They decided to reinvent themselves from selling high-dollar "servers" (not really, more minis, but whatever). By selling low-cost commodity PC's. And parts. At Walmart. About ten years ago.
Does anyone but me remember Wang? I didn't think so. Good-bye, Sun.
Besides as already noted they show correlation but not causation (despite the fact they try real hard to imply it), they don't even use a valid measure of ADD. They use a measure of hyperactivity. Hyperactivity is not ADD. ADD can occur with or without hyperactivity, and hyperactivity can be due to other than ADD.
It is well known that kids with ADD, even with hyperactivity, can sit and focus on active things for long periods of time (TV, video games, etc.). It is far more likely that lots of TV watching can be a sign of burgeoning ADD symptoms (or a very busy parent).
Anyone interested in what ADD is and isn't should read chapters 9 and 10 in Diane McGuiness's book "When Children Don't Learn". She pretty much tears a new one into the present tendency to diagnose any kid with any problems as having ADD.
Actually, whether there is such a thing as ADD(-H) (that is, ADHD without Hyperactivity) is perhaps the most hotly debated question among ADD researchers. Personally, I feel that there is such a thing as ADD(-H), as well as ADD(+H) to borrow the terms used in the DSM3. DSM4 abandoned the term ADD altogether in favor of "ADHD".
ADHD may be overdiagnosed - I honestly am not convinced either way. But do bear in mind that it is a real and significant problem for many people (myself included.) I spent 26 years of my life self-destructing because of ADHD - I ended up dropping out of high school, dropping out of college the first time around, and basically disfunctional except in a fairly narrow specialty of computer systems engineering. I couldn't even program because I couldn't stay focused long enough on the "grunt" code.
At 26, I was diagnosed with ADHD, treated with appropriate medications (Wellbutrin, Adderall, and Clonidine at the moment), and have since finished my BA (with a 4.0 for classes taken after returning to school) and am well on my way to a Masters in Theology (which will probably go on to become a Ph.D.) with a 4.15 out of a possible 4.3 GPA. Not bad for a high school dropout, eh?
For those who need a good, basic word processor with advanced language and academic style features, it's hard to beat mellel. Check it out at redlers.com. Cost is $29 shareware, so you can't beat the price, and it is definitely much better than MS "I reformat every document to make it not really Turabian because 'it looks like you are trying to write a letter!'" Word.
The more people like a job, the higher the supply, and the lower the pay (all else being equal).
That's why programmers, accountants, doctors and the like make a lot of money while teachers make little more than minimum wage. Moreso, teachers in public schools make reasonable (but not great money), but teachers in private schools make a lot less. Why can private schools get cheaper teachers? Because the teachers in private schools like their job better.
I guess I'm about 20 miles from goochland - I haven't had much occasion to go that way. Part of my Evil Plan includes driving to Richmond or UVA for Ph.D. work eventually.:)
I work for a company in the Northern Virginia space and live 90 minutes out in Louisa, VA. Very small town. Basically, I telecommute and come to work once a month or so. Been doing it for four years now, and seems to work pretty well. FWIW, I'm a rather senior UNIX sysadmin - fortunately, I'm in a team where other people do hardware, so I can mostly focus on the software aspects of my job.
I've become increasingly convinced that most "multi purpose" tools simply don't work very well. When I work on computers, I don't use a swiss army knife: instead, I carry a "screw stick" (one of those screwdrivers with four difference phillips and flat heads), a pair of needle-nose pliers, a regular pocket knife (a small gerber model that has one, sharp 2" blad) and a knoppix CD to diagnostics and the like. With those tools, I can fix anything. I might add a USB stick for quick backups and such if the price on big ones comes down some more.
I used to carry a swiss army knife, but found it difficult to get leverage and even more difficult to get to small, recessed screws and the like.
I think that, in response to SCO's newly discovered status as a proven Microsoft Proxy, we should start referring to them as Microsoft Puppets. After all, Microsoft Puppets is what they really are, as we all know. And nobody would want to give Microsoft Puppets money if they didn't have to. In fact, it is important that, when people search for Microsoft Puppets, they find out exactly who such Microsoft Puppets might be.
A couple of years ago, I bought a compact flash card at Walmart. Someone had taken the 128mb card out of the package and replaced it with their old, 4MB card. Once I managed to explain to the clueless person at the return desk what the problem was, she called the manager, who took it back (for exchange) no problem. I think if I had wanted cash back they might have given me a hard time.
Oh? And what makes this a frivolous lawsuit? While you may not agree with it, can you at least for a moment concede that just maybe SCO has a case and that some of their intellectual property was used in an unauthorized way.
The problem is that SCO has:
Spent a lot of time trumpeting how they own Linux code.
Changed their claims twenty times or so.
Refused to identify the actual code they claim to own beyond a few interface definitions. It has long been held that such information is *not* copyrightable.
Sued two companies - IBM and Autozone - for contract disputes only vaguely related to Linux, then tried to make it sound like the issue is UNIX IP in Linux.
Failed to produce any real evidence in their case with IBM, and pursued a case with Autozone on the flimsiest of evidence. (Namely, that the transition from SCO to Linux went too smoothly, so they *must* have used SCO. Are you a UNIX programmer on SCO and Linux? If you were, you would know that this argument is completely absurd, since there are few substantial differences.)
Now - it is certainly *possible* that there is some SCO property in Linux. But SCO has had every opportunity to show what it is, and at every step of the way they have failed to do so. For those of us familiar with the history of SCO Group, history of Linux, and the open source development process, there is simply no credible evidence to convince us that there is any SCO IP in Linux. If there is any IP, it is most likely confined to optional subsystems (e.g. the SGI XFS issue.)
Perhaps, we are taking the wrong angle here. Instead of trying to beat SCO in the press and the courts, maybe we should try beating them in the church.
Here's the scheme:
Darl McBride is a Mormon, and this fact has been commented on.
He is engaged in clearly fraudulent behavior, and holding Mormonism up for scorn.
The LDS has been known to kick people out for giving the church a bad rap (e.g. Alice Cooper was excommunicated.)
So... Let's start petitioning to have Darl excommunicated!
Think about it - sending him to hell for eternal damnation is much better than sending him to some Federal love-feast prison for stock fraud. Believe me, Hell is a real pound-you-in-the-&*(*&# kind of place.
(No, I'm not a Mormon, and am not seriously proposing this - but if I were a Mormon, I would consider raising the issue. There are any number of articles out there pointing out the Mormon influence in SCOgroup/Caldera. This kind of fraudulent and misleading nonsense does nothing to promote the Mormons' nice-to-little-old-ladies-and-family-values PR campaigns.)
Apple doesn't have a presence in the video game market, and if Microsoft uses something resembling the PPC 970 in the X2, that can only serve to [a] pay back IBM's investment in the 970 and [b] subsidize further development without Apple having to pick up the tab. Volume goes up, prices go down.
Yeah yeah. I knew of JWZ's rant, but thought (at the time) that he was mistaken. Remember, he was trying to discourage people from using Linux in favor of proprietary Unixes. My experience (going back to the early nineties) has always been that proprietary UNIX sucks more than anything.
My snappy comeback to those who claim Macs are more expensive is:
That's right, they are more expensive if your time has no value.
That usually elicits at least a thoughtful look. With that line as a starting point, I've converted three organizations over to Macs in the past 2 years, so it's got something going for it.
My wife had twins three years ago, and she breastfed. I will leave it to your imagination to consider how she looked after a year of breastfeeding *two* babies - she lost about 20 lbs. and gained a bra size. It was *very* nice.
Once in college, many years ago, drunk on the power of UNIX and beverages that I can't recall, I decided it would be clever to create, as root, a directory named '*' in the home directory. The following morning, hung over but still drunk on the power of UID 0, I correctly decided that this was a stupid id and ran the obvious command:
rm -rf/*
Then, I went looking for coffee.
Ooops. So, don't drink and root. Important safety note.
What I'm trying to say is that you believe what you read in the bible because you already believe to begin with. What makes those stories more true than greek, roman, or norse mythology, or scientology and rastafarians in more modern days even?
Well, for starters I don't think that much of Classical mythology was ever taken to be historical, even by most adherents of those religions. At least, that is what I've always been told. It comes down to question of intent - there's no reason to think that Homer was attempting to write history, and he certainly makes no claim to. On the other hand, the New Testament makes explicit claim in several places (1Cor 15, Luke 1, Jn 21) to be historical fact.
In the face of these claims, you have to suppose that the writer was either:
lying (yet why would he lie?)
incompetent (isn't this just temporal provincialism? What basis do we have for claiming that they were less able to discern mundane truth from their senses than we are? Believe it or not, the 17th century rationalists were not the first to realize that people usually do not rise from the dead.)
Accurate.
It's obvious which option I think most probable, is it not?
I will never believe that a person was resurrected from the dead because scientifically it can't happen. Can I believe that Jesus existed and walked around and spread some kind words around? Sure I can. Do I believe he fed masses of starving people with a loaf of bread and a few fish? No, huge diffference.
What scientific law would be broken by the resurrection? Come now, be specific. The fact of the matter is that it is quite easy to prove something possible, and quite difficult to prove something impossible. When people say that something is "scientifically impossible", ignoring the evidence that it happened, science has a habit of proving them wrong. I'm not saying that you have to approach the Bible with a naive, literalistic hermeneutic. However, I think that you are guilty of imposing your own experience over above those of at least several people who *claimed* to be eye-witnesses very casually.
Remember, in the forties "fly to the moon" was a synonym for "impossible."
What, exactly, in the constitution do you find to prevent a state from passing laws against public nudity? Just wondering - please quote the exact section and relevant precedent if you don't mind.
Whether you accept the claim or not, Christianity does claim to be based on historical fact:
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. [...] 12Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, zhow can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, athen not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.
1Corinthians 15:3-8, 12-14
Here we have an appeal to some very factual claims - including witnesses - and an insistence that if those factual claims are not true, then the Christian faith is meaningless. In my own, personal, theology, the "leap of faith" will only take you so far. It's great to make as the last step (or the first) along the road from "Jesus who?" to "Jesus Lord", but it's not sufficient. At some point, orthodox Christian theology boils down to certain historical claims that cannot be ignored and must be either accepted or denied. The key claim is the resurrection.
From what I've seen, no other world religion is so dependent on historical claims as Christianity. In fact, the only one that could even come close is Judaism. However, I cannot claim to be expert in any other religion, so will have to defer to those who are. Certainly, from what I know none of the Eastern religions seems to rely at all on historical claims.
Well, for what it's worth I had read the book. I may have been confusing the statement of the Magdalene theory in DC with another statement of it (this has been proposed, and rejected, for at least fifty years.)
I would expect it to be self-evident that a flip conversation on/. does not conform to the same rules as a research paper. If I *were* writing a research paper on DC (who would bother?) I would have re-read the book much more carefully. But, in case you haven't noticed,/. is not a research forum, it's an opinion forum. Translation: stop being silly and put your straw-man back in its place.
Go to your doctor and ask him to prescribe Zyban/Wellbutrin. It works by mimicing the "high" you get from smoking (i.e. raising dopamine levels), and was pretty effective for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone but me remember Wang? I didn't think so. Good-bye, Sun.
ADHD may be overdiagnosed - I honestly am not convinced either way. But do bear in mind that it is a real and significant problem for many people (myself included.) I spent 26 years of my life self-destructing because of ADHD - I ended up dropping out of high school, dropping out of college the first time around, and basically disfunctional except in a fairly narrow specialty of computer systems engineering. I couldn't even program because I couldn't stay focused long enough on the "grunt" code.
At 26, I was diagnosed with ADHD, treated with appropriate medications (Wellbutrin, Adderall, and Clonidine at the moment), and have since finished my BA (with a 4.0 for classes taken after returning to school) and am well on my way to a Masters in Theology (which will probably go on to become a Ph.D.) with a 4.15 out of a possible 4.3 GPA. Not bad for a high school dropout, eh?
For those who need a good, basic word processor with advanced language and academic style features, it's hard to beat mellel. Check it out at redlers.com. Cost is $29 shareware, so you can't beat the price, and it is definitely much better than MS "I reformat every document to make it not really Turabian because 'it looks like you are trying to write a letter!'" Word.
That's why programmers, accountants, doctors and the like make a lot of money while teachers make little more than minimum wage. Moreso, teachers in public schools make reasonable (but not great money), but teachers in private schools make a lot less. Why can private schools get cheaper teachers? Because the teachers in private schools like their job better.
I guess I'm about 20 miles from goochland - I haven't had much occasion to go that way. Part of my Evil Plan includes driving to Richmond or UVA for Ph.D. work eventually. :)
I work for a company in the Northern Virginia space and live 90 minutes out in Louisa, VA. Very small town. Basically, I telecommute and come to work once a month or so. Been doing it for four years now, and seems to work pretty well. FWIW, I'm a rather senior UNIX sysadmin - fortunately, I'm in a team where other people do hardware, so I can mostly focus on the software aspects of my job.
I used to carry a swiss army knife, but found it difficult to get leverage and even more difficult to get to small, recessed screws and the like.
(No Microsoft Puppets were harmed in the making of this ad, funded by the Committee for the advancement of Microsoft Puppets.)
A couple of years ago, I bought a compact flash card at Walmart. Someone had taken the 128mb card out of the package and replaced it with their old, 4MB card. Once I managed to explain to the clueless person at the return desk what the problem was, she called the manager, who took it back (for exchange) no problem. I think if I had wanted cash back they might have given me a hard time.
Bad news - Flash has been available for Linux for several years.
- Spent a lot of time trumpeting how they own Linux code.
- Changed their claims twenty times or so.
- Refused to identify the actual code they claim to own beyond a few interface definitions. It has long been held that such information is *not* copyrightable.
- Sued two companies - IBM and Autozone - for contract disputes only vaguely related to Linux, then tried to make it sound like the issue is UNIX IP in Linux.
- Failed to produce any real evidence in their case with IBM, and pursued a case with Autozone on the flimsiest of evidence. (Namely, that the transition from SCO to Linux went too smoothly, so they *must* have used SCO. Are you a UNIX programmer on SCO and Linux? If you were, you would know that this argument is completely absurd, since there are few substantial differences.)
Now - it is certainly *possible* that there is some SCO property in Linux. But SCO has had every opportunity to show what it is, and at every step of the way they have failed to do so. For those of us familiar with the history of SCO Group, history of Linux, and the open source development process, there is simply no credible evidence to convince us that there is any SCO IP in Linux. If there is any IP, it is most likely confined to optional subsystems (e.g. the SGI XFS issue.)Here's a nickel, get a real computer.
Here's the scheme:
- Darl McBride is a Mormon, and this fact has been commented on.
- He is engaged in clearly fraudulent behavior, and holding Mormonism up for scorn.
- The LDS has been known to kick people out for giving the church a bad rap (e.g. Alice Cooper was excommunicated.)
- So... Let's start petitioning to have Darl excommunicated!
Think about it - sending him to hell for eternal damnation is much better than sending him to some Federal love-feast prison for stock fraud. Believe me, Hell is a real pound-you-in-the-&*(*&# kind of place.(No, I'm not a Mormon, and am not seriously proposing this - but if I were a Mormon, I would consider raising the issue. There are any number of articles out there pointing out the Mormon influence in SCOgroup/Caldera. This kind of fraudulent and misleading nonsense does nothing to promote the Mormons' nice-to-little-old-ladies-and-family-values PR campaigns.)
I personally would love to find a good DTD for the humanities, but haven't yet found it.
Apple doesn't have a presence in the video game market, and if Microsoft uses something resembling the PPC 970 in the X2, that can only serve to [a] pay back IBM's investment in the 970 and [b] subsidize further development without Apple having to pick up the tab. Volume goes up, prices go down.
Yeah yeah. I knew of JWZ's rant, but thought (at the time) that he was mistaken. Remember, he was trying to discourage people from using Linux in favor of proprietary Unixes. My experience (going back to the early nineties) has always been that proprietary UNIX sucks more than anything.
They're so afraid of geeks that they don't even let them on TV in the first place.
My wife had twins three years ago, and she breastfed. I will leave it to your imagination to consider how she looked after a year of breastfeeding *two* babies - she lost about 20 lbs. and gained a bra size. It was *very* nice.
Ooops. So, don't drink and root. Important safety note.
In the face of these claims, you have to suppose that the writer was either:
- lying (yet why would he lie?)
- incompetent (isn't this just temporal provincialism? What basis do we have for claiming that they were less able to discern mundane truth from their senses than we are? Believe it or not, the 17th century rationalists were not the first to realize that people usually do not rise from the dead.)
- Accurate.
It's obvious which option I think most probable, is it not? What scientific law would be broken by the resurrection? Come now, be specific. The fact of the matter is that it is quite easy to prove something possible, and quite difficult to prove something impossible. When people say that something is "scientifically impossible", ignoring the evidence that it happened, science has a habit of proving them wrong. I'm not saying that you have to approach the Bible with a naive, literalistic hermeneutic. However, I think that you are guilty of imposing your own experience over above those of at least several people who *claimed* to be eye-witnesses very casually.Remember, in the forties "fly to the moon" was a synonym for "impossible."
What, exactly, in the constitution do you find to prevent a state from passing laws against public nudity? Just wondering - please quote the exact section and relevant precedent if you don't mind.
From what I've seen, no other world religion is so dependent on historical claims as Christianity. In fact, the only one that could even come close is Judaism. However, I cannot claim to be expert in any other religion, so will have to defer to those who are. Certainly, from what I know none of the Eastern religions seems to rely at all on historical claims.
I would expect it to be self-evident that a flip conversation on /. does not conform to the same rules as a research paper. If I *were* writing a research paper on DC (who would bother?) I would have re-read the book much more carefully. But, in case you haven't noticed, /. is not a research forum, it's an opinion forum. Translation: stop being silly and put your straw-man back in its place.
Go to your doctor and ask him to prescribe Zyban/Wellbutrin. It works by mimicing the "high" you get from smoking (i.e. raising dopamine levels), and was pretty effective for me.