This is built by SGI. SGI's are known to crash (Seriously, I used an SGI supercomputer for a few years, and it was always down for maintainence.) Running Linux is only relevant to frothing slashbots, most people couldn't care less. If it was running Solaris, now that would be usefull becasue solaris has some cool ass fault tolerance (hotswap CPUS). Linux can't do that, and neither can IRIX.
Windows? Cute troll, but Windows is not generally used for scientific computing... people like Unix environments.
I still stand by my statement that shorts and flipflops are unprofessional... unless you are a life gaurd maybe. Bottom line, guys look dorky in shorts. Even in, say, golf, the guys with the pants look way more professional.
Besdies, aside from a tie, why do people find dress cloathes uncomfortable?
Hm. No mention of DragonflyBSD. I don't have time to give it a proper blurb really, but DragonflyBSD is probably the most promising of the BSDs.
It uses a message passing framework, like a microkernel, but still keeps most things in kernel space. This quite a divergence from the other BSDs and Linux and will hopefully enable some really cool features.
It's nowhere near as clear cut as you would like. If someone didn't copy a product, they would not nessesarily have paid for it either. They might not be able to afford it, or might not think the product is worth the asking price.
The people who make the software have not 'earned' any money. The value of the software is determined by the market in part. The asking price does not nessesarily reflect the cost either. The biggest problem is unofficial standards like Office or Photoshop. Even if these programs are not the best at what they do, people are still forced to buy them because they need to work with others who alrady have them. It artificially increases the value of the software.
So copying is not nessesarily immoral because you aren't *nesessarily* depriving someone of something, unlike stealing where you obviously are because now they have one less unit to sell to someone else who *would* buy it.
No it isn't. Most people see stealing as highly immoral, while copying is seen as just that, copying. It may be illegal, but you can't force people to see it as immoral.
The point is, whatever liberties Americans lose, people from other countries lose also thanks to the success of US corporations.
Also, if a foriegn company operates in Canada, it should have to abide by OUR privacy laws. This is a fault of our government partly, it should kick out US corporations that do not abide by our laws. Your government should respect that subsidaries located on foreign grounds are subject to foriegn law, not american law. If this continues, and your government spits on the laws of other countries, you will find your economy furhtur degrading.
Finally, it's not always clear when a US company is involved. For instance, two *canadian* banks use a US company for Visa operations. Even though the banks are canadian, there is still a problem.
This is shaping up to be an information war. I already have to spend hours reading fine print to make sure theiving companies won't sell my information to the advertising hounds. Now I have to furthur boycott US corporations. When your economy fails, we will all suffer due to it's current strength.
Yes, there is foreign information in those databases. The solution? Boycott American companies. You don't need to worry about ALL american companies of course, only ones that might store sensitive information such as financial institutions, airlines, and buses.
In addition to being beyond their reach, this hurts their economy which MIGHT make some people in their government think twice about these types of initiatives.
Here's the catch. Many of your companies do business in foriegn countries. In Canada we have a big problem with this. There are many Canadian financial subsideries such as MBNA Canada. These subsideries are subject to Patriot and this TIS discussed here. Hence, as a Canadain, it may be the case that the US government has access to MY financial records, without telling me.
I am in fact in the process of cancelling both my credit cards, because they are either paritally run by american companies, or from subsideraries of american companies. I also need to avoid american airline companies.
No... that's Linux. Optionally, you can install over the network, hence it requires no price. It's priceless, see?
Re:It will probably do you more harm than good&
on
PhD's in the Industry?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Whoa! Don't listen to this guy. It's obvious that he hasn't the first clue as to what it takes to get a PhD at a good school in a difficult feild such as computer science or mathematics.
PhDs are definately hired, but usually right into a management position. Also, you will end up looking at different type of jobs, usually research related rather than simple a progammer or similar.
Only hiring PhDs: http://www.research.att.com/areas/stat/rese arch/jo b.html
Note the mention of 'postdoctoral-researcher' at the bottom of each job description: http://research.microsoft.com/aboutm sr/jobs/fullti me_positions.aspx
And I could go on and on. Basically you will be looking at totally different types of jobs. Jobs that the parent can't even get! And yes, they will pay you well. But no, you can't get a job doing basic programming easily. You are over qualified.
Whoa, 15 pounds is around 33 CAD. Out of curiosity, what do you folks in Britain make yearly on average? As in, is 15 pounds a lot relative to your salaries? For instance, in Canada 20 CAD is a fair amount for us. You can buy a large coffee for 1.50 CAD. Average salary here is probably around 25k CAD (after taxes nuke the rest).
It's already cheap and plentiful without having to resort to online "piracy". Local stores are selling CDs that I like for $5 on their bargain tables.
I'm not sure what kind of music you listen to, but the kinds of music I like (downtempo electronica and jazz, mostly imports), are certainly NOT cheap. They run anywhere from $24 - $35 CAD, double cd's easily top $45... I haven't been able to afford to buy any CDs for the longest time. The last two I bought were from a store in Norway, and probably totalled $40 CAD.
I'd say that a large majority of open source proponents think they are superior because they use and promote open source software.
You were whining about how open-source doesn't deliever good applications to solve every problem.
Pointing out faults in your development model of choice does not constitute whining. Stop trying to gloss over the issue by throwing insults.
If they are talking to the management of whatever company they work for, yes. Otherwise, they are under no obligation to provide anything for you personally. Quit whining.
Again, pointing out faults of open source software does not constitute whining. Did I ever once say that people should make software for me personally? No. I said that if people are going to try to "take over the desktop" and attract end users to open source, then they should follow through and support these users. Otherwise they should not be proposing that 'community support' is a good substitution corporate support. And that is exactly what many open source advocates expouse.
If I understand you correctly, this is some allusion to communism. As an analogy to open-source it doesn't quite work because the open-source community IS helping. They provide a significant amount of help in the form of an operating system, many utilities, applications, and the corresponding source code. If there is something lackign that you need, you should consider building it youself. That is just how the community works. It doesn't work well if filled with too many freeloaders expecting everything to be done for them... just like communism (or any system for that matter).
So first you say that open source is not like communism. Then you conclude that open source is just like communism. Make up your mind. And consider that the 'idea' of communism is not nesserily bad, but the historical implmentations of it certainly were.
If Microsoft doesn't fulfill my needs, should I go complain to the FCC to get Microsft to stop telling me to switch? No, that would be stupid whining.
If Microsoft made claims that they did not back up, then yes, you could complain to the appropriate government agency. Truth in advertising may be dying, but last I checked it is still law.
I am getting the impression that you think open source software is only for those capable of filling in the gaps. You don't seem to think it is appropriate for end-users who don't *want* to help, but still need functional software. Yes, Redhat and friends partially fill this role, but there are thousands of open source programs for which payed support is not avaliable.
Exactly how is it arrogant to suggest someone make something themselves if they want it so bad? It may not be productive or helpful, but it certainly isn't "arrogant."
It is arrogant in the following sense. Many people in the open source community go on and on about the wonders of open source and how much better it is than closed source software. It is often these same people who go and yell at end users to "quit whining and do it themselves". Hence it's arrogant. If these elements of the community only want open source software to exist, then they will have to cater to the end users who can't program but need certain features. In the real world, people need all sorts of software, much of it is not "fun" to code.
Why not just be grateful for what you *can* get out of open-source software? It is free, isn't it? Quit whining.
I'm not whining. I can program. I use proprietary software when appropriate, and open source if it's avaliable and works. I'm only pointing out something that annoys me terribly about the open source community.
If the community is going to keep telling people to ditch windows and go completely open source with Linux, then they these same people should be willing to provide the missing pieces. It's kind of like a group of people telling a blue collar worker, "hey, come with us, we have this awsome community where you don't have to kiss your bosses ass and have no life", then turning around when that person DOES come, and saying "you want a HOUSE? HA, get off your ass you lazy shit and go build it yourself. We're not helping."
Never help each other? Are you kidding me? Most open source projects depend on many libraries and much code written by others. Just putting your code into the public domain is helping others. And it isn't uncommon for programmers on one project to contribute to another. Where in the world do you get the idea that open-source developers don't help each other?
So you are saying open source software is only for programmers? What about non-programmers? They should just use windows and mac? Fine. But they don't go telling them to switch!
By we I assume you mean "the open source community" and the answer is "when you get off your ass and code it".
This comment is great. The arrogance of many open source people astounds me.
Non-programmer: Hey, I switch to this open source stuff which you say is better. It's cool, but it really needs feature X.
Arrogant-open-source-programmer: That's the beuty of open source. You can get off your ass and code it yourself!
Outcome: Non-programmer can't code it. Arrogant-open-source-programmer continues to scratch his itch. As a result, we have 10 thousand poor ass themes and numerous barely functional programs for each task. But what would be best is at least ONE good, working, application for each task.
So to you a "community" is a bunch of people who only do things which they themselves want and never help each other? Weird.
You cannot achieve what you want without the reader understanding context. Since computers can't yet understand context, we can't yet build such a system.
The counterpart to this, is of course the inference of context and meaning from text, which computers are poor at. The only attempt at doing this, and indeed tying it to synth or recognistion of voice, is the Cyc people.
1. influential (vs. uninfluential) -- (having or exercising influence or power; "an influential newspaper"; "influential leadership for peace")
If the man who created the company whose OS runs 90% of the worlds computers in addition to having a total monopoly on office software is not considered to be influential, than no one is. Influential does not mean "innovative". Gates most certainly does have influence, LOTS of it.
If Microsoft made Office for Linux, bang, linux would instantly become a major player on the desktop. That is influence. Likewise, if Microsoft put DRM into a Windows XP service pack, and refused to patch copies without this pack, then 90% of the worlds desktops would have DRM. Just like that. Influence. (Ok ok, lot's of people run other versions of windows, so less than 90% of desktops would be affected, but you get my point).
Slashdot, where we like to redefine words to push our agendas?
I would be curious to learn just how different they are on the inside. People are claiming that it is original on the inside, but other than Soviet propaganda what do we have to go on?
You know, the link to wikipedia has been posted over and over in this thread. That would tell you "just how different" they really are.
As for propaganda, I could say the same about US propaganda. The US was no better during this time period. You know, while your at it, why not just say the moon landings are fake?
The specs are known from many sources. Hell, there are even 'pictures' that show that say, the Buran did not have any main engines like the shuttle. But I guess those too are soviet propaganda? They photoshopped the picutres during the cold war... riiiight, that's it.
Slashdot Mirror
This is built by SGI. SGI's are known to crash (Seriously, I used an SGI supercomputer for a few years, and it was always down for maintainence.) Running Linux is only relevant to frothing slashbots, most people couldn't care less. If it was running Solaris, now that would be usefull becasue solaris has some cool ass fault tolerance (hotswap CPUS). Linux can't do that, and neither can IRIX.
Windows? Cute troll, but Windows is not generally used for scientific computing... people like Unix environments.
Firstly, I am not a Yank, eh.
I still stand by my statement that shorts and flipflops are unprofessional... unless you are a life gaurd maybe. Bottom line, guys look dorky in shorts. Even in, say, golf, the guys with the pants look way more professional.
Besdies, aside from a tie, why do people find dress cloathes uncomfortable?
man + shorts cannot possibly look professional, and flip flops?
Please.
I griped, I complained, I lamented.. but I still go to movies.
I don't go to movies anymore. And I have another freind doesn't either. Of course, that probably has more to do with crappy movies than anything else.
When I *did* still go to movies, I'd just go 20 minutes late... problem solved!
Hm. No mention of DragonflyBSD. I don't have time to give it a proper blurb really, but DragonflyBSD is probably the most promising of the BSDs.
It uses a message passing framework, like a microkernel, but still keeps most things in kernel space. This quite a divergence from the other BSDs and Linux and will hopefully enable some really cool features.
Check it out for yourself at http://www.dragonflybsd.org!
It's nowhere near as clear cut as you would like. If someone didn't copy a product, they would not nessesarily have paid for it either. They might not be able to afford it, or might not think the product is worth the asking price.
The people who make the software have not 'earned' any money. The value of the software is determined by the market in part. The asking price does not nessesarily reflect the cost either. The biggest problem is unofficial standards like Office or Photoshop. Even if these programs are not the best at what they do, people are still forced to buy them because they need to work with others who alrady have them. It artificially increases the value of the software.
So copying is not nessesarily immoral because you aren't *nesessarily* depriving someone of something, unlike stealing where you obviously are because now they have one less unit to sell to someone else who *would* buy it.
No it isn't. Most people see stealing as highly immoral, while copying is seen as just that, copying. It may be illegal, but you can't force people to see it as immoral.
The point is, whatever liberties Americans lose, people from other countries lose also thanks to the success of US corporations.
Also, if a foriegn company operates in Canada, it should have to abide by OUR privacy laws. This is a fault of our government partly, it should kick out US corporations that do not abide by our laws. Your government should respect that subsidaries located on foreign grounds are subject to foriegn law, not american law. If this continues, and your government spits on the laws of other countries, you will find your economy furhtur degrading.
Finally, it's not always clear when a US company is involved. For instance, two *canadian* banks use a US company for Visa operations. Even though the banks are canadian, there is still a problem.
This is shaping up to be an information war. I already have to spend hours reading fine print to make sure theiving companies won't sell my information to the advertising hounds. Now I have to furthur boycott US corporations. When your economy fails, we will all suffer due to it's current strength.
Yes, there is foreign information in those databases. The solution? Boycott American companies. You don't need to worry about ALL american companies of course, only ones that might store sensitive information such as financial institutions, airlines, and buses.
In addition to being beyond their reach, this hurts their economy which MIGHT make some people in their government think twice about these types of initiatives.
Here's the catch. Many of your companies do business in foriegn countries. In Canada we have a big problem with this. There are many Canadian financial subsideries such as MBNA Canada. These subsideries are subject to Patriot and this TIS discussed here. Hence, as a Canadain, it may be the case that the US government has access to MY financial records, without telling me.
I am in fact in the process of cancelling both my credit cards, because they are either paritally run by american companies, or from subsideraries of american companies. I also need to avoid american airline companies.
Other countries are in similar situations.
Too bad all that other information is used to verify your identity when you forget your password.
How would you feel if someone took your work, made a change or two and sold it as their own? I'd be pretty pissed.
I'd find it slightly funny, and slightly flattering. I suppose I am simply an altruist, where as most people are decidedly not.
No... that's Linux. Optionally, you can install over the network, hence it requires no price. It's priceless, see?
Whoa! Don't listen to this guy. It's obvious that he hasn't the first clue as to what it takes to get a PhD at a good school in a difficult feild such as computer science or mathematics.
e arch/jo b.html
/ resumes .nsf/USAindex.html?Open&count=2000
m sr/jobs/fullti me_positions.aspx
i nformat ics.html
PhDs are definately hired, but usually right into a management position. Also, you will end up looking at different type of jobs, usually research related rather than simple a progammer or similar.
Only hiring PhDs:
http://www.research.att.com/areas/stat/res
Again, mostly PhDs only:
http://domino.research.ibm.com/hr/research
Note the mention of 'postdoctoral-researcher' at the bottom of each job description:
http://research.microsoft.com/about
Again, *requiring* PhDs:
http://www.caprion.com/content/careers/bio
And I could go on and on. Basically you will be looking at totally different types of jobs. Jobs that the parent can't even get! And yes, they will pay you well. But no, you can't get a job doing basic programming easily. You are over qualified.
Whoa, 15 pounds is around 33 CAD. Out of curiosity, what do you folks in Britain make yearly on average? As in, is 15 pounds a lot relative to your salaries? For instance, in Canada 20 CAD is a fair amount for us. You can buy a large coffee for 1.50 CAD. Average salary here is probably around 25k CAD (after taxes nuke the rest).
It's already cheap and plentiful without having to resort to online "piracy". Local stores are selling CDs that I like for $5 on their bargain tables.
I'm not sure what kind of music you listen to, but the kinds of music I like (downtempo electronica and jazz, mostly imports), are certainly NOT cheap. They run anywhere from $24 - $35 CAD, double cd's easily top $45... I haven't been able to afford to buy any CDs for the longest time. The last two I bought were from a store in Norway, and probably totalled $40 CAD.
These prices are NOT acceptable.
Arrogance implies a sense of superiority.
I'd say that a large majority of open source proponents think they are superior because they use and promote open source software.
You were whining about how open-source doesn't deliever good applications to solve every problem.
Pointing out faults in your development model of choice does not constitute whining. Stop trying to gloss over the issue by throwing insults.
If they are talking to the management of whatever company they work for, yes. Otherwise, they are under no obligation to provide anything for you personally. Quit whining.
Again, pointing out faults of open source software does not constitute whining. Did I ever once say that people should make software for me personally? No. I said that if people are going to try to "take over the desktop" and attract end users to open source, then they should follow through and support these users. Otherwise they should not be proposing that 'community support' is a good substitution corporate support. And that is exactly what many open source advocates expouse.
If I understand you correctly, this is some allusion to communism. As an analogy to open-source it doesn't quite work because the open-source community IS helping. They provide a significant amount of help in the form of an operating system, many utilities, applications, and the corresponding source code. If there is something lackign that you need, you should consider building it youself. That is just how the community works. It doesn't work well if filled with too many freeloaders expecting everything to be done for them... just like communism (or any system for that matter).
So first you say that open source is not like communism. Then you conclude that open source is just like communism. Make up your mind. And consider that the 'idea' of communism is not nesserily bad, but the historical implmentations of it certainly were.
If Microsoft doesn't fulfill my needs, should I go complain to the FCC to get Microsft to stop telling me to switch? No, that would be stupid whining.
If Microsoft made claims that they did not back up, then yes, you could complain to the appropriate government agency. Truth in advertising may be dying, but last I checked it is still law.
I am getting the impression that you think open source software is only for those capable of filling in the gaps. You don't seem to think it is appropriate for end-users who don't *want* to help, but still need functional software. Yes, Redhat and friends partially fill this role, but there are thousands of open source programs for which payed support is not avaliable.
Exactly how is it arrogant to suggest someone make something themselves if they want it so bad? It may not be productive or helpful, but it certainly isn't "arrogant."
It is arrogant in the following sense. Many people in the open source community go on and on about the wonders of open source and how much better it is than closed source software. It is often these same people who go and yell at end users to "quit whining and do it themselves". Hence it's arrogant. If these elements of the community only want open source software to exist, then they will have to cater to the end users who can't program but need certain features. In the real world, people need all sorts of software, much of it is not "fun" to code.
Why not just be grateful for what you *can* get out of open-source software? It is free, isn't it? Quit whining.
I'm not whining. I can program. I use proprietary software when appropriate, and open source if it's avaliable and works. I'm only pointing out something that annoys me terribly about the open source community.
If the community is going to keep telling people to ditch windows and go completely open source with Linux, then they these same people should be willing to provide the missing pieces. It's kind of like a group of people telling a blue collar worker, "hey, come with us, we have this awsome community where you don't have to kiss your bosses ass and have no life", then turning around when that person DOES come, and saying "you want a HOUSE? HA, get off your ass you lazy shit and go build it yourself. We're not helping."
Never help each other? Are you kidding me? Most open source projects depend on many libraries and much code written by others. Just putting your code into the public domain is helping others. And it isn't uncommon for programmers on one project to contribute to another. Where in the world do you get the idea that open-source developers don't help each other?
So you are saying open source software is only for programmers? What about non-programmers? They should just use windows and mac? Fine. But they don't go telling them to switch!
By we I assume you mean "the open source community" and the answer is "when you get off your ass and code it".
This comment is great. The arrogance of many open source people astounds me.
Non-programmer: Hey, I switch to this open source stuff which you say is better. It's cool, but it really needs feature X.
Arrogant-open-source-programmer: That's the beuty of open source. You can get off your ass and code it yourself!
Outcome: Non-programmer can't code it. Arrogant-open-source-programmer continues to scratch his itch. As a result, we have 10 thousand poor ass themes and numerous barely functional programs for each task. But what would be best is at least ONE good, working, application for each task.
So to you a "community" is a bunch of people who only do things which they themselves want and never help each other? Weird.
You cannot achieve what you want without the reader understanding context. Since computers can't yet understand context, we can't yet build such a system.
The counterpart to this, is of course the inference of context and meaning from text, which computers are poor at. The only attempt at doing this, and indeed tying it to synth or recognistion of voice, is the Cyc people.
How was this modded up?
From wordnet:
1. influential (vs. uninfluential) -- (having or exercising influence or power; "an influential newspaper"; "influential leadership for peace")
If the man who created the company whose OS runs 90% of the worlds computers in addition to having a total monopoly on office software is not considered to be influential, than no one is. Influential does not mean "innovative". Gates most certainly does have influence, LOTS of it.
If Microsoft made Office for Linux, bang, linux would instantly become a major player on the desktop. That is influence. Likewise, if Microsoft put DRM into a Windows XP service pack, and refused to patch copies without this pack, then 90% of the worlds desktops would have DRM. Just like that. Influence. (Ok ok, lot's of people run other versions of windows, so less than 90% of desktops would be affected, but you get my point).
Slashdot, where we like to redefine words to push our agendas?
yeah.. it was a good story alright
I am a skeptic though. The whole, "I won't tell you where the cave is" is suspicious. Oh well.
This should give you more information. Google my friend, google.
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/buran.htm
I would be curious to learn just how different they are on the inside. People are claiming that it is original on the inside, but other than Soviet propaganda what do we have to go on?
You know, the link to wikipedia has been posted over and over in this thread. That would tell you "just how different" they really are.
As for propaganda, I could say the same about US propaganda. The US was no better during this time period. You know, while your at it, why not just say the moon landings are fake?
The specs are known from many sources. Hell, there are even 'pictures' that show that say, the Buran did not have any main engines like the shuttle. But I guess those too are soviet propaganda? They photoshopped the picutres during the cold war... riiiight, that's it.
Mmmm, poutine. Now I'm hungry dammit. Way to go.