That is true mac's market share did increase by 55% of it's own market share, and linux did increase by a smaller percentage of it's market share. Since we're being technical on it... let's take a look at window's XP alone. It rose from 29.1% to 61.3% which is about 210% increase in market share.
Of course that way of looking at it doesn't make any sense, and those numbers are pointless.
Since we don't know the total size of the market in 2003 nor do we know that it was the same in 2005. Presumably the size of the market increased in those two years by a considerable amount. So we have to consider the market as a whole.
Linux and MacOS both rose by 1 percentage point. Therefore they both increased by approx. the same number of users. What does this mean? Well the older versions of windows dropped drastically in market share in the 2 years, obviously from the emergence of a newer OS. We can't say for sure from this data, but the looks of it, most windows users shifted to XP and some moved off onto Linux and Mac, of course it could be anything, but this is most likely.
The only thing we can say for sure is that XP is growing very steadily and very strongly. Also, linux and Mac are still in a head to head battle for second.
NOTE TO RESPECTIVE FAN BOYS: I am not saying anything about any OS, I'm just breaking down the table.
It's not tangible? You can't touch the hard drives? A database of this size will undoubtably have it's own physical server. He transferred the property from one medium to another and moved it across state lines.
For example, say there was a video of you having sex with your partner. I copied this video onto my computer and burned it to a cd. Is this video tangible? Yes, you can even see it, much like the screen names.
Secondly, a screen name isn't a trade secret. Having millions of them doesn't make it any more a trade secret.
We can't be talking about the same FCC. Yes, the regulations have become more lax relative to where they started, but (and that's a big but) they haven't kept up with the societal norms.
They're still lagging behind what's acceptable public behavoir. I'm not saying that they should allow live sex on daytime tv, but the recent fine-sprees and heavy-handed enforcement of "decency" are out of control.
" His point being that broadcast standards were first imposed on the US by a Democrat - and those standard have been getting more and more permissive ever since then."
Yes, let's not blame those who abuse the system, let's blame those who implemented a system with good intentions. Firearms and cannons were invented in China. I blame the chinese for all deaths by ballistic weapons.
"You can thank the Republicans for blacks in starring roles with no stereotypes"
Yes, I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that blacks can actually act well. DAMN YOU DEMOCRATS FOR TRYING TO REINSTATE SLAVERY!
Oh, btw, what does this have to do with regulating what broadcasters do on public air waves?
I think that there are many scientists who would disagree with you. Most notably right now would be a Steen Rasmussen. He, along with quite a few other independant groups, are attempting to build a new life form from scratch.
I don't think they could do that if they could only describe the actions of a simple organism.
" Why are you bringing evolutionary theory in to the discussion?"
I used evolution to point out that we came from simple organisms. The actions of these organisms is, indeed, well understood by science. Therefore, it makes sense that a life composed of many of these organism will also be understandable someday.
"You also assume that the laws of chemistry and physics are all knowable through the human senses and via our conduits, the machina."
Not once did I even imply this. I merely said that we evolved from single celled organism who's actions are ruled by the laws of chemistry and physics. From what we understand of chemistry and physics we have been able to understand the actions of simple organisms. I never claimed that we would master all there is to know in the universe about chemistry and physics, nor do I think we need to to understand life.
"You are trying to suggest that all the sense we have evolved to live on this planet are enough to discover every fact in the universe and that is how inflated your ego is."
I never said/implied anything of this sort either. (You sure are on a roll with this huh?) Apparently you are implying that I don't understand evolution, or maybe you're imposing on me what you believe evolution is about?
The point of evolution is to adapt. Evolution has no intentions for a greater purpose down the road. Not even to discover every fact in the universe. I don't think it's possible to discover every fact in the universe, so atleast we agree on something.
We evolved from single celled organism who's actions are ruled by the laws of chemistry and physics. Life evolved by forming groups of cells to further their odds of survival. Eventually the cells connected began taking on different purposes and life evolved further into different organs and so on down the line until we have what we have here.
I know what your thinking, I left out the part where god himself forms us in his image and breathes life into us. Unfortunately, my human ego isn't so great that I think I exist outside the realm of reality and that I am destined to be master of this planet that god has given me.
I do believe, however, that we have evolved to such a level of complexity that it will be quite some time before we can fully understand the processes at work though.
If you were born paralyzed and your only connection to the outside world was your computer and the internet, what level of intelligence would you be able to achieve?
You can communicate with people in chat rooms, you can interact on a virtual level in games. You can gain any information you could possibly want. You will come across contradictions and extremisms. I think it'd be a farily substantial bit of knowledge, both academic and common sensical.
Not saying of course that a computer would be able to be as competent as we are, but don't fool yourself to believe that the human brain is so miraculous or that human life is so incredible that it will never be able to be reproduced mechanically.
-------------- Apple really took a step backwards when they made OS X because they tried to abandon the original interfaces and paradigms that so many of us loved from the original MacOS days. --------------
He clearly states that he's an old Mac fan, that's unhappy with their move towards using Unix.
Not quite sure how stating that he prefers the old Mac OS is giving some sort of sexual pleasure to Bill Gates, but I guess you got that part all figured out.
It's kinda funny that you say "know what you are talking about" twice in your short post, and you didn't even read the other guys post fully... can you say 'fanboy'?
Tapping, definately not, but the motion the finger uses during typing is a natural one for which the hand has evolved... wrapping around things, digging, climbing. Not exactly made for typing, but close enough to get by.
The thumb, anthropologically speaking, is not a finger. It's evolutionary features are a sustained powerful grip, not rapid up and down action. Our thumb tendons are not equipped for repeditive-speedy motions.
I'm a few years shy of your age, and have been using computers since about 8 also. The only area I feel any pain from typing is in my wrists.
If your fingers are feeling pain I'd suggest going to the doctor, also I suggest picking up a hobby that involves strenghtening your fingers, such as playing guitar or something similar.
There is a quote from either the guide book or the website (I forget which) that explains the Insane AI difficulty:
"[Expansion] Terran Campaign Insane... The computer will build all units and research abilities. After doing so, the computer will school you in the art of playing Starcraft."
Get an old jeep with a manual transmission. This way even if your ignition system is messed up (don't think an EMP would damage it though) you can push start it.
Public Nudity: I didn't explicitly mean that the dude would walk up to the kid, cock in hand, and begin waving it. During the course of a normal day, people come in close proximity to each other. Often in the form of lines. There may be some inadvertant cock wavage going on there in the face of little billy or susie. god know's i'd have some nasty mental images from that.
Also, imagine the crazy number of sexual harassment lawsuits from women seeing dudes with boners.
Polygamy: I have the same problems with Polygamy that you have. They kids may be consenting, but they don't posess the decision making capacity or experience to make those types of decisions.
Bestiality: I assure you the dog had no interest in the girl. Animals mate based on instincts. When a dog is in his instintcual mating period, he will attempt to mate with anything. Does this make him consenting? Of course not, he's not making a conscious decision to mate, he's just following instinct.
Incest: Have you heard of the term "accident" before? How often do you think accidental pregnancy occurs? I'd say more often than not. It may not be the intention of the incestuous sex, but it sure does and will happen.
Drug Possession/Use: My point is that you can't control yourself under the influence of drugs. Cannibus has been directly linked to schizophrenia and general psychosis. This is the weaker of the drugs that affect brain/body function.
Alcohol has been directly linked to waking up next to hideous {guys|girls}, and nobody wants that.
I'm not implying that all drugs need to be banned, but I do think there needs to be more hard scientific information gathered about the effects of these drugs on the brain and the body, and then from that information, appropriate legislation can be made. Of course, we all know that legislators won't be able to understand the information and will likely ignore it.
Public Nudity: How exactly is public nudity a matter private morality? An nasty old dude having his cock waving in your kids face could definately be considered a matter of child endangerment right? So should we allow them to only to be naked in public away from kids? I'll let you go make that map for them.
Polygamy: IANAL but from a legal point of view I see no problems with polygamy that fits your description.
Bestiality: The animal can never be a consenting sexual partner. How is this anything other than cruel?
Incest: Incest has been proven to cause/spread health problems in offspring.
Drug Profession/Use: Altering somebody's behavior in unpredictable ways that can lead to unexpected actions on the public. I'd say thats the concern for public. You may sit home and eat alot, but you might also think that you're in good enough condition to out and get some food. You can't depend on the user of a behavior altering substance to wholly control his/her actions.
Perjury/Fraud/Child Endangerment: No argument there.
That's like having a hollow metal sphere with a readius of R and a hollow metal sphere with a radius of 4R and saying that the larger one has more inside it.
It has a larger capacity, but it doesn't have more of anything inside it.
This will surely be outpaced by Time-Travel-Plus-Teleport Encryption, where you beam yourself to the time and place you need the information and hand it off.
I disagree. How does technology storing cultural aspects stagnate culture growth? Have books stalled out change?
I think that by allowing technology to store a snapshot of culture, it'll provide future people an interesting look back.
I think that todays society would love to see cultural aspects from a couple hundred years ago. What makes you think that future society wouldn't want to see how we are today?
The parents are closer than the judge to what? The constitution?
Having a concentration of close-minded, biased parents doesn't mean that we should cater to their desires. That would be akin to keeping slavery in the south, but not the north, or allowing hitler to kill the jews in Germany but not anywhere else.
"If the textbook does a good job of exploring evolution as a biological principle and the potential role of evolution in bringing life about, then it probably should not need the label."
The theory of evolution doesn't say how life was created, it says how life changes once it exists.
"the judge should not be judging ethical issues"
The judge isn't judging ethical issues, he's judging the illegal actions of of a public group that affects the education system. That's his job.
"I can't see how anyone would be intimidated by that label"
Stating that a theory is not a fact is in every science text book, it's in the glossary with all the other scientific definitions. Putting a label specifically to target evolution, is intended to intimidate. For example, teaching kids that having promiscious sex could lead to disease is a good thing to say. Saying "Don't have sex with TIffany because she could have sexual diseases." is a different story.
Slashdot Mirror
That is true mac's market share did increase by 55% of it's own market share, and linux did increase by a smaller percentage of it's market share. Since we're being technical on it... let's take a look at window's XP alone. It rose from 29.1% to 61.3% which is about 210% increase in market share.
Of course that way of looking at it doesn't make any sense, and those numbers are pointless.
Since we don't know the total size of the market in 2003 nor do we know that it was the same in 2005. Presumably the size of the market increased in those two years by a considerable amount. So we have to consider the market as a whole.
Linux and MacOS both rose by 1 percentage point. Therefore they both increased by approx. the same number of users. What does this mean? Well the older versions of windows dropped drastically in market share in the 2 years, obviously from the emergence of a newer OS. We can't say for sure from this data, but the looks of it, most windows users shifted to XP and some moved off onto Linux and Mac, of course it could be anything, but this is most likely.
The only thing we can say for sure is that XP is growing very steadily and very strongly. Also, linux and Mac are still in a head to head battle for second.
NOTE TO RESPECTIVE FAN BOYS: I am not saying anything about any OS, I'm just breaking down the table.
It's not tangible? You can't touch the hard drives? A database of this size will undoubtably have it's own physical server. He transferred the property from one medium to another and moved it across state lines.
For example, say there was a video of you having sex with your partner. I copied this video onto my computer and burned it to a cd. Is this video tangible? Yes, you can even see it, much like the screen names.
Secondly, a screen name isn't a trade secret. Having millions of them doesn't make it any more a trade secret.
According to this article: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1745930,00.as p and the related link http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.a sp (scroll down for OS statistics), Mac growth is being outpaced by both Linux and Windows XP.
Looks like MacOS is going.... going.... almost gone.
We can't be talking about the same FCC. Yes, the regulations have become more lax relative to where they started, but (and that's a big but) they haven't kept up with the societal norms.
They're still lagging behind what's acceptable public behavoir. I'm not saying that they should allow live sex on daytime tv, but the recent fine-sprees and heavy-handed enforcement of "decency" are out of control.
" His point being that broadcast standards were first imposed on the US by a Democrat - and those standard have been getting more and more permissive ever since then."
Yes, let's not blame those who abuse the system, let's blame those who implemented a system with good intentions. Firearms and cannons were invented in China. I blame the chinese for all deaths by ballistic weapons.
"You can thank the Republicans for blacks in starring roles with no stereotypes"
Yes, I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that blacks can actually act well. DAMN YOU DEMOCRATS FOR TRYING TO REINSTATE SLAVERY!
Oh, btw, what does this have to do with regulating what broadcasters do on public air waves?
I think that there are many scientists who would disagree with you. Most notably right now would be a Steen Rasmussen. He, along with quite a few other independant groups, are attempting to build a new life form from scratch.
I don't think they could do that if they could only describe the actions of a simple organism.
" Why are you bringing evolutionary theory in to the discussion?"
I used evolution to point out that we came from simple organisms. The actions of these organisms is, indeed, well understood by science. Therefore, it makes sense that a life composed of many of these organism will also be understandable someday.
"You also assume that the laws of chemistry and physics are all knowable through the human senses and via our conduits, the machina."
Not once did I even imply this. I merely said that we evolved from single celled organism who's actions are ruled by the laws of chemistry and physics. From what we understand of chemistry and physics we have been able to understand the actions of simple organisms. I never claimed that we would master all there is to know in the universe about chemistry and physics, nor do I think we need to to understand life.
"You are trying to suggest that all the sense we have evolved to live on this planet are enough to discover every fact in the universe and that is how inflated your ego is."
I never said/implied anything of this sort either. (You sure are on a roll with this huh?) Apparently you are implying that I don't understand evolution, or maybe you're imposing on me what you believe evolution is about?
The point of evolution is to adapt. Evolution has no intentions for a greater purpose down the road. Not even to discover every fact in the universe. I don't think it's possible to discover every fact in the universe, so atleast we agree on something.
I'm absolutely sure.
We evolved from single celled organism who's actions are ruled by the laws of chemistry and physics. Life evolved by forming groups of cells to further their odds of survival. Eventually the cells connected began taking on different purposes and life evolved further into different organs and so on down the line until we have what we have here.
I know what your thinking, I left out the part where god himself forms us in his image and breathes life into us. Unfortunately, my human ego isn't so great that I think I exist outside the realm of reality and that I am destined to be master of this planet that god has given me.
I do believe, however, that we have evolved to such a level of complexity that it will be quite some time before we can fully understand the processes at work though.
If you were born paralyzed and your only connection to the outside world was your computer and the internet, what level of intelligence would you be able to achieve?
You can communicate with people in chat rooms, you can interact on a virtual level in games. You can gain any information you could possibly want. You will come across contradictions and extremisms. I think it'd be a farily substantial bit of knowledge, both academic and common sensical.
Not saying of course that a computer would be able to be as competent as we are, but don't fool yourself to believe that the human brain is so miraculous or that human life is so incredible that it will never be able to be reproduced mechanically.
I think you need to reread the guys post.
--------------
Apple really took a step backwards when they made OS X because they tried to abandon the original interfaces and paradigms that so many of us loved from the original MacOS days.
--------------
He clearly states that he's an old Mac fan, that's unhappy with their move towards using Unix.
Not quite sure how stating that he prefers the old Mac OS is giving some sort of sexual pleasure to Bill Gates, but I guess you got that part all figured out.
It's kinda funny that you say "know what you are talking about" twice in your short post, and you didn't even read the other guys post fully... can you say 'fanboy'?
Tapping, definately not, but the motion the finger uses during typing is a natural one for which the hand has evolved... wrapping around things, digging, climbing. Not exactly made for typing, but close enough to get by.
The thumb, anthropologically speaking, is not a finger. It's evolutionary features are a sustained powerful grip, not rapid up and down action. Our thumb tendons are not equipped for repeditive-speedy motions.
I'm a few years shy of your age, and have been using computers since about 8 also. The only area I feel any pain from typing is in my wrists.
If your fingers are feeling pain I'd suggest going to the doctor, also I suggest picking up a hobby that involves strenghtening your fingers, such as playing guitar or something similar.
I have an idea!
You can embed SpyAir into the free air programs... this way people will be less likely to want to use the free air and will pay you for your air!
There is a quote from either the guide book or the website (I forget which) that explains the Insane AI difficulty:
... The computer will build all units and research abilities. After doing so, the computer will school you in the art of playing Starcraft."
"[Expansion] Terran Campaign Insane
Get an old jeep with a manual transmission. This way even if your ignition system is messed up (don't think an EMP would damage it though) you can push start it.
Public Nudity:
I didn't explicitly mean that the dude would walk up to the kid, cock in hand, and begin waving it. During the course of a normal day, people come in close proximity to each other. Often in the form of lines. There may be some inadvertant cock wavage going on there in the face of little billy or susie. god know's i'd have some nasty mental images from that.
Also, imagine the crazy number of sexual harassment lawsuits from women seeing dudes with boners.
Polygamy:
I have the same problems with Polygamy that you have. They kids may be consenting, but they don't posess the decision making capacity or experience to make those types of decisions.
Bestiality:
I assure you the dog had no interest in the girl. Animals mate based on instincts. When a dog is in his instintcual mating period, he will attempt to mate with anything. Does this make him consenting? Of course not, he's not making a conscious decision to mate, he's just following instinct.
Incest:
Have you heard of the term "accident" before? How often do you think accidental pregnancy occurs? I'd say more often than not. It may not be the intention of the incestuous sex, but it sure does and will happen.
Drug Possession/Use:
My point is that you can't control yourself under the influence of drugs. Cannibus has been directly linked to schizophrenia and general psychosis. This is the weaker of the drugs that affect brain/body function.
Alcohol has been directly linked to waking up next to hideous {guys|girls}, and nobody wants that.
I'm not implying that all drugs need to be banned, but I do think there needs to be more hard scientific information gathered about the effects of these drugs on the brain and the body, and then from that information, appropriate legislation can be made. Of course, we all know that legislators won't be able to understand the information and will likely ignore it.
I don't recall specifying which substances fall under this, and IIRC, alcohol does have legislation against its use... however limited it may be.
Public Nudity:
How exactly is public nudity a matter private morality? An nasty old dude having his cock waving in your kids face could definately be considered a matter of child endangerment right? So should we allow them to only to be naked in public away from kids? I'll let you go make that map for them.
Polygamy:
IANAL but from a legal point of view I see no problems with polygamy that fits your description.
Bestiality:
The animal can never be a consenting sexual partner. How is this anything other than cruel?
Incest:
Incest has been proven to cause/spread health problems in offspring.
Drug Profession/Use:
Altering somebody's behavior in unpredictable ways that can lead to unexpected actions on the public. I'd say thats the concern for public. You may sit home and eat alot, but you might also think that you're in good enough condition to out and get some food. You can't depend on the user of a behavior altering substance to wholly control his/her actions.
Perjury/Fraud/Child Endangerment:
No argument there.
Space itself is nothing, how can nothing expand.
That's like having a hollow metal sphere with a readius of R and a hollow metal sphere with a radius of 4R and saying that the larger one has more inside it.
It has a larger capacity, but it doesn't have more of anything inside it.
This will surely be outpaced by Time-Travel-Plus-Teleport Encryption, where you beam yourself to the time and place you need the information and hand it off.
Indeed, you should've switched to http://www.textpad.com/Textpad long ago...
I disagree. How does technology storing cultural aspects stagnate culture growth? Have books stalled out change?
I think that by allowing technology to store a snapshot of culture, it'll provide future people an interesting look back.
I think that todays society would love to see cultural aspects from a couple hundred years ago. What makes you think that future society wouldn't want to see how we are today?
"Oh how far and how fast we have fallen"
acceleration = 10 m/s^2 (approx.)
time = t (in seconds);
How fast: t * 10M/s^2 = 10t m/s (approx.)?
Oooooo... so sorry...
That mus+++ATH
NO CARRIER
Well, let me tell you a brief history of rhyme.
The parents are closer than the judge to what? The constitution?
Having a concentration of close-minded, biased parents doesn't mean that we should cater to their desires. That would be akin to keeping slavery in the south, but not the north, or allowing hitler to kill the jews in Germany but not anywhere else.
"If the textbook does a good job of exploring evolution as a biological principle and the potential role of evolution in bringing life about, then it probably should not need the label."
The theory of evolution doesn't say how life was created, it says how life changes once it exists.
"the judge should not be judging ethical issues"
The judge isn't judging ethical issues, he's judging the illegal actions of of a public group that affects the education system. That's his job.
"I can't see how anyone would be intimidated by that label"
Stating that a theory is not a fact is in every science text book, it's in the glossary with all the other scientific definitions. Putting a label specifically to target evolution, is intended to intimidate. For example, teaching kids that having promiscious sex could lead to disease is a good thing to say. Saying "Don't have sex with TIffany because she could have sexual diseases." is a different story.