So if new cells are continually being added to the brain, then there is no reason why we can't stop learning.
And if new cells are perpetually being created and the incorporation of these new cells in our brain allows us to change our thinking, then there is no reason why we can't accept new ideas.
So does this mean that it is possible to teach an old dog new tricks? While people are obviously going to be different, I think it is a fair statement to say that older people tend to be more fixed in their opinions and less willing to change them. If new cells are being created all the time and this enables our brains to be malleable, then is simply stubboness or our attitudes that prevent us from being open to other people's ideas or new technologies?
How is it that some older people can't comprehend an ATM, while others can easily use a computer? I don't think it is related to how smart you are, but maybe it is a function of how many brain cells are being created or how their bodies manage to incorporate them into their existing brain.
I think the research they are carrying out has some very interesting ramifications and opens up a lot of questions about ourselves and our learning ability over time.
I think many people get the wrong idea about the Palm - WinCE certainly does.
Most IT professionals aren't more than a couple of hours from their closest fully-deatured desktop computer. If I want to run Excel (or whatever other bloated application), I will use a proper sized keyboard, my 19" monitor, and a Pentium II 350 (okay, I am behind the 8 ball) at work or at home.
On the road, I simply want the ability to take a couple of notes, check my calendar, and update my address book.
The Palm is great because it does exactly that and doesn't add on useless features which the majority will not use.
Want sound and colour, go and use a real computer. Or if need the portability, get a laptop. Why must every piece of computer technology act like a desktop computer?
Open-source the rebuilding of your house
on
Hemos is Homeless
·
· Score: 5
Hey Hemos,
When you rebuild/redecorate your house, how about making it open-source. Sort of like the Kasporov vs. The World Chess match - but instead, The World redecorates Hemos' house!
Just think of the opportunities: Slashdot green walls in the computer room, DustPuppy themed vacuum cleaner cupboard...
On a serious note, I hope nothing irreplacable like photos were lost.
Personally, I can't wait until HDD (or any other storage media) becomes so cheap and so small that they will be able to put a movie on them and include them free with your box of corn flakes.
Heh heh, regardless of whether you have one or multiple patches, applying them to WinNT is painful!:)
I too have been in that situation. The GUI nirvana kinda falls down doesn't it when you have to push buttons a-l-l t-h-e t-i-m-e!! I synpathise with you.
My post was more about comparing a single patch for Unix to multiple patches for unix.
Yes, I totally agree with the previous replies - I too would use scripts.
In my haste to post my reply I overlooked the mot obvious way to handle multiple patches - yes, I look stupid.
I should have known better because I just performed 5 patches to the machines two weeks ago - hence my post on this topic - and yes, I used scripts then.
I work on one of the largest Unix sites in my country - 200 machines - and I can tell you, if I had to apply 21 individual patches to 200 machines, I would be ready to punch someone.
These machines are mission critical which means that the only time you are allowed to apply patches is outside business hours which for these boxes is between 9pm and 3am. That's a lot of late nights. Sure a single large patch still has to install the same amount, but you could start patching the system and then move onto another one which means you could do several in parallel. With individual patches, you would have to keep coming back to each system to start the next patch.
On top of this, due to the mission critical nature of the boxes (they are used nation wide), we have extensive change management controls. Any patch that we apply would have to have a corresponding backout procedure. It is much easier to consider a patch as one big patch than 21 individual patches. Sure, us tech people know that they are really one and the same. But try telling the change managment people that.
When you are dealing with a small site, individual patches are probably preferable - I would prefer them myself.
But on an enterprise level of any decent size, there is no way I want to have to deal with individual patches.
This is not intended as an insult to those who are contributing to this topic, but how many of you guys actually work in the enterprise area? Or are the majority of you making comments based on what you think happens in the enterprise arena?
When I heard that the Australian government wanted to implement 'content regulation' I was pretty ticked off (since I live in Australia).
I still am - but I have also thought about the issue a whole lot more without trying to jump on the 'censorship is evil and the work of the devil' bandwagon.
If I was a parent, I could see the benefits of content regulation. I would hope that I would be a parent who would take an interest in what my kid does and who would make sure that I knew what my kid was doing on the Internet. However, I cannot be around my hypothetical kid all the time and if content regulation helps me control when my kid is exposed to elements of society that are of the more unsavory kind, then so be it.
However,
where I have the biggest issue with content regulation is that the Australian government has decided to implement the content regulation on a nation wide level irrespective of who is trying to look at the content.
To me, this is synonomous to saying that since drivers aged between 18 and 25 cause the most accidents on the road, we should ban all drivers.
The brush is simply too broad and everyone is being tarred.
In my mind, this is the issue with content regulation - the fact that it is applied on a macro and not a micro level.
So, with regard to the Lotus CEO, I too agree with content regulation, just not how it is being implemented at the moment.
Okay, you think sand storms sting if you're caught in one... I'd hate to be caught in a diamond storm - I'm thinking that it would be a rather abrasive experience.
Having been brought up in the Microsoft world, I've come to expect that Windows PCs are not reliable and that the 'release early and fix later' mentality is a valid one.
But as I have got older, I have had two experiences which have changed that.
The first was Linux/*nix. Here was an OS that was stable and didn't crash or need multiple reboots after every software installation.
The second was working for the largest Telco in my country. When we had a software release, it had better be bug free, for if we had an outage for a couple of hours, it would cost the telco several hundred thousand as the application was used nation wide with thousands of users 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The Telco demanded that the software was stable and were happy to allow extensions of delivery dates to ensure that happened.
How did these experiences affect me?
First, Linux/*nix showed that it is possible to create stable software. Second, that if the customer wants a quality product, software developers will produce the goods.
So IMHO, it's not the shareholders that I would blame, but the customers. If the customers kicked up a big enough stink and looked for alternatives, M$ share price would drop which would hurt it where it really hurts.
But customers don't really have many alternatives, nor do many of them know that software can be stable. Maybe we are forever doomed to have buggy software?
Are we approaching microwave frequencies?
on
700 MHz Athlon
·
· Score: 4
I'm no physics wizz so correct me if I am wrong.
My understanding is that microwaves start at 1 Ghz and with CPU speed approaching those frequencies, does this mean that the CPU's will start emitting microwaves.
I'm assuming that I don't know my physics that well, because I guessing that microwave emitting CPU's would be a bad thing!
Then again, you could always cook the evening meal while you read/.
If I submit my browsing to the RIAA, I guess I won't be viewing many mp3 sites. Similarly, if I submit my browsing to Linus Torvalds, I guess I'll be viewing a lot of Linux sites, but not many Microsoft ones.
The first is Apple which was smart in realising that you could take a normal computer, put it in a new case, add a splash of color, and voila - rampant sales.
But Apple only had a limited vision. After all, one does not always see red, or feel green with jealousy, or feel grape colored.
Along came IBM, and swiping an idea from Nokia, decided that swappable colors would be even better. Now instead of deciding what to wear in the morning, you also had to decide if it would coordinate with the colour panels you had for your laptop.
So what is the third company? The third company is mine. I'm going out and manufacturing swappable color panels for everything under the sun. There is no way I cannot make a couple of billion based on peoples past purchasing habits.
Don't like the color of your car? Let me introduce to you the strawberry Ford - oh! you're wearing a navy suit, well just give me a couple of seconds... there we go, please step into your blueberry car.
Is the voting for the moves checked (and vetoed) by humans?
Cos if it isn't, I could see an amusing result if the/. effect was rolled out over the voting form and we had a solitary pawn on the far left of the chess board advancing one square at a time completely ignoring any move that Kasporov made...;)
One of the strengths of Linux is that there is a huge developer base - it can evolve in hundreds of different ways as seen fit by the whim of a single developer. This is a strength and one that cannot be matched by a solitary vendor.
However, this amazing diversity also has a downside and that is that no-one can exert a unifying pressure on the development. If you compare Linux to FreeBSD, you will find BSD tends to have very good help files, it's packages are conveniently located at a central location and well categorised and listed, and the OS as a whole is consistent with it's layout, help files, and program defaults.
In my experience, Linux tends to be less well organised, less documented and less consistent than most other versions of *nix.
This is not to say one is better than the other, all I'm pointing out is that each has strengths that are opposites and that the money factor, while a component, is not by any means the key factor in determining which will survive.
I work for a very large IT firm and in my area we look after 70 Unix servers all running Oracle databases. The 70 boxes provide a nation wide service and is used by 1000's of users. The system requires uptime of 22 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If we have an outage of approximately 2 hours on one of the key boxes, we are looking at a $100,000 penalty.
Any price/performance benefit of NT is wiped out if it crashes on a regular basis.
And believe me, NT does crash. There is a development group in our company investigating whether we can replace the 70 unix boxes with NT boxes. And guess what - the pilot release date has been delayed by two years because it doesn't run reliably and it requires twice the number of servers to handle the load.
That is why we stick with the high-margin vendors and why price/performance of NT simply isn't an issue.
In big business, money is nothing - reliability is everything.
This whole moderation thing is getting more and more complicated - although I think it works well. Rob must have really been bored to think up this system:)
Actually, I'm just trying to find out what my score is;)
Well not entirely. But it proves that the moderators aren't reading their guidelines - such as a score of 0 is for off-topic but not insulting etc posts.
A score of >1 is for posts that are on topic - how did this entire thread then score 1's when it plainly states that it is off-topic
However, I think as a whole, the moderators are doing a fine job.
I found this so funny! But if you were serious about it, it really wouldn't work in the long term - something along the lines of 'the boy who cried wolf'
Excellent idea! I hate having to scroll down a huge list of posts trying to find where I was when I followed a thread down a few levels - glad to see I'm not the only one!
Slashdot Mirror
And if new cells are perpetually being created and the incorporation of these new cells in our brain allows us to change our thinking, then there is no reason why we can't accept new ideas.
So does this mean that it is possible to teach an old dog new tricks? While people are obviously going to be different, I think it is a fair statement to say that older people tend to be more fixed in their opinions and less willing to change them. If new cells are being created all the time and this enables our brains to be malleable, then is simply stubboness or our attitudes that prevent us from being open to other people's ideas or new technologies?
How is it that some older people can't comprehend an ATM, while others can easily use a computer? I don't think it is related to how smart you are, but maybe it is a function of how many brain cells are being created or how their bodies manage to incorporate them into their existing brain.
I think the research they are carrying out has some very interesting ramifications and opens up a lot of questions about ourselves and our learning ability over time.
Most IT professionals aren't more than a couple of hours from their closest fully-deatured desktop computer. If I want to run Excel (or whatever other bloated application), I will use a proper sized keyboard, my 19" monitor, and a Pentium II 350 (okay, I am behind the 8 ball) at work or at home.
On the road, I simply want the ability to take a couple of notes, check my calendar, and update my address book.
The Palm is great because it does exactly that and doesn't add on useless features which the majority will not use.
Want sound and colour, go and use a real computer. Or if need the portability, get a laptop. Why must every piece of computer technology act like a desktop computer?
When you rebuild/redecorate your house, how about making it open-source. Sort of like the Kasporov vs. The World Chess match - but instead, The World redecorates Hemos' house!
Just think of the opportunities: Slashdot green walls in the computer room, DustPuppy themed vacuum cleaner cupboard ...
On a serious note, I hope nothing irreplacable like photos were lost.
Now that would be a cool promotion!
I too have been in that situation. The GUI nirvana kinda falls down doesn't it when you have to push buttons a-l-l t-h-e t-i-m-e!! I synpathise with you.
My post was more about comparing a single patch for Unix to multiple patches for unix.
In my haste to post my reply I overlooked the mot obvious way to handle multiple patches - yes, I look stupid.
I should have known better because I just performed 5 patches to the machines two weeks ago - hence my post on this topic - and yes, I used scripts then.
I do stand by my argument on red tape though.
These machines are mission critical which means that the only time you are allowed to apply patches is outside business hours which for these boxes is between 9pm and 3am. That's a lot of late nights. Sure a single large patch still has to install the same amount, but you could start patching the system and then move onto another one which means you could do several in parallel. With individual patches, you would have to keep coming back to each system to start the next patch.
On top of this, due to the mission critical nature of the boxes (they are used nation wide), we have extensive change management controls. Any patch that we apply would have to have a corresponding backout procedure. It is much easier to consider a patch as one big patch than 21 individual patches. Sure, us tech people know that they are really one and the same. But try telling the change managment people that.
When you are dealing with a small site, individual patches are probably preferable - I would prefer them myself.
But on an enterprise level of any decent size, there is no way I want to have to deal with individual patches.
This is not intended as an insult to those who are contributing to this topic, but how many of you guys actually work in the enterprise area? Or are the majority of you making comments based on what you think happens in the enterprise arena?
I still am - but I have also thought about the issue a whole lot more without trying to jump on the 'censorship is evil and the work of the devil' bandwagon.
If I was a parent, I could see the benefits of content regulation. I would hope that I would be a parent who would take an interest in what my kid does and who would make sure that I knew what my kid was doing on the Internet. However, I cannot be around my hypothetical kid all the time and if content regulation helps me control when my kid is exposed to elements of society that are of the more unsavory kind, then so be it.
However,
where I have the biggest issue with content regulation is that the Australian government has decided to implement the content regulation on a nation wide level irrespective of who is trying to look at the content.
To me, this is synonomous to saying that since drivers aged between 18 and 25 cause the most accidents on the road, we should ban all drivers.
The brush is simply too broad and everyone is being tarred.
In my mind, this is the issue with content regulation - the fact that it is applied on a macro and not a micro level.
So, with regard to the Lotus CEO, I too agree with content regulation, just not how it is being implemented at the moment.
(It's late at night - sorry for the bad pun).
But as I have got older, I have had two experiences which have changed that.
The first was Linux/*nix. Here was an OS that was stable and didn't crash or need multiple reboots after every software installation.
The second was working for the largest Telco in my country. When we had a software release, it had better be bug free, for if we had an outage for a couple of hours, it would cost the telco several hundred thousand as the application was used nation wide with thousands of users 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The Telco demanded that the software was stable and were happy to allow extensions of delivery dates to ensure that happened.
How did these experiences affect me?
First, Linux/*nix showed that it is possible to create stable software. Second, that if the customer wants a quality product, software developers will produce the goods.
So IMHO, it's not the shareholders that I would blame, but the customers. If the customers kicked up a big enough stink and looked for alternatives, M$ share price would drop which would hurt it where it really hurts.
But customers don't really have many alternatives, nor do many of them know that software can be stable. Maybe we are forever doomed to have buggy software?
My understanding is that microwaves start at 1 Ghz and with CPU speed approaching those frequencies, does this mean that the CPU's will start emitting microwaves.
I'm assuming that I don't know my physics that well, because I guessing that microwave emitting CPU's would be a bad thing!
Then again, you could always cook the evening meal while you read /.
Give a computer a genetic algorithm and it will build you a bridge.
Give a geek open source software and they will start a revolution.
Amen.
Get a rocket to deliver the pizza to any place in the world within 30 minutes or your money back.
And best of all, when the pizza reenters the atmosphere, it will heat up and be freshly cooked.
Can't wait ...
I guess I won't be able to safely mutter insults about my manager under my breath any more ...
If I submit my browsing to the RIAA, I guess I won't be viewing many mp3 sites. Similarly, if I submit my browsing to Linus Torvalds, I guess I'll be viewing a lot of Linux sites, but not many Microsoft ones.
If I submit my browsing to Anonymous Coward ...
The first is Apple which was smart in realising that you could take a normal computer, put it in a new case, add a splash of color, and voila - rampant sales.
But Apple only had a limited vision. After all, one does not always see red, or feel green with jealousy, or feel grape colored.
Along came IBM, and swiping an idea from Nokia, decided that swappable colors would be even better. Now instead of deciding what to wear in the morning, you also had to decide if it would coordinate with the colour panels you had for your laptop.
So what is the third company? The third company is mine. I'm going out and manufacturing swappable color panels for everything under the sun. There is no way I cannot make a couple of billion based on peoples past purchasing habits.
Don't like the color of your car? Let me introduce to you the strawberry Ford - oh! you're wearing a navy suit, well just give me a couple of seconds ... there we go, please step into your blueberry car.
KER-CHING!!
Cos if it isn't, I could see an amusing result if the /. effect was rolled out over the voting form and we had a solitary pawn on the far left of the chess board advancing one square at a time completely ignoring any move that Kasporov made ... ;)
One of the strengths of Linux is that there is a huge developer base - it can evolve in hundreds of different ways as seen fit by the whim of a single developer. This is a strength and one that cannot be matched by a solitary vendor.
However, this amazing diversity also has a downside and that is that no-one can exert a unifying pressure on the development. If you compare Linux to FreeBSD, you will find BSD tends to have very good help files, it's packages are conveniently located at a central location and well categorised and listed, and the OS as a whole is consistent with it's layout, help files, and program defaults.
In my experience, Linux tends to be less well organised, less documented and less consistent than most other versions of *nix.
This is not to say one is better than the other, all I'm pointing out is that each has strengths that are opposites and that the money factor, while a component, is not by any means the key factor in determining which will survive.
If we have an outage of approximately 2 hours on one of the key boxes, we are looking at a $100,000 penalty.
Any price/performance benefit of NT is wiped out if it crashes on a regular basis.
And believe me, NT does crash. There is a development group in our company investigating whether we can replace the 70 unix boxes with NT boxes. And guess what - the pilot release date has been delayed by two years because it doesn't run reliably and it requires twice the number of servers to handle the load.
That is why we stick with the high-margin vendors and why price/performance of NT simply isn't an issue.
In big business, money is nothing - reliability is everything.
Actually, I'm just trying to find out what my score is ;)
Okay, my own sarcasm turns around and bites me on my arse. Hmmm, doesn't taste so good eating it a second time :)
A score of >1 is for posts that are on topic - how did this entire thread then score 1's when it plainly states that it is off-topic
However, I think as a whole, the moderators are doing a fine job.
I found this so funny! But if you were serious about it, it really wouldn't work in the long term - something along the lines of 'the boy who cried wolf'
Excellent idea! I hate having to scroll down a huge list of posts trying to find where I was when I followed a thread down a few levels - glad to see I'm not the only one!