Man, not only did I reply to the wrong thread, I responded on slashdot to a IM message.
See what two consecutive bullshit stories regarding Microsoft IN ONE DAY can do to your brain? Turns it to recycled mush! This is your brain...and this is your brain when you start believing MS PR (pours brain out into saucepan)
Prior art. "Reload(ed) Windows" has been used many, many many times. Many times. Many....we're talking astronomical mathematical scales, here. At least.
The only thing that surpasses it is "restarted windows".
tell Microsoft that their calenders are all fucked up.
April 1st is a ways away yet.
Or is this more from the new Microsoft Time Travel Engine (TM)?
God, you'd think that after their latest public gaff that they'd just hunker down for a while and rethink their strategy, but NO...
I'm over the line from disgusted to sheer pity. Must be some good crack they're smoking over at 1 MS Way.
Fer crying out loud
Vulnerabilities aren't exploited until we release a patch for the "hackers" to reverse engineer, and NOW THEY'RE GOING TO PATCH IN A MAJOR WAY THE WHOLE OS.
This is semi-true. One of my best friends is a machinist who works out of his own workshop on his farm, fabricating custom auto parts, and he can't even come close to keeping up with the demand for older car parts. His most frequent bitch is that he wishes that MORE people would get into his trade so he could take more time off to be with family.
A half million dollar startup cost and he's pulling in close to two million a year, with two employees. He works 100 hour+ work weeks. Man, imagine working in a trade where you actually *want* some competent competition. Too many people are going into business and law, and trade skills (at least competent people in the "manual labor" trades are getting few and far between. This in a country touted as the "industrial capital of the world" once upon a time.
"There aren't any [machinists]". I'm going to show him this post. It'll crack him up. Mostly because he'll agree with it. But his greatest bitch wrt to auto parts is that it's near impossible to get specs for some parts - not that the specs aren't available, but because certain *cough*GM*cough* manufacturers won't release them.
The shit of it is, the computer field is going the same way...
At work we're switching from Sucky Coding Operation over to XP systems next month. Security, updates, yadda yadda. It'll still be an improvement, but I'm wondering just how much BS we're going to have to deal with this year. Here goes....I'm going to lay in a big supply of aspirin (preventative) and beer (pallalatitive).
Oh, and Corporate was originally going to linux systems, but changed their minds almost exactly one year ago. I wonder why? Thanks, SCO, you assholes. Don't be surprised if your gravestone is covered with spittle 24/7, Darl.
I agree about the people part, but then there's the server (machine) going down in the middle of an incredibly busy day, and by the time it's back up, it has dents in the case from people kicking it in frustration:)
Oh, wait. That was SCO Openserver that went down! Yeah, you're right, it's people. Certain people.
(we're switching over from that antiquated garbage in two weeks, yeeeehaaaaa! Finally! Now my stress will simply be caused by trying to teach people who have been using the old terms for 10 years how to deal with XP's GUI and the new POS software:) -- we also have two Win95 boxes here, and most of my coworkers still think you have to back out of one app to use another, aaarrrghhhh whap whap whap)
Stress: Being the only person at work who understands what a kilobyte is.
It's just as likely - and I consider it more likely - that those relationships didn't work because of societal pressure.
My point was that there's no objective way to tell, given how our society is structured.
Also, consider the stability of the group as a whole (which is what affects the kids) rather than the dynamics of one-on-one. That's what I was talking about.
I suspect that there's little clamor for the multiple spouse relationship dynamic because most people already living in such dynamics understand that it'd be useless to lobby for recognition of it - look at how long the RC marriage dynamic has influenced - nay, controlled - the legal side of relationships. I know a few people who live that way, and as long as they're not hassled - they keep their private life private - they don't feel any need to "lobby for their rights" - as a matter of fact, they don't particularly care all that much.
In addition, a three-way union is likely to be less stable than a two way union simply because the stability of a two way union requires maintaining the relationship between only one pair of people, whereas a three-way union depends upon three such relationships.
There is absolutely no evidence for this. As a matter of fact, "extended" families would be likely to provide greater stability for the children - whose welfare is, of course, the greatest argument for legal contracts between people.
You can think of it this way: In a two-way (m/f) marriage, if a divorce happens, the custody battles can harm the children horridly, because all of the adults in the relationship are basically in opposition to each other. OTOH, in a multi-way marriage, there is still at least a partially intact family from whom the children can rely on for emotional support.
Of course there are exceptions to what I stated (at least I can think of a few). Note I'm not talking about the Mormom concept of polygamy, either - I'm thinking more of the Heinlein concept of multiple spouses, not multiple wives.
Also of course we can't have studies on the multi-spouse family unit in the US, since it's illegal:) although I wouldn't doubt if some arrangements actually exist, just not within the framework of law.
Plus - if "two-way" marriages are so stable, why is the divorce rate (and attendant chasing by lawyers) so high in the US?
Basically, you can't just throw out some math involving the multiple relationships and claim that because there are more such relationships, that they're inherently "unstable". That's very bad science, to start with.
I agree with your last comment, but I think business management is more sociology and arthmetic theory than inventiveness; and I score creativity and the ability to invent/theorize as a indication of high intelligence more so than clever personal dealing and being able to crunch numbers. Not all of Bill's successes have necessarily been intelligently implemented.
What's harder, starting an OSS project and getting help from geeks to make it what it is today, or convincing the world that viruses, worms and rebooting are a normal and acceptable part of computing life?
Ow. I surrender to your superior wisdom on that one ^_^ although I do think that Microsoft's overemphasis on marketing is going to bite them pretty soon.
It's not irrelevant at all. Parent poster seemed disgusted that Bill didn't write Windows on his own. I was merely pointing out Linus didn't write all of Linux on his own, either.
No, he didn't, but he has been active at a coding level in it's development for more than a decade, which Gates hasn't been and never was.
Yes, that happens when you (effectively) retire. Linus doesn't have much to do with the 2.0 or 2.2 kernels anymore, either.
Linus isn't retired, either (not that Gates is, he's just "retreated" (it's a 80s 'yuppie' way - hmrph - of saying "I'm not involved anymore." Give me a break.
I never said Bill is (or was) a coder on par with Linus. These are not the straw men you're looking for.
As I stated, it was a thread response. Parent up for what I was replying to.
Plus wasn't a lot of the code that Bill started his company on bought from someone else?
Probably. But, again, that's irrelevant. I didn't say anything about their comparable coding abilities, I just said they are almost certainly of comparable intelligence.
No probably about it. But as to the intelligence factor, look at how much time each of them has spent actually coding, vs. doing Business Management. Now, you may consider BM as requiring more intelligence to accomplish than creative coding; personally, I don't. But we can agree to disagree on that.
Anyway, it's time to crash; long work day tomorrow. Thx:)
Product of the schools and mindset that produced him. He doesn't know any better. I pity the bastard - there's a lot of life he won't ever experience.
Wouldn't surprise me if he was one of those who "got religion" in the later stages of his life, and then espoused that to everyone who (won't want to) listen.
Nothing against religion there, just seen the type of person who takes and takes and takes and all of a sudden finds out they're going to die one day. It's the same mindset.
I was referring to the parent post that you replied to. My view is that you didn't read it completely. You are, of course, entitled to your own.
If I'd wanted to include something from the posts several levels above that, I would have.
I didn't think that his accusations were all that "baseless" - granted, he didn't give specifics, but he did point out inconsistencies, eh? If you're not that familiar with the analogies he used, I suggest that you look them up.
If you don't understand that, than you need to broaden your horizons (not a troll, a serious comment). Not everyone looks at things the way you do.
Oh, and pardonne moi for trying to condense several opinions/viewpoints into a couple comments. Guess I'm not that familiar with the English language, after all.
This is a a thread response, not necessarily a parent poster reponse:
Well, considering that Linus *did* write the original from scratch (and therefore can lay claim to creating it) and has also remained active in it's development for more than 12 years *and* that he holds the original copyrights, I think that your comment, while not necessarily inaccurate, is still irrelevant when the comparison to M. Gates is made - after all, Gates stated a while back that he has little to do with the day to day operations of "his" company.... didn't he?
Oh, and I have yet to see Bill state categorically that he has done any serious coding since the early days of DOS. One can't say that of Linus, eh?
Plus wasn't a lot of the code that Bill started his company on bought from someone else?
Slashdot Mirror
"Here comes Desktop Agent Clippy Smith! 'It looks like you're trying to type a letter, Mister Anderson...'"
Welcome back, Mr. Idiot User. We've missed you.
SB
Man, not only did I reply to the wrong thread, I responded on slashdot to a IM message.
See what two consecutive bullshit stories regarding Microsoft IN ONE DAY can do to your brain? Turns it to recycled mush! This is your brain...and this is your brain when you start believing MS PR (pours brain out into saucepan)
I think I need to go outside....
SB
Ok, my sense of humor is twisted mobius strip style. Well jeeze, it was warped by what I see coming out of Redmond nowadays. Especially today.
SB
Prior art. "Reload(ed) Windows" has been used many, many many times. Many times. Many....we're talking astronomical mathematical scales, here. At least.
The only thing that surpasses it is "restarted windows".
SB
tell Microsoft that their calenders are all fucked up.
April 1st is a ways away yet.
Or is this more from the new Microsoft Time Travel Engine (TM)?
God, you'd think that after their latest public gaff that they'd just hunker down for a while and rethink their strategy, but NO...
I'm over the line from disgusted to sheer pity. Must be some good crack they're smoking over at 1 MS Way.
Fer crying out loud
Vulnerabilities aren't exploited until we release a patch for the "hackers" to reverse engineer, and NOW THEY'RE GOING TO PATCH IN A MAJOR WAY THE WHOLE OS.
gaaarrrgghhhhhhh *choke*
SB
2004: The Year Linux 0wned Microsoft? :)
I'd even pray for that *grin* the cluestick is out, and it's hungry...
SB
This is semi-true. One of my best friends is a machinist who works out of his own workshop on his farm, fabricating custom auto parts, and he can't even come close to keeping up with the demand for older car parts. His most frequent bitch is that he wishes that MORE people would get into his trade so he could take more time off to be with family.
A half million dollar startup cost and he's pulling in close to two million a year, with two employees. He works 100 hour+ work weeks. Man, imagine working in a trade where you actually *want* some competent competition. Too many people are going into business and law, and trade skills (at least competent people in the "manual labor" trades are getting few and far between. This in a country touted as the "industrial capital of the world" once upon a time.
"There aren't any [machinists]". I'm going to show him this post. It'll crack him up. Mostly because he'll agree with it. But his greatest bitch wrt to auto parts is that it's near impossible to get specs for some parts - not that the specs aren't available, but because certain *cough*GM*cough* manufacturers won't release them.
The shit of it is, the computer field is going the same way...
SB
Security thru obsolescence. There's a concept. :)
SB
9% of the updates on XP don't require a restart, they just tell you it won't take effect until the next restart.
Um, that means you have to restart to have an updated system...
SB
Someone mod this guy up.
At work we're switching from Sucky Coding Operation over to XP systems next month. Security, updates, yadda yadda. It'll still be an improvement, but I'm wondering just how much BS we're going to have to deal with this year. Here goes....I'm going to lay in a big supply of aspirin (preventative) and beer (pallalatitive).
Oh, and Corporate was originally going to linux systems, but changed their minds almost exactly one year ago. I wonder why? Thanks, SCO, you assholes. Don't be surprised if your gravestone is covered with spittle 24/7, Darl.
SB
emerge -u sys
:)
emerge -u world
SB
I agree about the people part, but then there's the server (machine) going down in the middle of an incredibly busy day, and by the time it's back up, it has dents in the case from people kicking it in frustration :)
:) -- we also have two Win95 boxes here, and most of my coworkers still think you have to back out of one app to use another, aaarrrghhhh whap whap whap)
Oh, wait. That was SCO Openserver that went down! Yeah, you're right, it's people. Certain people.
(we're switching over from that antiquated garbage in two weeks, yeeeehaaaaa! Finally! Now my stress will simply be caused by trying to teach people who have been using the old terms for 10 years how to deal with XP's GUI and the new POS software
Stress: Being the only person at work who understands what a kilobyte is.
It's funny. Laugh.
SB
It's just as likely - and I consider it more likely - that those relationships didn't work because of societal pressure.
My point was that there's no objective way to tell, given how our society is structured.
Also, consider the stability of the group as a whole (which is what affects the kids) rather than the dynamics of one-on-one. That's what I was talking about.
I suspect that there's little clamor for the multiple spouse relationship dynamic because most people already living in such dynamics understand that it'd be useless to lobby for recognition of it - look at how long the RC marriage dynamic has influenced - nay, controlled - the legal side of relationships. I know a few people who live that way, and as long as they're not hassled - they keep their private life private - they don't feel any need to "lobby for their rights" - as a matter of fact, they don't particularly care all that much.
SB
My personal feeling is that we should throw out all laws, regulations, benefits, etc that involve the relationship between two (or more) people.
It's simply not the government's business to regulate relationships. Not in any way, shape, or form. I don't care what the Church thinks.
Government as an entity has many more important issues to address.
SB
Excellent points all, but I do have an issue with
:) although I wouldn't doubt if some arrangements actually exist, just not within the framework of law.
In addition, a three-way union is likely to be less stable than a two way union simply because the stability of a two way union requires maintaining the relationship between only one pair of people, whereas a three-way union depends upon three such relationships.
There is absolutely no evidence for this. As a matter of fact, "extended" families would be likely to provide greater stability for the children - whose welfare is, of course, the greatest argument for legal contracts between people.
You can think of it this way: In a two-way (m/f) marriage, if a divorce happens, the custody battles can harm the children horridly, because all of the adults in the relationship are basically in opposition to each other. OTOH, in a multi-way marriage, there is still at least a partially intact family from whom the children can rely on for emotional support.
Of course there are exceptions to what I stated (at least I can think of a few). Note I'm not talking about the Mormom concept of polygamy, either - I'm thinking more of the Heinlein concept of multiple spouses, not multiple wives.
Also of course we can't have studies on the multi-spouse family unit in the US, since it's illegal
Plus - if "two-way" marriages are so stable, why is the divorce rate (and attendant chasing by lawyers) so high in the US?
Basically, you can't just throw out some math involving the multiple relationships and claim that because there are more such relationships, that they're inherently "unstable". That's very bad science, to start with.
SB
Very good points, and I agree with all of them.
I still think something stinks. Ah well...I'll most likely be dead and gone before the truth comes out, as you point out. Such is life.
SB
I agree with your last comment, but I think business management is more sociology and arthmetic theory than inventiveness; and I score creativity and the ability to invent/theorize as a indication of high intelligence more so than clever personal dealing and being able to crunch numbers. Not all of Bill's successes have necessarily been intelligently implemented.
But that's just MO...
SB
What's harder, starting an OSS project and getting help from geeks to make it what it is today, or convincing the world that viruses, worms and rebooting are a normal and acceptable part of computing life?
Ow. I surrender to your superior wisdom on that one ^_^ although I do think that Microsoft's overemphasis on marketing is going to bite them pretty soon.
SB
It's not irrelevant at all. Parent poster seemed disgusted that Bill didn't write Windows on his own. I was merely pointing out Linus didn't write all of Linux on his own, either.
:)
No, he didn't, but he has been active at a coding level in it's development for more than a decade, which Gates hasn't been and never was.
Yes, that happens when you (effectively) retire. Linus doesn't have much to do with the 2.0 or 2.2 kernels anymore, either.
Linus isn't retired, either (not that Gates is, he's just "retreated" (it's a 80s 'yuppie' way - hmrph - of saying "I'm not involved anymore." Give me a break.
I never said Bill is (or was) a coder on par with Linus. These are not the straw men you're looking for.
As I stated, it was a thread response. Parent up for what I was replying to.
Plus wasn't a lot of the code that Bill started his company on bought from someone else?
Probably. But, again, that's irrelevant. I didn't say anything about their comparable coding abilities, I just said they are almost certainly of comparable intelligence.
No probably about it. But as to the intelligence factor, look at how much time each of them has spent actually coding, vs. doing Business Management. Now, you may consider BM as requiring more intelligence to accomplish than creative coding; personally, I don't. But we can agree to disagree on that.
Anyway, it's time to crash; long work day tomorrow. Thx
SB
Product of the schools and mindset that produced him. He doesn't know any better. I pity the bastard - there's a lot of life he won't ever experience.
Wouldn't surprise me if he was one of those who "got religion" in the later stages of his life, and then espoused that to everyone who (won't want to) listen.
Nothing against religion there, just seen the type of person who takes and takes and takes and all of a sudden finds out they're going to die one day. It's the same mindset.
Ah, well. Troll on.
SB
goatse(cx) speak?
Let's not start a meme, here. There's enough of them already.
SB
I was referring to the parent post that you replied to. My view is that you didn't read it completely. You are, of course, entitled to your own.
If I'd wanted to include something from the posts several levels above that, I would have.
I didn't think that his accusations were all that "baseless" - granted, he didn't give specifics, but he did point out inconsistencies, eh? If you're not that familiar with the analogies he used, I suggest that you look them up.
If you don't understand that, than you need to broaden your horizons (not a troll, a serious comment). Not everyone looks at things the way you do.
Oh, and pardonne moi for trying to condense several opinions/viewpoints into a couple comments. Guess I'm not that familiar with the English language, after all.
Cheers
SB
Microsoft Platform Strategist Speaks Truth about Linux.
Film at 11, Hell Hath Frozen Over. Corporate Sunbathers are pissed off, demand weather control.
SB
This is a a thread response, not necessarily a parent poster reponse:
Well, considering that Linus *did* write the original from scratch (and therefore can lay claim to creating it) and has also remained active in it's development for more than 12 years *and* that he holds the original copyrights, I think that your comment, while not necessarily inaccurate, is still irrelevant when the comparison to M. Gates is made - after all, Gates stated a while back that he has little to do with the day to day operations of "his" company.... didn't he?
Oh, and I have yet to see Bill state categorically that he has done any serious coding since the early days of DOS. One can't say that of Linus, eh?
Plus wasn't a lot of the code that Bill started his company on bought from someone else?
SB
Old journalistic trick. Quote 'em out of context, then flame 'em.
You quote one sentence out of his post, and flame him for something that he didn't say.
Eat your own words.
SB