I wouldn't say that a lack of specialized, third party, niche applications could be categorized as a weakness of the OS. It's simply a matter of a weakness in the demand for those specialized, third party, niche applications by the users of that OS.
The greater the demand, the greater the need for commercial developers to port their products to keep alive in the market.
"Condorcet's method is one of several pairwise methods, which are great methods for electing people in single-seat elections (president, governor, mayor, etc.). Condorcet's method is named after the 18th century election theorist who invented it. Unlike most methods which make you choose the lesser of two evils, Condorcet's method and other pairwise methods let you rank the candidates in the order in which you would see them elected. The way the votes are tallied is by computing the results of separate pairwise elections between all of the candidates, and the winner is the one that wins a majority in all of the pairwise elections.
The best result of this is that if there is Candidate A on one extreme who pulls 40% of the vote, Candidate B in the middle who only pulls 20% of the vote, and Candidate C on the other extreme who pulls 40% of the vote, Candidate B will get elected as a compromise. Why? Because in a two-way contest between A and B, B would win with 60% of the vote, and in a two-way contest between B and C, B would also win with 60% of the vote. (Note that if B is a looney billionaire, he might not be able to win separate pairwise elections against anyone, and this would be reflected with Condorcet's method.)
Condorcet's method lets voters mark their sincere wishes for who they would like to win the election, without having to consider strategy ("I'd vote for Candidate B, but I'm afraid of wasting my vote."). It's really just a logical extension of majority rule when more than two choices are involved."
No argument there. Its demise is directly linked to the rise of a GPL'd alternative. While it's true that many talented people are altruistic, talented primates are apparently more concerned about fairness. The GPL allows for fairness that the BSD license ignores. The spirit of the GPL is about sharing. Community is built on sharing. BSD was a foreshadowing of what was to come. However, its time has clearly passed as the ability to take from others without returning the favor is no longer allowed. No more Unix wars to divide the talented, allowing a single mediocre closed-source monopolist in Redmond to steal the popular mindshare.
It goes against the grain, and the moment it becomes "official", there will be an "outside" group immediately formed at odd with it. It has the scent of elitism about it.
Hackers don't travel in herds that can be easily labeled or logo'd. The moment some will decide to slip under the proposed abstract banner, will be the same they will be derided for being posers by others who refuse to wear the designer tag. Who will be correct? Neither, and the purpose of the logo (to categorize and unite under) will have failed.
Only one response appears to be appropriate, and it was first declared by an earlier 'hack'er. In addition, other witticisms can be found here.
Don't piss off Pakistani, Indian, Indonesian, Malaysian or Chinese foreign contractors if they've got your U.S. service, IT and manufacturing industries by the shorthairs. Imagine the billions (trillions?) of dollars worth of "sensitive" info that your competitors can arrange to access out of U.S. jurisdiction in countries known for corrupt political and business dealings (at least more so than the U.S.).
One of the biggest mistakes the Middle-East makes is not utilizing their oil profits to lobby and bid for U.S. corporate manufacturing, IT, and service jobs. With their resources, they could've easily have trained a large number of their citizens to steal away U.S. jobs. In the end, they let their fear and hatred of the west allow India, China and other developing nations to steal U.S. jobs. They've lost the only advantage they could have over the U.S.
I mean what were the chances that the U.S. would've bombed Bagdhad if the city's factories produced Intel's motherboards, Nike's shoes, General Electric's U.S. Defense Department electronic components, and the state of New York's offsite backup storage for electronic court transcriptions? If a country ever wants an advantage over the U.S., or at least a sure deterrence against imperial aggression, they must learn to sleep with the enemy. That's only way the aggressor will let you get close to the imperial shorthairs (not talking about the back of the neck here). Now that the pakistani has hold of one of the empire's pubes, that small portion of the empire is more amicable (at least on the surface). Various disciplines call this leveraging, the loser usually calls it blackmail.
If most U.S. citizens only knew the info being sent overseas, they'd fire every elected politician from office for the crime of stupidity.
...no longer being developed. The GNU.FREE author mentions another incident in his explanation of why he stopped development:
"The final straw was a book by Greg Palast, "The best democracy money can buy", which in one chapter explained how the Republicans had stolen tens of thousands of votes in Florida. The details are arduous, but in essence a sub-contractor used to clean the electoral roll was the cover for the illegitimate removal of a large number of Democrat voters. This was shocking enough, but the fact the Palast had to come all the way to the UK to get the story published in the independently funded BBC and Guardian newspaper truly drove me crazy."
Being clueless and a coward, you've mistaken Open Source (i.e. visible, transparent, peer-reviewed and accountable) with Proprietary (i.e. non-visible, opaque, unreviewed by peers, closed-source, unaccountable and I'll-bust-your-ass-if-you-peek-at-my-Intellectual- Property). What you state is an entirely plausible scenario for the MacroShafts of the world, but unlikely to survive a peer-reviewed process that Open Source owes its existance to.
Your clueless statement:
"Damn IP thiefs them GPLers are." would be more accurate if re-worded as: "Damn IP thieves them AT&Ters are." SCO's Unix, which is now in the public domain as it was released as such last year, was initially forced open in court in the 80's where it was proven in court that it contained stolen code from BSD where the BSD license had been removed. The irony of the situation was that it was AT&T (owner and creator of Unix before Novell, Caldera, and now SCOurge) who initially sued Berkeley for violating their intellectual property and stealing their source code. Only the opposite was proven.
Doom gave me a phobia of giant mechanized spiders with frikkin laser-beams on their foreheads. The incessant omni-directional sound of grinding gears sneaking up on you still give me the willies!
Ah, more new sweat/code/technique that can be "borrowed" by GPL'd (read Linux) and commercial (read Sun, AIX, Irix..etc) Operating Systems that don't have to contribute back to BSD.
Reminds me of the diminutive, smarter, nerdy kid who's forced to do the larger, lazy, bully's homework or else! I love them flabby-licenses! Thanks BSD; Apple and others appreciate the extra helping.
Shrub is clearly an imbecile. He needs to be replaced next election and his cronies need to be curbed before they drag us into a corner we can't manouver out of. There are frightening similarities between the current and Grant Administrations. The difference is we weren't a nuclear-capable super-power during the Grant Administration. The story: failed business man, wins war, picks a party (Republican in this case), becomes president, and gets mired in financial scandals.
If you shuffle the order of events, you could very well put Shrub into that role, instead of Grant. No intentional insult to Grant in the comparison. In fact, I'd take Grant over Shrub any day. At least Grant had some success in foreign affairs.
I was demonstrating a similar point in answering the original poster's absurd statement:
"Ronald Reagan put an end to the cold war. He was a Republican. Don't let your twisted little liberal mind forget that."
I did this by introducing a counterpoint that didn't involve a "Republican" as the poster was emphasizing. We could trace global political manouverings to either party (and countries) forever, and realize that no action or statement or achievement is an island or truly original. Someone can always be pointed out to have laid the groundwork beforehand. At best, what can be claimed is an incremental gain in the overall achievement. If you're lucky, you can even pinpoint its state in time within the achievement's boundaries.
If I were "owned" by another country as India was by England, I think I would join any damn group to get out from under a foreign power's existing yoke. Consider how you would feel, as the Indians did, to be treated by "superior" whites as second class citizens in your own country. Forget about being an Indian in a different Brittish colony. They weren't even considered human there. The Brittish at the time considered themselves a "master" race, and all others (inluding fellow Europeans) as less deserving of the title.
If you don't think its their military who just sent that manned missile into space, I recommend reading further about it.
It seems you didn't read my post carefully (or look at the maps in your own link). The U.S.'s capitol is currently outside China's reach. Yeah, now with secret launchings, they have a better platform to stage negotiations from. Its a whole different world when the missiles comes straight down on top of you. And, from space, you don't need alot of fuel to drop something. Just enough to guide a small nuke.
They're still a few years away (they just launched successfully this evening) from having anything to worry about. On the other hand, they have two critical things on their side: 1) Someone else has already laid the difficult ground work for them (U.S. and Russia), 2) technology today is a thousand times of what the U.S. and Russia had in their attempts to master space. These two factors should shave quite a few years in allowing them to mature their space program.
As for strategy, the chances that they'll try to bully the U.S. directly is not likely their goal. However, surrounding neighbors will be more pliable as trade deals are re-negotiated. And, if I were Taiwan, I'd be sweating as their protector, the U.S., weakens due to a loss of technological momentum to India and China. Those are the two major benefactors and repositories of technical experience who are gaining the momentum from us due to offshoring by "U.S." companies. Hell, the PCs we're both typing on are imported from countries where our jobs have gone to.
While I applaud another enterprise by humanity to venture into space, please don't mistake this as a anything other than a political move. There's nothing humanitarian about it. Hence, the "secrecy" and not a joint mission to reduce the cost and risk. Its funny how history repeats itself. The U.S. is apparently doomed to continuously misunderstand and underestimate Asian countries. Aside from all the war related blunders, our private sector did it with Japan, and now it appears our public sector is about to do it with China. The Chinese play a game they invented thousands of years ago. And, if they didn't invent it, they were certainly the first to formalize the rules. We're the new kid on the block in their philosophy. Yeah, we're tough (for only the past 60 years), and yeah they've had their ups and downs for the past 3,000 years. But, we've only been an Imperial power for a blink of an eye in comparison to China's experience of being one for 300 centuries.
As the U.S. overexposes and overplays its hand across the globe, rudely making waves and painfully highlighting our weaknesses. The Chinese avoid all these things and watch. So far, we've been successful in countering their moves (particularly in oil) as they've probed our weakspots and have made agreements with nearly all our enemies (and there are quite a few). But, these are merely feints on their part in what is going to be a long (if we're lucky and keep our wits), protracted campaign in a game of economic and political expansion.
They've decided that it's time for the sleeping giant to stretch, and the Soviet Union was nothing like what we're about to face in economical and political presence.
Slashdot Mirror
The greater the demand, the greater the need for commercial developers to port their products to keep alive in the market.
= 9J =
"Condorcet's method is one of several pairwise methods, which are great methods for electing people in single-seat elections (president, governor, mayor, etc.). Condorcet's method is named after the 18th century election theorist who invented it. Unlike most methods which make you choose the lesser of two evils, Condorcet's method and other pairwise methods let you rank the candidates in the order in which you would see them elected. The way the votes are tallied is by computing the results of separate pairwise elections between all of the candidates, and the winner is the one that wins a majority in all of the pairwise elections.
The best result of this is that if there is Candidate A on one extreme who pulls 40% of the vote, Candidate B in the middle who only pulls 20% of the vote, and Candidate C on the other extreme who pulls 40% of the vote, Candidate B will get elected as a compromise. Why? Because in a two-way contest between A and B, B would win with 60% of the vote, and in a two-way contest between B and C, B would also win with 60% of the vote. (Note that if B is a looney billionaire, he might not be able to win separate pairwise elections against anyone, and this would be reflected with Condorcet's method.)
Condorcet's method lets voters mark their sincere wishes for who they would like to win the election, without having to consider strategy ("I'd vote for Candidate B, but I'm afraid of wasting my vote."). It's really just a logical extension of majority rule when more than two choices are involved."
= 9J =
= 9J =
Hackers don't travel in herds that can be easily labeled or logo'd. The moment some will decide to slip under the proposed abstract banner, will be the same they will be derided for being posers by others who refuse to wear the designer tag. Who will be correct? Neither, and the purpose of the logo (to categorize and unite under) will have failed.
Only one response appears to be appropriate, and it was first declared by an earlier 'hack'er. In addition, other witticisms can be found here.
= 9J =
= 9J =
One of the biggest mistakes the Middle-East makes is not utilizing their oil profits to lobby and bid for U.S. corporate manufacturing, IT, and service jobs. With their resources, they could've easily have trained a large number of their citizens to steal away U.S. jobs. In the end, they let their fear and hatred of the west allow India, China and other developing nations to steal U.S. jobs. They've lost the only advantage they could have over the U.S.
I mean what were the chances that the U.S. would've bombed Bagdhad if the city's factories produced Intel's motherboards, Nike's shoes, General Electric's U.S. Defense Department electronic components, and the state of New York's offsite backup storage for electronic court transcriptions? If a country ever wants an advantage over the U.S., or at least a sure deterrence against imperial aggression, they must learn to sleep with the enemy. That's only way the aggressor will let you get close to the imperial shorthairs (not talking about the back of the neck here). Now that the pakistani has hold of one of the empire's pubes, that small portion of the empire is more amicable (at least on the surface). Various disciplines call this leveraging, the loser usually calls it blackmail.
If most U.S. citizens only knew the info being sent overseas, they'd fire every elected politician from office for the crime of stupidity.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
"The final straw was a book by Greg Palast, "The best democracy money can buy", which in one chapter explained how the Republicans had stolen tens of thousands of votes in Florida. The details are arduous, but in essence a sub-contractor used to clean the electoral roll was the cover for the illegitimate removal of a large number of Democrat voters. This was shocking enough, but the fact the Palast had to come all the way to the UK to get the story published in the independently funded BBC and Guardian newspaper truly drove me crazy."
= 9J =
Your clueless statement: "Damn IP thiefs them GPLers are." would be more accurate if re-worded as: "Damn IP thieves them AT&Ters are." SCO's Unix, which is now in the public domain as it was released as such last year, was initially forced open in court in the 80's where it was proven in court that it contained stolen code from BSD where the BSD license had been removed. The irony of the situation was that it was AT&T (owner and creator of Unix before Novell, Caldera, and now SCOurge) who initially sued Berkeley for violating their intellectual property and stealing their source code. Only the opposite was proven.
= 9J =
= 9J =
Doom gave me a phobia of giant mechanized spiders with frikkin laser-beams on their foreheads. The incessant omni-directional sound of grinding gears sneaking up on you still give me the willies!
Reminds me of the diminutive, smarter, nerdy kid who's forced to do the larger, lazy, bully's homework or else! I love them flabby-licenses! Thanks BSD; Apple and others appreciate the extra helping.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
If you shuffle the order of events, you could very well put Shrub into that role, instead of Grant. No intentional insult to Grant in the comparison. In fact, I'd take Grant over Shrub any day. At least Grant had some success in foreign affairs.
= 9J =
= 9J =
"Ronald Reagan put an end to the cold war. He was a Republican. Don't let your twisted little liberal mind forget that."
I did this by introducing a counterpoint that didn't involve a "Republican" as the poster was emphasizing. We could trace global political manouverings to either party (and countries) forever, and realize that no action or statement or achievement is an island or truly original. Someone can always be pointed out to have laid the groundwork beforehand. At best, what can be claimed is an incremental gain in the overall achievement. If you're lucky, you can even pinpoint its state in time within the achievement's boundaries.
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
= 9J =
It seems you didn't read my post carefully (or look at the maps in your own link). The U.S.'s capitol is currently outside China's reach. Yeah, now with secret launchings, they have a better platform to stage negotiations from. Its a whole different world when the missiles comes straight down on top of you. And, from space, you don't need alot of fuel to drop something. Just enough to guide a small nuke.
They're still a few years away (they just launched successfully this evening) from having anything to worry about. On the other hand, they have two critical things on their side: 1) Someone else has already laid the difficult ground work for them (U.S. and Russia), 2) technology today is a thousand times of what the U.S. and Russia had in their attempts to master space. These two factors should shave quite a few years in allowing them to mature their space program.
As for strategy, the chances that they'll try to bully the U.S. directly is not likely their goal. However, surrounding neighbors will be more pliable as trade deals are re-negotiated. And, if I were Taiwan, I'd be sweating as their protector, the U.S., weakens due to a loss of technological momentum to India and China. Those are the two major benefactors and repositories of technical experience who are gaining the momentum from us due to offshoring by "U.S." companies. Hell, the PCs we're both typing on are imported from countries where our jobs have gone to.
While I applaud another enterprise by humanity to venture into space, please don't mistake this as a anything other than a political move. There's nothing humanitarian about it. Hence, the "secrecy" and not a joint mission to reduce the cost and risk. Its funny how history repeats itself. The U.S. is apparently doomed to continuously misunderstand and underestimate Asian countries. Aside from all the war related blunders, our private sector did it with Japan, and now it appears our public sector is about to do it with China. The Chinese play a game they invented thousands of years ago. And, if they didn't invent it, they were certainly the first to formalize the rules. We're the new kid on the block in their philosophy. Yeah, we're tough (for only the past 60 years), and yeah they've had their ups and downs for the past 3,000 years. But, we've only been an Imperial power for a blink of an eye in comparison to China's experience of being one for 300 centuries.
As the U.S. overexposes and overplays its hand across the globe, rudely making waves and painfully highlighting our weaknesses. The Chinese avoid all these things and watch. So far, we've been successful in countering their moves (particularly in oil) as they've probed our weakspots and have made agreements with nearly all our enemies (and there are quite a few). But, these are merely feints on their part in what is going to be a long (if we're lucky and keep our wits), protracted campaign in a game of economic and political expansion.
They've decided that it's time for the sleeping giant to stretch, and the Soviet Union was nothing like what we're about to face in economical and political presence.
= 9J =