The instant you think of something that you need to do, immediately begin doing it. If you are at college, you should have a constant barrage of things. Do not bother trying to organize your time beyond the classes you must attend and meals you must eat. If you follow my advice correctly, you should be busy constantly.
The problem you are having is that you have many things to do. Sitting around worrying which to work on first is just a waste of time. Which did you think of first? Work on that one until you make significant progress, then switch to whatever you thought of next. Constant calculations about how to make yourself more efficient by prioritizing tasks drain your energy and increase your stress, while using my 'work whenever you think about work' method will get things done.
If you get distracted between the time you think of something you need to do and the time it takes to start doing it, you have the attention span of a hamster. I would warn you that you can make up all sorts of excuses for this, like attention deficit disorder, all the while insisting that you are intelligent (which may be true). But being intelligent is only the potential to do things - nobody will care that you are intelligent if you are too unfocused to use your mind. Lack of accomplishment equals lack of capability in most people's minds.
Hi, it has come to my attention that posts that have the same subject line as common trolls will be moderated into the ground, sometimes using the 'offtopic' moderation, even when they are entirely on topic, and relevant to the discussion at hand. That's life, I guess.
Mod away, morons, my karma bonus is not going to go away.
"would you choose a shitty car that broke all the fucking time and didn't use a normal steering wheel, a standard gear lever, or a wheel-mounted stalk for a turn indicator, or a toyota."
I actually thought open source software was supposed to be the toyota until I read the rest of your post. I guess it all depends on what you consider 'standard' and 'normal.'
Or, more to the point, reliable. I am unused to hearing attacks of open source software, especially operating systems like Linux or FreeBSD, being mounted from the position that it is unreliable. That is because the position is untenable, of course.
It may appear unreliable, but it is only as reliable as the user. Open software helps users realize their full potential as users, allowing them to go as deep as they like into the system, while closed software forces them to function only in ways the designer intended them to, most significantly taking away their freedom to modify the system.
The important question for governments is, who are the users? Is it really the politicians, or is it the people they represent? How important is openness? How important is modification? How important is freedom? I like your point about government workers, but it only underscores that freedom has a price.
I think it is worth paying. Consider the dividends.
I'll put in a vote right now that upgrading existing G4 systems to G5's truly is impossible, or at least not worthwhile, and it will never ever happen. The bus architecture is too different. Far too different.
There is a money transfer system called hawala that allows two people in different locations with a means of communication, who trust each other absolutely, to transfer money without the aid of the banking system. Lots of people use it to send money from America to the the Far East - mostly because it is cheaper than Western Union, etc. However, I understand it is being cracked down on because terrorists were using it to move funds around. Still, it will be difficult to shut down completely since it only takes two people and a means of communication to operate. Most of the people who use this system today do so because there is no reasonable alternative (financial system is not good in their area), not because they are terrorists.
I have read that organized crime transfers money from country to country by wiring small amounts (under the amount that must be reported) constantly. Even though there is a paper trail of sorts, it is very hard to sort through. But again, most of the people who wire money are not organized criminals. Should we stop this practice because some of the people are?
Means of moving illegal money secretively already exist. I think the idea with this system is it could allow people to make online purchases, even if they are from an area of the world that does not have the financial systems and identification systems that we take for granted in the West. I am inclined to think the net effect of this would be good. Many people do not have any sort of identification or formal bank account (as required for a service like paypal, which is apparently unavailable in much of the world), but if they could get to a kiosk with some cash, they might be able to order something - provided someone was willing to ship it to them. This could be a big improvement in the lives of many people. It could also help economic growth, facilitating transactions at greater distances and of greater complexity than was possible before.
Should we not build any infrastructure because criminals could use it? Criminals can drive on the roads, too, but that does not mean we stop building them. We police them. This system would have to be policed.
Yeah, but the nice thing about the recovery cds with macs is that you can completely reinstall the base system, and all the applications, without touching the home directories of the users. If all your important data is in your home directory, and your system fails to boot or something, you can reinstall the software without losing anything! Unlike the 'evil' cds another poster mentioned. For this reason it is best to keep your stuff in your home directory.
I do not understand how you could have an already installed system and it could be missing one app that you need to install from the restore cd - I doubt there is anything that was not preinstalled on your computer on the restore cd. Anybody run into an example of this? I guess you could have done a previous restore and deliberately chosen not to install an app or something when you did it, and then later changed your mind, leaving yourself with only another restore to reverse your mistake.
Your argument assumes that there is only a finite amount of wealth in the world, and that if we do not concentrate it here, it will go somewhere else and leave us impoverished. In reality, wealth is generated according to human production. If we (meaning the nation, or even the human race as a whole) produce more, we are more wealthy! Even if we have less 'money', which is just paper anyway, but more things we like, we are better off. Therefore not at all outsourcing is bad, as it allows us to enjoy the same products for less money, freeing up money to put to work doing other things. People always complain because this kind of thing hits specific groups of people hard, while benefitting everybody else. Steel workers come to mind - even though the United States steel industry has been in decline since the 50s, since most of the skyscrapers and railroads have been built already (never mind cars, they do not require newly made steel to make), they insisted on having protection against foreign competition at the cost of everybody, since this protection meant anybody who wanted to buy steel had to pay more. But the total cost of the tariffs to the economy was considerably greater than the money being paid to the steel workers. Protectionism does not create wealth - it hampers production by transferring wealth from everyone else to unproductive sectors of society.
I guess programming is going that way too these days, being replaced with foreign labor. And the programmers are upset.
I have no pity on the people who refuse to change their skillset as the economic rewards of their current occupation go down. What did you expect, your job was going to be some kind of golden ticket for the rest of your life? Maybe that is what you thought your college degree was going to be - that is sure how they are sold to young people. I am sorry for anyone who planned their life as if the world were more stable than it actually is. But the process of increasing production has got to continue, apparently, and the only way to encourage this to happen is to have global competition, and that means having to deal with competent people from India and the like who will do good work for $10 a day. Not fair, you say? Is it fairer that the Indian should live in poverty, despite having the skillset to do better? If you say you do not care what happens to India as long as you are not affected, consider that software will be much more costly as a result of this, leaving you less money to spend on anything else you might want. Unfortunately, it is possible for individuals to be negatively affected either way (if they are programmers or steel workers), but for society there is only one correct solution.
Now, having said all this, I think you are quite right that the bottom could still fall out of the U.S economy, quite possibly due to consumer spending. I am inclined to think the levels of household debt are alarming here. Consumers do not have much more to spend.
Nitpicking here, but looking at the specs from Sun's site, it does not appear that the D2 disk array supports the Sun Fire V240 server. Here's the link. Note the list of supported hardware platforms for the D2, about halfway down the page.
I thought it was mostly because the licensing terms of the BSD license were more liberal, allowing commercial use of the FreeBSD code with hardly any restrictions. Whereas the GPL contains more restrictions on the user that are intended to keep the code free no matter what.
Maybe this is what you just said, but I think what I am saying is a different reason. I think Apple went with FreeBSD because it was easier to use for commercial purposes than Linux, rather than because it was immune to lawsuits.
I also do not think that Apple could possibly be familiar with all the code bases of the commercial Unixes out there, of which SCO is one. That is where the lawsuit is coming from, a commercial Unix vendor, not the Linux community!
Incidentally, Apple approached Linus about working with them, but he refused because he thought MacOS 9 was a 'piece of crap' (direct quote).
Yeah, eventually good ideas even trickle up to reach into the upper eschelons of management and academia. Where they are appropriated seamlessly, as if they originated there.
"Why is linux getting all that good press is the real puzzlement."
Because during the dotcom boom it was tagged as the 'Microsoft killer', and a lot of people have bad feelings toward Microsoft. I mean regular people, who only intuitively know that things happen with their systems that should never occur, like bluescreens. That includes journalists, at least tech ones.
BSD for some reason did not get as much publicity during the dotcom boom, despite being a good system. There you have my theory.
From the article it seems like the Japanese government was running their payroll software on a big proprietary unix system anyway, and was looking to upgrade the underlying system. It is not surprising that they picked Linux to do this - they say one of the reasons for the selection is because the hardware it runs on is cheaper. Maybe they ditched some Sun hardware? Some other vendor?
I'm sure Microsoft wanted them to use their software, but Linux is more likely to win when the competition is another *nix. Microsoft probably couldn't meet the requirements of 'runs old payroll software' or something, no matter how low they could price their software to compete.
This is a win for Linux, but not that big of a win, considering the details of the situation. This hardly indicates an expanding mindshare for the platform, just ability to cannibalize another *nix with its freeness.
You don't suppose this was because of Jim Crow, do you? Yes, I believe that was it.
Why not extend the suggestion and only allow literate white males who make $150,000 a year or more to vote?
The argument usually goes is that since the government acts on behalf of the people, everyone it purports to act for should have a say in its operation. But many people would rather that the government attach more weight to their interests at the expense of everyone else. Ah, selfishness, it is what makes our society what it is today.
No kidding, these things have the potential to be a disaster for the democratic process, enabling voting fraud on a scale never before seen. If they ever try to get such devices in my district without making them open and easily accountable, my congressional district is going to hear holy hell about it from me. I almost never care about politics. I don't write letters to my elected officials or to the editor. I don't donate money to political campaigns or consider myself a member of either party.
But if democracy is going to be done away with through the adoption of flawed technology, I feel I have no choice but to act. Luckily, I believe budgetary constraints are preventing these 'upgrades' in my area.
Is how few emails were for business. I assume this category would include responses to spam. Maybe I do not understand the story, and the CyberAngels people were merely responsible for sending the spam (for other people), and if anyone responded to the offers in the mails it would go to an non-CyberAngels address. Or possibly redirected to a website, where they could make a purchase. Yeah, as I type out my thoughts, the reason for the dearth of business emails becomes clearer.
I had hoped for some accurate stats on the actual response rates to spam. I have heard rumors flying around that they are insanely low, like.0003%, and insanely high (compared with other forms of direct marketing), like 5%. People can argue for one side or another, but I need more evidence than conjecture to begin to understand the problem. If the response rate is already very low, then relatively simple technological solutions would probably suffice to drive them low enough to make spam unprofitable. If the response rate is high, it is going to take a lot of effort to fix this problem, possibly involving a redesign of the email system.
Glad to see these spammers were shut down, but we need more insights into the way they operate in order to shut them all down.
Well, there is one I/O system, the bus, but from what I understand it is a point to point system that runs at 1Ghz in the 2GHz dual processor machines. That is a heck of a lot of bus bandwidth. The G5 is designed to do 2, 4, or even 8 way multiprocessing without too much competition between the chips for system resources.
I agree totally that we need to see benchmarks of one dual system against another. But bear in mind that the use of dual processors depends a lot upon the specific code being run and also the operating system. I think the general problem here is that the G5, while fast, is not like 10X faster than the competition and at this point it is difficult to tell what scores where.
Um, her speech about childbirth was an analogy. You see, the Unwittingly Evil Scientists were not exactly unwitting - wasn't CyberDyne Systems working on developing weapons for the military in the movie? Admittedly, the line plays the gender card, saying since men were unable to bear children, they didn't know what it was like to create life, all they were creating was death.
I don't think the idea was that humanity should not pursue knowledge, it was that humanity should not use its reasoning ability to create destruction on an ever greater scale.
I thought what Linda Hamilton (as Sarah Conner) said was essentially, "What good is all this knowledge if we are just going to use it to kill people?" Yeah, it does not take much cleverness to carry a baby, but to understand the implications of doing so requires at least some moral development. You know, like caring about the future world in which the child will live? Looking at the situation in the movie, it was not at all clear that technology and science were going to make that world better. The scientists in T2, blithely pursuing their research without regard to the moral implications for humanity, were actually making the world a worse place!
Let us hope that reality does not correspond to this bleak assessment, but that depends on our moral ability to handle knowledge, not on our ability to avoid 'evil' knowledge. How can wisdom come without understanding? Many scientists consider the potential consequences of their findings carefully. While it is not always possible to predict in advance which research will have more destructive applications than positive ones, advance consideration at least reduces the chance of producing a Frankenstein's monster. Unfortunately, the movie scientists never stopped working for a moment (witness Dyson hard at work at home on his computer, ignoring his children - just before Sarah Conner attempts to kill him) to consider any implications of their work.
To summarize, knowledge without morals is not good for the future of humanity, as represented in this case by an unborn child.
This assertion, though crudely made in the movie, never disgusted me.
"the popularity of libraries today has been dropping."
This is because stupid people have more children than well-educated ones. Because of this, as the population increases, the amount of interest in education and even reading remains about the same. Therefore dropping proportionate to the increase in population.
I think it is unfair to say that the popularity of libraries is dropping, just that the level of interest is not increasing with increased population. If you accept that stupid people have more children, this is what you would expect. Right?
People are still shocked by this because champagne is supposed to be a premium product, while ink is a more everyday item. Further, ink is supposed to be mass produced (I bet you use more ink per year than champagne) in an easily scaleable process, while champagne of quality is supposed to be difficult to produce in a process that is hard to refine further for efficiency without compromising quality.
You cannot substitute one for the other, but is it strange to wonder about the consumer cost of both given the factors that govern/constrain their manufacture?
Much as I abhor the idea of war, I find myself fascinated by the instruments with which it is waged. I am ashamed of this.
American society needs to get over this Cold War fascination with ever larger, more powerful, and more complex military technology. The military is not the solution to every problem, they are just a last resort when we have no real solution.
We need to expend more effort developing technologies that will really improve our lives, no matter how gee-whiz hypersonic bombers, planetary annihilation lasers, and the like, may be.
Even human cloning would be better than this. Honestly.
Re:Denial is the 3rd stage of the psychosis
on
Bill Gates On Linux
·
· Score: 1
"Mod me down if you want, but if Linux commands were a lot more like DOS (which I already know) I'd be running some sort of Linux on my PCs at home. Frankly, I haven't the time to try to remember all of the equivalent Linux commands for those I already know in DOS."
You got modded up my friend, so at least part of your post must be quality. Unfortunately, I am deeply suspicious of this part. I find it hard to believe that anybody uses the DOS command line to do complicated things, for extended periods of time. Could you please explain what you do at home that involves DOS? Maybe I'm wrong.
I do know that if you have trouble remember Linux commands that have a rough DOS equivalent, and would like them to be the same as DOS, then all you have to do in bash at least is make yourself a set of shell aliases. All you have to do is figure out the command once, put an alias to it in your.bashrc file (or.bash_profile), and use it as if it were a DOS command, from then on!
Here's an example, you do not want to remember that 'ls' is the command to list the files in a directory. You would rather use the DOS command 'dir.' Add this line to your.bash_profile -
alias dir='ls --color | more'
Simple huh? That is just one example. If you want one command to execute multiple commands, you must use a shell function instead of an alias. There is lots of documentation for this.
Bash also supports tabbed completion, shell history, pipes, and the commands pushd and popd, features I can think of off the top of my head that makes it a superior command line to DOS. There are lots of other shells available on Linux, too.
Though its other merits may be in dispute, I can say with complete confidence that the Linux command line is vastly better than anything DOS has to offer, and you just don't know what you are missing. If you really use the DOS command line frequently, you are already doing so much unnecessary work that your time would be better invested in learning the Linux command line.
Now, if you have a lot of custom batch files or something, I could see how you would be hesitant to go through the work of porting those.
Otherwise, I cringe to think of what your life must be like without tabbed completion, let alone any other feature I mentioned. Oh, no tabbed completion hurts...
Slashdot Mirror
The instant you think of something that you need to do, immediately begin doing it. If you are at college, you should have a constant barrage of things. Do not bother trying to organize your time beyond the classes you must attend and meals you must eat. If you follow my advice correctly, you should be busy constantly.
The problem you are having is that you have many things to do. Sitting around worrying which to work on first is just a waste of time. Which did you think of first? Work on that one until you make significant progress, then switch to whatever you thought of next. Constant calculations about how to make yourself more efficient by prioritizing tasks drain your energy and increase your stress, while using my 'work whenever you think about work' method will get things done.
If you get distracted between the time you think of something you need to do and the time it takes to start doing it, you have the attention span of a hamster. I would warn you that you can make up all sorts of excuses for this, like attention deficit disorder, all the while insisting that you are intelligent (which may be true). But being intelligent is only the potential to do things - nobody will care that you are intelligent if you are too unfocused to use your mind. Lack of accomplishment equals lack of capability in most people's minds.
Concentrate. Stay busy. Start now.
Yeah, I wish slashdot would pick up on this whole SCO thing. I cannot understand why SCO is being completely and uttely ignored here.
Hi, it has come to my attention that posts that have the same subject line as common trolls will be moderated into the ground, sometimes using the 'offtopic' moderation, even when they are entirely on topic, and relevant to the discussion at hand. That's life, I guess.
Mod away, morons, my karma bonus is not going to go away.
"would you choose a shitty car that broke all the fucking time and didn't use a normal steering wheel, a standard gear lever, or a wheel-mounted stalk for a turn indicator, or a toyota."
I actually thought open source software was supposed to be the toyota until I read the rest of your post. I guess it all depends on what you consider 'standard' and 'normal.'
Or, more to the point, reliable. I am unused to hearing attacks of open source software, especially operating systems like Linux or FreeBSD, being mounted from the position that it is unreliable. That is because the position is untenable, of course.
It may appear unreliable, but it is only as reliable as the user. Open software helps users realize their full potential as users, allowing them to go as deep as they like into the system, while closed software forces them to function only in ways the designer intended them to, most significantly taking away their freedom to modify the system.
The important question for governments is, who are the users? Is it really the politicians, or is it the people they represent? How important is openness? How important is modification? How important is freedom? I like your point about government workers, but it only underscores that freedom has a price.
I think it is worth paying. Consider the dividends.
Itunes is an application, not a .com
I'll put in a vote right now that upgrading existing G4 systems to G5's truly is impossible, or at least not worthwhile, and it will never ever happen. The bus architecture is too different. Far too different.
There is a money transfer system called hawala that allows two people in different locations with a means of communication, who trust each other absolutely, to transfer money without the aid of the banking system. Lots of people use it to send money from America to the the Far East - mostly because it is cheaper than Western Union, etc. However, I understand it is being cracked down on because terrorists were using it to move funds around. Still, it will be difficult to shut down completely since it only takes two people and a means of communication to operate. Most of the people who use this system today do so because there is no reasonable alternative (financial system is not good in their area), not because they are terrorists.
I have read that organized crime transfers money from country to country by wiring small amounts (under the amount that must be reported) constantly. Even though there is a paper trail of sorts, it is very hard to sort through. But again, most of the people who wire money are not organized criminals. Should we stop this practice because some of the people are?
Means of moving illegal money secretively already exist. I think the idea with this system is it could allow people to make online purchases, even if they are from an area of the world that does not have the financial systems and identification systems that we take for granted in the West. I am inclined to think the net effect of this would be good. Many people do not have any sort of identification or formal bank account (as required for a service like paypal, which is apparently unavailable in much of the world), but if they could get to a kiosk with some cash, they might be able to order something - provided someone was willing to ship it to them. This could be a big improvement in the lives of many people. It could also help economic growth, facilitating transactions at greater distances and of greater complexity than was possible before.
Should we not build any infrastructure because criminals could use it? Criminals can drive on the roads, too, but that does not mean we stop building them. We police them. This system would have to be policed.
Yeah, but the nice thing about the recovery cds with macs is that you can completely reinstall the base system, and all the applications, without touching the home directories of the users. If all your important data is in your home directory, and your system fails to boot or something, you can reinstall the software without losing anything! Unlike the 'evil' cds another poster mentioned. For this reason it is best to keep your stuff in your home directory.
I do not understand how you could have an already installed system and it could be missing one app that you need to install from the restore cd - I doubt there is anything that was not preinstalled on your computer on the restore cd. Anybody run into an example of this? I guess you could have done a previous restore and deliberately chosen not to install an app or something when you did it, and then later changed your mind, leaving yourself with only another restore to reverse your mistake.
Hey, why didn't you just say the Ghandicon? We're at the fight part of the Ghandicon. See, that is so much simpler, everyone is saying it now.
Your argument assumes that there is only a finite amount of wealth in the world, and that if we do not concentrate it here, it will go somewhere else and leave us impoverished. In reality, wealth is generated according to human production. If we (meaning the nation, or even the human race as a whole) produce more, we are more wealthy! Even if we have less 'money', which is just paper anyway, but more things we like, we are better off. Therefore not at all outsourcing is bad, as it allows us to enjoy the same products for less money, freeing up money to put to work doing other things. People always complain because this kind of thing hits specific groups of people hard, while benefitting everybody else. Steel workers come to mind - even though the United States steel industry has been in decline since the 50s, since most of the skyscrapers and railroads have been built already (never mind cars, they do not require newly made steel to make), they insisted on having protection against foreign competition at the cost of everybody, since this protection meant anybody who wanted to buy steel had to pay more. But the total cost of the tariffs to the economy was considerably greater than the money being paid to the steel workers. Protectionism does not create wealth - it hampers production by transferring wealth from everyone else to unproductive sectors of society.
I guess programming is going that way too these days, being replaced with foreign labor. And the programmers are upset.
I have no pity on the people who refuse to change their skillset as the economic rewards of their current occupation go down. What did you expect, your job was going to be some kind of golden ticket for the rest of your life? Maybe that is what you thought your college degree was going to be - that is sure how they are sold to young people. I am sorry for anyone who planned their life as if the world were more stable than it actually is. But the process of increasing production has got to continue, apparently, and the only way to encourage this to happen is to have global competition, and that means having to deal with competent people from India and the like who will do good work for $10 a day. Not fair, you say? Is it fairer that the Indian should live in poverty, despite having the skillset to do better? If you say you do not care what happens to India as long as you are not affected, consider that software will be much more costly as a result of this, leaving you less money to spend on anything else you might want. Unfortunately, it is possible for individuals to be negatively affected either way (if they are programmers or steel workers), but for society there is only one correct solution.
Now, having said all this, I think you are quite right that the bottom could still fall out of the U.S economy, quite possibly due to consumer spending. I am inclined to think the levels of household debt are alarming here. Consumers do not have much more to spend.
Nitpicking here, but looking at the specs from Sun's site, it does not appear that the D2 disk array supports the Sun Fire V240 server. Here's the link. Note the list of supported hardware platforms for the D2, about halfway down the page.
I thought it was mostly because the licensing terms of the BSD license were more liberal, allowing commercial use of the FreeBSD code with hardly any restrictions. Whereas the GPL contains more restrictions on the user that are intended to keep the code free no matter what.
Maybe this is what you just said, but I think what I am saying is a different reason. I think Apple went with FreeBSD because it was easier to use for commercial purposes than Linux, rather than because it was immune to lawsuits.
I also do not think that Apple could possibly be familiar with all the code bases of the commercial Unixes out there, of which SCO is one. That is where the lawsuit is coming from, a commercial Unix vendor, not the Linux community!
Incidentally, Apple approached Linus about working with them, but he refused because he thought MacOS 9 was a 'piece of crap' (direct quote).
Yeah, eventually good ideas even trickle up to reach into the upper eschelons of management and academia. Where they are appropriated seamlessly, as if they originated there.
"Why is linux getting all that good press is the real puzzlement."
Because during the dotcom boom it was tagged as the 'Microsoft killer', and a lot of people have bad feelings toward Microsoft. I mean regular people, who only intuitively know that things happen with their systems that should never occur, like bluescreens. That includes journalists, at least tech ones.
BSD for some reason did not get as much publicity during the dotcom boom, despite being a good system. There you have my theory.
From the article it seems like the Japanese government was running their payroll software on a big proprietary unix system anyway, and was looking to upgrade the underlying system. It is not surprising that they picked Linux to do this - they say one of the reasons for the selection is because the hardware it runs on is cheaper. Maybe they ditched some Sun hardware? Some other vendor?
I'm sure Microsoft wanted them to use their software, but Linux is more likely to win when the competition is another *nix. Microsoft probably couldn't meet the requirements of 'runs old payroll software' or something, no matter how low they could price their software to compete.
This is a win for Linux, but not that big of a win, considering the details of the situation. This hardly indicates an expanding mindshare for the platform, just ability to cannibalize another *nix with its freeness.
You don't suppose this was because of Jim Crow, do you? Yes, I believe that was it.
Why not extend the suggestion and only allow literate white males who make $150,000 a year or more to vote?
The argument usually goes is that since the government acts on behalf of the people, everyone it purports to act for should have a say in its operation. But many people would rather that the government attach more weight to their interests at the expense of everyone else. Ah, selfishness, it is what makes our society what it is today.
No kidding, these things have the potential to be a disaster for the democratic process, enabling voting fraud on a scale never before seen. If they ever try to get such devices in my district without making them open and easily accountable, my congressional district is going to hear holy hell about it from me. I almost never care about politics. I don't write letters to my elected officials or to the editor. I don't donate money to political campaigns or consider myself a member of either party.
But if democracy is going to be done away with through the adoption of flawed technology, I feel I have no choice but to act. Luckily, I believe budgetary constraints are preventing these 'upgrades' in my area.
Has Apache 2.1 been released as a stable, non-developmental release? If not I would say testing it for defects is a bit premature.
Is how few emails were for business. I assume this category would include responses to spam. Maybe I do not understand the story, and the CyberAngels people were merely responsible for sending the spam (for other people), and if anyone responded to the offers in the mails it would go to an non-CyberAngels address. Or possibly redirected to a website, where they could make a purchase. Yeah, as I type out my thoughts, the reason for the dearth of business emails becomes clearer.
.0003%, and insanely high (compared with other forms of direct marketing), like 5%. People can argue for one side or another, but I need more evidence than conjecture to begin to understand the problem. If the response rate is already very low, then relatively simple technological solutions would probably suffice to drive them low enough to make spam unprofitable. If the response rate is high, it is going to take a lot of effort to fix this problem, possibly involving a redesign of the email system.
I had hoped for some accurate stats on the actual response rates to spam. I have heard rumors flying around that they are insanely low, like
Glad to see these spammers were shut down, but we need more insights into the way they operate in order to shut them all down.
Well, there is one I/O system, the bus, but from what I understand it is a point to point system that runs at 1Ghz in the 2GHz dual processor machines. That is a heck of a lot of bus bandwidth. The G5 is designed to do 2, 4, or even 8 way multiprocessing without too much competition between the chips for system resources.
I agree totally that we need to see benchmarks of one dual system against another. But bear in mind that the use of dual processors depends a lot upon the specific code being run and also the operating system. I think the general problem here is that the G5, while fast, is not like 10X faster than the competition and at this point it is difficult to tell what scores where.
Um, her speech about childbirth was an analogy. You see, the Unwittingly Evil Scientists were not exactly unwitting - wasn't CyberDyne Systems working on developing weapons for the military in the movie? Admittedly, the line plays the gender card, saying since men were unable to bear children, they didn't know what it was like to create life, all they were creating was death.
I don't think the idea was that humanity should not pursue knowledge, it was that humanity should not use its reasoning ability to create destruction on an ever greater scale.
I thought what Linda Hamilton (as Sarah Conner) said was essentially, "What good is all this knowledge if we are just going to use it to kill people?" Yeah, it does not take much cleverness to carry a baby, but to understand the implications of doing so requires at least some moral development. You know, like caring about the future world in which the child will live? Looking at the situation in the movie, it was not at all clear that technology and science were going to make that world better. The scientists in T2, blithely pursuing their research without regard to the moral implications for humanity, were actually making the world a worse place!
Let us hope that reality does not correspond to this bleak assessment, but that depends on our moral ability to handle knowledge, not on our ability to avoid 'evil' knowledge. How can wisdom come without understanding? Many scientists consider the potential consequences of their findings carefully. While it is not always possible to predict in advance which research will have more destructive applications than positive ones, advance consideration at least reduces the chance of producing a Frankenstein's monster. Unfortunately, the movie scientists never stopped working for a moment (witness Dyson hard at work at home on his computer, ignoring his children - just before Sarah Conner attempts to kill him) to consider any implications of their work.
To summarize, knowledge without morals is not good for the future of humanity, as represented in this case by an unborn child.
This assertion, though crudely made in the movie, never disgusted me.
"the popularity of libraries today has been dropping."
This is because stupid people have more children than well-educated ones. Because of this, as the population increases, the amount of interest in education and even reading remains about the same. Therefore dropping proportionate to the increase in population.
I think it is unfair to say that the popularity of libraries is dropping, just that the level of interest is not increasing with increased population. If you accept that stupid people have more children, this is what you would expect. Right?
People are still shocked by this because champagne is supposed to be a premium product, while ink is a more everyday item. Further, ink is supposed to be mass produced (I bet you use more ink per year than champagne) in an easily scaleable process, while champagne of quality is supposed to be difficult to produce in a process that is hard to refine further for efficiency without compromising quality.
You cannot substitute one for the other, but is it strange to wonder about the consumer cost of both given the factors that govern/constrain their manufacture?
Much as I abhor the idea of war, I find myself fascinated by the instruments with which it is waged. I am ashamed of this.
American society needs to get over this Cold War fascination with ever larger, more powerful, and more complex military technology. The military is not the solution to every problem, they are just a last resort when we have no real solution.
We need to expend more effort developing technologies that will really improve our lives, no matter how gee-whiz hypersonic bombers, planetary annihilation lasers, and the like, may be.
Even human cloning would be better than this. Honestly.
"Mod me down if you want, but if Linux commands were a lot more like DOS (which I already know) I'd be running some sort of Linux on my PCs at home. Frankly, I haven't the time to try to remember all of the equivalent Linux commands for those I already know in DOS."
.bashrc file (or .bash_profile), and use it as if it were a DOS command, from then on!
.bash_profile -
You got modded up my friend, so at least part of your post must be quality. Unfortunately, I am deeply suspicious of this part. I find it hard to believe that anybody uses the DOS command line to do complicated things, for extended periods of time. Could you please explain what you do at home that involves DOS? Maybe I'm wrong.
I do know that if you have trouble remember Linux commands that have a rough DOS equivalent, and would like them to be the same as DOS, then all you have to do in bash at least is make yourself a set of shell aliases. All you have to do is figure out the command once, put an alias to it in your
Here's an example, you do not want to remember that 'ls' is the command to list the files in a directory. You would rather use the DOS command 'dir.' Add this line to your
alias dir='ls --color | more'
Simple huh? That is just one example. If you want one command to execute multiple commands, you must use a shell function instead of an alias. There is lots of documentation for this.
Bash also supports tabbed completion, shell history, pipes, and the commands pushd and popd, features I can think of off the top of my head that makes it a superior command line to DOS. There are lots of other shells available on Linux, too.
Though its other merits may be in dispute, I can say with complete confidence that the Linux command line is vastly better than anything DOS has to offer, and you just don't know what you are missing. If you really use the DOS command line frequently, you are already doing so much unnecessary work that your time would be better invested in learning the Linux command line.
Now, if you have a lot of custom batch files or something, I could see how you would be hesitant to go through the work of porting those.
Otherwise, I cringe to think of what your life must be like without tabbed completion, let alone any other feature I mentioned. Oh, no tabbed completion hurts...