Bad analogy. A better one would be a comparison to car recalls. There are two pending for mine but I haven't had the problem (they are minor ones, nothing saftey related)so I keep putting it off. That doesn't mean the design problem doesn't exist; just that it hasn't affected me.
Your comment is off topic since we were talking about *desktops* and not *servers*. Servers are another matter, though I'd still recommend a Linux solution over Mac OS if those were the choices.
I work in IT and do a fair it of consulting on COEs (Common Operating Environments)among other things. I see *far* more interest in Linux on the desktop than Mac OS among most of the enterprises who are entertaining anything different than Windows.
This reads like a Mac fanboy wrote it. I can't think of any compelling reasons to recommend Macs in an enterprise environment. Properly implemented (that is with proper profiles and security), Windows 'Just Works' in business, and if one wants something different then there is Linux. The latter gives the benefit of being more customizable than either Windows or OS X in fact, given that all the source is available.
I like Linux as much as most of Slashdot, but do you *really* think that not having a Linux version of tax software will cause any appreciable loss of market share for the mainstream tax software providers? If you do it's time to take the rose colored glasses off!
Non sequiter. What you quote means that other rights retained by the people cannot be trampled on inadvertently by the rights enumerated. In other words, you can't ues your right to bear arms to take my right to life (except in self defense).
"This has 1 benefit only, cross platform compatibility."
You're smoking something really good, or you've forgotten the hell of windmodems and how long it took to get support on other OS'es for them. Requiring a software layer to drive a device as you describe works *against* cross platform compatability. It just adds more complextity to the driver/application layer of the device, which in turn makes it a less than trivial task to implement on multiple platforms. The latter is especially true when the device and software specs are closed.
This is the exact same pattern that almost every computing technology follows. First the lemmings all rush to sound smart by touting it's benefits. Soon it is the be all and end all in "everyone's" mind. Then the honeymoon fades and people realise it's a useful tool, and toss it into the chest with all the other useful tools to be used where it makes sense.
If you actually bothered to do your research you'd find that it varies by State in the US. It's not a universal thing. Non competes are unenforceable in many states for reasons already spelled out (see: "Right to Work").
First off, there are plenty of things you can trash the US for, but Russia's dictatorship is not one of them.
Second, with regards to Europe, I refer you to the ubiquitous surveillance cameras in the UK, the new law in France forbidding non registered journalists from photographing street violence, etc. The list goes on. Europe is no more free than the US, and probably less in many respects.
The title of this article is totally off. This is nothing more than a way to analyze battlefield intel better. It's got nothing to do with any kind of surveillance programs or anything other than being able to better catagorize threats and analyze data after a conflict.
This gives a whole new meaning to 'knee jerk reaction'.
Did you even bother to RTFA or did you just copy a random blurb? All this initiative is about is better ways to analyze intel after a battle or attack. It's not about 'anti-terrorism cameras'. Either you didn't pay attention to much of the article, you have your own agenda to push, or you're daft.
One of the reasons he became so well known in popular culture is his ability to put things into layman's terms. He isn't a pedantic nitpicker like many of the armchair scientists here on Slashdot are.
Re:throwing up my hands so high that I can't count
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
You do not need more. His response was to someone who willingly upgraded to Vista. He didn't say you HAD to upgrade, just that doing so on a substandard machine was ill advised.
Besides, the OP actually admitted to buying an emachine! That was his first mistake.
Sounds more like a stupid idea. There is such a thing as using the right tool for the job. There is nothing to see here but some 'gee whiz i did it because i could' geek factor.
How can he put an algorithm under the GPL? How is that any better than someone patenting an algorithm? Is it OK because it's the GPL and this is Slashdot? I know that a license != a patent, but if one supports the idea that algorithms should not be protected IP then shouldn't we all be crying foul over that?
Not to mention that this doesn't appear to be any kind of new algorithm, just a 'rebranded' one.
Slashdot Mirror
Bad analogy. A better one would be a comparison to car recalls. There are two pending for mine but I haven't had the problem (they are minor ones, nothing saftey related)so I keep putting it off. That doesn't mean the design problem doesn't exist; just that it hasn't affected me.
Your comment is off topic since we were talking about *desktops* and not *servers*. Servers are another matter, though I'd still recommend a Linux solution over Mac OS if those were the choices.
There are Mac servers?
Yes, yes, you and I know there are...but that's the response you'll get from your 'everyone'...
I work in IT and do a fair it of consulting on COEs (Common Operating Environments)among other things. I see *far* more interest in Linux on the desktop than Mac OS among most of the enterprises who are entertaining anything different than Windows.
This reads like a Mac fanboy wrote it. I can't think of any compelling reasons to recommend Macs in an enterprise environment. Properly implemented (that is with proper profiles and security), Windows 'Just Works' in business, and if one wants something different then there is Linux. The latter gives the benefit of being more customizable than either Windows or OS X in fact, given that all the source is available.
I like Linux as much as most of Slashdot, but do you *really* think that not having a Linux version of tax software will cause any appreciable loss of market share for the mainstream tax software providers? If you do it's time to take the rose colored glasses off!
Non sequiter. What you quote means that other rights retained by the people cannot be trampled on inadvertently by the rights enumerated. In other words, you can't ues your right to bear arms to take my right to life (except in self defense).
Good try though.
Actually, neither 'right' with regards to anonymnity is enumerated in the Constitution, nor is any right to privacy outside of unlawful searches.
I for one welcome our new cybernetic overlords.
(Give me a break, in all my years here I don't think I've *ever* posted about overlords, Soviet Russia, or hot grits on petrified Natalie Portman)
"This has 1 benefit only, cross platform compatibility."
You're smoking something really good, or you've forgotten the hell of windmodems and how long it took to get support on other OS'es for them. Requiring a software layer to drive a device as you describe works *against* cross platform compatability. It just adds more complextity to the driver/application layer of the device, which in turn makes it a less than trivial task to implement on multiple platforms. The latter is especially true when the device and software specs are closed.
This is the exact same pattern that almost every computing technology follows. First the lemmings all rush to sound smart by touting it's benefits. Soon it is the be all and end all in "everyone's" mind. Then the honeymoon fades and people realise it's a useful tool, and toss it into the chest with all the other useful tools to be used where it makes sense.
If you actually bothered to do your research you'd find that it varies by State in the US. It's not a universal thing. Non competes are unenforceable in many states for reasons already spelled out (see: "Right to Work").
Try posting on a non AC account next time. Oh that's right, you are a coward so you won't.
I *almost* hope *you* suffer a terrible loss, but two wrongs don't make a right.
People like you are good for society in a way though. You're a doctoral dissertation waiting to happen for some lucky psychology major.
First off, there are plenty of things you can trash the US for, but Russia's dictatorship is not one of them.
Second, with regards to Europe, I refer you to the ubiquitous surveillance cameras in the UK, the new law in France forbidding non registered journalists from photographing street violence, etc. The list goes on. Europe is no more free than the US, and probably less in many respects.
Maybe in a bizarro world, but then again we live in one. It's about having some respect for the dead and not making media spectacles out of them.
The policy started long before GWB was in office. Try again, that one wasn't even a good try.
It's France, not the US. As long as it's any country but the US it's ok, after all this is Slashdot isn't t?
It's always been et cetera, but refered to by most as 'etcee'. What a non issue to debate!
The title of this article is totally off. This is nothing more than a way to analyze battlefield intel better. It's got nothing to do with any kind of surveillance programs or anything other than being able to better catagorize threats and analyze data after a conflict.
This gives a whole new meaning to 'knee jerk reaction'.
Did you even bother to RTFA or did you just copy a random blurb? All this initiative is about is better ways to analyze intel after a battle or attack. It's not about 'anti-terrorism cameras'. Either you didn't pay attention to much of the article, you have your own agenda to push, or you're daft.
It's the duplicity that matters here, not the credentials. The lesson here should be 'don't fucking lie'. You missed it.
One of the reasons he became so well known in popular culture is his ability to put things into layman's terms. He isn't a pedantic nitpicker like many of the armchair scientists here on Slashdot are.
You do not need more. His response was to someone who willingly upgraded to Vista. He didn't say you HAD to upgrade, just that doing so on a substandard machine was ill advised.
Besides, the OP actually admitted to buying an emachine! That was his first mistake.
Sounds more like a stupid idea. There is such a thing as using the right tool for the job. There is nothing to see here but some 'gee whiz i did it because i could' geek factor.
You must be new here if you expect the 'editors' to actually proofread anything.
How can he put an algorithm under the GPL? How is that any better than someone patenting an algorithm? Is it OK because it's the GPL and this is Slashdot? I know that a license != a patent, but if one supports the idea that algorithms should not be protected IP then shouldn't we all be crying foul over that?
Not to mention that this doesn't appear to be any kind of new algorithm, just a 'rebranded' one.