It's also interesting that your facts seem to be incorrect.
The Roman governmental system is somewhat similar in a couple of ways, but the USE government is more patterned after modern deviations of that government... especially after the renesaince. The British parlaimentary system is somewhat more similar to our system of government than the Roman form of Government. Though it is obvious that all three are entirely different.
It's interesting that no cranes or bulldozers or basically any equipment made of metal alloy of that size and complexity have been excavated. Powerful engines, and the like would have been found by now.
--
We can find dinosaurs, but not ancient motorized cranes and wheels.
I'm not saying that it's not amazing, what they did is amazing. I'm saying, that is fairly inplausable that a superior culture of people lived on Earth, and then a great cataclism wiped out all that tech. (I agree that wiping out all the digital equipment is still fairly plausible though.)
Basically, they are saying...
blocks near the base may have been quarried and dragged to the site.
Joe Egyptian thought "Damn, this is some hard work, pulling these tons of blocks and stuff... why don't we pound this stone into dust... carry it in bags... and add some water and beer into the mix when we get to it..."
I for one welcome my unicorn overlords! -- Really though, good point. I was waiting for the mythical creature argument. Though I agree with you (as I am an Athiest), it is not a fair argument to the people who are religious because it leaves you no room to be incorrect about callying their deity a mythical creature. This gets at the root of the reason of why religious people are typically intolerant of opposing views. They get defensive when you say that the thing they believe in so heavily is untrue and/or not real. Which is also unfair.
Athiests tend to rely on science or societal ethical standards. Each of those belief systems is also based on a foundation of assumptions and conjectures, just as any belief system such as Christians, Pagans, Muslims, Hindu, whatever believe.
I try to be fair. Atheism would be more widely accepted if it was practiced in a less demeaning towards those with other beliefs. The problem is that most athiests don't care about whatever stupidity others believe. They'll either come around to light on their own or not. Personally, I think they all will come around eventually, so I let them be... unless they ask... and then, since I don't want them to think that I am incapable of love or some other ridiculus notion I just say something that is comforting and neutral. If they push it farther, then I'll provide more reasoning.
I'm sorry, but you are the biggest idiot on slashdot.
Find is the worst command to use.
Ring, Ring,
Me: Hello Mom: Hi Brad
Me: Hey, how's it going? Mom: Fine, but I lost this letter I was writing on the computer. I'm sure that it's still there, but I can't remember where I saved it...
Me: Okay, mom, no problem.... Just open a command terminal, and change directory to the root. Then type: find forward slash Me: Wait, Do you rememember the name of the file? Mom: I think it was "Letter to School district" or something like that
Me: Oh, well that's okay we can just escape those spaces in the filename. Me: okay type the name and before each space type a back slash. Mom: Which slash is that one...
Me: It's the one on the question mark key. Mom: Oh, okay...
Mom: Okay, I pressed enter... I'm not really sure if it is working.
...
Even on windows XP it is easier...
Right click "My computer"
Click "Search"
Click "Docuemnts"
Type the name of the document
or
Type the part of the text in the document.
You can do something similar on Linux in the GUI.
Find is a horrible command line tool, and should be put into a capsule and shot into space... preferrably towards the sun.
I don't have much trouble finding my files. But, my wife, mother, father, in laws, and friends all do. They aren't computer programmers, or network administrators. They don't even read slashdot.
I think it will be easier for them to find their documents now.
There's been a couple of attempts by these companies to get at linux. Some of them gave up due to poor market penetration. But, look at it this way. It is hard to take over a linux machine remotely. I personally believe that is becuase it is damn hard just to get linux to do exactly what you want it to while you are sitting there -- right in front of the local workstation.
Besides most linux people/companies don't want to pay for anything. Is there a free solution that sucks, but still does the job... Yep... so we'll just use it and then hack it up if we need something it aint got.
Also, there is hardly any other commercial software for linux. I think companies are scared that they won't make money on Linux. And, they are mostly correct. Linux people will either write their own software or download some crappy free equivilent software.
I've seen and worked with vista already. Here were my impressions.
It is really hard to lose your work. It is really easy to find your files.
It is a lot prettier.
The GUI for the system has been re-engineered and it is easier to use. Other applications have been rewritten to have the same look and feel so that the system as a whole will be easier to use.
Then it must be common place... Try a search for your name in google. I get like 1000 hits on Google for mine. It must mean that there are a 1000 of me out there, and everyone knows me. Then again, probably not.
I'm just saying that the statistic you posted is not very relevant for your argument.
The first 10 or 20 results in google might be relevant to a search, but they pretty much go to hell after that. This is usually enough to find whatever you were looking for, or to know that you should try another search term.
Dude, this isn't a response. It is useless rhetoric.
Oh, What about the children?!
Maybe, you just missed the context...
Basically, a parent was like, any machine nowadays can handle linux.... even machines without much ram... and I was basically saying that any older machine without a gb of ram won't run well. 1 gb is still a good chunk of ram, and so is 512, and 256. (Linux on low amounts of ram runs like a fat slug crawling vertically up a wall)
The post you were responding to was basically saying, "Oh, interesting, this seems to be history repeating itself. I saw this once before..."
You misinterpreted this as "Oh, you stupid kids with your mountains of free memory... back in my day... memory had to be created starting with a bucket of sand and a sifter until you had enough silicon to fabricate a chip..."
Now you can see, what a little bit of understanding can do to help the situation.
It's true. It is different. The package support and integration in windows is far superior to ubuntu Linux. But, wait... there's more. They both still suck like a blackwhole of PS3 systems consuming so much power that the Sun flickers off.
Are you a computer scientist?
If not then you should not comment on things that you don't know about?
If so, then you should research more about these things before you make dumb statements. (I'm not trying to be mean here... I've made this mistake before too.)
Windows is far more complex. When I say windows, I really do include a lot of extra superfluous software like you are talking about. Because, to me I refer to it as a whole system. That's the way I use it. That's the way I mean it. At Microsoft that is also way it is used, built, distributed, and so forth.
It's a huge system, and I've seen the insides of both, the nightmare that is Ubuntu, and the nightmare that is Windows. Given that, Windows is still a more pleasant dream compared to other massive software development projects that I've seen. The only better projects that I've seen are ones that I wrote, and I assume that is because I don't have the same kinds of backward compatibility constraints, or other nonsense that I have to adhere to.
The package system in windows resolves dependencies first (albeit, usually with manually written code). The package system in Ubuntu just proclaims that it resolves dependencies. It never works when upconverting to the version that you actually need. It never lets you actually use a system that needs to be tweaked to work after it is installed. (Like an installer that asks you for an administrator password.... for example). I know there are good reasons for that. I just don't care. I want a real installer, and real package management. Not half-ass garbage.
Linux and Windows both fail at this horribly.
It doesn't mean that windows doesn't try as hard, or negate my point about Windows being more complex.
By, the way, in my experience, more complexity is typically bad. (At least with software)
I agree, counting bugs is an oversimplification...
My biggest surprise here is that they only found/or reviewed less than a couple hundred bugs each. Strange, because I am sure that I can find more bugs than that in 4 days work on each product. This research can't be all that deep. I must be missing something???
Any normal QA person would be able to find that many bugs in 10 or 20 days.
Linux does not even begin to compare in size and complexity to windows. This might be good and bad. I don't really care. Though, your suggestion of using a package system has been tried and is used in some parts of the build.
Hey, don't worry, most PMs help mitigate the problem some.
Unfortunately, this isn't as good as just solving the problem... Too many freaking meaningless meetings. Why not have two meeting days a week, and then let everyone just work the rest of the time? Make those days Monday, and one Thursday.
One day to start off lining up the week. One day for follow up. No need to schedule around a whole bunch of people. Just get all the PMs together for the first half of the day. Then have meetings with everyone else the second half of the day. Then move the one on ones to once every two weeks instead of once every week. Have them on Friday to gather individual status. This would do away with unecessary status reports that flood email.
Believe me, because even the contractors get stuck going to too many useless meetings. At least this way, only 2/5 of the time will be wasted instead of more than half the time.
It's because of bloat. Basically every PMs fault shared equally (becuase it can be fixed). Not just you.
Here is another suggestion, make it possible for the devs/testers/whatever to actually figure out and know who to go talk to about a feature/problem/whatever without needing to ask 10 people who has the information. A single *meaningful* repository on MSWeb would be helpful. (Who somone is, what they do, and a time window every week that they are available to answer walk-in questions from anyone) Make it a searchable database!:)
This might be an interesting point, unfortunately he is pointing out the inefficiency at MS. And unfortunately, I worked there too and must say that I agree with him. If middle management were re-organized, and the tree was more unified, the end result would be much better.
This is almost exactly my latest experience at Microsoft too.
The difference is that most of my code was independant of others so I didn't need to worry about other people's garbage as much. But, when I did have to deal with it, then this is exactly how it was.
Please, though slashdot Microsoft haters, remember that it was not always this way. Microsoft used to be more efficient. Size, scope, and culture there has changed. It used to be a fun, great place to work. Now it is filled with the same corporate stupidity that other big companies have.
A lot of hard working smart people are leaving for other companies. Not necessarily the brightest of the bunch, but the people that got most of the work done are leaving. The brightest of the bunch get paid so well, that it would take more than complete corporate idiocy to drive them away.
That's why I won't go back -- unless I am offered a freaking ton of money. I think that more people are starting to feel this way about Microsoft too... Anyone else on slashdot (not afraid of the huge flames you will attract for saying you worked at MS) willing to post one way or the other about that idea?
Hopefully, I can assume that they won't waste cycles as much for the highest paid range. Maybe this is an incorrect assumption? Does anyone that works there at a high echelon, have some good input here?
Unfortunately, the fact is that manufactured/modular homes are of the worst quality made almsot entirely by people who are not carpenters.
I should group tract homes into this category too, but I don't want to waste a lot of time on slashdot explaining why.
Basically, there are two kinds of buildings. Those built by idiots/ built for profit, and those buildings that are built custom to live in or to be directly used by the person paying for the construction. Guess which building type turns out to be of higher quality almost every time.
Though, let me not miss the point. I do agree with the main part of your post. Building stick frame homes is slow, and perhaps stupid. I'm just pointing out that it is the quality of construction that matters more than anything. Building with Logs, bricks, cement, glass, steele can be great, or it can be dumb too. It might depend on the climate. Sometimes, ice is a great resource for building material. Context is important.
By the way, you might want to check out metal buildings. They can be built quickly, and by a couple of people. Same thing with cement buildings. Same thing with simple rectangular stick frame buildings.
Slashdot Mirror
It's also interesting that your facts seem to be incorrect.
The Roman governmental system is somewhat similar in a couple of ways, but the USE government is more patterned after modern deviations of that government... especially after the renesaince. The British parlaimentary system is somewhat more similar to our system of government than the Roman form of Government. Though it is obvious that all three are entirely different.
all other
Ah, yes, ... next we'll be seeing the torture and executing equipment... any volunteers? :)
It's interesting that no cranes or bulldozers or basically any equipment made of metal alloy of that size and complexity have been excavated. Powerful engines, and the like would have been found by now.
--
We can find dinosaurs, but not ancient motorized cranes and wheels.
I'm not saying that it's not amazing, what they did is amazing. I'm saying, that is fairly inplausable that a superior culture of people lived on Earth, and then a great cataclism wiped out all that tech. (I agree that wiping out all the digital equipment is still fairly plausible though.)
used whenever there is light reflecting off an object.
Basically, they are saying...
blocks near the base may have been quarried and dragged to the site.
Joe Egyptian thought "Damn, this is some hard work, pulling these tons of blocks and stuff... why don't we pound this stone into dust... carry it in bags... and add some water and beer into the mix when we get to it..."
I for one welcome my unicorn overlords! -- Really though, good point. I was waiting for the mythical creature argument. Though I agree with you (as I am an Athiest), it is not a fair argument to the people who are religious because it leaves you no room to be incorrect about callying their deity a mythical creature. This gets at the root of the reason of why religious people are typically intolerant of opposing views. They get defensive when you say that the thing they believe in so heavily is untrue and/or not real. Which is also unfair.
Athiests tend to rely on science or societal ethical standards. Each of those belief systems is also based on a foundation of assumptions and conjectures, just as any belief system such as Christians, Pagans, Muslims, Hindu, whatever believe.
I try to be fair. Atheism would be more widely accepted if it was practiced in a less demeaning towards those with other beliefs. The problem is that most athiests don't care about whatever stupidity others believe. They'll either come around to light on their own or not. Personally, I think they all will come around eventually, so I let them be... unless they ask... and then, since I don't want them to think that I am incapable of love or some other ridiculus notion I just say something that is comforting and neutral. If they push it farther, then I'll provide more reasoning.
I'm sorry, but you are the biggest idiot on slashdot.
Find is the worst command to use.
Ring, Ring,
Me: Hello
Mom: Hi Brad
Me: Hey, how's it going?
Mom: Fine, but I lost this letter I was writing on the computer. I'm sure that it's still there, but I can't remember where I saved it...
Me: Okay, mom, no problem.... Just open a command terminal, and change directory to the root. Then type: find forward slash
Me: Wait, Do you rememember the name of the file?
Mom: I think it was "Letter to School district" or something like that
Me: Oh, well that's okay we can just escape those spaces in the filename.
Me: okay type the name and before each space type a back slash.
Mom: Which slash is that one...
Me: It's the one on the question mark key.
Mom: Oh, okay...
Mom: Okay, I pressed enter... I'm not really sure if it is working.
Even on windows XP it is easier...
Right click "My computer"
Click "Search"
Click "Docuemnts"
Type the name of the document
or
Type the part of the text in the document.
You can do something similar on Linux in the GUI.
Find is a horrible command line tool, and should be put into a capsule and shot into space... preferrably towards the sun.
I don't have much trouble finding my files. But, my wife, mother, father, in laws, and friends all do. They aren't computer programmers, or network administrators. They don't even read slashdot.
I think it will be easier for them to find their documents now.
There's been a couple of attempts by these companies to get at linux. Some of them gave up due to poor market penetration. But, look at it this way. It is hard to take over a linux machine remotely. I personally believe that is becuase it is damn hard just to get linux to do exactly what you want it to while you are sitting there -- right in front of the local workstation.
Besides most linux people/companies don't want to pay for anything. Is there a free solution that sucks, but still does the job... Yep... so we'll just use it and then hack it up if we need something it aint got.
Also, there is hardly any other commercial software for linux. I think companies are scared that they won't make money on Linux. And, they are mostly correct. Linux people will either write their own software or download some crappy free equivilent software.
It was still in alpha stage of development. I was one of the first people to actually use it.
I've seen and worked with vista already. Here were my impressions.
It is really hard to lose your work. It is really easy to find your files.
It is a lot prettier.
The GUI for the system has been re-engineered and it is easier to use. Other applications have been rewritten to have the same look and feel so that the system as a whole will be easier to use.
It was not stable when I used it.
Then it must be common place... Try a search for your name in google. I get like 1000 hits on Google for mine. It must mean that there are a 1000 of me out there, and everyone knows me. Then again, probably not.
I'm just saying that the statistic you posted is not very relevant for your argument.
The first 10 or 20 results in google might be relevant to a search, but they pretty much go to hell after that. This is usually enough to find whatever you were looking for, or to know that you should try another search term.
Dude, this isn't a response. It is useless rhetoric.
Oh, What about the children?!
Maybe, you just missed the context...
Basically, a parent was like, any machine nowadays can handle linux.... even machines without much ram... and I was basically saying that any older machine without a gb of ram won't run well. 1 gb is still a good chunk of ram, and so is 512, and 256. (Linux on low amounts of ram runs like a fat slug crawling vertically up a wall)
The post you were responding to was basically saying, "Oh, interesting, this seems to be history repeating itself. I saw this once before..."
You misinterpreted this as "Oh, you stupid kids with your mountains of free memory... back in my day... memory had to be created starting with a bucket of sand and a sifter until you had enough silicon to fabricate a chip..."
Now you can see, what a little bit of understanding can do to help the situation.
It's true. It is different. The package support and integration in windows is far superior to ubuntu Linux. But, wait... there's more. They both still suck like a blackwhole of PS3 systems consuming so much power that the Sun flickers off.
Are you a computer scientist?
If not then you should not comment on things that you don't know about?
If so, then you should research more about these things before you make dumb statements. (I'm not trying to be mean here... I've made this mistake before too.)
Windows is far more complex. When I say windows, I really do include a lot of extra superfluous software like you are talking about. Because, to me I refer to it as a whole system. That's the way I use it. That's the way I mean it. At Microsoft that is also way it is used, built, distributed, and so forth.
It's a huge system, and I've seen the insides of both, the nightmare that is Ubuntu, and the nightmare that is Windows. Given that, Windows is still a more pleasant dream compared to other massive software development projects that I've seen. The only better projects that I've seen are ones that I wrote, and I assume that is because I don't have the same kinds of backward compatibility constraints, or other nonsense that I have to adhere to.
The package system in windows resolves dependencies first (albeit, usually with manually written code). The package system in Ubuntu just proclaims that it resolves dependencies. It never works when upconverting to the version that you actually need. It never lets you actually use a system that needs to be tweaked to work after it is installed. (Like an installer that asks you for an administrator password.... for example). I know there are good reasons for that. I just don't care. I want a real installer, and real package management. Not half-ass garbage.
Linux and Windows both fail at this horribly.
It doesn't mean that windows doesn't try as hard, or negate my point about Windows being more complex.
By, the way, in my experience, more complexity is typically bad. (At least with software)
Oh, sorry.
I agree, counting bugs is an oversimplification...
My biggest surprise here is that they only found/or reviewed less than a couple hundred bugs each. Strange, because I am sure that I can find more bugs than that in 4 days work on each product. This research can't be all that deep. I must be missing something???
Any normal QA person would be able to find that many bugs in 10 or 20 days.
Linux does not even begin to compare in size and complexity to windows. This might be good and bad. I don't really care. Though, your suggestion of using a package system has been tried and is used in some parts of the build.
Hey, don't worry, most PMs help mitigate the problem some.
:)
Unfortunately, this isn't as good as just solving the problem... Too many freaking meaningless meetings. Why not have two meeting days a week, and then let everyone just work the rest of the time? Make those days Monday, and one Thursday.
One day to start off lining up the week. One day for follow up. No need to schedule around a whole bunch of people. Just get all the PMs together for the first half of the day. Then have meetings with everyone else the second half of the day. Then move the one on ones to once every two weeks instead of once every week. Have them on Friday to gather individual status. This would do away with unecessary status reports that flood email.
Believe me, because even the contractors get stuck going to too many useless meetings. At least this way, only 2/5 of the time will be wasted instead of more than half the time.
It's because of bloat. Basically every PMs fault shared equally (becuase it can be fixed). Not just you.
Here is another suggestion, make it possible for the devs/testers/whatever to actually figure out and know who to go talk to about a feature/problem/whatever without needing to ask 10 people who has the information. A single *meaningful* repository on MSWeb would be helpful. (Who somone is, what they do, and a time window every week that they are available to answer walk-in questions from anyone) Make it a searchable database!
This might be an interesting point, unfortunately he is pointing out the inefficiency at MS. And unfortunately, I worked there too and must say that I agree with him. If middle management were re-organized, and the tree was more unified, the end result would be much better.
These power save features can be turned off.
Maybe, its more like... "If small piece of hardware is present, then remove superfluous menu item"
I can't believe how acurate this is!
This is almost exactly my latest experience at Microsoft too.
The difference is that most of my code was independant of others so I didn't need to worry about other people's garbage as much. But, when I did have to deal with it, then this is exactly how it was.
Please, though slashdot Microsoft haters, remember that it was not always this way. Microsoft used to be more efficient. Size, scope, and culture there has changed. It used to be a fun, great place to work. Now it is filled with the same corporate stupidity that other big companies have.
A lot of hard working smart people are leaving for other companies. Not necessarily the brightest of the bunch, but the people that got most of the work done are leaving. The brightest of the bunch get paid so well, that it would take more than complete corporate idiocy to drive them away.
That's why I won't go back -- unless I am offered a freaking ton of money. I think that more people are starting to feel this way about Microsoft too... Anyone else on slashdot (not afraid of the huge flames you will attract for saying you worked at MS) willing to post one way or the other about that idea?
Hopefully, I can assume that they won't waste cycles as much for the highest paid range. Maybe this is an incorrect assumption? Does anyone that works there at a high echelon, have some good input here?
I knew that someone would bring this point up.
It seems to make sense right?
Unfortunately, the fact is that manufactured/modular homes are of the worst quality made almsot entirely by people who are not carpenters.
I should group tract homes into this category too, but I don't want to waste a lot of time on slashdot explaining why.
Basically, there are two kinds of buildings. Those built by idiots/ built for profit, and those buildings that are built custom to live in or to be directly used by the person paying for the construction. Guess which building type turns out to be of higher quality almost every time.
Though, let me not miss the point. I do agree with the main part of your post. Building stick frame homes is slow, and perhaps stupid. I'm just pointing out that it is the quality of construction that matters more than anything. Building with Logs, bricks, cement, glass, steele can be great, or it can be dumb too. It might depend on the climate. Sometimes, ice is a great resource for building material. Context is important.
By the way, you might want to check out metal buildings. They can be built quickly, and by a couple of people. Same thing with cement buildings. Same thing with simple rectangular stick frame buildings.
What do you consider low ram? 1gb? Get real.