely new, and the processors did have protection before. It was just in a place where the feature wasn't used much.
What might make a real difference, according to any intelligent person not tied monitarily to the spammers, is a bill that isn't so forking full of holes, exceptions, and limitations that it does more dammage than good.
Yes I could.
If I was really trying to be wrong, the first thing I would do is predict a narrow and radical view of the future whereby my favorite project overcomes all odds and takes over the world.
The next thing I would do is predict that any project that I don't like would collapse dispite widespread use.
And the last thing I would do is declare anyone wrong who disagreed with my prediction.
But don't worry. I'm not trying that hard to be wrong. :-)
Someone will even come up with clever packaging schemes that let you drop a 4.4 package directly into a clean (or not so clean) new install of most of the major distributors. I wouldn't be surprised if the distributors themselves don't put up some help info on how to better integrate the 4.4 install with their system, should you go get it yourself. Their only problem with it is actually distributing it themselves. It's not as as if they don't want you to use it.
If gaming in Linux is that important, then it will happen. Just because RedHat or others don't package 4.4 by default doesn't mean the end user can't use it. It's just a little less convenient.
Win64
PCI Express is an Intel design bus. Win64 is an Athlon64 OS. It could be a while before we see AMD processors on PCI-Express boards.
Of course, the specs are out for HyperTransport 2.0, which is supposed to be compatible with PCI-Express. But we still need AMD to make a next generation processor with HT2. It hasn't been anounced, but 2H04 maybe.
I want to be dropped into a super giant star. That way when it collapses, I could find out what really happens inside a black hole.
You can take virtual flyovers of Mars now. A neat website hosts virtual, controlable Mars flyovers of famous sites, including the lander sites. MarsQuestOnline has several Mars virtual flyovers, and lots of other good Mars stuff. check it out.
The original request was to replace the actor who played the Emperor in Empire Strikes Back. That was Clive Revill. You are probably pointing back to Ian because he played the emperor in Return of the Jedi. Just a little mix up there.
The mix of strategy can be used when you are more involved. You can build bases, take territory, gather resources, and make an army. Strategy player vs player or player vs machine are also available in multiplayer.
One of the nicest parts is that the community is dedicated. They help new users and play cooperatively for training and learning. Go check the forums and screenshots. It' a little old (2000) but it still looks great, and playes nicely on older hardware (a 300-500 P3 will work, wants 16Mb+ graphics, 32 better). Some original developers are keeping the code up so bug fixes are available and improvements are on the way.