I know you know this, and everyone know this, but it took me a some time to figure why it's magically SQRT(2)...because what you want is to double one axis lenght only and reach the same ratio.
|---|X Lameness filter encountered. | | Post aborted! | | Reason: Please use fewer |---| 'junk' characters.
1
|---|---|X Lameness filter encountered. | | | Post aborted! | | | Reason: Please use fewer |---|---| 'junk' characters.
2
They dont offer long term unemployment / bad employment insurance yet (and never will) and a Baby is a long term investment (or an act of love).
Second and more important, everyone has the right to have kids, and to live in a country that can support kids. If you country does not allow for that, or aims to allow that, then you will be in trouble when you find out most of your people are oldies with no future, and second, because what the fuck do you need a country for if you can even choose to have one or two children (as to keep the population equal).
Anyway, you probably agree on castrating whoever you feel shouldnt have kids based on income (africans, etc.) instead of limiting on how much care, good guidance and moral fathers can transmit.
Well, I would fin it usefull to be able to have a fully functional Linux system at AL-TAB distance, as opposed to REBOOT distance. For example, I would use it run server stuff like Apache, MySQL, etc. that Windows can talk to if both systems are simultaneously online. I could also use a lot of toher software that Linux has that Windows does not. I could even have a Linux system running at work, because I must have Outlook and Excel available at ALL times, but they wouldnt force me to NOT have Linux running at the same time, so thats the only way for me.
Anyway, colinux will NOT replace Linux, of course Linux alone is better for most situations, but it kills the NO LINUX IF YOU NEED 1 SINGLE WINDOWS APP scenario.
I think there are, just not on all subjects. Also, the "waters" are divided whan two competing important customers demand the same study. For example, AMD and Intel are customers, so there is no unintentional biasing there, and there is no biasing in estimating markets in general. When studing demand (what they need), there also no biasing. Also, any biasedness in the case of the MS study will be complemented by IBM being an important customer. So I will try to keep the Linux vs. Microsoft study neutral, but the point is...99% of the analists here haven't even SEEN a Linux screen, and they somhow react in the same way when they ignore something, they are at a huge disavantage if anything they don' t have a clue about succeeds. Same with admins.
It's very difficult to be 100% unbiased...but you tend to speak better of what you know better. And also, nobody will complain if you say Windows is just a bit more valuable for X kind of company, and many WILL if you say otherwise.
TCO and ROI analisys will always be biased, even companies like HP and IBM do this kind of analisys for their clients (or a third party does those for them) and guess what? They always have a better ROI for their outsourcing solutions for example.
In brief, it's easy to lie with statistics, but some facts do not change. Linux is growing, people are finding it usefull, no matter what we say. Even myself, a Linux enthusiast, dont feel like "pushing" for Linux any harder than they can accept...
The IT research firm I work for has been contracted by Microsoft to study the Linux vs Windows value to corporations just recently (last week).
Microsoft, for the first time, paid in full advance even before a full proposal could be drafted, or even basic details.
They initially wanted a TCO study, and our CEO told them to NOT DO THAT, he is very honest, and knew beforehand Windows would lose. On the other hand, ew do not know what will happen.
The reality is that under some very common scenarios, at least where I live, Linux expertise is regarded as expensive, and that some Microsoft apps allow companies to get work done quicker.
If you where to look at the Linux trend of adoption, growing support, etc., regarded retraining costs as an investment into future savings, noted that Microsoft is free to change it's pricing policy anytime, and they can force you to demand more than you want in the future, and that after 3 years you own nothing at all (license obsolete, or app obsolete), then you'll see Linux wining by large.
But guess what, Research firms, even unbiased ones, tend to choose scenarios that are real world, but benefit their customers more.
If IT adopters where the ones financing these research studies, then the story would be different. But guess what? They dont pay much, and if they do, then Microsoft and the likes can double the bet to get what they want or, as someone else put it, they'd pay you $400 so that you'll "agree" with whatever their CIO believes is true. The same happens with newspapers, what you read is 90% dicatated by the ads they can sell in that "section". Thats why you always see some Cars suplement, because people like it, but MORE importantly, because they can sell expensive adds.
If you want unbiased researchers, find a way to fund that does not involved their reveneus depending on an interested party.
Yes, I agree with you completelly. And it still doesn't make sense. On the one hand you want the companies where you own shares to be granted monopolies, big contract, unjustified patents of all kinds, on the other hand, 95% of the people depend for a living on getting salaries paid at end of month.
What I mean is, a company that makes money is not PER SE good for the economy. If it does so in an uncompetitive market, if it abuses a monopoly position, if it abused the law system (buy politicians), if it abused the pantent system (any of which can be "semi" legaly done), then it's bad for the country, the citizens, etc.
The problem now is a the is not so much apparent conflict of interest in some countries. While people in the US are getting screwed with offshoring, overpriced music and the like, they US as a country is trying to push all other countries into accepting laws that are not benefical to the mayority of the population, and the point is more "who gets what share" than "how to we promote science and better welfare". Everyone agrees the same quantity of music would e created if copyrights lasted 10 years. If you make a hit, chances you will get incredible rich in the first 3 years. Year 4+ are not there to promote arts, they are there to milk the masses, and it does not make economical sense (in terms of benefit to society).
It's starting NOT to make sense to vote. You can only choose a Mix, each politician is a mix. What we want is not to opt for "War to Irak, but No PIRATE Act) or (Patriot Act, but no H1 visas), etc.
What we need is to choose exactly what people want, not what people we want. Voting for people is no longuer working, because the scope is now too broad. Not everyone can know about everything, but if 500 guys can rule everyone, why cannot we make a change and force those 500 guys to vote what their supporters want (ie: they must obey their masters, the citizens).
Ubiquitous access to a network could solve the problem, the time for direct democracy is now...we don't need representatives anymore.
By the very nature of music and movies, if you steal one of those binary you...
1) don't impose additional costs to "manufacturer" 2) don't restrict their ability to keep on manufacturing the item 3) don't make is more difficult for others to buy the item
You see, what happens is that people do not agree with the prices of these autoreplicable goods.
People are not 100% convinced that absolute rights should be given to any "inventor" (you may, but not everyone agrees).
Companies want to milk every last penny in their favour (and as movies and music are monopolies by definition), but progress depends on them NOT being able to do that. Progress depends on manufacturing goods (or services) for the lowest posible price, and that's why capitasm's key word is "competition", and not "profit". Profits arise from opportunities in competitive markets, and only THAT profit is benefical for society. Patents, Copyrights and many other instruments of monopoly are not per-se materially benefical to society, and for that reason, they are not efficient.
Corporations are more efficient at creating wealth than nation-states
Correction: Corporations and their laws are more efficient at extracting wealth. They do not necesarily create wealth. For example, a company can be granted a monopoly, and become the most valued company on earth (Microsoft as one of the examples). But that does not create wealth at all. They are charging you more than they are offering in return, because you or your other companies have no other option than to pay the extra "price". And all other companies and their citizens earn less. The thing becomes worst with patents, as they can not only extract wealth from everyone else, they can STOP progress by laying mines of restriction on what everyone else in the world can do. That's not only granted by the pantents themselves, but by the assimestric nature of justice (big company dumps 100 millons in lawers and you have to defend yourself with much less...in effect).
So no, companies PER SE, are not better at creating wealth, only humans create wealth, after all, it's all our work.
Now follow the line of reasoning:... Countries -> Multicountry pseudo governments (like EU) -> World Government
The trend is for organizations to become wider. The day many people WORLDWIDE are fucked up, because capital respects no country, and cares about nobody, is the day that you'll begin to see a push for a worldwide government that can regulate capitalists worldwide...they will have nowhere to hide.
Some thing will be governed worldwide, some others in a regional way, just like Federal and State governments can peacefully coexist, so will countries. But the shift will not be swift...
The other alternative is that 99% of the population become slaves or exterminated (less jobs available than people, remember automation?).
Correction, shareholders and managers of USA corporations are in charge of your pritty cute democracy. Their ONLY concern is money (maximize shareholder value).
Now, managers either acomplish their only goal in life, or lose their jobs. So there is nothing they can do about it. This leaves as only with the shareholders in mind.
In brief, you have two classes, capital owners and workers. Workers get to choose their presidents and congressmen. Shareholders get to choose workers candidates.
Lastly, 90% of your wealth is owned by 10% of your country men (Note I don't mean to picture the rest of the world is different), and they move it in and out of the USA without having to ask anyone permission (in general).
Basically, they have you workers by the balls, as someone predicted long time ago.
Right, but you still need to explain the notion of "event" without any reference to neither "time" nor "once"...
"Identically" is not suited, and "toghether" still needs what it does mean. I am not saying it's a paradox, but you cannot use notions that depend on "time" to understand the concept. I can understand zero, null, void, etc. If time where so easy to explain, then there wouldn't be so much controvery about what it is... I think that was my point, not that I want to be picky.
I couldn't understand you...anyway, was I too far from it, for a lazy layman...or worst than nothing?:-)
Re:web designers...siiigh.
on
Gimp Hits 2.0
·
· Score: 1
Why jpg for something more suited to a gif? Anyway, I have go to the Microsoft site, the IBM site, and many other big sites, and they do not seem to be needing much jpg "collage" work...
I am not saying you don't need it for other porpuses, but then again, flash is probably more suited to those kind of sites (or demos).
One if time is an information flow measurement, in which information measurement is time, and you have't explained time then.
Maybe each particle is only allowed to consume a limited set of resources, so that every universe can be computed (yeah, makes no sense), so whoever invented this systems had no better idea to limited how fast things move or how fast things happen. Time probably is discrete, just as space.
Anyway, time is what gives space it's definition, without it, things could not be pictured, as any order will suffice. It would just be a mess of somethings in no particular order (any order would be arbitrary). Time exposes a single coordinate system.
And yes, it's TOO late to be awake, no further reasons needed!
Zero is very easy to visualize. For example, give all your money, and you'll grasp the concept of "nothing of some sort" quickly, and inmediatelly link it with the meaning of "zero".
Time is a bit harder. You "gadawahoo" (whatever it is) at some limited constant arbitrary number God choose. Now you are entitled to choose the mix of your gadawahoo, as either "speed of events" or "speed as movement". The trick is, you are always adding up the same amount of gadawahoo whether you like it or not.
The only difference this time, is many companies against MS for the first time on a single plataform push. That is, SUN, IBM, Novell, Sony (their are losing control of music distribution w/Linux, XBox a threat, etc.) Phillips, Oracle, Intel, SGI, Governments... and many others already aligned or getting ready for it.
This is not the same as IBM pushing OS/2, Novell Netware, SUN Solaris (as mandated OS), etc.
Adn there is nothing Microsoft can do, because if MS wants to grow further, which is dificult, they need to pick many battles at once, and thats what they are actually doing, putting 70% of the IT SW and SRV companies against them. They need Oracle DB market, SUNs java (.NET), Novell Netware (LAN, they got them with NT), IBM's AIX and OS/2 (already done), the music industry, the hardware control (signed drivers? DRM?)...
Slashdot Mirror
I know you know this, and everyone know this, but it took me a some time to figure why it's magically SQRT(2)...because what you want is to double one axis lenght only and reach the same ratio.
... sorry
|---|X Lameness filter encountered.
| | Post aborted!
| | Reason: Please use fewer
|---| 'junk' characters.
1
|---|---|X Lameness filter encountered.
| | | Post aborted!
| | | Reason: Please use fewer
|---|---| 'junk' characters.
2
X 2
--- = --- => X^2 = 2 => X = SQRT(2)
1 X
I know, I know
They dont offer long term unemployment / bad employment insurance yet (and never will) and a Baby is a long term investment (or an act of love).
Second and more important, everyone has the right to have kids, and to live in a country that can support kids. If you country does not allow for that, or aims to allow that, then you will be in trouble when you find out most of your people are oldies with no future, and second, because what the fuck do you need a country for if you can even choose to have one or two children (as to keep the population equal).
Anyway, you probably agree on castrating whoever you feel shouldnt have kids based on income (africans, etc.) instead of limiting on how much care, good guidance and moral fathers can transmit.
Well, I would fin it usefull to be able to have a fully functional Linux system at AL-TAB distance, as opposed to REBOOT distance. For example, I would use it run server stuff like Apache, MySQL, etc. that Windows can talk to if both systems are simultaneously online. I could also use a lot of toher software that Linux has that Windows does not. I could even have a Linux system running at work, because I must have Outlook and Excel available at ALL times, but they wouldnt force me to NOT have Linux running at the same time, so thats the only way for me.
Anyway, colinux will NOT replace Linux, of course Linux alone is better for most situations, but it kills the NO LINUX IF YOU NEED 1 SINGLE WINDOWS APP scenario.
You can RUN Linux under Windows, as opposed to LAUNCH Linux from Windows...
Maybe you can grasp the difference and consecuences...
I think there are, just not on all subjects. Also, the "waters" are divided whan two competing important customers demand the same study. For example, AMD and Intel are customers, so there is no unintentional biasing there, and there is no biasing in estimating markets in general. When studing demand (what they need), there also no biasing. Also, any biasedness in the case of the MS study will be complemented by IBM being an important customer. So I will try to keep the Linux vs. Microsoft study neutral, but the point is...99% of the analists here haven't even SEEN a Linux screen, and they somhow react in the same way when they ignore something, they are at a huge disavantage if anything they don' t have a clue about succeeds. Same with admins.
It's very difficult to be 100% unbiased...but you tend to speak better of what you know better. And also, nobody will complain if you say Windows is just a bit more valuable for X kind of company, and many WILL if you say otherwise.
TCO and ROI analisys will always be biased, even companies like HP and IBM do this kind of analisys for their clients (or a third party does those for them) and guess what? They always have a better ROI for their outsourcing solutions for example.
In brief, it's easy to lie with statistics, but some facts do not change. Linux is growing, people are finding it usefull, no matter what we say. Even myself, a Linux enthusiast, dont feel like "pushing" for Linux any harder than they can accept...
The IT research firm I work for has been contracted by Microsoft to study the Linux vs Windows value to corporations just recently (last week).
Microsoft, for the first time, paid in full advance even before a full proposal could be drafted, or even basic details.
They initially wanted a TCO study, and our CEO told them to NOT DO THAT, he is very honest, and knew beforehand Windows would lose. On the other hand, ew do not know what will happen.
The reality is that under some very common scenarios, at least where I live, Linux expertise is regarded as expensive, and that some Microsoft apps allow companies to get work done quicker.
If you where to look at the Linux trend of adoption, growing support, etc., regarded retraining costs as an investment into future savings, noted that Microsoft is free to change it's pricing policy anytime, and they can force you to demand more than you want in the future, and that after 3 years you own nothing at all (license obsolete, or app obsolete), then you'll see Linux wining by large.
But guess what, Research firms, even unbiased ones, tend to choose scenarios that are real world, but benefit their customers more.
If IT adopters where the ones financing these research studies, then the story would be different. But guess what? They dont pay much, and if they do, then Microsoft and the likes can double the bet to get what they want or, as someone else put it, they'd pay you $400 so that you'll "agree" with whatever their CIO believes is true. The same happens with newspapers, what you read is 90% dicatated by the ads they can sell in that "section". Thats why you always see some Cars suplement, because people like it, but MORE importantly, because they can sell expensive adds.
If you want unbiased researchers, find a way to fund that does not involved their reveneus depending on an interested party.
I bought some Sanyo 2.8Ah batteries in MEXICO two months ago (Model N-3US, 14-16hs charge time at 280mA), and 2.0Ah some years ago. All of them Sanyo.
They themselves but abusing the market and legal system...sistematically.
Yes, I agree with you completelly. And it still doesn't make sense. On the one hand you want the companies where you own shares to be granted monopolies, big contract, unjustified patents of all kinds, on the other hand, 95% of the people depend for a living on getting salaries paid at end of month.
What I mean is, a company that makes money is not PER SE good for the economy. If it does so in an uncompetitive market, if it abuses a monopoly position, if it abused the law system (buy politicians), if it abused the pantent system (any of which can be "semi" legaly done), then it's bad for the country, the citizens, etc.
The problem now is a the is not so much apparent conflict of interest in some countries. While people in the US are getting screwed with offshoring, overpriced music and the like, they US as a country is trying to push all other countries into accepting laws that are not benefical to the mayority of the population, and the point is more "who gets what share" than "how to we promote science and better welfare". Everyone agrees the same quantity of music would e created if copyrights lasted 10 years. If you make a hit, chances you will get incredible rich in the first 3 years. Year 4+ are not there to promote arts, they are there to milk the masses, and it does not make economical sense (in terms of benefit to society).
It's starting NOT to make sense to vote. You can only choose a Mix, each politician is a mix. What we want is not to opt for "War to Irak, but No PIRATE Act) or (Patriot Act, but no H1 visas), etc.
What we need is to choose exactly what people want, not what people we want. Voting for people is no longuer working, because the scope is now too broad. Not everyone can know about everything, but if 500 guys can rule everyone, why cannot we make a change and force those 500 guys to vote what their supporters want (ie: they must obey their masters, the citizens).
Ubiquitous access to a network could solve the problem, the time for direct democracy is now...we don't need representatives anymore.
By the very nature of music and movies, if you steal one of those binary you ...
1) don't impose additional costs to "manufacturer"
2) don't restrict their ability to keep on manufacturing the item
3) don't make is more difficult for others to buy the item
You see, what happens is that people do not agree with the prices of these autoreplicable goods.
People are not 100% convinced that absolute rights should be given to any "inventor" (you may, but not everyone agrees).
Companies want to milk every last penny in their favour (and as movies and music are monopolies by definition), but progress depends on them NOT being able to do that. Progress depends on manufacturing goods (or services) for the lowest posible price, and that's why capitasm's key word is "competition", and not "profit". Profits arise from opportunities in competitive markets, and only THAT profit is benefical for society. Patents, Copyrights and many other instruments of monopoly are not per-se materially benefical to society, and for that reason, they are not efficient.
Corporations are more efficient at creating wealth than nation-states
Correction: Corporations and their laws are more efficient at extracting wealth. They do not necesarily create wealth. For example, a company can be granted a monopoly, and become the most valued company on earth (Microsoft as one of the examples). But that does not create wealth at all. They are charging you more than they are offering in return, because you or your other companies have no other option than to pay the extra "price". And all other companies and their citizens earn less. The thing becomes worst with patents, as they can not only extract wealth from everyone else, they can STOP progress by laying mines of restriction on what everyone else in the world can do. That's not only granted by the pantents themselves, but by the assimestric nature of justice (big company dumps 100 millons in lawers and you have to defend yourself with much less...in effect).
So no, companies PER SE, are not better at creating wealth, only humans create wealth, after all, it's all our work.
We can do nothing.
... Countries -> Multicountry pseudo governments (like EU) -> World Government
Yes we can, and we will (I hope). Look at your evolution trend:
Individuals -> Tribes -> Cities -> Kingdoms -> Countries...
Now follow the line of reasoning:
The trend is for organizations to become wider. The day many people WORLDWIDE are fucked up, because capital respects no country, and cares about nobody, is the day that you'll begin to see a push for a worldwide government that can regulate capitalists worldwide...they will have nowhere to hide.
Some thing will be governed worldwide, some others in a regional way, just like Federal and State governments can peacefully coexist, so will countries. But the shift will not be swift...
The other alternative is that 99% of the population become slaves or exterminated (less jobs available than people, remember automation?).
Correction, shareholders and managers of USA corporations are in charge of your pritty cute democracy. Their ONLY concern is money (maximize shareholder value).
Now, managers either acomplish their only goal in life, or lose their jobs. So there is nothing they can do about it. This leaves as only with the shareholders in mind.
In brief, you have two classes, capital owners and workers. Workers get to choose their presidents and congressmen. Shareholders get to choose workers candidates.
Lastly, 90% of your wealth is owned by 10% of your country men (Note I don't mean to picture the rest of the world is different), and they move it in and out of the USA without having to ask anyone permission (in general).
Basically, they have you workers by the balls, as someone predicted long time ago.
Good point. If it's supposed to bea background app, you can disown it...but I don't know if you can regain the apps screen afterwards.
They will force Samba to have to circunvent security measures...
Right, but you still need to explain the notion of "event" without any reference to neither "time" nor "once"...
"Identically" is not suited, and "toghether" still needs what it does mean. I am not saying it's a paradox, but you cannot use notions that depend on "time" to understand the concept. I can understand zero, null, void, etc. If time where so easy to explain, then there wouldn't be so much controvery about what it is... I think that was my point, not that I want to be picky.
I couldn't understand you...anyway, was I too far from it, for a lazy layman...or worst than nothing? :-)
Why jpg for something more suited to a gif? Anyway, I have go to the Microsoft site, the IBM site, and many other big sites, and they do not seem to be needing much jpg "collage" work...
I am not saying you don't need it for other porpuses, but then again, flash is probably more suited to those kind of sites (or demos).
One if time is an information flow measurement, in which information measurement is time, and you have't explained time then.
Maybe each particle is only allowed to consume a limited set of resources, so that every universe can be computed (yeah, makes no sense), so whoever invented this systems had no better idea to limited how fast things move or how fast things happen. Time probably is discrete, just as space.
Anyway, time is what gives space it's definition, without it, things could not be pictured, as any order will suffice. It would just be a mess of somethings in no particular order (any order would be arbitrary). Time exposes a single coordinate system.
And yes, it's TOO late to be awake, no further reasons needed!
"However, doesn't this make it a little difficult to navigate when your traveling at the speed of light?"
That's why light goes though a "straight" line (but can't be bent from the outside. Yeah, I know, I make no sense, but this IS slashdot.
Zero is very easy to visualize. For example, give all your money, and you'll grasp the concept of "nothing of some sort" quickly, and inmediatelly link it with the meaning of "zero".
Time is a bit harder. You "gadawahoo" (whatever it is) at some limited constant arbitrary number God choose. Now you are entitled to choose the mix of your gadawahoo, as either "speed of events" or "speed as movement". The trick is, you are always adding up the same amount of gadawahoo whether you like it or not.
What is "once" then? You have to explain it without the notion of "of time".
The only difference this time, is many companies against MS for the first time on a single plataform push. That is, SUN, IBM, Novell, Sony (their are losing control of music distribution w/Linux, XBox a threat, etc.) Phillips, Oracle, Intel, SGI, Governments ... and many others already aligned or getting ready for it.
This is not the same as IBM pushing OS/2, Novell Netware, SUN Solaris (as mandated OS), etc.
Adn there is nothing Microsoft can do, because if MS wants to grow further, which is dificult, they need to pick many battles at once, and thats what they are actually doing, putting 70% of the IT SW and SRV companies against them. They need Oracle DB market, SUNs java (.NET), Novell Netware (LAN, they got them with NT), IBM's AIX and OS/2 (already done), the music industry, the hardware control (signed drivers? DRM?)...
I say the IT WWI is in the preliminary phase.
Because the 99,9999999999% of the rest of the country is supporting their business, their courts, their property laws, etc, etc, etc?