The thing with BitKeeper is that there isn't an open source equivalent. Arch and Subversion are cool, don't get me wrong, but BitKeeper has all they have and more, like some fantastic GUI utils and great merging functionality.
BitKeeper is competing more against Rational ClearCase and the like. Compared against the other heavy weight proprietary SCMs, BitKeeper stacks up *very* well in terms of scalability, usability, and most of all: cost. You can get like 10 BitKeeper dev lincenses for the cost of one Clearcase license, and as your projects get bigger the odds of you having to hire a full time admin with BitKeeper is much lower than Clearcase.
Thus, McVoy is trying to compete with the big boys . He doesn't see (or *want* to see) any advantage to going GPL'ed.
And you say you worked for the industry, well guess what, so do I.
What industry? Airlines? Baggage handlers also work "in the industry" but I wouldn't think of them especially suited to answer questions about RF interference.
Fly by wire isn't, fly by RF, there are actual wires, and these wires wont pick up RF from a device as you say.
So if by "in the industry" you mean have actuall experience testing for interference then you surely know wires are antennas. They *will* pick up RF signals. Chances are small that your RF unit will cause any malfunction in some instrument, but it has happened.
Several years ago, my EE prof was returning on a flight from his vacation when he observed a guy talking on his cell well into the taxi. Sure enough the flight attendant comes over and tells him to shut it off. He ends the call but doesn't shut the phone off. Long story short, his cell phone was interfering with some instrument needed for take-offs. The pilots repeatedly asked everybody to make *sure* they turned everything off. A stewardess heard his phone make a beep from an incomming message or something and turned it off. After it shut down, everything returned to normal.
Now, I've heard anacdotes about how cell phones and airplane cabins have been redesigned since then, so I wouldn't expect it to happen nowadays.
To the OP, yes it can happen, and if it happens at all it'll be at takeoff or landing when all of the instruments are being used. I prolly wouldn't worry about using Bluetooth stuff en route.
I used to think it was stupid that they made you turn off everythink too, but after taking RF theory and learning about all the different ways RF can interfere with electronics, I make damn sure everything is off at takeoff and landing..
Seriously. If you are going to put that much work into it, why not get some drama students? Or hire an acting coach? The CGI stuff and space scenes were fabulous, as were the set designs.
However, the Jedi instill no sence of being Jedi. The dialog is inane and the acting terrible. And not to be sexist or anything but the men handle the light saber much better than the women. Will fan fiction please notice that if you're not good with one light saber don't try to use more than one. The most powerful Jedi only used one. Obi-wan, Luke, Vader, Yoda: one saber. There's a reason for that.
Also, the story isn't that great. There is *much* better fan fiction out there. I know they really couldn't do too much in the time span that they had, but there is better stuff out there.
In conclusion: The space visuals and ship design are professional. The scene backdrops and explosions were very good. Costumes were ok to amaturish. Casting, acting, and blocking was amature.
Master Yoda says, "Unused their potential was. Great the movie could have been. But great they were not. Not like Jedi the Jedi were."
It's also that the activation wasn't a painless process. It may be better now, but when I bought it opening weekend, it took me five hours from first putting the disk in until I finally got to play. Not only did the steam server run painfully slow and wouldn't log me in for hours, but *then* I had to sit through *another* download!
I can also imagine what the process would have been like for someone using dailup. Steam could have been very painless to use but it's current implementation is flawed to the extreme.
First kudos for working an ambulance. I've got more than one friend that does it and it's often a thankless job. So thank you.
Secondly, you work 24 hours shifts? Wow.
Lastly, IIRC and correct me if I'm wrong, but when you are out, you are suppose to stay in a cetain area right? So you spend a lot of time parked in central spots. This guy's job to cover as much area as possible. That makes 3000 mi per month even less impressive.
I was thinking the same thing. 3000/20 working days is 150 miles/day. At the most he's driving within a 75 mile radius.
While I don't know many people willing to commute 75 miles, I do know that people that drive all day in the city regularly log such miles. Think UPS, USPS, Bus Drivers, Cabbies, etc. 150/6.5 driving hours (8 minus setup time and lunch) is about 23 miles an hour.
So he's not really traveling that far, just driving all day.
I have to agree. Java-Doc is one of the best things about java. The API listing is enormously useful and links regularly to the tutorials. Java is simply the most accessible, best documented language/platfrom I've used.
I do wonder why other languages don't adopt some sort of javadoc. While it may add more verbosity to an already verbose class file, modern editors allow ways to hide arbitrary sections.
Sun's api listing is vastly easier to navigate then python's , perl outdated man-page style, or even ruby
Seriously, (and I'm not trying to troll) is there anything better than javadoc? I don't see any drawbacks to it. Why doesn't the rest of the open language community adopt it?
"I'd include using an old-fashioned language like C or C++ in a system which does not require huge speed or efficiency"
I'd like to say that it's not only speed or efficient requirements for C or C++, but for legacy needs as well. One could probably make the argument that more legacy development is done than new speed-dependent code. Last time I wrote C was to interface with a FORTRAN backend. We didn't have the time or money to rewrite 200K+ LOC, nor spend time validating "new" compilers. C was the most logical and quickest choice here.
Main point is that C/C++ have many applications in which they would be used, not just for the sake of speed/efficiency.
Here's an explaination to those of you who are wondering why the you would put puncutation between the upper and lower case letters.
Regular expressions operate on the ascii table. Thus the letters are encoded as numbers (duh). Anyway, they have it so that the upper and lower case letters are exactly 0x20 or 32 away. This is to be able to flip one bit to upper or lower the case letters so that it's a very efficient operation.
A = 0x41 = 0100 0001
a = 0x61 = 0110 0001
In pseudo code A xor 0x20 -> a.(for those that know what xor is)
I relize that explaining this in an article about regexs may not find any readers who didn't already know it. But hey, I though it was cool when I learned it.
I argee. Plus apt-get isn't distro specific. apt works for debs and rpms. It probably works with most all linux installations, as at works with some of the biggestest players: Debian(namely Ubuntu) and Redhat (Fedora through freshrpms and apt-rpm).
Apt is solid stable, easy to use by commandline. Synaptic is better than most GUI package tools. I don't see how a "minimalistic" and young distro specific pacage manager could even compete. Though the name is cute it doesn't install confidence in me.
No, i haven't tried arch, but i'll probably give it a try. But to say that pacman is even on the same level of power and ease as apt is really hard to swallow. Any pacman advocates out there? Care to explain why Arch uses yet-another-packaging-system?
For my money apt and checkinstall is the simplest to use, most powerful and robust packaging system around. I'd challange any comers.
For those that have never heard of checkinstall, it's a wonderfull little utility that captures the "make install" stage of compiling programs yourself. It looks at what "make install" stage does and rolls a.deb or.rpm automatically. Last I checked it didn't work too well with fedora, but it works great with Ubuntu and apt. No more guessing what you have installed on your system, or headaches removing or upgrading custom built software. Easy to use too. Install of make;make install it's make;checkinstall. Bingo, custom built package.
Except the problem is that distro maintainers will never include an dev kernel as the default choice. Most end users, especially businesses, don't want any part of a dev kernel. And I don't really understand how your version is different than the old major.even-stable/major.old-dev model.
I find that less people will use the dev branch and it'll in turn get less testing. Therefore development slows down for stabilities sake. Thus having a labeled dev branch slows development.
What I think Linus was thinking for the 2.6 kernel is as follows. Linux was approaching a level of stability that the latest vinilla kernel will be called stable and still be developed on. Problems will get flushed out sooner because more people are using the latest snapshot. If distros want more stability, they can lag four or five versions back + security fixes. I thought it was the best of both worlds.
Now that he's decided to label dev and stable versions again, it brings back some of the problems, but here the time between stable and dev kernels should be significantly shorter. 2.6.12 and 14 will come out a heck of a lot faster than, say, the time difference between 2.4 and 2.6.
Thus people get their vaunted labels and development features get tested more widely. Distros can ship with the latest they fell comfortable with. Thus we, presumably, get the same stability with the addition of faster development.
It may not work out this way, but I think it's a great idea.
I don't know if it's strengthened sales. And you don't know that it hasn't.
Doesn't matter if it has helped or hurt. It's still illegal and anybody that justifies it away is an ignoramus. Also, so far the courts held my position. So I have the law with my astertion. You have anecdotal evidence. Which side stands stronger? hmmm....
Because we can't separate losses from P2P from losses due to music FUCKING SUCKING.
The RIAA *does* put out some good music, they just don't promote it as much as the shit for the teeny-bopper market. If you can't find any music the RIAA produces that you like, you're not looking hard enough, don't like music, or an idiot.
The whole point to home-brew studios is that they lower the bar of entry. You can record flat vocals and several instruments and get descent quality with only a computer and a couple hundred dollars worth of equipment.
Are producers and studio engineers worth it? No doubt. But, you can begin distributing and making money off of your sound without ever setting foot in a real studio.
Then as time goes on, maybe artists finance themselves. They've sold their home-brew albums at gigs and through a couple of on-line music sites. They start to make real money without an outside investment. Then they can afford some studio work themselves. I know several bands personally that've taken this approach.
Without file sharing, that's hundreds of dollars the recording industry wouldn't have seen.
A good point, but As opposed to millions lost? But do you believe yourself in the majority? I know a couple of people like you who try bands out on teh P2P and then download their albums from iTunes. But does that offset the hundreds of thousands of poor college students with high speed access?
I remember it being like, hmm, ramen or radiohead? You can't eat radiohead. There's no P2P ramen noodle, pizza, and mac & cheese network. And poor college students are just one demographic.
No, we'll never know the actual loses. But do you honestly believe that P2P has *strengthened* sales?
Erm, I never mentioned drugs! I just mentioned sugar.
I quite you: "So it's not a free market in the same sense; it's more like a cartel." So yes, you mentioned cartels. I extended your argument. Mea Culpa. But I wasn't just pulling it out of my ass;).
People don't want some music, they want some specific music.
And specific bands have the right to charge want they want. Most sign over (some/all of) their rights to labels. They set the price. If you don't want to pay that price, you can't have the music. Simple. Now, if you're an alternative, R&B, jazz or fan of whatever, there are alternatives. Many times just as good or better.
And I'm not advocating stealing. I just think that we might want to reconsider what we define as 'stealing' in this context.
I agreee. Totally. It's insane to bring up ridiculous lawsuits and assert enormous amounts of money lost. It's not theft. The RIAA is evil. The law is unclear and unfair. But as for now, it's still wrong. I'm not argueing with you, but others that justicfy music-sharing to this day.
Under those conditions, maybe it's not quite so just for the cartel to choose whatever price it likes?
So don't buy it. There is plenty of good music from independant labels, and many smaller bands give their stuff away for free on the internet. You have no right to, say, a Metalica song no matter how unfairly they price their songs. If you want it, you pay their price. That's the law. Your argument is flawed. There are other producers of music.
But if I copy music, although I get the benefit, the original owner doesn't lose anything.
Flawed logic. You're assuming that a consumer wouldn't go out and buy it if they didn't have any other avenue. Theft isn't the right word, but copyright-infringement *does* cost major labels money. Yes, you may be an idealogue and never buy an RIAA record. But since you are standing up for ideals, why are you listening to the music that the RIAA funds??. Does the RIAA lose as much as they say. Probably not. Has music-sharing cost them money? Yes, and I challenge anybody to argue that assertion.
So copying music is only like theft of physical objects in some ways; in others, it's different.
Correct, but an analogy to drug cartels doesn't make it right to steal drugs. Jesus, I wish freakin people would get it through their heads. Though it's not stealing, it potentially costs labels sales. It's the potentially part that makes it different then theft, but it makes it none-the-less wrong. Don't anybody kid yourself. You have no right to distribute or recieve other people's music. Nada. Zilch.
That the RIAA is evil doesn't make any difference. If you don't like the RIAA, don't listen to any of the music they provide. If you do, you're a fucking hypocrite.
Do I wish the RIAA go to hell and die? Yep. There's no need for them when individuals record, produce and distribute their own music at minimal cost. Promotion and investment can be handled by radio stations. Though this has the scary effect of Clear Channel running the music industry even more than it is.
However, that does nothing to the fact that, by and large, illicit music sharing costs millions of dollars. Billions? Maybe, I don't know. But don't try and make yourself feel good by justifying it.
I like nagios, but it can be difficult to set up. To obtain the same level of functionality with MS Mom, I had to write a number of plugins. Plugin writing is really easy if you know some perl, it's basically just creating a CLI utility that outputs in a certain format that nagios can understand.
Remote services can be checked with ease, but stuff that needs to query the local system, disk-space or load for example, needs a different setup. I ran it through SSH, but I'm not sure the kind of load that would put on 200+ machines and the network. SSH was never ment to be lightweight. You could also do some MRTG hacking and SNMP, but it's a lot of work. If the network was mostly linux machines, I'd go with nagios. However, since this problem is mostly with windows machines, I'd use MS-MOM as the main tool, and go from there.
What is the big deal with flying into space? Space tourism is about as interesting as sitting in your cubicle with added nausea to keep you on your toes.
Millioniares are lining up around the block to sing up for just a venture. And that's totally a surprise right? Nobody had already paid to go (or tried) to, say, the ISS or Mir right? Right. People *are* willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to go into space. Some have already paid millions. Hell, I want to go. There is a market. You don't want to go to space? Hand in your geek card.
but without government money, that isn't going to happen.
As others have already pointed out, this is an entirely private venture, and as the technology gets cheaper and more accessible, the stars will be the limit. If you wanted to go to mars today, it would take a govn't. In 50 years, it's entirely possible to be privately funded, and that's what they're shooting for.
So the next best thing is to make a space "plane" that can transport passengers from New York to Sydney in less than an hour.
I suppose you haven't heard about the brand new venture, Virgin Galatic. What do you think they will do?
Who wants to sit on a thousand pounds of explosives and not go anywhere? Space flight ought to be seen as a means to an end, not the end itself.
Millions of people are intoxicated with the dream of venturing into space. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. Ask some 8 year olds what they want to be. How many say astronauts?
(Score:0, Offtopic)
Training for a start. Peer Support second.
Offtopic? A direct answer to an on-topic question? The parent's answer is terribly short, unproven, and doesn't make any type of a good argument other than regurgitating oft-repeated FUD. However, there is no Wrong -1 mod option, and there shouldn't be.
There *are* training costs to move to any other computer based system, no matter how simple. There may not be much training needed at all, but that is something to consider. Training *is* expensive. Secondly, there *are* less vendors who support linux than windows. Both are valid points, even if I don't agree that would upset the TCO. The post is still valid though it is obviously flippant.
Is parent perhaps flaim-bait? Sure, I wouldn't meta-mod against that. But offtopic?
Come on people, parent may be a MS fanboy but modding is not a weapon to silence dissenting opinions. If you disagree, say why.
Modding them down is junvinille. And surely there is a better mod than offtopic.
IIRC there was a company developing a product that used a separate technology in conjunction with the optical reader to measure the bloodflow in the finger. That way you couldn't just heat up a finger and have it pass, it'd actually have to have blood running through it at the right temperatrure.
It seems that technology like that would make it near impossible in practice to forge.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing with BitKeeper is that there isn't an open source equivalent. Arch and Subversion are cool, don't get me wrong, but BitKeeper has all they have and more, like some fantastic GUI utils and great merging functionality.
BitKeeper is competing more against Rational ClearCase and the like. Compared against the other heavy weight proprietary SCMs, BitKeeper stacks up *very* well in terms of scalability, usability, and most of all: cost. You can get like 10 BitKeeper dev lincenses for the cost of one Clearcase license, and as your projects get bigger the odds of you having to hire a full time admin with BitKeeper is much lower than Clearcase.
Thus, McVoy is trying to compete with the big boys . He doesn't see (or *want* to see) any advantage to going GPL'ed.
I can see it now...
"There's damn bug som'er in mem.c, can you see if you squish that son'va'bitch?"
"Public? I made it a private construct. Torvalds threw it in public."
"If you construct your own low level CMS when the other one runs away,you just might be a redDevneck."
And you say you worked for the industry, well guess what, so do I.
What industry? Airlines? Baggage handlers also work "in the industry" but I wouldn't think of them especially suited to answer questions about RF interference.
Fly by wire isn't, fly by RF, there are actual wires, and these wires wont pick up RF from a device as you say.
So if by "in the industry" you mean have actuall experience testing for interference then you surely know wires are antennas. They *will* pick up RF signals. Chances are small that your RF unit will cause any malfunction in some instrument, but it has happened.
Several years ago, my EE prof was returning on a flight from his vacation when he observed a guy talking on his cell well into the taxi. Sure enough the flight attendant comes over and tells him to shut it off. He ends the call but doesn't shut the phone off. Long story short, his cell phone was interfering with some instrument needed for take-offs. The pilots repeatedly asked everybody to make *sure* they turned everything off. A stewardess heard his phone make a beep from an incomming message or something and turned it off. After it shut down, everything returned to normal.
Now, I've heard anacdotes about how cell phones and airplane cabins have been redesigned since then, so I wouldn't expect it to happen nowadays.
To the OP, yes it can happen, and if it happens at all it'll be at takeoff or landing when all of the instruments are being used. I prolly wouldn't worry about using Bluetooth stuff en route.
I used to think it was stupid that they made you turn off everythink too, but after taking RF theory and learning about all the different ways RF can interfere with electronics, I make damn sure everything is off at takeoff and landing..
Seriously. If you are going to put that much work into it, why not get some drama students? Or hire an acting coach? The CGI stuff and space scenes were fabulous, as were the set designs.
However, the Jedi instill no sence of being Jedi. The dialog is inane and the acting terrible. And not to be sexist or anything but the men handle the light saber much better than the women. Will fan fiction please notice that if you're not good with one light saber don't try to use more than one. The most powerful Jedi only used one. Obi-wan, Luke, Vader, Yoda: one saber. There's a reason for that.
Also, the story isn't that great. There is *much* better fan fiction out there. I know they really couldn't do too much in the time span that they had, but there is better stuff out there.
In conclusion: The space visuals and ship design are professional. The scene backdrops and explosions were very good. Costumes were ok to amaturish. Casting, acting, and blocking was amature.
Master Yoda says, "Unused their potential was. Great the movie could have been. But great they were not. Not like Jedi the Jedi were."
It's also that the activation wasn't a painless process. It may be better now, but when I bought it opening weekend, it took me five hours from first putting the disk in until I finally got to play. Not only did the steam server run painfully slow and wouldn't log me in for hours, but *then* I had to sit through *another* download!
I can also imagine what the process would have been like for someone using dailup. Steam could have been very painless to use but it's current implementation is flawed to the extreme.
Compare: go to mozilla.org, download files, fire up file browser to where you saved it, double click and go through the installation choices.
or
open terminal. apt-get install firefox
Having it in the repository makes life easier. Especially if you want to remove it or update it in the future.
First kudos for working an ambulance. I've got more than one friend that does it and it's often a thankless job. So thank you.
Secondly, you work 24 hours shifts? Wow.
Lastly, IIRC and correct me if I'm wrong, but when you are out, you are suppose to stay in a cetain area right? So you spend a lot of time parked in central spots. This guy's job to cover as much area as possible. That makes 3000 mi per month even less impressive.
I was thinking the same thing. 3000/20 working days is 150 miles/day. At the most he's driving within a 75 mile radius.
While I don't know many people willing to commute 75 miles, I do know that people that drive all day in the city regularly log such miles. Think UPS, USPS, Bus Drivers, Cabbies, etc. 150/6.5 driving hours (8 minus setup time and lunch) is about 23 miles an hour.
So he's not really traveling that far, just driving all day.
Wow. That was a fasinating story.
I have to agree. Java-Doc is one of the best things about java. The API listing is enormously useful and links regularly to the tutorials. Java is simply the most accessible, best documented language/platfrom I've used.
I do wonder why other languages don't adopt some sort of javadoc. While it may add more verbosity to an already verbose class file, modern editors allow ways to hide arbitrary sections.
Sun's api listing is vastly easier to navigate then python's , perl outdated man-page style, or even ruby
Seriously, (and I'm not trying to troll) is there anything better than javadoc? I don't see any drawbacks to it. Why doesn't the rest of the open language community adopt it?
"I'd include using an old-fashioned language like C or C++ in a system which does not require huge speed or efficiency"
I'd like to say that it's not only speed or efficient requirements for C or C++, but for legacy needs as well. One could probably make the argument that more legacy development is done than new speed-dependent code. Last time I wrote C was to interface with a FORTRAN backend. We didn't have the time or money to rewrite 200K+ LOC, nor spend time validating "new" compilers. C was the most logical and quickest choice here.
Main point is that C/C++ have many applications in which they would be used, not just for the sake of speed/efficiency.
Doh. I knew I should have read a few more posts. I should have known somebody else would've explained it earlier, (albiet much less verbose) than I.
Here's an explaination to those of you who are wondering why the you would put puncutation between the upper and lower case letters.
Regular expressions operate on the ascii table. Thus the letters are encoded as numbers (duh). Anyway, they have it so that the upper and lower case letters are exactly 0x20 or 32 away. This is to be able to flip one bit to upper or lower the case letters so that it's a very efficient operation.
A = 0x41 = 0100 0001
a = 0x61 = 0110 0001
In pseudo code A xor 0x20 -> a.(for those that know what xor is)
I relize that explaining this in an article about regexs may not find any readers who didn't already know it. But hey, I though it was cool when I learned it.
I argee. Plus apt-get isn't distro specific. apt works for debs and rpms. It probably works with most all linux installations, as at works with some of the biggestest players: Debian(namely Ubuntu) and Redhat (Fedora through freshrpms and apt-rpm).
.deb or .rpm automatically. Last I checked it didn't work too well with fedora, but it works great with Ubuntu and apt. No more guessing what you have installed on your system, or headaches removing or upgrading custom built software. Easy to use too. Install of make;make install it's make;checkinstall. Bingo, custom built package.
Apt is solid stable, easy to use by commandline. Synaptic is better than most GUI package tools. I don't see how a "minimalistic" and young distro specific pacage manager could even compete. Though the name is cute it doesn't install confidence in me.
No, i haven't tried arch, but i'll probably give it a try. But to say that pacman is even on the same level of power and ease as apt is really hard to swallow. Any pacman advocates out there? Care to explain why Arch uses yet-another-packaging-system?
For my money apt and checkinstall is the simplest to use, most powerful and robust packaging system around. I'd challange any comers.
For those that have never heard of checkinstall, it's a wonderfull little utility that captures the "make install" stage of compiling programs yourself. It looks at what "make install" stage does and rolls a
Apt and checkinstall. A system maintainers dream.
Sorry for the tangent.
Except the problem is that distro maintainers will never include an dev kernel as the default choice. Most end users, especially businesses, don't want any part of a dev kernel. And I don't really understand how your version is different than the old major.even-stable/major.old-dev model.
I find that less people will use the dev branch and it'll in turn get less testing. Therefore development slows down for stabilities sake. Thus having a labeled dev branch slows development.
What I think Linus was thinking for the 2.6 kernel is as follows. Linux was approaching a level of stability that the latest vinilla kernel will be called stable and still be developed on. Problems will get flushed out sooner because more people are using the latest snapshot. If distros want more stability, they can lag four or five versions back + security fixes. I thought it was the best of both worlds.
Now that he's decided to label dev and stable versions again, it brings back some of the problems, but here the time between stable and dev kernels should be significantly shorter. 2.6.12 and 14 will come out a heck of a lot faster than, say, the time difference between 2.4 and 2.6.
Thus people get their vaunted labels and development features get tested more widely. Distros can ship with the latest they fell comfortable with. Thus we, presumably, get the same stability with the addition of faster development.
It may not work out this way, but I think it's a great idea.
I applaud your fantastic retort.
I don't know if it's strengthened sales. And you don't know that it hasn't.
Doesn't matter if it has helped or hurt. It's still illegal and anybody that justifies it away is an ignoramus. Also, so far the courts held my position. So I have the law with my astertion. You have anecdotal evidence. Which side stands stronger? hmmm....
Because we can't separate losses from P2P from losses due to music FUCKING SUCKING.
The RIAA *does* put out some good music, they just don't promote it as much as the shit for the teeny-bopper market. If you can't find any music the RIAA produces that you like, you're not looking hard enough, don't like music, or an idiot.
The whole point to home-brew studios is that they lower the bar of entry. You can record flat vocals and several instruments and get descent quality with only a computer and a couple hundred dollars worth of equipment.
Are producers and studio engineers worth it? No doubt. But, you can begin distributing and making money off of your sound without ever setting foot in a real studio.
Then as time goes on, maybe artists finance themselves. They've sold their home-brew albums at gigs and through a couple of on-line music sites. They start to make real money without an outside investment. Then they can afford some studio work themselves. I know several bands personally that've taken this approach.
Without file sharing, that's hundreds of dollars the recording industry wouldn't have seen.
A good point, but As opposed to millions lost? But do you believe yourself in the majority? I know a couple of people like you who try bands out on teh P2P and then download their albums from iTunes. But does that offset the hundreds of thousands of poor college students with high speed access?
I remember it being like, hmm, ramen or radiohead? You can't eat radiohead. There's no P2P ramen noodle, pizza, and mac & cheese network. And poor college students are just one demographic.
No, we'll never know the actual loses. But do you honestly believe that P2P has *strengthened* sales?
Erm, I never mentioned drugs! I just mentioned sugar.
;).
I quite you: "So it's not a free market in the same sense; it's more like a cartel." So yes, you mentioned cartels. I extended your argument. Mea Culpa. But I wasn't just pulling it out of my ass
People don't want some music, they want some specific music.
And specific bands have the right to charge want they want. Most sign over (some/all of) their rights to labels. They set the price. If you don't want to pay that price, you can't have the music. Simple. Now, if you're an alternative, R&B, jazz or fan of whatever, there are alternatives. Many times just as good or better.
And I'm not advocating stealing. I just think that we might want to reconsider what we define as 'stealing' in this context.
I agreee. Totally. It's insane to bring up ridiculous lawsuits and assert enormous amounts of money lost. It's not theft. The RIAA is evil. The law is unclear and unfair. But as for now, it's still wrong. I'm not argueing with you, but others that justicfy music-sharing to this day.
Under those conditions, maybe it's not quite so just for the cartel to choose whatever price it likes?
So don't buy it. There is plenty of good music from independant labels, and many smaller bands give their stuff away for free on the internet. You have no right to, say, a Metalica song no matter how unfairly they price their songs. If you want it, you pay their price. That's the law. Your argument is flawed. There are other producers of music.
But if I copy music, although I get the benefit, the original owner doesn't lose anything.
Flawed logic. You're assuming that a consumer wouldn't go out and buy it if they didn't have any other avenue. Theft isn't the right word, but copyright-infringement *does* cost major labels money. Yes, you may be an idealogue and never buy an RIAA record. But since you are standing up for ideals, why are you listening to the music that the RIAA funds ??. Does the RIAA lose as much as they say. Probably not. Has music-sharing cost them money? Yes, and I challenge anybody to argue that assertion.
So copying music is only like theft of physical objects in some ways; in others, it's different.
Correct, but an analogy to drug cartels doesn't make it right to steal drugs. Jesus, I wish freakin people would get it through their heads. Though it's not stealing, it potentially costs labels sales. It's the potentially part that makes it different then theft, but it makes it none-the-less wrong. Don't anybody kid yourself. You have no right to distribute or recieve other people's music. Nada. Zilch.
That the RIAA is evil doesn't make any difference. If you don't like the RIAA, don't listen to any of the music they provide. If you do, you're a fucking hypocrite.
Do I wish the RIAA go to hell and die? Yep. There's no need for them when individuals record, produce and distribute their own music at minimal cost. Promotion and investment can be handled by radio stations. Though this has the scary effect of Clear Channel running the music industry even more than it is.
However, that does nothing to the fact that, by and large, illicit music sharing costs millions of dollars. Billions? Maybe, I don't know. But don't try and make yourself feel good by justifying it.
I like nagios, but it can be difficult to set up. To obtain the same level of functionality with MS Mom, I had to write a number of plugins. Plugin writing is really easy if you know some perl, it's basically just creating a CLI utility that outputs in a certain format that nagios can understand.
Remote services can be checked with ease, but stuff that needs to query the local system, disk-space or load for example, needs a different setup. I ran it through SSH, but I'm not sure the kind of load that would put on 200+ machines and the network. SSH was never ment to be lightweight. You could also do some MRTG hacking and SNMP, but it's a lot of work. If the network was mostly linux machines, I'd go with nagios. However, since this problem is mostly with windows machines, I'd use MS-MOM as the main tool, and go from there.
What is the big deal with flying into space? Space tourism is about as interesting as sitting in your cubicle with added nausea to keep you on your toes.
Millioniares are lining up around the block to sing up for just a venture. And that's totally a surprise right? Nobody had already paid to go (or tried) to, say, the ISS or Mir right? Right. People *are* willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to go into space. Some have already paid millions. Hell, I want to go. There is a market. You don't want to go to space? Hand in your geek card.
but without government money, that isn't going to happen.
As others have already pointed out, this is an entirely private venture, and as the technology gets cheaper and more accessible, the stars will be the limit. If you wanted to go to mars today, it would take a govn't. In 50 years, it's entirely possible to be privately funded, and that's what they're shooting for.
So the next best thing is to make a space "plane" that can transport passengers from New York to Sydney in less than an hour.
I suppose you haven't heard about the brand new venture, Virgin Galatic. What do you think they will do?
Who wants to sit on a thousand pounds of explosives and not go anywhere? Space flight ought to be seen as a means to an end, not the end itself.
Millions of people are intoxicated with the dream of venturing into space. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. Ask some 8 year olds what they want to be. How many say astronauts?
(Score:0, Offtopic)
Training for a start. Peer Support second.
Offtopic? A direct answer to an on-topic question? The parent's answer is terribly short, unproven, and doesn't make any type of a good argument other than regurgitating oft-repeated FUD. However, there is no Wrong -1 mod option, and there shouldn't be.
There *are* training costs to move to any other computer based system, no matter how simple. There may not be much training needed at all, but that is something to consider. Training *is* expensive. Secondly, there *are* less vendors who support linux than windows. Both are valid points, even if I don't agree that would upset the TCO. The post is still valid though it is obviously flippant.
Is parent perhaps flaim-bait? Sure, I wouldn't meta-mod against that. But offtopic?
Come on people, parent may be a MS fanboy but modding is not a weapon to silence dissenting opinions. If you disagree, say why.
Modding them down is junvinille. And surely there is a better mod than offtopic.
IIRC there was a company developing a product that used a separate technology in conjunction with the optical reader to measure the bloodflow in the finger. That way you couldn't just heat up a finger and have it pass, it'd actually have to have blood running through it at the right temperatrure.
It seems that technology like that would make it near impossible in practice to forge.