Not to nitpick, but "survival of the fittest" is one of the greatest misconceptions out there. A male peacock without huge plumes would be far more efficient in mobility. But since the plumage attracts females, the selection pressure is tilted in a direction having little to do with direct survival characteristics. Indeed we often do NOT see the "fittest" survive, but rather species that specialize and carve out little niches. This also explains why the biodiversity we observe exists.
I didn't really care about the difference between 100% gas and E10. I thought it was a bunch of hoopla from competing political interests. Then I lost a trimmer and a tiller to ethanol's corrosive powers. Within a couple of weeks of being fueled with E10, both had developed holes in the gas tanks and were dead. Happily my mower didn't suffer the same fate.
The moral? Don't let E10 sit in your trimmer or other yard equipment. In fact, use 100% gas in them when possible.
The likely concern the government has with this publicly-available classified information is the chance that someone with legitimate access to related information might download and (perhaps unintentionally) combine it with unclassified information. That act causes the all that data to become classified... thus causing an information "spillage" on many unclassified systems. Cleaning up classified information spillages is very expensive for the government... even minor ones.
Thus the main idea here is to stop this problem from occurring before Murphy's Law can take effect. Nothing sinister, just pragmatic.
The problem with the "free market" is it isn't free -- the big players have made sure that nobody will ever be able to compete with them thanks to lock-ins, onerous penalties on contracts, and other anti-competitive measures. Not to mention the billions of dollars necessary to start a cell phone service on a national level.
"Free markets" are a myth; you either have regulation or monopoly. Neither of which are very desirable, but that's the way things work outside an Ayn Rand book.
In related news, the same body has approved a special security packet encapsulator consisting of pigmented lipids that bond the rolled packet together, with a special imprinted signature to establish non-deniability of the transmitter and ensure the packet has not been intercepted and examined by third parties.
I think Adblock may do more harm than good. With all the major browsers moving towards HTML 5, advertisers will have many more opportunities to inject intrusive advertising into web content with simple CSS commands. We have already seen CSS-layer popups that require JavaScript to be enabled to make them go away -- which then allows the other ads to display.
At some point these industries have to make money, and they only make money from advertising. There has to be a decent middle ground here.
The problem is that we are basing our species' survival on a resource that was already formed when the dinosaurs first showed up. "Market forces" tend to be more like collapses and disasters, rather than gradual shifts. I think I would rather transition to renewable energy smoothly, than Use the Market Force, Luke. Because there definitely is a Dark Side to it.
Same here. At $89, SpinRite is a bit on the pricey side, but I have recovered data from hard drives that I thought I had zero chance of saving. I figure since it saved hundreds of dollars in labor -- several times -- it was worth every penny. Especially in those circumstances where your highly paid datacenter techs thought it was a great idea to construct a RAID 5 from all identical hard drives from the exact same manufacturer lot. Sucks when two of those drives experience the exact same fault within a few minutes of each other. Fortunately I was able to whip out SpinRite and save the day, because otherwise we were looking at days and days of restoring from incremental backup tapes.
It's an ancient-looking DOS command-line utility, but I definitely give props to Steve Gibson for keeping SpinRite up to date to where it works on modern hard drives. $89 versus days and days of overtime pay for IT guys -- it certainly made me look pretty good come performance review time.
Rule #2 is: Making a huge stink about your private neighborhood against a well-liked company like Google will probably mean you're going to get a lot more attention than if you just let well enough alone.
Think about people in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Ohio, etc -- they need those over-the-air TV signals for severe weather warnings starting in April or so. The TV is often the difference between life and death in Tornado Alley. So if people are stuck without the money to buy a converter, then by all means, let's give them a bit more time. It's not like DTV hasn't taken off.
In the long term, I think Time-Warner has the upper hand here. Viacom is wanting Time-Warner to pay a significant chunk of more money to carry its commercial-laden content. If Viacom is unable to fund itself through these constant deluges of crass commercials, then perhaps Viacom needs to find itself a better revenue stream. Squeezing the pipe that actually delivers the eyes that the advertisers are wanting to get in front of is not a good idea. TWC owns the pipe, Viacom simply owns the content. Which one is more valuable? Considering how digital on-demand style services are taking off, I think Viacom is playing a dangerous game here. TWC can afford to lose a few channels for a while much more than Viacom can afford to lose ad revenue due to 13+ million eyes disappearing overnight.
Windows XP (Pro) is already limited to two processors -- I wonder if Microsoft will remove this limitation given the likely escalation of multi-core CPUs on home computers. Given the bloat of the Vista beta, this is certainly not an unreasonable expectation.
I think IBM has the right idea here. SCO is obviously attempting to delay the inevitable at this point, so anything that will shed complexity from this worthless case is A Good Thing(tm).
That being said, I think IBM has little worry about SCO's position at this point, as SCO is poised to burn through its remaining cash reserves RSN. I think the Nazgûl are just eager to at least recoup some legal expenses out of this row before Novell cleans the rest out.
Ahhh, see how the vultures circle the wounded animal...
What Linux really needs is a cousing to Microsoft's management console, which allows server programs to write plug-in modules that will allow a sysadmin to control multiple servers from a single program. Sure, you can edit text files all day, but the fact is, it's often much easier and faster in a graphical environment.
Frankly, with all the open source management tools out there, I'm surprised that there isn't something to this effect. Webmin is close, but not quite there.
Actually this could be a very good thing. Let's stop and think about this from a developer's perspective. First off, since the majority of hardware interface issues will come from the driver and kernel levels, and the BSD-based kernel is very portable, there should be little issue with respect to recompiling binaries for the x86 instruction set.
The bad part: this will also allow far easier binary compatibility with Win32 binaries. OS/2 made the mistake of emulating Windows too well: everyone ran Windows programs under OS/2 and didn't bother developing native applications. MacOS might share the same fate, especially with Redmond's habit of causing (intentional?) compatibility issues with competing products.
The biggest thing about moving to Intel is bringing down cost: with all the offerings available for the x86 platform, I would suspect that Apple hardware will fall about 25% in price. Imagine a Mac Mini for $350 -- it's very possible.
Apple usually has great hardware (and backs it up well) but moving to an Intel platform doesn't mean compromising that quality -- look at Asus motherboards, for example.
All in all, if the rumors are true, this will be a major threat to either Apple or Microsoft -- because it's the equivalent of going "all in" on Apple's part. Is it a bluff, or does Apple hold the aces?
Slashdot Mirror
Same here on 28.0.1500.71 (Official Build 209842) beta.
And it's STILL 32-bit. Really Google?!?
Not to nitpick, but "survival of the fittest" is one of the greatest misconceptions out there. A male peacock without huge plumes would be far more efficient in mobility. But since the plumage attracts females, the selection pressure is tilted in a direction having little to do with direct survival characteristics. Indeed we often do NOT see the "fittest" survive, but rather species that specialize and carve out little niches. This also explains why the biodiversity we observe exists.
I didn't really care about the difference between 100% gas and E10. I thought it was a bunch of hoopla from competing political interests. Then I lost a trimmer and a tiller to ethanol's corrosive powers. Within a couple of weeks of being fueled with E10, both had developed holes in the gas tanks and were dead. Happily my mower didn't suffer the same fate.
The moral? Don't let E10 sit in your trimmer or other yard equipment. In fact, use 100% gas in them when possible.
Every plane registered is stored there, the logistics center is there, and their academy is located there too.
Why did OKC reach this prominence? Of all the lower 48 states, it has the best flying weather for most of the year.
But is it on fire?
(If you get this, then you're REALLY old-school.)
The likely concern the government has with this publicly-available classified information is the chance that someone with legitimate access to related information might download and (perhaps unintentionally) combine it with unclassified information. That act causes the all that data to become classified... thus causing an information "spillage" on many unclassified systems. Cleaning up classified information spillages is very expensive for the government... even minor ones.
Thus the main idea here is to stop this problem from occurring before Murphy's Law can take effect. Nothing sinister, just pragmatic.
Personality disorders, like, extreme anti-government paranoia? Or confusing basic regulations for Stalinist policies?
The problem with the "free market" is it isn't free -- the big players have made sure that nobody will ever be able to compete with them thanks to lock-ins, onerous penalties on contracts, and other anti-competitive measures. Not to mention the billions of dollars necessary to start a cell phone service on a national level.
"Free markets" are a myth; you either have regulation or monopoly. Neither of which are very desirable, but that's the way things work outside an Ayn Rand book.
In related news, the same body has approved a special security packet encapsulator consisting of pigmented lipids that bond the rolled packet together, with a special imprinted signature to establish non-deniability of the transmitter and ensure the packet has not been intercepted and examined by third parties.
The standard was submitted for approval in '02.
That is, 0002.
I think Adblock may do more harm than good. With all the major browsers moving towards HTML 5, advertisers will have many more opportunities to inject intrusive advertising into web content with simple CSS commands. We have already seen CSS-layer popups that require JavaScript to be enabled to make them go away -- which then allows the other ads to display.
At some point these industries have to make money, and they only make money from advertising. There has to be a decent middle ground here.
The problem is that we are basing our species' survival on a resource that was already formed when the dinosaurs first showed up. "Market forces" tend to be more like collapses and disasters, rather than gradual shifts. I think I would rather transition to renewable energy smoothly, than Use the Market Force, Luke. Because there definitely is a Dark Side to it.
Cowboynealium?
Same here. At $89, SpinRite is a bit on the pricey side, but I have recovered data from hard drives that I thought I had zero chance of saving. I figure since it saved hundreds of dollars in labor -- several times -- it was worth every penny. Especially in those circumstances where your highly paid datacenter techs thought it was a great idea to construct a RAID 5 from all identical hard drives from the exact same manufacturer lot. Sucks when two of those drives experience the exact same fault within a few minutes of each other. Fortunately I was able to whip out SpinRite and save the day, because otherwise we were looking at days and days of restoring from incremental backup tapes.
It's an ancient-looking DOS command-line utility, but I definitely give props to Steve Gibson for keeping SpinRite up to date to where it works on modern hard drives. $89 versus days and days of overtime pay for IT guys -- it certainly made me look pretty good come performance review time.
Rule #1 is:
Security through obscurity isn't.
Rule #2 is: Making a huge stink about your private neighborhood against a well-liked company like Google will probably mean you're going to get a lot more attention than if you just let well enough alone.
Think about people in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Ohio, etc -- they need those over-the-air TV signals for severe weather warnings starting in April or so. The TV is often the difference between life and death in Tornado Alley. So if people are stuck without the money to buy a converter, then by all means, let's give them a bit more time. It's not like DTV hasn't taken off.
In the long term, I think Time-Warner has the upper hand here. Viacom is wanting Time-Warner to pay a significant chunk of more money to carry its commercial-laden content. If Viacom is unable to fund itself through these constant deluges of crass commercials, then perhaps Viacom needs to find itself a better revenue stream. Squeezing the pipe that actually delivers the eyes that the advertisers are wanting to get in front of is not a good idea. TWC owns the pipe, Viacom simply owns the content. Which one is more valuable? Considering how digital on-demand style services are taking off, I think Viacom is playing a dangerous game here. TWC can afford to lose a few channels for a while much more than Viacom can afford to lose ad revenue due to 13+ million eyes disappearing overnight.
Apparently IBM employs half the world of Linux advocates and code writers, according to McBride. They're all out to get him.
SCO should be suing for the IP rights to the tinfoil hat.
Windows XP (Pro) is already limited to two processors -- I wonder if Microsoft will remove this limitation given the likely escalation of multi-core CPUs on home computers. Given the bloat of the Vista beta, this is certainly not an unreasonable expectation.
Watching that shook my nerves, and it rattled my brain.
Human muscles are powered by electricity, you know. Just imagine, if you will, the worse case scenario is the Super Outbreak of 2008:
Phase 1: The virus merges RNA chains with the Bird Flu
Phase 2: It then mutates into human, airborne form
Phase 3: Everyone on earth is infected
Phase 4: Suddenly, without warning, the microbatteries kick in, and everyone on earth begins simultaneously dancing the funky chicken
Does each airship come with a pilot named Cid?
I think IBM has the right idea here. SCO is obviously attempting to delay the inevitable at this point, so anything that will shed complexity from this worthless case is A Good Thing(tm).
That being said, I think IBM has little worry about SCO's position at this point, as SCO is poised to burn through its remaining cash reserves RSN. I think the Nazgûl are just eager to at least recoup some legal expenses out of this row before Novell cleans the rest out.
Ahhh, see how the vultures circle the wounded animal...
What Linux really needs is a cousing to Microsoft's management console, which allows server programs to write plug-in modules that will allow a sysadmin to control multiple servers from a single program. Sure, you can edit text files all day, but the fact is, it's often much easier and faster in a graphical environment.
Frankly, with all the open source management tools out there, I'm surprised that there isn't something to this effect. Webmin is close, but not quite there.
I found why we went to X11 -- I tried reverting to X10 and kept getting pop-up ads for voyeur cameras.
Actually this could be a very good thing. Let's stop and think about this from a developer's perspective. First off, since the majority of hardware interface issues will come from the driver and kernel levels, and the BSD-based kernel is very portable, there should be little issue with respect to recompiling binaries for the x86 instruction set.
The bad part: this will also allow far easier binary compatibility with Win32 binaries. OS/2 made the mistake of emulating Windows too well: everyone ran Windows programs under OS/2 and didn't bother developing native applications. MacOS might share the same fate, especially with Redmond's habit of causing (intentional?) compatibility issues with competing products.
The biggest thing about moving to Intel is bringing down cost: with all the offerings available for the x86 platform, I would suspect that Apple hardware will fall about 25% in price. Imagine a Mac Mini for $350 -- it's very possible.
Apple usually has great hardware (and backs it up well) but moving to an Intel platform doesn't mean compromising that quality -- look at Asus motherboards, for example.
All in all, if the rumors are true, this will be a major threat to either Apple or Microsoft -- because it's the equivalent of going "all in" on Apple's part. Is it a bluff, or does Apple hold the aces?