How convenient for the environmental alarmists. Now any weather event, hot or cold, can be used as "evidence" for further scaremongering.
No, it can't. I never said that. The reason cold weather events in Europe can't be used as scaremongering in this context, is because that assumes the Gulf Stream has already been disrupted from its regular route. That is not the case as far as I know. I'm pretty sure someone would have told us about the fact, if it had happened.
Look, from your post I gather we disagree about humans being responsible for global warming. Fine, but that doesn't mean all other assumptions about our climate supports one side or another. The global warming I mentioned as a trigger doesn't even have to be caused by humans.
What's interesting, is that global warming might trigger an ice age, at least for the northern hemisphere. As I'm sure many/.-ers are aware of, much of the reason for the mild climate in northern and western Europe, is the Gulf Stream.
What happens in detail, is that warm surface water flows from the equator towards the northern parts of the Atlantic. As the Gulf Stream moves north, some of the warm water evaporates, which increases the salinity level of the remaining water. At the same time, the water temperature becomes lower as the current dissipates its heat to the atmosphere and colder ocean waters in the northern parts of the Atlantic. When the current finally approaches the same temperature as its surroundings, it sinks (because the water is saltier than usual, and therefore heavier) and flows south again as a deep sea stream. So the North Atlantic is basically one huge conveyor belt that transports heat.
Now, what has this got to do with global warming? Well, if the ice on Greenland and the North Pole melts at an increased rate, the fresh water might lower the salinity level of the Gulf Stream so much that the water won't sink and the heat transport system gets seriously messed up. If the northern hemisphere stops getting this added heat, winters will be longer and increased snow and ice coverage will reflect more sun light, accelerating the cooling of land areas.
What's even worse, is that findings in ice cores from the glaciers on Greenland, seem to indicate that this change from status quo to (small) ice age has happened very quickly earlier in history, single digit number of years. I'm not saying this is guaranteed to happen, but it's worth considering that global warming might actually make the northeastern America and western Europe colder, not warmer. And yes, it might happen in our lifetimes.
When I want the truth on a difficult issue I don't take a poll. I don't give a rats arse how many scientists agree on such a politically charged topic.
If the area of climate change is a free-for-all politically fueled debate, rather than a scientific one, how come none of the papers concluded with the opposite point? Surely someone would have published those views if the standards were as non-existant as in astrology?
It is a politically charged topic, but shouldn't that be all the more reason to pay more attention to those who publish scientific papers? After all, they are the ones who make some effort to arrive at conclusions after getting the facts. You can rightfully claim this will never be completely unbiased, but does anyone else do a better job? Should I rather believe politicians who usually take their stand first, and then try to make the facts match? I can see many political issues where scientists might be tempted to look after their own interests rather than pointing out potential problems with their conclusions, like stem-cell research, genetic engineering and nanotechnology, but this is an area where I can't really see a good reason for them to do that.
Even if it is true, I actually don't think it is provable and a non-verifiable hypothesis is not one that I have much faith in.
So, you are saying that
1. It's impossible to prove conclusively the hypothesis that global warming is caused by humans (even in the event of armageddon, as you say).
2. You won't believe any hypothesis that cannot be proven.
And it would therefore follow, logically, that
3. You will never believe the hypothesis that global warming is caused by humans, no matter what, even if you are wrong.
CO2 is not a toxic gas. I think we should be more concerned about geniune pollution problems. Things like nuclear waste for instance.
The idea that global warming is caused by human activity is just a theory. A very much unproven one. Maybe it's true. Maybe it's not
Have you already forgotten what this Slashdot story is about? 75% of the peer-reviewed papers published on climate change explicitly or implictly said that global warming is in fact caused by human activities. The remaining 25% took no position on the issue, while not a single paper claimed global warming isn't caused by humans.
No, proving climate changes isn't a case of 2+2=4, but the consus among the scientists in this area seems extremely convincing to me. How do you suggest we prove it? Increase CO2 production by a huge amount to see if that drastically increases global warming? Unless you are an authority on climate change yourself, I can't see how you can suggest that this entire field of science knows less about their subject than you do?
With regards to your point about genuine pollution problems. Yes, I agree that we mustn't forget about other issues. However global warming is a big issue. Changes in rainfall patterns and possible disruption of sea currents can lead to far more drastic impacts on local climate than what a simple look at the temperature increase would indicate.
No, I'm not an expert, that's correct. But what I have contributed to is about my local football (soccer) team (which was linked to, but didn't have an entry). In addition I have mostly done some additions on national football players, and corrected spelling, grammar and wikified articles on various topics.
With regards to research, that statement applied to the mentioned random topics. I did look up a lot of things when I added something myself. Assuming that most articles are in fact correct, it would probably take me hours to source-check and find actual mistakes in popular subjects that I don't know anything about.
The fact that I wikify articles written by someone else, should indicate that I have some ambition and willingness to work.
With regards to my curiosity, I did ask for example articles, didn't I?
Now tell my why I shouldn't have anything useful to contribute to an encyclopedia.
BTW, sorry about my late reply, but I have been without network access for a short while.
Do you have any specific examples? I am not trying to start an argument with you, I'm just curious, since I started contributing to Wikipedia just days ago. The impression I have gotten from the various FAQs etc on the WP-site, is that the more popular topics tend to end up on the watchlists of people who actually have real knowledge, and thereby are able to correct mistakes. I know I could try to check the truth of this myself, but I'm not an expert in any field, and don't have enough time to look up random topics and do real source comparisons. So, if you have something specific to point to, that would be nice.
And yes, I know I have to check a timestamped version of the article, since complaints about facts in specific articles tend to cause editing of those same articles.;)
Perhaps the low FPS in death match is why they released it as an add-on download instead of in the initial release? Think about it, if it was in the retail box (or Steam purchase), the feature would almost certainly be advertised in promo material and everyone would expect performance to be good (or at least decent) if the system requirements were met. Finding out this was not the case would have made a lot of people complain, including reviewers, who might have subtracted from their scores.
The way it is now, HL2 gets reviewed only on what was advertised and was in the box. Valve is happy and so is everyone who bought the game. Now, when death match is released, some will be a bit disappointed about performance, but as it was never part of the initial game, Valve will get credit for releasing a free extra instead of complaints about a product they charged money for.
Note: I don't have anything against Valve, and this is not an attempt to bash the company, but simply an attempt so see things from a marketing POV. And, of course, there's always the possibilty that they weren't able to finish DM-mode in time for the release.
You seem to be right in your concerns. According to CNN and Associated Press, the new Attorney General might be Alberto Gonzales. From the AP-article:
Gonzales has been at the center of developing Bush's positions on balancing civil liberties with waging the war on terrorism - opening the White House counsel to the same line of criticism that has dogged Ashcroft.
For instance, Gonzales publicly defended the administration's policy - essentially repudiated by the Supreme Court and now being fought out in the lower courts - of detaining certain terrorism suspects for extended periods without access to lawyers or courts.
He also wrote a controversial February 2002 memo in which Bush claimed the right to waive anti-torture law and international treaties providing protections to prisoners of war. That position drew fire from human rights groups, which said it helped led to the type of abuses uncovered in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
He certainly doesn't sound any better than Ashcroft.
Most Bush-voters think the Iraq war was justified, but many purely on the grounds that they still believe Iraq had WMD and/or Saddam was behind 9/11. Some of these voters might be disappointed by what they learn during the next four years.
From http://www.pipa.org/:
A new PIPA/Knowledge Networks poll finds a consensus among
the American public that if Iraq did not have WMD and was
not providing substantial support to al Qaeda, the US should
not have gone to war with Iraq. Seventy-four percent overall
have this view, including 58% of Bush supporters, 92% of
Kerry supporters and 77% of the uncommitted-those who have
not made a definite commitment to vote for one or the other
candidate.
A majority also rejects the argument that the US should
have gone to war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein had the
intention to acquire WMD. Presented two arguments, only
35% endorsed the one that said, Even if Iraq did not
have weapons of mass destruction, the US still should have
gone to war with Iraq, because Saddam Hussein had the intention
to acquire such weapons at some point in the future.
Rather, 60% said that if Saddam only had a desire for such
weapons, instead of invading Iraq, the US should have
made sure he did not get the capability to make them.
Overall,
support for the decision to go to war has eroded slightly,
so that a bare majority of 51% now says that it was the
wrong decision, and 46% say it was the right decision (as
compared to August when 49% said it was the wrong decision
and 46% the right decision).
Steven
Kull comments, It may seem contradictory that three
quarters of Americans say that the US should not have gone
to war if Iraq did not have WMD or was not providing support
to al Qaeda, while nearly half still say the war was the
right decision. However, support for the decision is sustained
by persisting beliefs among half of Americans that Iraq
provided substantial support to al Qaeda, and had WMD, or
at least a major WMD program.
Despite
the widely-publicized conclusions of the Duelfer report,
49% of Americans continue to believe Iraq had actual WMD
(27%) or a major WMD program (22%), and 52% believe that
Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.
I don't know much about databases, but what I have been told, is that IBM bought Cloudscape, implemented the DB2 datatypes, and then open sourced the whole thing.
Obviously this was not only to be nice and get goodwill from the open source community, but to have a product that can get a foothold with small businesses instead of e.g. MySQL. The difference is of course that the direct upgrade path from Cloudscape is IBM's own DB2.
but, but, what about all those movie scenes where's it the middle of the night, and the woman desperately tries to start her car, while the stalker is running towards her. I'm sure that the 30 second breath test will be the death of large numbers of movie babes...
For those that weren't immediately able to understand what the story is about (that includes me), here is the start of the Wired article:
For the third year in a row, a bipartisan congressional coalition is pushing a bill that would require all government agencies to study the privacy impact of new rules before they put them into effect.
The Defense of Privacy Act (PDF), which was approved by a House subcommittee on Tuesday, would complement the E-Government Act of 2001, which requires agencies to submit privacy impact assessments whenever they buy new technology
If I'm not mistaken, TSR was practically bankrupt at the time of the acquisition by Wizards of the Coast.
Part of the reason was, ironically enough, that TSR had lost a lot of money in a failed attempt to get into the card-trading business. At the same time, Wizards of the Coast had pulled out of RPG-products just a short time earlier. Go figure...
Well, there might not be any links to moviemistakes.com, but the Newsweek article states in the first paragraph that the bloopers were taken from moviemistakes.com.
Peter Jackson's comments are probably what got this story accepted. After all, it's not news that moviemistakes.com has a list of movie mistakes, is it?
Those two things together, make me consider this a dupe. But you are of course free to disagree with me.
The Phantom has no actual input devices for physical media. No CD/DVD drives, no cartridge slots, not even a place for memory cards. All content is delivered online, via the mighty power of it's "always on" broadband connection. Games can be downloaded as trial demos, rented, or outright purchased. In the case of demos or rentals, you are required to be connected to the internet while you play. Rob certainly pitched the upside of this delivery model: no paying for packaging and no paying for shelf space at Wal-Mart or Best Buy. Ok, cool. One attendee asked if these savings would pass down to the consumer-- considering the "3 to 5 dollars" per game packaging costs and the ten to twenty dollars spent paying the store would be saved, games could be offered to a user at a lower price. Well, no, says Rob. He says that they don't want to have games that "cannibalize each other", and there he may have a point.
Then how on earth are they supposed to compete?
They are limiting their own market to those who can get broadband. And for those who don't already have broadband, that's an extra cost, in addition to the regular console game pricing.
Add in the fact that they are competing with Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony, who have exclusive content for their consoles. I really don't see how this can work. Lower price is probably the only way they can compete.
Those who are constantly writing buggy code, no matter what,
Those who can write reasonable code, given coaching and examples,
Those who write good code most of the time, but who don't fully realize their limitations,
Those who really understand the language, the machine architecture, software engineering, and the application area, and who can write textbook code on a regular basis.
There are, as Spafford claims, too many people in category 3 who think they belong to the category 4, and that's the primary target audience of the book.
Well, I don't need this, since I'm in category 4. Instead of reading this nonsense, I'll go finish my Visual Basic project.
Vonage had maintained that it does not provide telephone service. Instead, lawyers for Vonage contended, the company offers data services over the internet
Where does this put VoIP with regards to telemarketers? If it's a data service, the FTC no-call list can't be applied, can it? Does this mean a call from a telemarketer to a VoIP-phone could be classified as spam?
Claiming critics of Verisign are stifling innvation is ridiculous. If the internet is going to work, it needs to use open standards that everyone agrees on. The problem is that Verisign, as a commercial company, implemented their own implementation on a whim! If they thought this was such a good, altruistic idea, why don't they try submitting it as a standard for the internet and get it peer-reviewed instead?
I couldn't see it mentioned anywhere, but I found this on www.kemet.org, a site about the religious tradition of Ancient Egypt:
Sebek (Sobek; G/R Suchos) - "Watching over You" Son of Nit (and also, according to some myths, Set), Sebek is either depicted as a full crocodile, or, less often, as a crocodile-headed man. He is often given the epithets of Heru-sa-Aset as a Netjer [manifestation of god] of protection, healing and vengeance over the wrongdoer. In some mythologies Sebek is a powerful and awe-inspiring denizen of the underworld, and was invoked to do away with annoyances and negative situations, in the phrase "to Sebek with it(him)!," much as modern-day slang consigns bothersome things and persons "to Hell."
From the post: To begin with, GNU will be a kernel plus all the utilities needed to
write and run C programs: editor, shell, C compiler, linker,
assembler, and a few other things. After this we will add a text
formatter, a YACC, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of
other things.
Dreaming of world domination was obviously among the top priorities already at that point...;)
I predict that many of the first/.-ers who post replies won't have finished reading the review, but will simply have skipped the entire long-winded, complicated review in order to go for a first post instead.
Slashdot Mirror
How convenient for the environmental alarmists. Now any weather event, hot or cold, can be used as "evidence" for further scaremongering.
No, it can't. I never said that. The reason cold weather events in Europe can't be used as scaremongering in this context, is because that assumes the Gulf Stream has already been disrupted from its regular route. That is not the case as far as I know. I'm pretty sure someone would have told us about the fact, if it had happened.
Look, from your post I gather we disagree about humans being responsible for global warming. Fine, but that doesn't mean all other assumptions about our climate supports one side or another. The global warming I mentioned as a trigger doesn't even have to be caused by humans.
What's interesting, is that global warming might trigger an ice age, at least for the northern hemisphere. As I'm sure many /.-ers are aware of, much of the reason for the mild climate in northern and western Europe, is the Gulf Stream.
What happens in detail, is that warm surface water flows from the equator towards the northern parts of the Atlantic. As the Gulf Stream moves north, some of the warm water evaporates, which increases the salinity level of the remaining water. At the same time, the water temperature becomes lower as the current dissipates its heat to the atmosphere and colder ocean waters in the northern parts of the Atlantic. When the current finally approaches the same temperature as its surroundings, it sinks (because the water is saltier than usual, and therefore heavier) and flows south again as a deep sea stream. So the North Atlantic is basically one huge conveyor belt that transports heat.
Now, what has this got to do with global warming? Well, if the ice on Greenland and the North Pole melts at an increased rate, the fresh water might lower the salinity level of the Gulf Stream so much that the water won't sink and the heat transport system gets seriously messed up. If the northern hemisphere stops getting this added heat, winters will be longer and increased snow and ice coverage will reflect more sun light, accelerating the cooling of land areas.
What's even worse, is that findings in ice cores from the glaciers on Greenland, seem to indicate that this change from status quo to (small) ice age has happened very quickly earlier in history, single digit number of years. I'm not saying this is guaranteed to happen, but it's worth considering that global warming might actually make the northeastern America and western Europe colder, not warmer. And yes, it might happen in our lifetimes.
If the area of climate change is a free-for-all politically fueled debate, rather than a scientific one, how come none of the papers concluded with the opposite point? Surely someone would have published those views if the standards were as non-existant as in astrology?
It is a politically charged topic, but shouldn't that be all the more reason to pay more attention to those who publish scientific papers? After all, they are the ones who make some effort to arrive at conclusions after getting the facts. You can rightfully claim this will never be completely unbiased, but does anyone else do a better job? Should I rather believe politicians who usually take their stand first, and then try to make the facts match? I can see many political issues where scientists might be tempted to look after their own interests rather than pointing out potential problems with their conclusions, like stem-cell research, genetic engineering and nanotechnology, but this is an area where I can't really see a good reason for them to do that.
So, you are saying that1. It's impossible to prove conclusively the hypothesis that global warming is caused by humans (even in the event of armageddon, as you say).
2. You won't believe any hypothesis that cannot be proven.
And it would therefore follow, logically, that
3. You will never believe the hypothesis that global warming is caused by humans, no matter what, even if you are wrong.
It sounds like a very political stance to me.
Have you already forgotten what this Slashdot story is about? 75% of the peer-reviewed papers published on climate change explicitly or implictly said that global warming is in fact caused by human activities. The remaining 25% took no position on the issue, while not a single paper claimed global warming isn't caused by humans.
No, proving climate changes isn't a case of 2+2=4, but the consus among the scientists in this area seems extremely convincing to me. How do you suggest we prove it? Increase CO2 production by a huge amount to see if that drastically increases global warming? Unless you are an authority on climate change yourself, I can't see how you can suggest that this entire field of science knows less about their subject than you do?
With regards to your point about genuine pollution problems. Yes, I agree that we mustn't forget about other issues. However global warming is a big issue. Changes in rainfall patterns and possible disruption of sea currents can lead to far more drastic impacts on local climate than what a simple look at the temperature increase would indicate.
No, I'm not an expert, that's correct. But what I have contributed to is about my local football (soccer) team (which was linked to, but didn't have an entry). In addition I have mostly done some additions on national football players, and corrected spelling, grammar and wikified articles on various topics.
With regards to research, that statement applied to the mentioned random topics. I did look up a lot of things when I added something myself. Assuming that most articles are in fact correct, it would probably take me hours to source-check and find actual mistakes in popular subjects that I don't know anything about.
The fact that I wikify articles written by someone else, should indicate that I have some ambition and willingness to work.
With regards to my curiosity, I did ask for example articles, didn't I?
Now tell my why I shouldn't have anything useful to contribute to an encyclopedia.
BTW, sorry about my late reply, but I have been without network access for a short while.Do you have any specific examples? I am not trying to start an argument with you, I'm just curious, since I started contributing to Wikipedia just days ago. The impression I have gotten from the various FAQs etc on the WP-site, is that the more popular topics tend to end up on the watchlists of people who actually have real knowledge, and thereby are able to correct mistakes. I know I could try to check the truth of this myself, but I'm not an expert in any field, and don't have enough time to look up random topics and do real source comparisons. So, if you have something specific to point to, that would be nice.
;)
And yes, I know I have to check a timestamped version of the article, since complaints about facts in specific articles tend to cause editing of those same articles.
Perhaps the low FPS in death match is why they released it as an add-on download instead of in the initial release? Think about it, if it was in the retail box (or Steam purchase), the feature would almost certainly be advertised in promo material and everyone would expect performance to be good (or at least decent) if the system requirements were met. Finding out this was not the case would have made a lot of people complain, including reviewers, who might have subtracted from their scores.
The way it is now, HL2 gets reviewed only on what was advertised and was in the box. Valve is happy and so is everyone who bought the game. Now, when death match is released, some will be a bit disappointed about performance, but as it was never part of the initial game, Valve will get credit for releasing a free extra instead of complaints about a product they charged money for.
Note: I don't have anything against Valve, and this is not an attempt to bash the company, but simply an attempt so see things from a marketing POV. And, of course, there's always the possibilty that they weren't able to finish DM-mode in time for the release.
He certainly doesn't sound any better than Ashcroft.
From http://www.pipa.org/:
A new PIPA/Knowledge Networks poll finds a consensus among the American public that if Iraq did not have WMD and was not providing substantial support to al Qaeda, the US should not have gone to war with Iraq. Seventy-four percent overall have this view, including 58% of Bush supporters, 92% of Kerry supporters and 77% of the uncommitted-those who have not made a definite commitment to vote for one or the other candidate.
A majority also rejects the argument that the US should have gone to war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein had the intention to acquire WMD. Presented two arguments, only 35% endorsed the one that said, Even if Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, the US still should have gone to war with Iraq, because Saddam Hussein had the intention to acquire such weapons at some point in the future. Rather, 60% said that if Saddam only had a desire for such weapons, instead of invading Iraq, the US should have made sure he did not get the capability to make them.
Overall, support for the decision to go to war has eroded slightly, so that a bare majority of 51% now says that it was the wrong decision, and 46% say it was the right decision (as compared to August when 49% said it was the wrong decision and 46% the right decision).
Steven Kull comments, It may seem contradictory that three quarters of Americans say that the US should not have gone to war if Iraq did not have WMD or was not providing support to al Qaeda, while nearly half still say the war was the right decision. However, support for the decision is sustained by persisting beliefs among half of Americans that Iraq provided substantial support to al Qaeda, and had WMD, or at least a major WMD program.
Despite the widely-publicized conclusions of the Duelfer report, 49% of Americans continue to believe Iraq had actual WMD (27%) or a major WMD program (22%), and 52% believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.
I don't know much about databases, but what I have been told, is that IBM bought Cloudscape, implemented the DB2 datatypes, and then open sourced the whole thing.
Obviously this was not only to be nice and get goodwill from the open source community, but to have a product that can get a foothold with small businesses instead of e.g. MySQL. The difference is of course that the direct upgrade path from Cloudscape is IBM's own DB2.
but, but, what about all those movie scenes where's it the middle of the night, and the woman desperately tries to start her car, while the stalker is running towards her. I'm sure that the 30 second breath test will be the death of large numbers of movie babes...
For those that weren't immediately able to understand what the story is about (that includes me), here is the start of the Wired article:
If I'm not mistaken, TSR was practically bankrupt at the time of the acquisition by Wizards of the Coast.
Part of the reason was, ironically enough, that TSR had lost a lot of money in a failed attempt to get into the card-trading business. At the same time, Wizards of the Coast had pulled out of RPG-products just a short time earlier. Go figure...
Well, there might not be any links to moviemistakes.com, but the Newsweek article states in the first paragraph that the bloopers were taken from moviemistakes.com.
Peter Jackson's comments are probably what got this story accepted. After all, it's not news that moviemistakes.com has a list of movie mistakes, is it?
Those two things together, make me consider this a dupe. But you are of course free to disagree with me.
Wake up editors, this is a duplicate story. /. story
Second link in this
Then how on earth are they supposed to compete?
They are limiting their own market to those who can get broadband. And for those who don't already have broadband, that's an extra cost, in addition to the regular console game pricing.
Add in the fact that they are competing with Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony, who have exclusive content for their consoles. I really don't see how this can work. Lower price is probably the only way they can compete.
From the New Scientist article
I wonder how that sentence should be interpreted...- Those who are constantly writing buggy code, no matter what,
-
Those who can write reasonable code, given coaching and examples,
-
Those who write good code most of the time, but who don't fully realize their limitations,
-
Those who really understand the language, the machine architecture, software engineering, and the application area, and who can write textbook code on a regular basis.
There are, as Spafford claims, too many people in category 3 who think they belong to the category 4, and that's the primary target audience of the book.Well, I don't need this, since I'm in category 4. Instead of reading this nonsense, I'll go finish my Visual Basic project.
As long as I can use my 28.8 modem, I don't care whether it's via a regular phone line or over a VoIP line!
Vonage had maintained that it does not provide telephone service. Instead, lawyers for Vonage contended, the company offers data services over the internet
Where does this put VoIP with regards to telemarketers? If it's a data service, the FTC no-call list can't be applied, can it? Does this mean a call from a telemarketer to a VoIP-phone could be classified as spam?
Claiming critics of Verisign are stifling innvation is ridiculous. If the internet is going to work, it needs to use open standards that everyone agrees on. The problem is that Verisign, as a commercial company, implemented their own implementation on a whim! If they thought this was such a good, altruistic idea, why don't they try submitting it as a standard for the internet and get it peer-reviewed instead?
I couldn't see it mentioned anywhere, but I found this on www.kemet.org, a site about the religious tradition of Ancient Egypt:
Sebek (Sobek; G/R Suchos) - "Watching over You" Son of Nit (and also, according to some myths, Set), Sebek is either depicted as a full crocodile, or, less often, as a crocodile-headed man. He is often given the epithets of Heru-sa-Aset as a Netjer [manifestation of god] of protection, healing and vengeance over the wrongdoer. In some mythologies Sebek is a powerful and awe-inspiring denizen of the underworld, and was invoked to do away with annoyances and negative situations, in the phrase "to Sebek with it(him)!," much as modern-day slang consigns bothersome things and persons "to Hell."
From the post:
To begin with, GNU will be a kernel plus all the utilities needed to write and run C programs: editor, shell, C compiler, linker, assembler, and a few other things. After this we will add a text formatter, a YACC, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other things.
Dreaming of world domination was obviously among the top priorities already at that point... ;)
SCO is really grasping at straws,
...in a barren desert,
...on Mars,
...which is apparently the place Darl McBride comes from anyway.
I predict that many of the first /.-ers who post replies won't have finished reading the review, but will simply have skipped the entire long-winded, complicated review in order to go for a first post instead.