But you understand - Anime is it's own cliche of trying to be non-cliche?
I didn't watch many Disney movies, thanks. But I do like stories to have an ending, which besides the credits rolling, we still haven't gotten. Unsettling? No. The family is just fine. Unpredictable? Nope - they've been pulling this shit since Season 2. Non-cliche? Well, I don't know what your version of cliche would be for a show about the mob.
You aren't very researched on the F-22. Even a Wikipedia search would have shown to you that the incremental cost of new F-22 Raptors will initially be $120 million and scale downward rapidly as more planes are ordered.
The overall cost, including development costs, will be $361 million per plane which will scale down significantly as development costs are a one-time affair.
Nobody ever said the F-22 was cheap, but it's going to replace fleets of aging F-15 Eagles and F/A-18 Hornets, which incur significant costs to maintain. The F-22 is a better built plane, and requires less maintenance. Let's also not forget that the F-22 is nearly as stealthy as the B2 (and will replace it in most cases), which rings in around 1 billion per plane these days.
The F-22 uses significantly less "stealth" materials as the B2 while remaining stealthy due to it's much more advanced design. Most of the stealth characteristics of the B2 and Raptor come from the shape of the aircraft. While special polymers help absorb some of the radar, it's mostly the shape of the plane that refracts the radar signal away from the source to prevent pings. Since the Raptor was designed with much more sophisticated computers, they were able to build a more traditional looking plane that maneuvers better then current fighters while still retaining stealth.
You mention that this money should be spent on troop armor, like this is an either/or situation. It's not. The troops have a fine budget for these things. The problems with actually getting armor and new vehicles out to the troops are independent of a new fighter jet. There's problems there, no doubt. Money, however, is not one of them.
Nobody will know for sure how much the new jets will require in the terms of long-time maintenance. However, the plane was designed from the ground-up to be more reliable, serviceable and cheaper to maintain. The F-16 and F-18 were both designed in the 70's, with the technology and experience of the time.
Let's also not forget that the F-22 is not just better than the F-16 and F-18. It's a LOT better. It doesn't just give the US air superiority, it gives it a huge advantage that will be held for a long, long time. If you're really interested in protecting our troops, the F-22 gives every F-22 pilot a significant advantage over their enemies.
Lastly, the F-22 is a Fighter, but it can contain a significant armory and can be used as an effective bomber, at super-sonic speeds.
I'm not an expert on the F-22 or the financials around it, but at least I try to do a little research on a topic before dismissing it.
Without going into the history of computers in business and home, I'll just say that things were much different with IBM then they are with Microsoft. While I don't believe that Microsoft is infallible, they are in a much better position with desktop lock-in then IBM ever was.
Just FYI, the F-22 Raptor, including the purchasing of a fleet of them, accounts for only 2% of the total DoD budget and will save the military billions in the years to come because they will be able to retire the old 25 year old technology jets.
Just because the enemy of today uses soda cans filled with gasoline to attack our troops doesn't mean everyone in the future will, too.
I work at a prison. It's really showed me how pointless prison is, and how punishments for a lot of things are just too harsh. Capital crimes might get you 20 years, but having an ounce of weed could get you 15. It's completely out of whack.
But the sex offenders "list" goes way beyond serving your sentence. It's like a damned scarlet letter. And let's be realistic: not even a sex offender thinks they'll be caught, so what is some list going to stop someone that intends to re-offend?
What do these lists do besides further punish people that served their sentences in full?
There's got to be a better way.. I say put bracelets on their ankles for 10 years, if you're that worried about it. At least it's not a big sign over your head.
Perhaps so, but at least here in New England, people are distributed fairly evenly over the area. While my commute is short at 15 miles, I used to have to drive at least 50 each way to get to work, and same with the 2 jobs before that.
It's not because I wanted to drive. I would have gladly taken subways, trains, buses, etc. They're just not available enough to be worth it. I could have taken a bus, then a train, then a bus, to another bus, then a 2 mile walk. Not feasible.
I believe that public transportation in Europe is much better then it is in the states (outside the mega cities.)
ps. All of Europe is still smaller then the U.S. Take a look at a map some day.
Almost everyone is selling CPU-based licenses based on the number of sockets, not cores. If you have a single-socket, quad-core CPU, it will only cost you one license.
The reason for this is because CPU's aren't getting all that much faster anymore. There's little steps here and there but they're small steps. The multi-core CPU's are an attempt to increase speed via parallelism, because it's relatively easy to multiply the number of CPU units in each package compared to getting a 10% speed increase with a single CPU. So rather then punish the consumer because they can't upgrade CPU's to double performance anymore, software vendors charge per-socket so you still can - with multi-core.
Ahh, so you're one of them. The old black-and-white way of thinking.
No, I don't like it, and I still eat meat. But I would like animals to be treated better. Is that any different from so many other issues? I don't like pollution, but I use computers with mercury in them, that consume electricity, and I think global warming is a serious problem but drive to work. Sometimes I take airplanes across the country *gasp*. Should I become a homeless bum to save the environment? Isn't there an alternative to boycotting (which doesn't work?)
No, I won't be a vegan but I do feel bad for all the animals slaughtered for food. However, I understand it, and I do like meat. Animals need to be treated with respect and if killed for food, killed in a humanitarian manner.
I've always felt that way too. I do think it's because they're innocent. I don't believe an animal has the mental capacity to really distinguish right and wrong (especially not in relation to our laws.) I also feel bad when animals get hurt because they can't understand what's happening to them. They just know it's painful.
I understand what you're saying here about things "just working" on Linux distributions but I really cringe when I see that argument because it's really not the truth any more then it is with Windows. When I plug in my scanner on Windows Vista, it just works too. But when I get a NEW scanner, it might not, and it might not on Ubuntu either. The difference is that it WILL have a CD with Windows drivers and software, but not Ubuntu. Thus, you can say "Ubuntu is less compatible with Windows hardware and Windows software then Windows is." You might say "duhh!" But a lot of people don't.
I firmly believe that if you make a purchase you should buy for your system. Meaning, you don't see too many Mac users bitching that they can't get a windows-only printer working on the Mac. They make sure the printer works on Macs before they buy them. The same should be true with Ubuntu and Linux in general, but there's an odd culture surrounding "linux bashing" that seems to think Linux should be somehow different because it runs on PC's.
I wouldn't sweat it. I know, you know, and a lot of people know, that Linux distributions are really great operating systems for nearly all users - NOW. Once installed, they're easy to maintain, there's so many cool softwares available at your finger tips, and it does everything you need it to do. These naysayers will learn eventually.
Most people around here (RI) seem to call it a "directional" - ie "that asshole didn't use his god damned directional!" Turn signal is used a lot too, though.
But seriously, I agree with your points. I just don't understand people with no interest in making things work properly - not even with expensive things like cars and HDTV's and computers.
There's more to GPL/OSS than pure psychological benefits. While it may make me feel good to use OSS, if my company decides to go GPL, we also gain the benefit of being able to use all the other GPL code out there. There's the trade. It's just not monetary.
I don't actually consider that a huge insult. I don't believe that pure capitalism is the one "true way" and it can bring out the very worst in society. I do believe there can be a balance.
You're also assuming that I care if someone else is making money. I don't. As long as I get what I need, it really doesn't matter.
Perhaps I don't aspire to be a big shot rich bastard that sold my soul for the almighty buck, like you.
I've read all your posts here on this topic and I just can't believe how many people just won't "get it." It's kinda sad, because the whole idea is actually very simple. Thanks for the good reading.
It's been mentioned in this thread right here that the issues you suggest as being part of the "marginal cost" are actually additional services that have been traditionally given to the end-user as a bonus for buying the software.
It's equivalent to a "warranty for software." Generally, a software company will warranty their software for a limited amount of time via bug fixes, technical support, or perhaps free upgrades for a period. These benefits are put in place to persuade you to spend the money on the software. There's no law requiring it, though. And, a WHOLE lot of software comes with absolutely no warranty and very limited free support options, such as any Microsoft server product. You pay extra for any sort of technical support.
While I understand your confusion, it's just that.
OSS, on the other hand, takes a different approach: You can use the software for no cost, and even modify it to suit your needs and install it on as many computers as you want. However, if you need support beyond the normal FAQ or message boards, you'll have to pay someone (usually the developer, but not always) to support you. That's the "service component" you speak of, but you don't have to pay it if you don't need it.
No, not at all. In fact, that happens for the vast majority of GPL code already. Millions are using Linux distributions, and only a very small handful of those people actually write any code. Yet, the software still gets written.
It's a whole "economy of scale" type thing. With so many capable programmers in the world, even if a very small percentage actually contributes you still end up with a huge development community, relative to an effort put forth by a proprietary development house. Of course, the only software that actually gets written is software that someone needs.
So, go ahead and use that GPL code. It's all yours. If you don't want to contribute back, that's okay. Just don't try to distribute your modified GPL code as closed-source binaries!
As an addendum, there's some software that I just don't see becoming open source anytime soon, such as games. But that's okay by me; games aren't a critical piece of software (although some WoW fans might disagree.) I'm not an evangelist, and if you want to write closed-source software and sell it that's your deal. Go for it. Hey, a lot of really great software comes from traditional closed-source software companies.
But, I feel as though the days of critical software being closed-source are numbered. (I'm referring to critical system libraries, the operating system itself, etc.) I also feel as though closed-document formats will become a thing of the past. I want to unlock my machines from any single vendor, dammit! A lot of folks feel the same way. This is just one more reason OSS is A Good Thing.
I'd recommend to any development house to at least acknowledge GPL/OSS and prepare for it, lest be left behind.
What do you term "exchange?" When I submit any GPL code, it allows everyone to use it. In trade, I get your GPL code.
It's not a direct hand-to-cash deal but there IS a return on open source/free software. If you can't see that, this late in the game, then you MUST be brainwashed.
ps. Nearly all "significant" OSS/GPL/Linux software is developed by paid programmers. If you're a programmer, you will have a job even if OSS becomes the #1. Besides, the vast majority of code written today is for in-house use, not for sale.
Do you really need 64-bit "native" code on the e-mail function of SQL server? (note the quotes around Native; 32-bit code runs native too.)
To me, I think I'd rather use more stable, proven code, even if it IS running under WoW. I'm guessing they would have gone with all 64-bit native tools if the code was ready, but it wasn't, so you can use the 32-bit code until such time as it is. Because WoW is fairly low overhead and the code runs natively on the CPU, it's a fairly good trade-off.
I just don't think the argument is valid. The important pieces run on 64-bit compiled executables, and the rest still runs natively (albeit after loading a few more libraries.)
The code still runs native on X86-64 CPU's; it's just that a few extra DLL's have to be loaded. In real world performance, often times running apps in WoW is faster then running the whole OS is 32-bit land, depending on the application. Some 32-bit games, for instance, benefit from having 64-bit drivers for video and disk access, and I'd imagine that a heavy app like SQL benefits even more if you have more then 3 GB RAM.
Your argument is really kinda weak. WoW is a great function of Windows, it's just too bad MORE things don't work under it. Most applications do run great, though.
The good thing about GPL software is that the license for it is all over the source code, software, Internet; whereas my receipt for Windows Vista Business is in a file cabinet and if I lose that piece of paper I'm screwed.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's very easy to prove that OSS/Free/GPL software is, in fact, what it claims.
Leak current aside, the fact is that if a CPU is doing nothing, it's not consuming (much) electricity. If you throttle down a CPU to 10Mhz, you could shove as many volts as you want at it, because volts isn't what you pay for, it's watts. Watts are volts * amps. If the CPU is doing nothing, it's using no (or hardly any) amps. I think 10W is an overestimation.
But don't try to use this whole "if there's 10 millions of chips!!!" crap. I'm fairly sure that we as the human race waste a lot more of everything else versus the minute amount of power we're "wasting." Such a bullshit thing to say. "There's starving kids in Africa!!!" While I'm not a proponent of waste, you do have to draw a line somewhere, man.
I'd bet that the wall warts for everything from gameboys, phones, portable TV's, alarm clocks, etc in your house right now use more electricity then 50 idle AMD Quad-Cpu cores.
Slashdot Mirror
But you understand - Anime is it's own cliche of trying to be non-cliche?
I didn't watch many Disney movies, thanks. But I do like stories to have an ending, which besides the credits rolling, we still haven't gotten. Unsettling? No. The family is just fine. Unpredictable? Nope - they've been pulling this shit since Season 2. Non-cliche? Well, I don't know what your version of cliche would be for a show about the mob.
Using the word cliche is so cliche.
You aren't very researched on the F-22. Even a Wikipedia search would have shown to you that the incremental cost of new F-22 Raptors will initially be $120 million and scale downward rapidly as more planes are ordered.
The overall cost, including development costs, will be $361 million per plane which will scale down significantly as development costs are a one-time affair.
Nobody ever said the F-22 was cheap, but it's going to replace fleets of aging F-15 Eagles and F/A-18 Hornets, which incur significant costs to maintain. The F-22 is a better built plane, and requires less maintenance. Let's also not forget that the F-22 is nearly as stealthy as the B2 (and will replace it in most cases), which rings in around 1 billion per plane these days.
The F-22 uses significantly less "stealth" materials as the B2 while remaining stealthy due to it's much more advanced design. Most of the stealth characteristics of the B2 and Raptor come from the shape of the aircraft. While special polymers help absorb some of the radar, it's mostly the shape of the plane that refracts the radar signal away from the source to prevent pings. Since the Raptor was designed with much more sophisticated computers, they were able to build a more traditional looking plane that maneuvers better then current fighters while still retaining stealth.
You mention that this money should be spent on troop armor, like this is an either/or situation. It's not. The troops have a fine budget for these things. The problems with actually getting armor and new vehicles out to the troops are independent of a new fighter jet. There's problems there, no doubt. Money, however, is not one of them.
Nobody will know for sure how much the new jets will require in the terms of long-time maintenance. However, the plane was designed from the ground-up to be more reliable, serviceable and cheaper to maintain. The F-16 and F-18 were both designed in the 70's, with the technology and experience of the time.
Let's also not forget that the F-22 is not just better than the F-16 and F-18. It's a LOT better. It doesn't just give the US air superiority, it gives it a huge advantage that will be held for a long, long time. If you're really interested in protecting our troops, the F-22 gives every F-22 pilot a significant advantage over their enemies.
Lastly, the F-22 is a Fighter, but it can contain a significant armory and can be used as an effective bomber, at super-sonic speeds.
I'm not an expert on the F-22 or the financials around it, but at least I try to do a little research on a topic before dismissing it.
Without going into the history of computers in business and home, I'll just say that things were much different with IBM then they are with Microsoft. While I don't believe that Microsoft is infallible, they are in a much better position with desktop lock-in then IBM ever was.
Just FYI, the F-22 Raptor, including the purchasing of a fleet of them, accounts for only 2% of the total DoD budget and will save the military billions in the years to come because they will be able to retire the old 25 year old technology jets.
Just because the enemy of today uses soda cans filled with gasoline to attack our troops doesn't mean everyone in the future will, too.
I agree with you.
I work at a prison. It's really showed me how pointless prison is, and how punishments for a lot of things are just too harsh. Capital crimes might get you 20 years, but having an ounce of weed could get you 15. It's completely out of whack.
But the sex offenders "list" goes way beyond serving your sentence. It's like a damned scarlet letter. And let's be realistic: not even a sex offender thinks they'll be caught, so what is some list going to stop someone that intends to re-offend?
What do these lists do besides further punish people that served their sentences in full?
There's got to be a better way.. I say put bracelets on their ankles for 10 years, if you're that worried about it. At least it's not a big sign over your head.
Perhaps so, but at least here in New England, people are distributed fairly evenly over the area. While my commute is short at 15 miles, I used to have to drive at least 50 each way to get to work, and same with the 2 jobs before that.
It's not because I wanted to drive. I would have gladly taken subways, trains, buses, etc. They're just not available enough to be worth it. I could have taken a bus, then a train, then a bus, to another bus, then a 2 mile walk. Not feasible.
I believe that public transportation in Europe is much better then it is in the states (outside the mega cities.)
ps. All of Europe is still smaller then the U.S. Take a look at a map some day.
Why bother running Windows for that? Seems like too much hassle and work.
You should just use Linux like everyone else does. It's easier.
Almost everyone is selling CPU-based licenses based on the number of sockets, not cores. If you have a single-socket, quad-core CPU, it will only cost you one license.
The reason for this is because CPU's aren't getting all that much faster anymore. There's little steps here and there but they're small steps. The multi-core CPU's are an attempt to increase speed via parallelism, because it's relatively easy to multiply the number of CPU units in each package compared to getting a 10% speed increase with a single CPU. So rather then punish the consumer because they can't upgrade CPU's to double performance anymore, software vendors charge per-socket so you still can - with multi-core.
Ahh, so you're one of them. The old black-and-white way of thinking.
No, I don't like it, and I still eat meat. But I would like animals to be treated better. Is that any different from so many other issues? I don't like pollution, but I use computers with mercury in them, that consume electricity, and I think global warming is a serious problem but drive to work. Sometimes I take airplanes across the country *gasp*. Should I become a homeless bum to save the environment? Isn't there an alternative to boycotting (which doesn't work?)
No, I won't be a vegan but I do feel bad for all the animals slaughtered for food. However, I understand it, and I do like meat. Animals need to be treated with respect and if killed for food, killed in a humanitarian manner.
I've always felt that way too. I do think it's because they're innocent. I don't believe an animal has the mental capacity to really distinguish right and wrong (especially not in relation to our laws.) I also feel bad when animals get hurt because they can't understand what's happening to them. They just know it's painful.
I understand what you're saying here about things "just working" on Linux distributions but I really cringe when I see that argument because it's really not the truth any more then it is with Windows. When I plug in my scanner on Windows Vista, it just works too. But when I get a NEW scanner, it might not, and it might not on Ubuntu either. The difference is that it WILL have a CD with Windows drivers and software, but not Ubuntu. Thus, you can say "Ubuntu is less compatible with Windows hardware and Windows software then Windows is." You might say "duhh!" But a lot of people don't.
I firmly believe that if you make a purchase you should buy for your system. Meaning, you don't see too many Mac users bitching that they can't get a windows-only printer working on the Mac. They make sure the printer works on Macs before they buy them. The same should be true with Ubuntu and Linux in general, but there's an odd culture surrounding "linux bashing" that seems to think Linux should be somehow different because it runs on PC's.
I wouldn't sweat it. I know, you know, and a lot of people know, that Linux distributions are really great operating systems for nearly all users - NOW. Once installed, they're easy to maintain, there's so many cool softwares available at your finger tips, and it does everything you need it to do. These naysayers will learn eventually.
Most people around here (RI) seem to call it a "directional" - ie "that asshole didn't use his god damned directional!" Turn signal is used a lot too, though.
But seriously, I agree with your points. I just don't understand people with no interest in making things work properly - not even with expensive things like cars and HDTV's and computers.
Use the "System Update" icon blinking on the corner of your screen and forget about downloading updates from dozens of web sites. A thing of the past.
There's more to GPL/OSS than pure psychological benefits. While it may make me feel good to use OSS, if my company decides to go GPL, we also gain the benefit of being able to use all the other GPL code out there. There's the trade. It's just not monetary.
It is a confusing subject any way you look at it.
I don't actually consider that a huge insult. I don't believe that pure capitalism is the one "true way" and it can bring out the very worst in society. I do believe there can be a balance.
You're also assuming that I care if someone else is making money. I don't. As long as I get what I need, it really doesn't matter.
Perhaps I don't aspire to be a big shot rich bastard that sold my soul for the almighty buck, like you.
I've read all your posts here on this topic and I just can't believe how many people just won't "get it." It's kinda sad, because the whole idea is actually very simple. Thanks for the good reading.
But that's the point - it has to be artificially increased in value. This doesn't change the argument any.
It's been mentioned in this thread right here that the issues you suggest as being part of the "marginal cost" are actually additional services that have been traditionally given to the end-user as a bonus for buying the software.
It's equivalent to a "warranty for software." Generally, a software company will warranty their software for a limited amount of time via bug fixes, technical support, or perhaps free upgrades for a period. These benefits are put in place to persuade you to spend the money on the software. There's no law requiring it, though. And, a WHOLE lot of software comes with absolutely no warranty and very limited free support options, such as any Microsoft server product. You pay extra for any sort of technical support.
While I understand your confusion, it's just that.
OSS, on the other hand, takes a different approach: You can use the software for no cost, and even modify it to suit your needs and install it on as many computers as you want. However, if you need support beyond the normal FAQ or message boards, you'll have to pay someone (usually the developer, but not always) to support you. That's the "service component" you speak of, but you don't have to pay it if you don't need it.
No, not at all. In fact, that happens for the vast majority of GPL code already. Millions are using Linux distributions, and only a very small handful of those people actually write any code. Yet, the software still gets written.
It's a whole "economy of scale" type thing. With so many capable programmers in the world, even if a very small percentage actually contributes you still end up with a huge development community, relative to an effort put forth by a proprietary development house. Of course, the only software that actually gets written is software that someone needs.
So, go ahead and use that GPL code. It's all yours. If you don't want to contribute back, that's okay. Just don't try to distribute your modified GPL code as closed-source binaries!
As an addendum, there's some software that I just don't see becoming open source anytime soon, such as games. But that's okay by me; games aren't a critical piece of software (although some WoW fans might disagree.) I'm not an evangelist, and if you want to write closed-source software and sell it that's your deal. Go for it. Hey, a lot of really great software comes from traditional closed-source software companies.
But, I feel as though the days of critical software being closed-source are numbered. (I'm referring to critical system libraries, the operating system itself, etc.) I also feel as though closed-document formats will become a thing of the past. I want to unlock my machines from any single vendor, dammit! A lot of folks feel the same way. This is just one more reason OSS is A Good Thing.
I'd recommend to any development house to at least acknowledge GPL/OSS and prepare for it, lest be left behind.
What do you term "exchange?" When I submit any GPL code, it allows everyone to use it. In trade, I get your GPL code.
It's not a direct hand-to-cash deal but there IS a return on open source/free software. If you can't see that, this late in the game, then you MUST be brainwashed.
ps. Nearly all "significant" OSS/GPL/Linux software is developed by paid programmers. If you're a programmer, you will have a job even if OSS becomes the #1. Besides, the vast majority of code written today is for in-house use, not for sale.
Do you really need 64-bit "native" code on the e-mail function of SQL server? (note the quotes around Native; 32-bit code runs native too.)
To me, I think I'd rather use more stable, proven code, even if it IS running under WoW. I'm guessing they would have gone with all 64-bit native tools if the code was ready, but it wasn't, so you can use the 32-bit code until such time as it is. Because WoW is fairly low overhead and the code runs natively on the CPU, it's a fairly good trade-off.
I just don't think the argument is valid. The important pieces run on 64-bit compiled executables, and the rest still runs natively (albeit after loading a few more libraries.)
WoW isn't really that big of a deal, you know.
The code still runs native on X86-64 CPU's; it's just that a few extra DLL's have to be loaded. In real world performance, often times running apps in WoW is faster then running the whole OS is 32-bit land, depending on the application. Some 32-bit games, for instance, benefit from having 64-bit drivers for video and disk access, and I'd imagine that a heavy app like SQL benefits even more if you have more then 3 GB RAM.
Your argument is really kinda weak. WoW is a great function of Windows, it's just too bad MORE things don't work under it. Most applications do run great, though.
The good thing about GPL software is that the license for it is all over the source code, software, Internet; whereas my receipt for Windows Vista Business is in a file cabinet and if I lose that piece of paper I'm screwed.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's very easy to prove that OSS/Free/GPL software is, in fact, what it claims.
Leak current aside, the fact is that if a CPU is doing nothing, it's not consuming (much) electricity. If you throttle down a CPU to 10Mhz, you could shove as many volts as you want at it, because volts isn't what you pay for, it's watts. Watts are volts * amps. If the CPU is doing nothing, it's using no (or hardly any) amps. I think 10W is an overestimation.
But don't try to use this whole "if there's 10 millions of chips!!!" crap. I'm fairly sure that we as the human race waste a lot more of everything else versus the minute amount of power we're "wasting." Such a bullshit thing to say. "There's starving kids in Africa!!!" While I'm not a proponent of waste, you do have to draw a line somewhere, man.
I'd bet that the wall warts for everything from gameboys, phones, portable TV's, alarm clocks, etc in your house right now use more electricity then 50 idle AMD Quad-Cpu cores.