This isn't remotely comparable. A computer bought 5 years ago, still does exactly what it did.
I buy a new computer not because this one cannot play DVDs and run Civ any more, I buy it because it's a prereq for a new capability I'm seeking. Be that a game, a graphics suite, or higher grade DVDs.
But I actually keep my old computers, because most of them have 'surf the net' or 'run a low load server' value for a lot longer.
This is not the same as a product that's designed to self destruct in substantially less than it's theoretical lifetime, and effectively accelerating the discard cycle.
Some of the best stuff I've ever seen has been 'low budget' (and admittedly, this is in part, because low budget and crap means it disappears entirely), where I've seen some pretty expensive crap make it to the cinema screen.
Why does the amount of money dropped on a film alter it's entitlement to make a profit?
I wouldn't be too suprised to find that the unit cost of a 'real' DVD is lower than this disposable one. They're production line stamped after all - tooling is the overhead and barrier to entry, not the per unit.
So, it may well be more wasteful to make 1 'disposable' than 1 'permanent' DVD.
Even before you get into one being kept/re-used, and the other being discarded.
I think it actually is important to a free society - laws exist for the protection of the populace. There are laws against child pornography, not because we consider it 'nasty' but because of the harm to the children involved, and the fact they are unable to give informed consent.
Going witchhunting against the current thing that's disapproved of is extremely harmful to a free society. Suppressing something simply because it's considered 'dirty', especially in something that's emotionally charged and can carry stigma by association is entirely contrary to a free society.
That's even before we get into the discussion of whether suppressing a fantasy makes it more or less likely to get acted out, by someone who might be considered mentally ill.
This whole subject is emotionally loaded. Anyone who points out the common sense argument that 'child porn' is illegal because of the harm to the children, yet a 'synthetic' image that someone happens to find erotic does not, runs the risk of being branded a 'dirty pervert'.
I feel this is entirely wrong. I fully support making 'harmful' activity illegal, especially in the sense of sexually related and/or involving minors. I don't feel that fantasy, or 'synthetic' imagery is in any way relevant. Yeah, I find some of the stuff I've run into vaguely distasteful. I don't think much of slash, or furry stuff. But... as long is it's in places where I, and more importantly underage people won't run into it, I don't much care. Indeed I feel that people _should_ indulge whatever fantasys they care to, provided it's between consenting adults.
Until the day where they prove that thinking 'I'd like to do her' is the same as sexually assaulting someone, that's exactly the way it should be.
Not withstanding that 17 is 'legal' by UK law, but wouldn't be by US law. In a world where the internet makes moving digital imagery trivial, that's also a bit of a minefield.
I'm afraid you're incorrect. 'big corps' often do not allow direct connection out to the internet for this very reason. A consequence of Sarbanex Oxley, means they _have_ to record any communication in a specific category (email and messaging primarily), which in turn means they must ensure they can control that communication. The most effective way to do this 'proxy only' internet, and a block list.
Users would, of course, assume you were patronising them when you asked 'is the cable plugged in' (be it network, of power, or whatever) and say 'yes' despite not knowing.
So we included a standard check of 'what kind of connector is it?' in the call resolution process. Not because we think it's likely that anyone has anything other than the standard IEC connector, and RJ45 network plug, but because that basically guarantees they'll look at the back of their machine, and probably spot unplugged cables, isolator switches toggled, or just 'stolen' gang sockets.
We have had a fairly substantial number of calls end with 'oops, nevermind' at that point.
Now you've said that, I could probably draw some parallels between the Bible and the current Sci-Fi anthology I'm reading.
There's a whole bunch of stories, that have a a bit of 'what if' to them, including a few where something believed impossible becomes possible.
They're all in some degree a matter of society and human reaction, as that's what Sci-Fi is mostly all about - new possibilities, and it's impact on everyone else. Some have mysterious happenings, and stuff beyond the understanding of man.
Some are carrying an interesting underlying message, moral or otherwise.
*shrug*. There's a certain basis of argument that the Bible isn't the literal truth, but has value as fiction which educates. Not so very different to a Sci-Fi short story anthology.
Well, if I put my evil hat on, I'd be thinking less in terms of DDOS and more in terms of phishing. I mean, it'd be superb for introducting a MITM style attack on internet banking sites, or whatnot.
As a wise man once said: "Democracy is the worst possible form of government, apart from all the rest".
At the end of the day, you never get away from the fact that half the voters are mentally below average. All of them are motivated by self interest, but some see 'way, get tax break' as more immediate self interest than investing in social services.
Seriously, for all the horrible stuff that happens in Syria, the chronically bad state of play that is Guantanamo, indefinite detention without trial, and torture is pretty disgusting too. One does not excuse the other, but at least Syria isn't _pretending_ to be an elightened beacon of democracy and humanity.
I really like the Solaris installer. That actually counts as one of my debug tools - boot up a mini-os, start up the stuff I need, and proceed to fix whatever was wrong with the 'real' OS, mounting partitions as I go.
Not to mention being able to do that via Jumpstart, without actually needing to do more than typing a single command on the 'OK' prompt.
But I am a Solaris fanboy in a big way, I'll freely admit. I have worked with, and supported and fiddeled with, and broken many OS variants. HP-UX, AIX, Solaris, Windows NT/2000/98/XP/2003, MacOS (both before and after it 'was a Unix'), IRIX, and other 'non computer' OS stuff, like Cisco IOS. There's even a smattering of VMS in there.
Of these, I proclaim my faith in Solaris, as the most luvverly of the lot. Although, VMS did have some very definite plus points, and AIX has a few things that it really does do nicely.
Not really, no. Solaris was built as a top down OS, from a world where it was _expected_ to be multi-user. It therefore doesn't actually make any distinction/restriction/arbitrary limitation of 'console' in real use, and the permissions and device access also reflect this design philisophy.
Windows started single user. It's only VERY recently that it's been possible to do remote admin on Windows servers, and even then there's still some stuff that 'just doesn't work' over RDP.
From experience, viruses don't work anywhere near as well in the POSIX permissioning and 'layout' environment. There's clear boundaries of 'stuff' in Solaris, where users Do Not Go. Where 'being able to run' is a file permission that has to be set, rather than a question of which file extension it happens to be, a virus has a MUCH harder time functioning. When your system paths, never ever include things that 'non-root' can touch, and day to day use DOESN'T mean being root at all. Maybe it's just noobishness, but I find a whole boatload of 'windows stuff' that ends up being 'you must be admin to do this' when it really shouldn't.
And I still reckon in a 'rebuild' race, Solaris still wins. Even if you don't include the fact that remote software install is built into the OS.
Yeah, but you have to concede that may only say something about your own level of familiarity with the two products, and have absolutely nothing to do with how the products are actually constructed.
For instance, if I have a DNS problem in Solaris, I'd have no clue how to tackle and resolve it. But if I had the same problem in Windows, I'd type "ipconfig/flushdns" and more than likely the problem's solved.
Then a week later it comes up on Slashdot, and I write a post exactly like yours but the opposite. I was able to fix Windows much easier than reinstalling it, but that damned Solaris is so difficult I had to reinstall it! And of course that would apply regardless of what the product is; I'd always find the one I'm more familiar with easier to fix than reinstall, and the one I'm less familiar with harder to fix than reinstall.
In short, I don't find your argument compelling. At least, not without more information about your background.
Fair point.
How about:
I started doing sysadmin in a mixed OS environment when I was at University. Solaris and Windows machines being used in an uneasy truce. Ever since I've been working on both for about 10 years.
In this time, I've had 'users' working on both, and 'doing their thing'. Now, it may be that there's a difference in style of user you get on either - it was the engineers and developers who were fans of Solaris, and the sales team were much happier with Outlook.
I have had infrastructure running on both platforms, and on numerous occasions caught myself wishing the Windows infrastructure was 'more like Solaris' - because literally everything 'is a file', on the fly fixes to... well, to follow on for your example - DNS problems. I have 'truss' built into the OS, so if my nslookup fails, I can see exactly which 'bit' caused it to fail. New versions of Solaris have DTrace, which is even better at that sort of thing. The sysinternals and drwatson diag tools in windows are acceptable alternatives, but... not really anywhere close in terms of what they tell me, and let me analyze.
Solaris config and 'stuff' can be a bit on the obscure side, I agree - there is a tendancy to 'if you know which file to edit, it's fine'. But at the same time, the process isolation on Solaris, in my experience, has meant that it is phenomenally rare for one process to trigger a failure cascade that leads to needing a reboot.
Hardware redetection too - yes, there _has_ been occasions where you need to restart, but mostly it's actually very easy to rediscover and instantiate new devices. Windows catches up on this one (part of me wonders how much open source microsoft is using for inspiration, not that I think that's a bad thing)
Yes, relative experience levels _do_ come into it, and I probably come across as utterly snobbish when I say I've met Solaris admins who have been able to keep servers online almost indefinitely, barring 'systems maintenance' and Windows systems that get 'fixed' by slapping the reset switch every couple of weeks.
Slashdot Mirror
I buy a new computer not because this one cannot play DVDs and run Civ any more, I buy it because it's a prereq for a new capability I'm seeking. Be that a game, a graphics suite, or higher grade DVDs.
But I actually keep my old computers, because most of them have 'surf the net' or 'run a low load server' value for a lot longer.
This is not the same as a product that's designed to self destruct in substantially less than it's theoretical lifetime, and effectively accelerating the discard cycle.
Some of the best stuff I've ever seen has been 'low budget' (and admittedly, this is in part, because low budget and crap means it disappears entirely), where I've seen some pretty expensive crap make it to the cinema screen.
Why does the amount of money dropped on a film alter it's entitlement to make a profit?
And probably costs about as much to produce.
This is pretty disgusting actually - it's flagrant waste, because of the 'convenience' market.
So, it may well be more wasteful to make 1 'disposable' than 1 'permanent' DVD.
Even before you get into one being kept/re-used, and the other being discarded.
Clearly you've never met a salesperson.
Only if you can make the same proof regarding finding a 17 year old sexually attractive.
Thinking someone is sexy without their consent is clearly thought-rape, and thus should be illegal.
Going witchhunting against the current thing that's disapproved of is extremely harmful to a free society. Suppressing something simply because it's considered 'dirty', especially in something that's emotionally charged and can carry stigma by association is entirely contrary to a free society.
That's even before we get into the discussion of whether suppressing a fantasy makes it more or less likely to get acted out, by someone who might be considered mentally ill.
I feel this is entirely wrong. I fully support making 'harmful' activity illegal, especially in the sense of sexually related and/or involving minors. I don't feel that fantasy, or 'synthetic' imagery is in any way relevant. Yeah, I find some of the stuff I've run into vaguely distasteful. I don't think much of slash, or furry stuff. But ... as long is it's in places where I, and more importantly underage people won't run into it, I don't much care. Indeed I feel that people _should_ indulge whatever fantasys they care to, provided it's between consenting adults.
Until the day where they prove that thinking 'I'd like to do her' is the same as sexually assaulting someone, that's exactly the way it should be.
Not withstanding that 17 is 'legal' by UK law, but wouldn't be by US law. In a world where the internet makes moving digital imagery trivial, that's also a bit of a minefield.
I'm afraid you're incorrect. 'big corps' often do not allow direct connection out to the internet for this very reason. A consequence of Sarbanex Oxley, means they _have_ to record any communication in a specific category (email and messaging primarily), which in turn means they must ensure they can control that communication. The most effective way to do this 'proxy only' internet, and a block list.
Users would, of course, assume you were patronising them when you asked 'is the cable plugged in' (be it network, of power, or whatever) and say 'yes' despite not knowing.
So we included a standard check of 'what kind of connector is it?' in the call resolution process. Not because we think it's likely that anyone has anything other than the standard IEC connector, and RJ45 network plug, but because that basically guarantees they'll look at the back of their machine, and probably spot unplugged cables, isolator switches toggled, or just 'stolen' gang sockets.
We have had a fairly substantial number of calls end with 'oops, nevermind' at that point.
There's a whole bunch of stories, that have a a bit of 'what if' to them, including a few where something believed impossible becomes possible.
They're all in some degree a matter of society and human reaction, as that's what Sci-Fi is mostly all about - new possibilities, and it's impact on everyone else. Some have mysterious happenings, and stuff beyond the understanding of man.
Some are carrying an interesting underlying message, moral or otherwise.
*shrug*. There's a certain basis of argument that the Bible isn't the literal truth, but has value as fiction which educates. Not so very different to a Sci-Fi short story anthology.
At least, the bits of it that the UK government hasn't opted out of. We don't like to mention those.
The most ironic thing about the song 'ironic' was that she didn't know what irony was.
Choosing not to out of respect is not the same as being unable to because the Government says so.
Well, if I put my evil hat on, I'd be thinking less in terms of DDOS and more in terms of phishing. I mean, it'd be superb for introducting a MITM style attack on internet banking sites, or whatnot.
At the end of the day, you never get away from the fact that half the voters are mentally below average. All of them are motivated by self interest, but some see 'way, get tax break' as more immediate self interest than investing in social services.
For all we might deplore Syria's actions and legal system, at least this guy got a trial.
Seriously, for all the horrible stuff that happens in Syria, the chronically bad state of play that is Guantanamo, indefinite detention without trial, and torture is pretty disgusting too. One does not excuse the other, but at least Syria isn't _pretending_ to be an elightened beacon of democracy and humanity.
Or Guantanamo bay where things like legal constraints seem optional.
Why bother, when /dev/null is so handy and quick?
Not to mention being able to do that via Jumpstart, without actually needing to do more than typing a single command on the 'OK' prompt.
But I am a Solaris fanboy in a big way, I'll freely admit. I have worked with, and supported and fiddeled with, and broken many OS variants. HP-UX, AIX, Solaris, Windows NT/2000/98/XP/2003, MacOS (both before and after it 'was a Unix'), IRIX, and other 'non computer' OS stuff, like Cisco IOS. There's even a smattering of VMS in there.
Of these, I proclaim my faith in Solaris, as the most luvverly of the lot. Although, VMS did have some very definite plus points, and AIX has a few things that it really does do nicely.
Windows started single user. It's only VERY recently that it's been possible to do remote admin on Windows servers, and even then there's still some stuff that 'just doesn't work' over RDP.
From experience, viruses don't work anywhere near as well in the POSIX permissioning and 'layout' environment. There's clear boundaries of 'stuff' in Solaris, where users Do Not Go. Where 'being able to run' is a file permission that has to be set, rather than a question of which file extension it happens to be, a virus has a MUCH harder time functioning. When your system paths, never ever include things that 'non-root' can touch, and day to day use DOESN'T mean being root at all. Maybe it's just noobishness, but I find a whole boatload of 'windows stuff' that ends up being 'you must be admin to do this' when it really shouldn't.
And I still reckon in a 'rebuild' race, Solaris still wins. Even if you don't include the fact that remote software install is built into the OS.
How about:
I started doing sysadmin in a mixed OS environment when I was at University. Solaris and Windows machines being used in an uneasy truce. Ever since I've been working on both for about 10 years.
In this time, I've had 'users' working on both, and 'doing their thing'. Now, it may be that there's a difference in style of user you get on either - it was the engineers and developers who were fans of Solaris, and the sales team were much happier with Outlook.
I have had infrastructure running on both platforms, and on numerous occasions caught myself wishing the Windows infrastructure was 'more like Solaris' - because literally everything 'is a file', on the fly fixes to ... well, to follow on for your example - DNS problems. I have 'truss' built into the OS, so if my nslookup fails, I can see exactly which 'bit' caused it to fail. New versions of Solaris have DTrace, which is even better at that sort of thing. The sysinternals and drwatson diag tools in windows are acceptable alternatives, but ... not really anywhere close in terms of what they tell me, and let me analyze.
Solaris config and 'stuff' can be a bit on the obscure side, I agree - there is a tendancy to 'if you know which file to edit, it's fine'. But at the same time, the process isolation on Solaris, in my experience, has meant that it is phenomenally rare for one process to trigger a failure cascade that leads to needing a reboot.
Hardware redetection too - yes, there _has_ been occasions where you need to restart, but mostly it's actually very easy to rediscover and instantiate new devices. Windows catches up on this one (part of me wonders how much open source microsoft is using for inspiration, not that I think that's a bad thing)
Yes, relative experience levels _do_ come into it, and I probably come across as utterly snobbish when I say I've met Solaris admins who have been able to keep servers online almost indefinitely, barring 'systems maintenance' and Windows systems that get 'fixed' by slapping the reset switch every couple of weeks.