I mean, I don't see RMS' version of cloud computing that does a better job than the commercial options available now.
It's coming! Immediately after Hurd is complete. Uh oh! According to the Hurd website: "The latest release of GNU Mach is version 1.3, 2002-05-28." Oops.
I loved the Workpad z50. One of the coolest little machines I ever owned, even if it did run WinCE. I ended up shipping it down to my mother and she used it for email and web browsing for 2 or 3 years.
We should just call it Lignux and forget this argument ever existed.
OR... we could just call it Linux and tell all of the pedantic fucktards to shut the fuck up. No one outside of a handful of GNU people give a flying fuck about the differences between a kernel, an OS, and a desktop environment. It's a moot point and on top of that it is really, really silly. 'Linux' is the name that people know, well, Linux by and nothing you do will change that.
That may be the "law" but in reality bribery by US companies doing business overseas is HUGE. I worked briefly with a company who did business in Latin and South America. When we would ship a couple of Sun boxes down to Brazil we always made sure the poor sap of a sysadmin accompanying them had 10k or so in US bills to "ease" their entry into the country.
Hehe... your post brings back memories of the first time I got paid while living in Tokyo. I was expecting a check but instead got an envelope... stuffed with 1M yen. Only in Tokyo can you walk down the streets with that much money (about 8k when I was there) in your pocket and not even think twice about. Of course, I also learned very quickly that a) 1M yen is not very much money in Tokyo, and b) one can get a pretty mighty hangover when one has that much money in cash on them on payday.
he... a prospectus that I used for one of my companies was 37 pages long. The first 10 or so pages were the legal boiler plate (ie... "YOU HAVE A 99.999% CHANCE OF LOSING YOUR MONEY"), followed by a few more pages of definitions. The next 10 or so pages were full of core business info (company overview, product(s) overview, executive bios). 5 or so pages were full of financial and the remaining pages were essentially a rehash of the "YOU WILL LOSE YOUR MONEY". It was embarrassing to be in the presence of a potential investor while they read through it.
Investor: "What does it mean, 'The Company's methods and operations are unproven'?"
Me: "That means we are a startup and have not been in business very long."
Investor: "Ok. What about: 'The Company's products and services may never make it to market'?"
Me: "Well, we can't guarantee that our services and products will ever sell"
Investor: 'Hm. What about: 'The Company cannot guarantee that its products and services will be able to compete with its established competitors'?"
Me: (Twitching uncontrollably and muttering something about first to market)
Investor: "So, it sounds to me that what you are looking for is someone to put money into an unproven company, that may never actually bring a product to market, and that if you do somehow manage to bring it to market, no one may care. Does that sum it up?"
Me: "Er..."
Investor: "Do I have the word 'DUMBFUCK' tattooed on my forehead?"
Me: "Err... no (under breath: fucking lawyers!)".
I understand the whole concept of not allowing companies to make absurd claims that ignorant sheep will buy into to, but having to essentially emasculate your company is, well... emasculating.
What is truly sad is that these sorts of errors are becoming rather commonplace in mainstream, "real" news sources. In the last couple of weeks I have seen a story on CNN.com that used "it's" when it should have been "its", a story on MSNBC.com that used "to" instead of "too", etc, etc,etc. Even books that have been printed in the last couple of years have grammatical errors that are truly mind-boggling. Good thing we are pushing math and science so hard in schools, huh?
...or had a road-warrior type of job. I spent three years running a public company and one month got a bill for several thousand dollars. The bill was for something along the lines of 12,000 text messages. That was when I slapped myself for being a dolt and not reading that the stupid TMobile Oz IM client uses SMS as its communication endpoint. Mind you, that was my personal phone (not, unfortunately company subsidized)... Turns out each of those "ok" or "sounds good" messages were costing me.25/each (after the first thousand or so). That's some expensive bandwidth.
This is also a true story... I was sitting here innocently eating Dick's and trust me if I HAD a vagina my vanilla shake would have spurted out of it after reading the above comment. Instead the white, frothy liquid came cascading out of my nose.
Before my wife, then my girlfriend, moved in, I had a similar setup and it was great; she enjoys the cable.
I have found it is better to have the girlfriend move in before the wife. Having the wife move in AFTER the girlfriend can cause all sorts of female rivalry. But I do have to give you kudos on pulling it off!
I like the first two ideas (the third one would simply fill the same purpose as the outright ban, in my opinion). I do NOT believe that restaurants should be smoking ever... even the heaviest of smokers can go an hour without lighting up. But smoking and drinking are so chained together in the American psyche that it just seems strange to not have one without the other.
And I quote the great philosopher Alice Cooper: "All of my life was a laugh and a joke, a drink and a smoke, and then I'd pass out on the floor". What a sage.
The signs thing sends me off on another of my favorite diatribes... think of the ridiculous amount of money spent on all of those stupid green "Smoke-free Washington" signs? But the ones that really get me are the announcements at the airports and the fact that flight attendants spend 5 minutes telling you that you can't smoke on the flight. Really? No shit!?
You will notice that NYC and LA (both of which I have lived and/or worked in both pre and post their smoking bans) don't feel the need to put up fucking dorky signs. This gets back to what I said before... the people behind the WA smoking ban have an agenda far and beyond just not smoking in bars and restaurants. They want an all-out smoking ban. I say, if that's what they really want, why don't they have the balls to go for it? This passive-aggressive "Smoke-free Washington" shit pisses me off much worse than the ban. Of course, I have never lived in a place with such a high level of passive-aggressive people in my life (think of the absolutely retarded "734-HERO" campaign. Yeah, you're a true hero for turning someone in who is illegally using the HOV lanes).
And before someone dings me for using the adjective "passive-aggresive" to describe Seattle... remember that this is the city that has systematically balked at mass-transit for several decades, usually for no good reason at all. According to Wikipedia, passive aggressive can be defined as : "Passive-aggressive behavior refers to passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following authoritative instructions in interpersonal or occupational situations. It can manifest itself as resentment, stubbornness, procrastination, sullenness, or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is assumed, often explicitly, to be responsible" Seems pretty fitting to me!
You unintentionally hit on a very important point for me. By pushing the smoking outside from a place where it could be contained we now have the air outside full of smoke where the smokers congregate and cigarette butts all over the sidewalks. I have (unintentionally, honest!) blown a huge cloud of smoke in the face of a passing pedestrian on more than one occasion. I apologized profusely, however, because I like to think of myself as at least a partially considerate smoker.
The 30 foot rule is completely and totally asinine because unless you are in the middle of absolutely nowhere, 30 feet in either direction away from a door means you are standing within 30 feet of the door next door, or in the middle of the street.
I do agree about the smoking in parks, beaches, and other places where there are congregations of people (especially kids). I have a 5 1/2 year old and I do everything in my power to keep him away from smoke.
Now here's the thing that irks me the most about the smoking bans: what many of the proponents of the bans really want is to outlaw smoking. Why don't they grow a pair and try to push that through the legislature? I would actually appreciate that (even if I don't happen to agree)... but the reasoning that the bans are there to protect the workers is, in my opinion, horseshit. Well, not entirely horeshit (no one in their right mind could argue that smoke is not detrimental to your health), but it's not the real reason. Again... my opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
Parse Error: invalid state transition near 'got Im'. Too many errors, cannot continue.
Amateur!
It's coming! Immediately after Hurd is complete. Uh oh! According to the Hurd website: "The latest release of GNU Mach is version 1.3, 2002-05-28." Oops.
I loved the Workpad z50. One of the coolest little machines I ever owned, even if it did run WinCE. I ended up shipping it down to my mother and she used it for email and web browsing for 2 or 3 years.
WHOOOOHOOO! That means I am only 26 years old and hair metal is still the rage!
Then you will love Cobol on Cogs.
I believe that is how Anal Cunt (not called AxCx) composes their music. Well, that and TubGirl, LemonParty, MeatSpin, etc...
OR... we could just call it Linux and tell all of the pedantic fucktards to shut the fuck up. No one outside of a handful of GNU people give a flying fuck about the differences between a kernel, an OS, and a desktop environment. It's a moot point and on top of that it is really, really silly. 'Linux' is the name that people know, well, Linux by and nothing you do will change that.
Brides perhaps, but the bribes to get 3 or 4 E450s across with minimal headache were a lot more.
That may be the "law" but in reality bribery by US companies doing business overseas is HUGE. I worked briefly with a company who did business in Latin and South America. When we would ship a couple of Sun boxes down to Brazil we always made sure the poor sap of a sysadmin accompanying them had 10k or so in US bills to "ease" their entry into the country.
In fact, the average mentally retarded person is even capable of posting on Slashdot.
A truer statement was never uttered.
Not all people of religion are cooks.
Indeed not! Some of them are bakers, some are sous chefs, and a very select group of them religious folks are Sandwich Artists.
So Frontpage was responsible for goatse! Better go check goatse in Firefox to see what it is really supposed to look like...
But... imagine the name of that project: MINE. Or to you Farkers out there: Can't Have. Not Yours.
Excellent! lolcode haiku. Will wonders never cease?
That is true.
(and, no, there is no affiliate link there... just happened to be the first link on Google)
Hehe... your post brings back memories of the first time I got paid while living in Tokyo. I was expecting a check but instead got an envelope... stuffed with 1M yen. Only in Tokyo can you walk down the streets with that much money (about 8k when I was there) in your pocket and not even think twice about. Of course, I also learned very quickly that a) 1M yen is not very much money in Tokyo, and b) one can get a pretty mighty hangover when one has that much money in cash on them on payday.
Investor: "What does it mean, 'The Company's methods and operations are unproven'?"
Me: "That means we are a startup and have not been in business very long."
Investor: "Ok. What about: 'The Company's products and services may never make it to market'?"
Me: "Well, we can't guarantee that our services and products will ever sell"
Investor: 'Hm. What about: 'The Company cannot guarantee that its products and services will be able to compete with its established competitors'?"
Me: (Twitching uncontrollably and muttering something about first to market)
Investor: "So, it sounds to me that what you are looking for is someone to put money into an unproven company, that may never actually bring a product to market, and that if you do somehow manage to bring it to market, no one may care. Does that sum it up?"
Me: "Er..."
Investor: "Do I have the word 'DUMBFUCK' tattooed on my forehead?"
Me: "Err... no (under breath: fucking lawyers!)".
I understand the whole concept of not allowing companies to make absurd claims that ignorant sheep will buy into to, but having to essentially emasculate your company is, well... emasculating.
What is truly sad is that these sorts of errors are becoming rather commonplace in mainstream, "real" news sources. In the last couple of weeks I have seen a story on CNN.com that used "it's" when it should have been "its", a story on MSNBC.com that used "to" instead of "too", etc, etc ,etc. Even books that have been printed in the last couple of years have grammatical errors that are truly mind-boggling. Good thing we are pushing math and science so hard in schools, huh?
...or had a road-warrior type of job. I spent three years running a public company and one month got a bill for several thousand dollars. The bill was for something along the lines of 12,000 text messages. That was when I slapped myself for being a dolt and not reading that the stupid TMobile Oz IM client uses SMS as its communication endpoint. Mind you, that was my personal phone (not, unfortunately company subsidized)... Turns out each of those "ok" or "sounds good" messages were costing me .25/each (after the first thousand or so). That's some expensive bandwidth.
This is also a true story... I was sitting here innocently eating Dick's and trust me if I HAD a vagina my vanilla shake would have spurted out of it after reading the above comment. Instead the white, frothy liquid came cascading out of my nose.
I have found it is better to have the girlfriend move in before the wife. Having the wife move in AFTER the girlfriend can cause all sorts of female rivalry. But I do have to give you kudos on pulling it off!
And I quote the great philosopher Alice Cooper: "All of my life was a laugh and a joke, a drink and a smoke, and then I'd pass out on the floor". What a sage.
You will notice that NYC and LA (both of which I have lived and/or worked in both pre and post their smoking bans) don't feel the need to put up fucking dorky signs. This gets back to what I said before... the people behind the WA smoking ban have an agenda far and beyond just not smoking in bars and restaurants. They want an all-out smoking ban. I say, if that's what they really want, why don't they have the balls to go for it? This passive-aggressive "Smoke-free Washington" shit pisses me off much worse than the ban. Of course, I have never lived in a place with such a high level of passive-aggressive people in my life (think of the absolutely retarded "734-HERO" campaign. Yeah, you're a true hero for turning someone in who is illegally using the HOV lanes).
And before someone dings me for using the adjective "passive-aggresive" to describe Seattle... remember that this is the city that has systematically balked at mass-transit for several decades, usually for no good reason at all. According to Wikipedia, passive aggressive can be defined as : "Passive-aggressive behavior refers to passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following authoritative instructions in interpersonal or occupational situations. It can manifest itself as resentment, stubbornness, procrastination, sullenness, or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is assumed, often explicitly, to be responsible" Seems pretty fitting to me!
The 30 foot rule is completely and totally asinine because unless you are in the middle of absolutely nowhere, 30 feet in either direction away from a door means you are standing within 30 feet of the door next door, or in the middle of the street.
I do agree about the smoking in parks, beaches, and other places where there are congregations of people (especially kids). I have a 5 1/2 year old and I do everything in my power to keep him away from smoke.
Now here's the thing that irks me the most about the smoking bans: what many of the proponents of the bans really want is to outlaw smoking. Why don't they grow a pair and try to push that through the legislature? I would actually appreciate that (even if I don't happen to agree)... but the reasoning that the bans are there to protect the workers is, in my opinion, horseshit. Well, not entirely horeshit (no one in their right mind could argue that smoke is not detrimental to your health), but it's not the real reason. Again... my opinion.