No, he let the weapons inspectors in and let them search anywhere.
If you want to make a case to back up your point, fine. But even considering making this claim indicates to me that you need to go back and do some remedial research. Try googling for "iraq" and "presidential palaces".
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me.
This sounds like something a coworker of mine said at a departmental meeting I attended: "Our quality analysis phase was a complete success; not a single release-critical bug was discovered."
Incidentally, if you compare calories expended in farming and harvesting to calories obtained from the food, stone-age-tech farming is about 3 times as efficient as anything we do today. People are *better* able to feed themselves with traditional farming; it just makes multinationals *less* able to make a profit off of it.
Efficiency has little to do with anything. Yes, we spend more energy getting crops to shelves per capita than we did in the stone age. However, this is a moot point unless you can discover some better way to magically turn electricity and kinetic energy into a form fit for human use.
Actually, I may be wrong. Looking into some mailing list history, it appears the new design for Evolution 2.0 came about in July 2003. Outlook 2003's beta was released in July 2003, as I recall.
If I recall, this was innovative when they first came up with the idea several years ago, in order to distance themselves from Outlook. Once again, it would be Microsoft that took the idea, not Evolution.
It would be great for folks to realize that writing applications in a cross-platform manner is not always possible or even desirable.
Cross-platform applications require much work in maintaining that cross-platform capability. Not only that, but they must sacrifice potential features of operating environments for the sake of being cross-platform. Evolution happens to rely quite extensively on some of the advanced features provided by libgnome--which, coincidentally, isn't available on Windows.
How is this informative? They didn't rewrite Evolution in Mono because that would have involved rewriting hundreds of thousands of lines of code, for little benefit.
By your exact line of reasoning, it would only be fair if the rich person were taxed 91.5%, thus bringing his income down to $8,500.
Ever consider the fact that the guy making $100,000/yr is doing work of more value than the one earning $10,000/yr? And that he *should* be paid 10x the other guy's salary?
With apt I see outdated, broken, and/or missing packages everywhere. More mature my ass.
As for what this actually has to do with apt, I have no clue. Package selection != package management.
Source based Linux is far more practical.
Right, because installing development tools on every server and having to spend two hours of system resources compiling every upgrade is more practical than a three-second binary installation.
Apt is great in theory but until all of Linux unites behind it as THE binary standard, its problems will not go away.
You seem to be utterly clueless as to what apt is. Apt is not the package selection. Apt is not the package format. Apt is a utility for managing packages, their dependencies, and their installation. Exactly what emerge is. And I fail to see what the "problems" are you refer to.
I'll switch off Gentoo the day I can reliably go to ANY Linux software website, EXPECT a download for a.deb, double click install it, and expect it to work.
This is a double standard. I don't see a.ebuild file on the website of every source package. Not to mention, apt is not tied to the.deb format; plenty of people use apt to manage their RPM-based distributions. Oh, and Debian has over 15,000 packages available in its software archive--your (irrelevant) argument is even flawed there: there are far more packages available for Debian than Gentoo.
As it stands, most Linux software is released as source only and it is the distro's responsibility to compile it. Who wants to compile for 5 different binary standards? Source is the unfortunate best way to go in Linux. This is why Gentoo's portage (and BSD's system) shines.
Learn your Linux history; this is why binary packaging systems were created in the first place. You're not supposed to go to the author's website, compile it, and install it. You're not even supposed to get the package off the author's website. You're supposed to grab it straight from your distributor. The sole purpose of distributions is to bring together a suite of packages and ensure they all work correctly in unison. Downloading from the original author entirely defeats the purpose.
Indeed. It's quite amazing how many people will vote for "anyone but Bush", all the while forgetting to actually examine the positions of anyone but Bush.
If you don't know what you're doing, and something is slightly off-kilter...you're better off in Debian or some other distro with an easier installer which won't give you a scary cryptic error message.
Do you guys actually ever listen to how condescending you sound? It's your distribution of choice; get over yourself.
Also, Portage is the single best software management I've ever encountered, bar none
Really? Because apt and ports have been around for far, far longer, and are far, far more mature.
I, as a former Gentoo user, used to believe this. And then I realized how ludicrous it was to believe that typing "emerge world" somehow gives you any insight into how the operating system itself works.
Yes, you become familiar with some aspects of BASH. Yes, you learn what chroot does. Yes, you could have learned all of it by simply picking up a book and reading, or just looking around in/usr/bin on a clean system.
Gentoo doesn't make you a knowledgeable Linux user. Spending time actually at the command-line does.
Actually, you mischaracterize Google. I applied for one of these positions that you speak of, and they were quite forthcoming. When I started inquiring about working my way up the ladder, the HR representative I talked to made sure I was aware of the fact that the job was for a period of three to six months. She acknowledged that there may be opportunities for advancement, but that there wasn't guaranteed to even be a chance.
This one is fairly easy, I posted my reply to similar sentiments in my weblog not long ago. I'll paste the contents below, to avoid blatant whoring.
As I see it, a vote for a third party carries far more weight than a vote for one of the primary parties. When you vote, for instance, Libertarian, your vote gives them proportionally more media coverage, funding, and ballot access than either of the established parties receive. As recent example, both Greens and Libertarians received enormously disproportional amounts of coverage (the Greens in particular) after the 2000 election. Why? The percentage of their votes, in many states, was well above the margin between the two primary candidates. Most political analysts believed that the Green Party significantly swung the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, and as a result, they gained more media coverage than anyone could have predicted.
Third parties also gain in less inflammatory ways when they receive more votes. It helps them receive campaign funding from the federal government, for one. A few more votes one year, in many cases, will allow the party to run several more candidates the next. All thanks to more funding. Even more importantly, in many states, more votes are the precursor to ballot access, which in turn helps the party concentrate on campaigning rather than petitioning. Today, ballot access is one of the most pressuring obstacles facing third parties; in states like Georgia, only one third party candidate has ever been on the ballot for the United States House of Representatives.
How does this happen? In Georgia, third parties must submit a petition signed by over 5% of the number of registered voters in the district in order to get on the ballot for any office. When the voter roles haven't been purged in a decade, leaving both dead voters and invalidated voters still listed, the true number in many cases exceeds 10%. Even worse, due to gerrymandering, many third parties have no clue about the final geographical layout of districts, until a month or two prior to the petition deadlines. When the district lines are changed again and again, many petition signatures which were once valid are no longer, since the signatory no longer lives within the correct district. I am digressing substantially from my original purpose, but there is plenty to read regarding ballot access, for those who are interested.
Back to the original topic. We've covered voting for third parties, but if you look closely, does it really matter if we have a Republican or a Democrat president? It's a toss-up to how much they will suck, and it's usually irrelevant what party they're from. Bush hasn't been the best president ever, but Clinton was pretty poor, too. And now, it seems like the two parties are converging. Republicans are creating bureaucracy and spending like crazy. Democrats are opposing gay marriage and won't stop the drug war. As far as I'm concerned, it's two heads of the same hydra.
So go ahead, throw away that vote of yours. I insist.
Google is such a distributed computing network that when a single computer in a cluster fails, they've discovered that it'd cost them more to go to the broken node and repair it than the vaule of the computing resources they've lost.
This is nothing more than just a myth. They continually have job postings looking for Data Center Technicians, whose entire job is to crawl through their massive cluster and repair downed nodes. I should know, I interviewed for the position just a month or two ago.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he let the weapons inspectors in and let them search anywhere.
If you want to make a case to back up your point, fine. But even considering making this claim indicates to me that you need to go back and do some remedial research. Try googling for "iraq" and "presidential palaces".
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me.
This sounds like something a coworker of mine said at a departmental meeting I attended: "Our quality analysis phase was a complete success; not a single release-critical bug was discovered."
Incidentally, if you compare calories expended in farming and harvesting to calories obtained from the food, stone-age-tech farming is about 3 times as efficient as anything we do today. People are *better* able to feed themselves with traditional farming; it just makes multinationals *less* able to make a profit off of it.
Efficiency has little to do with anything. Yes, we spend more energy getting crops to shelves per capita than we did in the stone age. However, this is a moot point unless you can discover some better way to magically turn electricity and kinetic energy into a form fit for human use.
I am on my second one now. They last forever.
...I see.
The phone number given seems to be for Xbox customer support.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
With apologies to Inigo.
Actually, I may be wrong. Looking into some mailing list history, it appears the new design for Evolution 2.0 came about in July 2003. Outlook 2003's beta was released in July 2003, as I recall.
If I recall, this was innovative when they first came up with the idea several years ago, in order to distance themselves from Outlook. Once again, it would be Microsoft that took the idea, not Evolution.
It would be great for folks to realize that writing applications in a cross-platform manner is not always possible or even desirable.
Cross-platform applications require much work in maintaining that cross-platform capability. Not only that, but they must sacrifice potential features of operating environments for the sake of being cross-platform. Evolution happens to rely quite extensively on some of the advanced features provided by libgnome--which, coincidentally, isn't available on Windows.
Score: 5, Informative?
How is this informative? They didn't rewrite Evolution in Mono because that would have involved rewriting hundreds of thousands of lines of code, for little benefit.
By your exact line of reasoning, it would only be fair if the rich person were taxed 91.5%, thus bringing his income down to $8,500.
Ever consider the fact that the guy making $100,000/yr is doing work of more value than the one earning $10,000/yr? And that he *should* be paid 10x the other guy's salary?
Beware, shameless blog whoring!
However, most people don't understand that :)
Sounds like a lack of sufficient technology to me.
complaint
Without fail, whenever you make a comment on someone's spelling/grammar, you make a mistake yourself. Nice law of physics there.
With apt I see outdated, broken, and/or missing packages everywhere. More mature my ass.
As for what this actually has to do with apt, I have no clue. Package selection != package management.
Source based Linux is far more practical.
Right, because installing development tools on every server and having to spend two hours of system resources compiling every upgrade is more practical than a three-second binary installation.
Apt is great in theory but until all of Linux unites behind it as THE binary standard, its problems will not go away.
You seem to be utterly clueless as to what apt is. Apt is not the package selection. Apt is not the package format. Apt is a utility for managing packages, their dependencies, and their installation. Exactly what emerge is. And I fail to see what the "problems" are you refer to.
I'll switch off Gentoo the day I can reliably go to ANY Linux software website, EXPECT a download for a .deb, double click install it, and expect it to work.
This is a double standard. I don't see a .ebuild file on the website of every source package. Not to mention, apt is not tied to the .deb format; plenty of people use apt to manage their RPM-based distributions. Oh, and Debian has over 15,000 packages available in its software archive--your (irrelevant) argument is even flawed there: there are far more packages available for Debian than Gentoo.
As it stands, most Linux software is released as source only and it is the distro's responsibility to compile it. Who wants to compile for 5 different binary standards? Source is the unfortunate best way to go in Linux. This is why Gentoo's portage (and BSD's system) shines.
Learn your Linux history; this is why binary packaging systems were created in the first place. You're not supposed to go to the author's website, compile it, and install it. You're not even supposed to get the package off the author's website. You're supposed to grab it straight from your distributor. The sole purpose of distributions is to bring together a suite of packages and ensure they all work correctly in unison. Downloading from the original author entirely defeats the purpose.
Indeed. It's quite amazing how many people will vote for "anyone but Bush", all the while forgetting to actually examine the positions of anyone but Bush.
If you don't know what you're doing, and something is slightly off-kilter...you're better off in Debian or some other distro with an easier installer which won't give you a scary cryptic error message.
Do you guys actually ever listen to how condescending you sound? It's your distribution of choice; get over yourself.
Also, Portage is the single best software management I've ever encountered, bar none
Really? Because apt and ports have been around for far, far longer, and are far, far more mature.
I, as a former Gentoo user, used to believe this. And then I realized how ludicrous it was to believe that typing "emerge world" somehow gives you any insight into how the operating system itself works.
/usr/bin on a clean system.
Yes, you become familiar with some aspects of BASH. Yes, you learn what chroot does. Yes, you could have learned all of it by simply picking up a book and reading, or just looking around in
Gentoo doesn't make you a knowledgeable Linux user. Spending time actually at the command-line does.
Actually, you mischaracterize Google. I applied for one of these positions that you speak of, and they were quite forthcoming. When I started inquiring about working my way up the ladder, the HR representative I talked to made sure I was aware of the fact that the job was for a period of three to six months. She acknowledged that there may be opportunities for advancement, but that there wasn't guaranteed to even be a chance.
I had the same concern. However, thinking about it further, a DOS is infinitely preferable to a loss of confidential data.
On the other hand, it might be far easier to DOS a quantum-encryption system.
Gee, because dpkg -i is so much harder to type than rpm -ivh .
ESR wrote a very insightful piece on exactly this.
This one is fairly easy, I posted my reply to similar sentiments in my weblog not long ago. I'll paste the contents below, to avoid blatant whoring.
As I see it, a vote for a third party carries far more weight than a vote for one of the primary parties. When you vote, for instance, Libertarian, your vote gives them proportionally more media coverage, funding, and ballot access than either of the established parties receive. As recent example, both Greens and Libertarians received enormously disproportional amounts of coverage (the Greens in particular) after the 2000 election. Why? The percentage of their votes, in many states, was well above the margin between the two primary candidates. Most political analysts believed that the Green Party significantly swung the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, and as a result, they gained more media coverage than anyone could have predicted.
Third parties also gain in less inflammatory ways when they receive more votes. It helps them receive campaign funding from the federal government, for one. A few more votes one year, in many cases, will allow the party to run several more candidates the next. All thanks to more funding. Even more importantly, in many states, more votes are the precursor to ballot access, which in turn helps the party concentrate on campaigning rather than petitioning. Today, ballot access is one of the most pressuring obstacles facing third parties; in states like Georgia, only one third party candidate has ever been on the ballot for the United States House of Representatives.
How does this happen? In Georgia, third parties must submit a petition signed by over 5% of the number of registered voters in the district in order to get on the ballot for any office. When the voter roles haven't been purged in a decade, leaving both dead voters and invalidated voters still listed, the true number in many cases exceeds 10%. Even worse, due to gerrymandering, many third parties have no clue about the final geographical layout of districts, until a month or two prior to the petition deadlines. When the district lines are changed again and again, many petition signatures which were once valid are no longer, since the signatory no longer lives within the correct district. I am digressing substantially from my original purpose, but there is plenty to read regarding ballot access, for those who are interested.
Back to the original topic. We've covered voting for third parties, but if you look closely, does it really matter if we have a Republican or a Democrat president? It's a toss-up to how much they will suck, and it's usually irrelevant what party they're from. Bush hasn't been the best president ever, but Clinton was pretty poor, too. And now, it seems like the two parties are converging. Republicans are creating bureaucracy and spending like crazy. Democrats are opposing gay marriage and won't stop the drug war. As far as I'm concerned, it's two heads of the same hydra.
So go ahead, throw away that vote of yours. I insist.
Google is such a distributed computing network that when a single computer in a cluster fails, they've discovered that it'd cost them more to go to the broken node and repair it than the vaule of the computing resources they've lost.
This is nothing more than just a myth. They continually have job postings looking for Data Center Technicians, whose entire job is to crawl through their massive cluster and repair downed nodes. I should know, I interviewed for the position just a month or two ago.
I feel really stupid. I didn't realize your post was a copy of the article text. *smacks self*