Our house here was built in 1900. Judging from how it was laid out, we are suspecting it was originally a highway-front store or some building of that sort. But we're more than a mile from downtown on the Old Trunk Highway here. It's had a lot added on to it, but the part of it that is original has the high twelve foot ceilings, etc.
It was a hell of a deal, IMHO, because we got the place, on almost five acres of land for $120K. Lots of room out back for the Electronics/Computer lab I hope to one day be able to build. And the wife's water garden projects.
Hey, there are always a lot of people like him out there. They focus heavily on the GPA. They view their college transcript as a tangible asset. I have always tended to piss people like that off, because I will ask questions during the lecture that relate strongly to the subject matter, but that might not even be on an exam for the course. I did that in tech school and it was inevitable that while the lecturer was answering my question, someone else would raise their hand and ask 'will this be on the test Friday.'
My opinion is that if you focus too much on what's on the syllabus, and don't ask those extra questions and do your own side work while in school, you're cheating yourself. A C student who got those C's because he wandered around too much in the library is better than an A student who 'crammed' to earn that A. (granted, there are also 'A' students who aren't rote learners)
I think what you describe might be a thin slice of history. Before the 70's, colleges had very strict requirements, and a standard liberal arts curriculum (or a somewhat lesser version for the engineering students) that had to be followed.
You're mixing up concepts of 'Academic Freedom' which apply to the faculty, with that wishy-washy notion that 'students should only be required to take the courses they want to take,' which is part of what damages the credibility of a college diploma.
Undergrads should NOT be taking only courses from the narrow degree program they choose. If you don't understand that, it's inapproprate for you to be tossing around the term 'Academic Freedom' like you have a right to use it.
When people have been taking a herb for 4000 years to cure menstrual cramps, or whatever, and nobody has died, there really doesn't need to be a 'scientific study' to prove it isn't a lethal herb.
Yeah, I know. The FDA wishes there needed to be one...
Philosophic topics are pretty important. Unless you're just going to be a technician, and you're satisfied letting someone else know why that knob does this.
Some alternative medicine is based on the findings of pre-scientific cultures. Over thousands of years people learned the effect of eating this or that herb. There's no scientific basis or understanding of the chemistry behind the particular herb being a cure.
There doesn't necessarily need to be.
Of course, there's always someone who doesn't have tenure yet, somewhere, who'll dig in and figure it out to get a softer seat at the table.
It comes down to a point that I kept thinking over and over as I watched the first "Lord of the Rings" movie this past week.
Science is not 'revealed.' It is not a matter of digging up some 'fact' buried in arcana. That's the fatal error that many people make. The Wizard in that movie, digging through the dusty old library, finds the ancient tomes that contain the crucial information. This, while plain romantic and a nice component to a fantasy work, misses out on the plain fact knowledge is not something 'discovered' so much as something that is reasoned out.
Knowledge seekers aren't on a quest to discover the 'lost secrets of our past' (sorry, neo-pagans). We're on a mission to learn, through trial and error, the observation of reality (rather than recorded depictions of reality coded into some language).
Re:"please don't ignore us"
on
Linuxworld Fun
·
· Score: 1
Actually, they'll just bring back moon rocks.
While the OS zealots moan and wail and gnash their teeth. And, probably, come up with some ideologically sound reason why we "shouldn't interfere with the natural state of the moon's surface."
That's the time it takes to put the floppy diskette in the drive.
It'll wait for an eternity until you enter a date and a time during the bootup, though. (DOS 1.0 will NOT let you skip setting time and date). And there's no hard drive support, or subdirectories. (how many subdirectories do you want to HAVE on a 180K floppy diskette??)
Therefore, it takes an infinite amount of time to install MacOS.
MacOS loses, hands down.
Personally, I think NetBSD is faster than any of the above. Though you don't get much beyond bare X11 and the Tab Window Manager in the default install, you at least get that much more control over what does get installed on your system.
And it installs on Intel and Apple Hardware, all the way back to an SE/30. What current Apple software product will install on an SE/30??
Actually, in the old days UNIX could be case-insensitive. If you log on with cap-locks on it decides that you are using a caps-only terminal (i.e. a Teletype ASR-33) and the shell switches to a caps-only mode. I don't know if this is true in this day and age, but I know it was in some earlier versions of UNIX. It might be a termcap thing more than a shell thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it looks like the march never happened.
It's Thursday night, and the silence was deadening.
Our house here was built in 1900. Judging from how it was laid out, we are suspecting it was originally a highway-front store or some building of that sort. But we're more than a mile from downtown on the Old Trunk Highway here. It's had a lot added on to it, but the part of it that is original has the high twelve foot ceilings, etc.
It was a hell of a deal, IMHO, because we got the place, on almost five acres of land for $120K. Lots of room out back for the Electronics/Computer lab I hope to one day be able to build. And the wife's water garden projects.
Hey, there are always a lot of people like him out there. They focus heavily on the GPA. They view their college transcript as a tangible asset. I have always tended to piss people like that off, because I will ask questions during the lecture that relate strongly to the subject matter, but that might not even be on an exam for the course. I did that in tech school and it was inevitable that while the lecturer was answering my question, someone else would raise their hand and ask 'will this be on the test Friday.'
My opinion is that if you focus too much on what's on the syllabus, and don't ask those extra questions and do your own side work while in school, you're cheating yourself. A C student who got those C's because he wandered around too much in the library is better than an A student who 'crammed' to earn that A. (granted, there are also 'A' students who aren't rote learners)
I think what you describe might be a thin slice of history. Before the 70's, colleges had very strict requirements, and a standard liberal arts curriculum (or a somewhat lesser version for the engineering students) that had to be followed.
You're mixing up concepts of 'Academic Freedom' which apply to the faculty, with that wishy-washy notion that 'students should only be required to take the courses they want to take,' which is part of what damages the credibility of a college diploma.
Undergrads should NOT be taking only courses from the narrow degree program they choose. If you don't understand that, it's inapproprate for you to be tossing around the term 'Academic Freedom' like you have a right to use it.
But that leaves several avenues for appeal, and one of them is to question the patentability of software in the first place.
Oh, come on.
There are stronger cases to use to fight software patents.
Nobody fighting software patents is going to want this case becoming part of their crusade.
Back in the day, I bought Tannenbaum's "Operating System" textbook in part to get the Minix software that was on the CD pasted inside the cover.
The book is definitely worth having as well, however.
Yep.
Raymond's got enough now to afford a classic VW Beetle Convertible.
Not a restored one, mind you...
It would scare the hell out of me.
It would be the government saying that people are not allowed to have private organizations that are allowed to choose their own memberships.
The week after that happened, there would be Klansmen in the NAACP, and the NAACP would cease to be a viable organisation.
Anti Abortion people would stack pro-choice organizations.
Bible thumpers would stack the Gay rights organizations and appoint their people to the leadership positions.
It just doesn't work.
When people have been taking a herb for 4000 years to cure menstrual cramps, or whatever, and nobody has died, there really doesn't need to be a 'scientific study' to prove it isn't a lethal herb.
Yeah, I know. The FDA wishes there needed to be one...
Guess what?
All of science is based in philosophy.
Philosophic topics are pretty important. Unless you're just going to be a technician, and you're satisfied letting someone else know why that knob does this.
Some alternative medicine is based on the findings of pre-scientific cultures. Over thousands of years people learned the effect of eating this or that herb. There's no scientific basis or understanding of the chemistry behind the particular herb being a cure.
There doesn't necessarily need to be.
Of course, there's always someone who doesn't have tenure yet, somewhere, who'll dig in and figure it out to get a softer seat at the table.
There could even be a God/Gods and life on other planets. Hell, maybe God created the rules of evolution..
There's not enough data to really state wether 'the odds are against or for it'.
Whoop! Just throw the numbers into a formulae and let's see what comes out.
Your 'Fourier transform' analogy breaks down. One can do spectral analysis by other means.
The 'clobber data with statistics' social 'science' is often a solution chasing after a problem to solve.
It comes down to a point that I kept thinking over and over as I watched the first "Lord of the Rings" movie this past week.
Science is not 'revealed.' It is not a matter of digging up some 'fact' buried in arcana. That's the fatal error that many people make. The Wizard in that movie, digging through the dusty old library, finds the ancient tomes that contain the crucial information. This, while plain romantic and a nice component to a fantasy work, misses out on the plain fact knowledge is not something 'discovered' so much as something that is reasoned out.
Knowledge seekers aren't on a quest to discover the 'lost secrets of our past' (sorry, neo-pagans). We're on a mission to learn, through trial and error, the observation of reality (rather than recorded depictions of reality coded into some language).
Actually, they'll just bring back moon rocks.
While the OS zealots moan and wail and gnash their teeth. And, probably, come up with some ideologically sound reason why we "shouldn't interfere with the natural state of the moon's surface."
One problem with your analogy:
The 'Open field of battle' is the Digital Hub.
The 'Vietnamese' is Hollywood, using whatever means necessary to defeat their enemy.
Keep that in mind.
The point was:
Any Mac, even as old as a SE/30.
There is ethernet available for the SE/30. Usually on eBay for less than $20. NetBSD supports it.
It takes a short amount of time to add whatever Window Manager you want using the Packages system.
Don't you mean, the last version of A/UX? It's a dead OS.
Wow! Now everybody is gonna want a Bruce Schneier drivers license, that shows no picture, signature, or SSN. Sounds like a handy thing to keep around.
And you're saying that having, ummm... magazines in the bathroom is sanitary?
Better wipe that up there.
I've installed NetBSD on SparcStation IPX and IPC machines, over a serial console. Using the NFS method, from a server running Slackware.
It's sort of cool getting those little Sparc cubes running, without a keyboard or a monitor.
A DOS 1.0 install takes about four seconds.
That's the time it takes to put the floppy diskette in the drive.
It'll wait for an eternity until you enter a date and a time during the bootup, though. (DOS 1.0 will NOT let you skip setting time and date). And there's no hard drive support, or subdirectories. (how many subdirectories do you want to HAVE on a 180K floppy diskette??)
You can't.
Therefore, it takes an infinite amount of time to install MacOS.
MacOS loses, hands down.
Personally, I think NetBSD is faster than any of the above. Though you don't get much beyond bare X11 and the Tab Window Manager in the default install, you at least get that much more control over what does get installed on your system.
And it installs on Intel and Apple Hardware, all the way back to an SE/30. What current Apple software product will install on an SE/30??
Whoops. You just killed a bunch of systems that have a few thousand files in the directory.
That Hash sounds pretty bloaty to me. Are all these hashes going to be redundant and supplied by each application in userspace?
and prompt the user when there are conflicts
Okay. Now, let's remember that sometimes 'the user' is a process known as Init. Init doesn't like to stop for prompt dialogues.
Actually, in the old days UNIX could be case-insensitive. If you log on with cap-locks on it decides that you are using a caps-only terminal (i.e. a Teletype ASR-33) and the shell switches to a caps-only mode. I don't know if this is true in this day and age, but I know it was in some earlier versions of UNIX. It might be a termcap thing more than a shell thing.