the phrase "third world" has not to do with economics yet it has everything to do with economics. mostly, when most people hear the word, it immediately conjures up a picture of really dire living conditions. the actual meaning of the term refers to the fact that there were two major schools of economic models. the capitilistic and the socialist. "third world" was a way of saying neither.
police will probably fill you in on the parts you missed when you get home
i take it you don't have kids. i don't either. but i'm planning for one. i don't intend for the police to fill me in on any such part since i don't intend on missing it if something does happen. fuck y'all if my cell phone irritates you.
1900,1990... i don't know what they did back in the old west but i'm damn sure they didn't spend the day posting to/. either. if you want to live in the past that's your choice. the rest of us would like to enjoy the progress.
what i don't get about people is why a person talking on the cell phone is irritating. if it were two people talking in person it seems ok. but if it's a person talking into a cell phone many people seem annoyed. is that because they only get to hear half the conversation?
it's not that there aren't any delta32 posessors in asia or africa. there are. just that in europe, those that didn't have it were wiped out during the plague. so the concentration of delta32 in europe is much much higher since present day europeans were decendents of delta32 carriers. and anyone that didn't have delta32 didn't stick around to pass on there non-mutated gene.
in asia and africa, you didn't have to survive the plague (since there hasn't been one like in europe) to be able to pass your genes. hence the very low concentration of delta32.
to the parent post: as far as i can remember, delta32 prevents the virii from latching onto the white blood cell. i believe the virus has to hijack WBC to launch attack against other WBCs rendering the defence machanisms useless.
interestingly, plague infection and AIDS infection work with the same mechanism (the virus puncturing a WBC and then hijacking it) and delta32 prevents the puncturing. so decendents of those who survived the plague have a high chance of having delta32 which would then give them immunity from AIDS. which then explains the AIDS epedimic in africa and asia since the inhabitants were not necessarily decendents of people that had to have delta32 to survive to pass on their genes.
that the so called 'solid engineering process' is any better than just 'hacking' something together. during my undergrad, i was part of a pilot program in which you used 'formal methods' for software design. what it meant was that you first took the requirements in plain english. then you mathmaticised it, using predicate calculas. then you kept refining it until you essentially derived the code entirely mathmatically.
personally, i found five problems with the 'formal methods' approach.
it took far too much time.
the proof relied too heavily on intuition (try proving a hello world program)
humans communicate in english. a very 'buggy' language. in the sense that it's open to interpretation. transforming the requirements from english to predicate calc won't help unless both parties understand predicate calc. and i'm expecting my manager to speak predicate calc any day now...
not like mathmatical proofs don't have their share of bugs. moving the bugs from proggies to their proofs doesn't make the bug any shallower.
in most proofs there is some hand waving; assumptions, if you will. same thing with predicate calc because you just can't quantify everything down to gnat's ass. buffer overflows galore.
i thought i'd mention the above to make my point that just because you are structured or the processes you are using is structured doesn't mean that it's automatically better than 'hackage'. after all, Therac-25 wasn't hacked together. it was build by engineers.
what opensource does do for you is that it allow many more people to use it -- and whoever runs into problems can find out why the problem exists -- and have the potential to fix it. "many eyes == shallow bugs" is a very powerful concept. one which the old school cathedral people are in complete denial of for it defies everything they've ever known.
(as an aside, what was cool about the formal methods was that if you got the requirements right, and were able to derive the proofs, you essentially had a mathmatically correct pseudo-code and all that was needed as transcribing it into your favorite programming language. pretty freaky.)
i started out in computing with DOS 4/5. i loved MS.
fast forward a decade or so..
am a diehard debian fan. hate MS. (i'm using the word 'hate' here.)
what drove me to it? nobody on either side paid me.
i think the post partially answers it. blatent rip-offs, redefining the meaning of 'innovation' to be 'predetory compitition squashing and conveniently swallowing up them whole'. disgusting. just plain disgusting. a two bit company that was at the right place at the right time.
i still use links and lynx occasionally. if MS invented (and are thus now eligible for this patent), they can suck on my hairy ball-sack.
MS-Free since 95. they'll have to pry my debian from my cold dead hands.
sorry about my near non-articulation of my frustration and resorting to various things i've resorted to. every day my disgust for the corp grows leaps and bounds. i mean, don't they *know* that lynx does it and has been doing it for years and thus they are relying on USPTO being overwhelmed and thus not checking on the prior art? this is the most obvious application of the "INNOVATION" at MS. it's been done before. but the rest of the world doen't know better. fuck 'em. rome fell too.
part of the reason the browser wars were won by MS was because of the distribution channels. MS had total control over the OEMs. Netscape got left out flapping in the wind. The only way for people to get netscape on their computers was to download it over their 56k modem (if they were lucky). and a program that size takes a while to download. unless you were savy with 'resume downloading', you generally would not look forward to downloading anything that took over a couple of minutes.
IE was already installed.
fast forward a couple of years.. most people have broadband. takes all of 2 minutes to download firefox.
while that alone doesn't mean people will start treating the built-in IE as a convinient way to bootstrap a firefox install it does put people, for the first time in MS history, quite able to choose an alternative. but will they? that's another question entirely. insert the devo "choice" quote here.
(as an aside, imagine if the OS didn't come with a browser. people would have a hard time installing firefox. If i were microsoft, i would take IE out of the OS, and have people buy it at the store. the reason being, if they don't buy it, there is no browser on their system to go download firefox with. and if they pay for it, well, since they've paid for a browser would they want to not use it?)
precisely. if you watch 'revolution OS', he mentions how the GPL is a hack on copyright -- using copyright to un-copyright itself (copyleft). it's the most beautiful hack ever done. it's like judo -- using the opponents force to down the opponent without breaking a sweat on your part.
for that, i regard him as the greatest hacker of our generation.
after having invented "double secret probation", i'm sure they can muster up "double secret encryption". but i don't know if they can go as far as "super" secret encryption.
Explain to me then - given that the costs are the same upfront for the users - that they should buy a Linux based system over a Windows based system
sorry i was a little aggrivated when i read your last post. i understand what you mean. but you just answered you own question. consider this:
because they have a good admin
we don't have an admin. i'm a programmer. i'm not even a sys-admin (and i was able to set this all up -- that alone should tell you if it's hard or easy to do). i spent the time once when we were setting it all up. now i don't even have to look at it. we have no admin (we're a small shop with about 40 workstations). and the setup just works. drives fail and we replace 'em (RAID comes handy). apart from the usual apt-getting there is no admin-ing to do. so given that maintainence cost is almost $0, i would make the decisions the same way all over again. but as far as what people should run, i would say, go with what tickles your ticklables. there simply isn't one shoe that fits all. but assuming that setting up xyz is impossible because you couldn't do it is just plain FUD. i realize the same goes the other way too but for me, what i did makes sense. as i'm sure what you did makes sense for you. it would be like me saying you can't compile something easily in windows because i can't get autoconf/automake to work in windows without a hassle (those are the tools of my choice and translating what i know from one platform to another one doesn't make much sense now does it?) different strokes for different folks. plain and simple.
sorry for making it a little personal, but you must be on some really good crack.
i have a single sign on. from VPN to dial-up to email to smb shares, to domain logins, to web mail/regular-mail. even our in-house app is capable of using the feature. (we decided not to use it for that one thing because of some business logic.) *and* it's all redundent. except of course the file server. walk into the server room and pull the plug on any server and no one is gonna notice except the monitoring devices. and guess what? it's all on GNU/Linux.
it might be educational for you to read up on PAM/LDAP/SAMBA/SASL-Auth/Raduis before spreading the FUD.
granted it's not pointy-and-clicky but i like it the way it is -- configurable to the point where i can get it to work just the way I want it. and you would be right if you said it is hard to setup. but it's also easy as all hell to mantain. i haven't looked at it in about 3 years (going on 4)!
the only reason most things have there own authentication scheme (with really good support for a 'single-sign-on') is that there are times when you want to have boxes with, say, email accounts but no other type of account. ISPs make use of that (ISP admins, chime in here..).
so quit smoking the cool-aid. drink it at least.
Hypocracy on /. -- Is this really a suprise?
on
CAN-SPAM Is A Bust
·
· Score: 1
i hear moans and groans going on and on about letting the market fix itself and not over regulating it by overzealous laws etc.
but i guess we pick and choose what should and shouldn't be codified eh?
why don't i hear everyone cheering that the law men found something that they couldn't fix with a wave of their wand? especially now that it's squarely (and rightly) back on the shoulder of techies to implement a spam free email systems.
if regulating VoIP is bad, regulating broadcasting is bad, how come we're all secretly hoping the gummint step in and clean up the spam mess?
yes it does. The roman empire. it fell. is gone. buried beneath ten layers of dirt. why? narcissism. plain and simple. while i don't think MS is detrimentally narcissistic, it certainly is arrogant. but that's besides the point.
now, nowhere did i say MS was going to disappear. so calling me stupid over something i never said was uncalled for.
what i did say is that MS is starting to have to fight for *keeping* it's mindshare because they've got nothing else until longhorn. now is the time to creep up on it.
you have to ask, why now? MS has been in business for such a long time (in software industry terms). MS has never been known to hand out payola. why now?
MS has nothing else to keep the mindshare. OSS is creeping up outside the realm of just the geeks. MS has nothing effective to fend it off. except hoards of cash.
without the payola, the stock would start on a slippery slide downwards all the while losing mindshare. and remember, mindshare among geeks is what got MS to where it is in the first place.
all this just to buy time, literally, until longhorn ships.
if there is any 'after burner' somewhere in the FOSS community, the time is now to kick it in. to win over mindshare before longhorn. because from now until longhorn, MS has nothing but diversionary tactics to keep people interested in MS.
and to all MS fanboys out there, i'm not saying this is a bad thing. it's a great thing. i'm just making a guess as to why they are doing it now.
make that "tens of billions of cold hard cash don't disappear that easily". when it comes to "assets" including stock evaluations and company's market value, "vanished in thin air" can be a reality even for billions.
and yeah, bill's billions are comprised of current market values of various assets that are closely tied to MS. notice the little bouncy bouncy he and other MS richest men (the "developer-developer" monkey among others) went thru in the "richest men in the world" list of forbes at the height of the dot-bomb (the worst part of the dot com crash). Buffett gained in position in the list. what actually happened was the because of software companies' values tanking, some of those billions just vaporised. it would be quite a magic trick if it were cold hard cash. but with "assets" it's a very realistic possibility.
Da Vinci was a genius. We all know he was a painter, mathmatician, scientist, astronomer etc. What we didn't know up until now was that he was also a hard core, first rate hacker. It was Da Vinci who wrote the code for linux. There is even a book that has all the code he wrote.
You heard it here folks, Da Vinci wrote linux. It was written using the mirror technique he loved so much. Linus only had to hold a mirror against his copy of "The Da Vinci Code" and copy it line by line. The rest of us fools just read the book without using a mirror and thought it was a novel when it was actually a mirrored printout of the linux source code written by Da Vinci.
on/. we complain about legislative measures to stop spam etc. why should MS be treated any differently?
their monopoly and the choke hold on the market is coming to an end. we don't need no stinkin' corrupt legislation/lobbying to bring that about. let the big corps and the legislators shake hands and shake whatever else they do for each other. the people will have moved on. they will become irrelevent. and in this respect the GPL is brillient. it's a check-mate to them, using their rules, on their turf. long live the GPL/FOSS.
yesterday it was apache/linux on the servers. today it's firefox on the desktop. tomorrow it will be one more. the dominos are toppling.
i haven't see the film but i've seen the interviews. and one thing he said struck me. it's been *2 years* of major media's lopsided reporting. so he's trying to bring out the other side. in *2 hours*. someone had to present the other side. the big media weren't touching it with a ten foot pole. the public already has already seen the gummint party line. for the last 2 years (i'm talking just about the iraqi war and the 404'ed WMD etc.). i don't see why micheal moore had to "present the other side". we've seen plenty of it, and only it, on big media.
Slashdot Mirror
the phrase "third world" has not to do with economics yet it has everything to do with economics. mostly, when most people hear the word, it immediately conjures up a picture of really dire living conditions. the actual meaning of the term refers to the fact that there were two major schools of economic models. the capitilistic and the socialist. "third world" was a way of saying neither.
i take it you don't have kids. i don't either. but i'm planning for one. i don't intend for the police to fill me in on any such part since i don't intend on missing it if something does happen. fuck y'all if my cell phone irritates you.
1900,1990... i don't know what they did back in the old west but i'm damn sure they didn't spend the day posting to /. either. if you want to live in the past that's your choice. the rest of us would like to enjoy the progress.
what i don't get about people is why a person talking on the cell phone is irritating. if it were two people talking in person it seems ok. but if it's a person talking into a cell phone many people seem annoyed. is that because they only get to hear half the conversation?
in response to the grandparent post:
it's not that there aren't any delta32 posessors in asia or africa. there are. just that in europe, those that didn't have it were wiped out during the plague. so the concentration of delta32 in europe is much much higher since present day europeans were decendents of delta32 carriers. and anyone that didn't have delta32 didn't stick around to pass on there non-mutated gene.
in asia and africa, you didn't have to survive the plague (since there hasn't been one like in europe) to be able to pass your genes. hence the very low concentration of delta32.
to the parent post:
as far as i can remember, delta32 prevents the virii from latching onto the white blood cell. i believe the virus has to hijack WBC to launch attack against other WBCs rendering the defence machanisms useless.
interestingly, plague infection and AIDS infection work with the same mechanism (the virus puncturing a WBC and then hijacking it) and delta32 prevents the puncturing. so decendents of those who survived the plague have a high chance of having delta32 which would then give them immunity from AIDS. which then explains the AIDS epedimic in africa and asia since the inhabitants were not necessarily decendents of people that had to have delta32 to survive to pass on their genes.
but, but, goldstein IS a godless communist oppressor who is a traitor and the enemy. we all hate him.
that's volume licensing for ya.
personally, i found five problems with the 'formal methods' approach.
i thought i'd mention the above to make my point that just because you are structured or the processes you are using is structured doesn't mean that it's automatically better than 'hackage'. after all, Therac-25 wasn't hacked together. it was build by engineers.
what opensource does do for you is that it allow many more people to use it -- and whoever runs into problems can find out why the problem exists -- and have the potential to fix it. "many eyes == shallow bugs" is a very powerful concept. one which the old school cathedral people are in complete denial of for it defies everything they've ever known.
(as an aside, what was cool about the formal methods was that if you got the requirements right, and were able to derive the proofs, you essentially had a mathmatically correct pseudo-code and all that was needed as transcribing it into your favorite programming language. pretty freaky.)
i started out in computing with DOS 4/5. i loved MS.
fast forward a decade or so..
am a diehard debian fan. hate MS. (i'm using the word 'hate' here.)
what drove me to it? nobody on either side paid me.
i think the post partially answers it. blatent rip-offs, redefining the meaning of 'innovation' to be 'predetory compitition squashing and conveniently swallowing up them whole'. disgusting. just plain disgusting. a two bit company that was at the right place at the right time.
i still use links and lynx occasionally. if MS invented (and are thus now eligible for this patent), they can suck on my hairy ball-sack.
MS-Free since 95. they'll have to pry my debian from my cold dead hands.
sorry about my near non-articulation of my frustration and resorting to various things i've resorted to. every day my disgust for the corp grows leaps and bounds. i mean, don't they *know* that lynx does it and has been doing it for years and thus they are relying on USPTO being overwhelmed and thus not checking on the prior art? this is the most obvious application of the "INNOVATION" at MS. it's been done before. but the rest of the world doen't know better. fuck 'em. rome fell too.
IE was already installed.
fast forward a couple of years.. most people have broadband. takes all of 2 minutes to download firefox.
while that alone doesn't mean people will start treating the built-in IE as a convinient way to bootstrap a firefox install it does put people, for the first time in MS history, quite able to choose an alternative. but will they? that's another question entirely. insert the devo "choice" quote here. (as an aside, imagine if the OS didn't come with a browser. people would have a hard time installing firefox. If i were microsoft, i would take IE out of the OS, and have people buy it at the store. the reason being, if they don't buy it, there is no browser on their system to go download firefox with. and if they pay for it, well, since they've paid for a browser would they want to not use it?)
Blah Blah Blah Blah,Blah,Blah, of their works.
so, you're a left hander.
;)
i must have missed the memo to start calling it *gaming*
precisely. if you watch 'revolution OS', he mentions how the GPL is a hack on copyright -- using copyright to un-copyright itself (copyleft). it's the most beautiful hack ever done. it's like judo -- using the opponents force to down the opponent without breaking a sweat on your part.
for that, i regard him as the greatest hacker of our generation.
after having invented "double secret probation", i'm sure they can muster up "double secret encryption". but i don't know if they can go as far as "super" secret encryption.
sorry i was a little aggrivated when i read your last post. i understand what you mean. but you just answered you own question. consider this:
because they have a good admin
we don't have an admin. i'm a programmer. i'm not even a sys-admin (and i was able to set this all up -- that alone should tell you if it's hard or easy to do). i spent the time once when we were setting it all up. now i don't even have to look at it. we have no admin (we're a small shop with about 40 workstations). and the setup just works. drives fail and we replace 'em (RAID comes handy). apart from the usual apt-getting there is no admin-ing to do. so given that maintainence cost is almost $0, i would make the decisions the same way all over again. but as far as what people should run, i would say, go with what tickles your ticklables. there simply isn't one shoe that fits all. but assuming that setting up xyz is impossible because you couldn't do it is just plain FUD. i realize the same goes the other way too but for me, what i did makes sense. as i'm sure what you did makes sense for you. it would be like me saying you can't compile something easily in windows because i can't get autoconf/automake to work in windows without a hassle (those are the tools of my choice and translating what i know from one platform to another one doesn't make much sense now does it?) different strokes for different folks. plain and simple.
sorry for making it a little personal, but you must be on some really good crack.
i have a single sign on. from VPN to dial-up to email to smb shares, to domain logins, to web mail/regular-mail. even our in-house app is capable of using the feature. (we decided not to use it for that one thing because of some business logic.) *and* it's all redundent. except of course the file server. walk into the server room and pull the plug on any server and no one is gonna notice except the monitoring devices. and guess what? it's all on GNU/Linux.
it might be educational for you to read up on PAM/LDAP/SAMBA/SASL-Auth/Raduis before spreading the FUD.
granted it's not pointy-and-clicky but i like it the way it is -- configurable to the point where i can get it to work just the way I want it. and you would be right if you said it is hard to setup. but it's also easy as all hell to mantain. i haven't looked at it in about 3 years (going on 4)!
the only reason most things have there own authentication scheme (with really good support for a 'single-sign-on') is that there are times when you want to have boxes with, say, email accounts but no other type of account. ISPs make use of that (ISP admins, chime in here..).
so quit smoking the cool-aid. drink it at least.
but i guess we pick and choose what should and shouldn't be codified eh?
why don't i hear everyone cheering that the law men found something that they couldn't fix with a wave of their wand? especially now that it's squarely (and rightly) back on the shoulder of techies to implement a spam free email systems.
if regulating VoIP is bad, regulating broadcasting is bad, how come we're all secretly hoping the gummint step in and clean up the spam mess?
i love the smell of hypocracy in the morning.
yes it does. The roman empire. it fell. is gone. buried beneath ten layers of dirt. why? narcissism. plain and simple. while i don't think MS is detrimentally narcissistic, it certainly is arrogant. but that's besides the point.
now, nowhere did i say MS was going to disappear. so calling me stupid over something i never said was uncalled for.
what i did say is that MS is starting to have to fight for *keeping* it's mindshare because they've got nothing else until longhorn. now is the time to creep up on it.
you have to ask, why now? MS has been in business for such a long time (in software industry terms). MS has never been known to hand out payola. why now?
MS has nothing else to keep the mindshare. OSS is creeping up outside the realm of just the geeks. MS has nothing effective to fend it off. except hoards of cash.
without the payola, the stock would start on a slippery slide downwards all the while losing mindshare. and remember, mindshare among geeks is what got MS to where it is in the first place.
all this just to buy time, literally, until longhorn ships.
if there is any 'after burner' somewhere in the FOSS community, the time is now to kick it in. to win over mindshare before longhorn. because from now until longhorn, MS has nothing but diversionary tactics to keep people interested in MS.
and to all MS fanboys out there, i'm not saying this is a bad thing. it's a great thing. i'm just making a guess as to why they are doing it now.
the technical device happens to be the bra. then you're really rooting for the device to come "down".
has some traces of perfume and lipstick it would settle beyond any doubt that men are indeed from mars and women are from venus.
"when in doubt, throw apostrophes at it's" shit.
"Tens of billions don't disappear that easily"
make that "tens of billions of cold hard cash don't disappear that easily". when it comes to "assets" including stock evaluations and company's market value, "vanished in thin air" can be a reality even for billions.
and yeah, bill's billions are comprised of current market values of various assets that are closely tied to MS. notice the little bouncy bouncy he and other MS richest men (the "developer-developer" monkey among others) went thru in the "richest men in the world" list of forbes at the height of the dot-bomb (the worst part of the dot com crash). Buffett gained in position in the list. what actually happened was the because of software companies' values tanking, some of those billions just vaporised. it would be quite a magic trick if it were cold hard cash. but with "assets" it's a very realistic possibility.
You heard it here folks, Da Vinci wrote linux. It was written using the mirror technique he loved so much. Linus only had to hold a mirror against his copy of "The Da Vinci Code" and copy it line by line. The rest of us fools just read the book without using a mirror and thought it was a novel when it was actually a mirrored printout of the linux source code written by Da Vinci.
their monopoly and the choke hold on the market is coming to an end. we don't need no stinkin' corrupt legislation/lobbying to bring that about. let the big corps and the legislators shake hands and shake whatever else they do for each other. the people will have moved on. they will become irrelevent. and in this respect the GPL is brillient. it's a check-mate to them, using their rules, on their turf. long live the GPL/FOSS.
yesterday it was apache/linux on the servers. today it's firefox on the desktop. tomorrow it will be one more. the dominos are toppling.
i haven't see the film but i've seen the interviews. and one thing he said struck me. it's been *2 years* of major media's lopsided reporting. so he's trying to bring out the other side. in *2 hours*. someone had to present the other side. the big media weren't touching it with a ten foot pole. the public already has already seen the gummint party line. for the last 2 years (i'm talking just about the iraqi war and the 404'ed WMD etc.). i don't see why micheal moore had to "present the other side". we've seen plenty of it, and only it, on big media.
well, with the download well present in the other 50% of the population, data mining just became a helluva lot more fun!