Marx is not an economist!? I guess we should start telling all of the econimists to stop using Captial in thier classes. (see almost any online sylibus dealing with labor econimics, such as http://www.eco.utexas.edu/Homepages/Faculty/Cleave r/387Lintro.html ) I do not claim (or beieve for that matter) that Marx has the definitive economic theory - history clearly shows that market economies are stronger. There are things to learn from mistakes, so I'm all for studying Marxist economics.
Read some of the investigations of the Deibold computers. They don't even use SQL Server, they use ACCESS, a personal database that was never meant to be used as a secure database - we are supposed to use SQL Sever in MS-land. At the VERY LEAST, the logs for this system must be recorded on an write-only medium, so you can't just run Access to alter the log records.
Maye they are both considered important books in the history of economics. Marx did study Capitalism after all. I am most certainly not a Marxist, but that doesn't change history. In physics, I can appreciate Dirac's theory of the electron without disparaging Plank for completely ignoring relativity. Why can't I study Smith and Marx when I want to understand economics?
As a minor variation.. replace a few of the monitored words with bitmaps of the words in a similar font. If you make it look right in Outlook, 98% of the usrs will see the intented messaged but the filters will not. At least at first, this would get you past the filters.
This is not the first new way of generating electricity in 150 years. The photoelectric effect, which underlies all photocells that gnerate electicity, was explained by Einstein. This was the subject that earned him the Nobel Prize, not relativity. (In defence of the Nobel comittee of 1906, the Prize is supposed to be for work that is of practical benefit. At least at the time, the photoelectric effect must have looked more practical than relativity.)
This is very strange math, an accountant would not describe it like this. You amost make it sound that software is free. Like all expenses, it reduces your taxable income. Since the marginal tax rate never exceeds 40%, most of the burden remains with the corporation. I find it chilling that you seem to think that in a market economy, the government would effectively pay corporate expenses by allowing corporations to lower their tax burden dollar for dollar for their business expenses.
Secondly, governments are not in the business of spending money. They are 'in the business' of providing common services that can be more effectively done collectively. Courts, police, fire departments, military, highways, schools are example of activities that are done by governments. As you may guess, these services take... money. Real people do these services and they deserve to be paid with real money. Grrr.. I wish everyone else would just work for free, its so much better for me.
There is good evidence that governments can do certain tasks more efficiently than private industry. The US healthcare system consumes about 13.6% of GDP. The French healthcare system consumes about 10.6%. Which system covers 100% of the population? (France). In which system do doctors still makes housecalls? (France). Which system has a lower infant mortaility rate? (France) Which system requires the doctor's office to spend several minutes verifying that you have insurance and figuring out how much you have to pay for todays visit (US). By the way, the French system doesn't mall all doctors state employees, many doctors are in private practice - they only have to deal with one set of bureactrats to get paid.
Go Google for Bev Harris Microsoft access. It quickly becomes apparent that Microsoft Access is used in a rather bizarre way in the Diebold voting machines. There are details at Scoop. I'm not completely convinced, but I am alarmed by tthe deisgn of the Diebold machines - they really do seemed to be designed to allow officials to throw an election. In what seems to be a radical departure from proper database design, the Diebold database is radically DEnormalized with votes recored in 3 databases. While Microsoft can hardly be blamed for idiots that happen to use Access, it is well known that Access is a poor choice for secure systems.
So, here is once case where a Microsoft database is essential for crooked governments
In any case it's hard to feel sorry for Microsoft here, they've been intentionally trying to stifle competition, and make it difficult (if not impossible) to use a homogenous OS solution for many years. Now it seems their time to pay the piper has come.
Microsoft makes it easy to use a homogenous OS solution. What they make difficult is using heterogenous systems
Gemini
May 22 - June 21
A shake-up in human resources may be in the works...
I blame Slashdot for getting my 30 day notice yesterday! But, on the bright side my "problem-solving and extraordinary organzational skills are about to pay off in a big way monetarily." SO, IF YOU ARE READING THIS HIRE ME NOW AND "everyone will benefit."
At 150,000 quid, it would certainly end any congestion in both my wallet and my bank account. I guess if you forced everyone to use this or a bus, it would certainly end road congestion since most of us would have to go back to public transportation.
The only 100% is for MSVC++ version 7.1 (up from 86% in version 7.0). The next highest score is gcc 3.3.1 on linux (99%). These are both excellent scores - the boost tests are heavy into templates, which are about the nastiest thing a compiler will see.
The guru's are correct, but ask them if they can tell you if they have encountered a real world case where gcc 3.3 wasn't good enough. Now ask the faculty if access to the source code is helpful in the advanced classes. I'll bet the answers will be.... ummmmm no and YES.
But, you are right - gcc needs to improve. And from the boost test results, I would say that gcc is improving rapidly. MS VC++ can compile clean on one platform, gcc is cross patform. Hats off to the gcc team for writing some great code.
The CDV folks are talking about $5 per carot. (of course this is for an ingot that makes the hope diamond look small) each diamond may be expensive, but the cost/kg can be much lower than hiring thugs to maim Africans that live near diamond mines.
Do you really think that you cannot tweak the CDV processes to introduce defects? The scientists making the CDV are dreaming of very fast processors (Si single crystals get replaced by C single crystals - same structure - different band gap). They want to make huge single crystals. If you want to add imperfections, I'm sure that can be arranged. It was really hard to eliminate all of the defects, i'm sure they can dope or otherwise add imperfections.
Clearly, SCO wants money, not the code out. They see open source as a meal ticket. With just a little work, it might be possible to make the IT world fear open source.
1) The SCO code that was released looks as much like BSD code as Linux code.
2) SCO asserts that the code in Linux is worth biillions, and that is was copied illegally
3) There is a stronger arguement that the SCO code was lifted from BSD. SCO managed to violate one of only 4 conditions in the BSD license -they removed the names of the original authors.
4) A gift doesn't loose its value when you give it away. The value of the BSD code is apparently in the billions - at least to SCO.
5) The UC system certainly seems to be strapped for cash. This is one of the largest expenditures in California, and California is clearly in a budget crisis.
6) The second clause of the BSD license is that any binary that uses BSD code needs to acknowledge the original developers. If it were to turn out that an OS lifted BSD networking code, the company that released the OS would also be violating the BSD license.
Stealing a gift is still theft. Denying the value of Open Source, while taking open source code is disengenuous.
1) SCO believes that volating a Unix source code license should cost the guilty part 3 billion
2) It seems SCO managed to do the only thing possible to vioate the BSD license (they removed the copyright)
3) You, Arnold, seem to be the leading candidate for Gov. of California
4) Therefore, if you become governor, your sadly underfuned schools look like they have a 3 billion dollar opportunity to SUE SCO FOR COPYRIGHT VIOATIONS
5) Hey look we got to MAKE LOTS OF MONEY without the pesky ????? step.
You are completely right. Besides, the size of the population doesn't really matter, as long as the number of vote counters scales with the population.
What does matter is the complexity of each ballot. We, in the US, have long complex ballots that contain votes for many elections (President to local dog catcher) and various propositions. Even California's governor's recall vote has a referendum tacked on to it.
Under these conditions, paper is a pain. You need to print different ballots for each city or town. This also gives rise to the disgracefull differences in voting accuracy between districts - it seems that wealthy districts can affort more accurate equiptment, so a larger fraction of the votes are counted. Sadly, this means that you really can buy votes - at least statistically speaking. Rant aside, the complexity of our ballots makes electronic voting attractive.
Look at a BSD code base. tar is on all Unix-like systems. If you don't like the GPL, respect it but don't use it. The BSD folks don't mind if you use thier tar, just remember to give credit where it is due.
This weekend, not someday, start writing to your representatives. Ask them to support an Oregon-like law to have state agencies consider using Open Source when then send out bids.
A few of us need to find some local LUG members that had a job shipped offshore and form a company that can offer local support for some promising packages - SAMBA, Apache and OpenOffice come to mind. We should learn to set up SAP on Linux. Then, we need to learn how to bid on government contracts and sell services to local companies.
We can think globally, which is why we like OSS, now we need to act locally The Quiet War must be won in the trenches, not in WIPO.
I don't understand your issues. CIFS/SMB is a protocol controlled by Microsoft. The Samba team has no ability to 'do anything' about the protocols. The EC may have the ability to force Microsoft to release full documents of the protocol, but the Samba team can only ready what they can and reverse engineer the rest.
There are plenty of of more elegant solutions for filesharing that have been developed and implemented in an open manner. AFS was designed at CMU and OpenAFS is largely the result of U of Michigan. This is certainly inovative and it is also open source. Painting 'open source' as a monolithic entity is silly, you may as well say that "I knew an MIT grad and he was a git, so all MIT grads are gits."
I have no reason to make Linux 'act like' Windows at home, where I can run a LInux network. However, at work I don't have that luxury. Networking with Windows is a reality. For this, Samba is an amazingly good piece of kit.
Vizzini (aka McBride): Ha ha, you fool! You've fallen victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this - "Never go in against IBM when intellectual property rights are on the line!" Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha h-! (falls over dead)
Slashdot Mirror
Marx is not an economist!? I guess we should start telling all of the econimists to stop using Captial in thier classes. (see almost any online sylibus dealing with labor econimics, such as http://www.eco.utexas.edu/Homepages/Faculty/Cleave r/387Lintro.html ) I do not claim (or beieve for that matter) that Marx has the definitive economic theory - history clearly shows that market economies are stronger. There are things to learn from mistakes, so I'm all for studying Marxist economics.
Read some of the investigations of the Deibold computers. They don't even use SQL Server, they use ACCESS, a personal database that was never meant to be used as a secure database - we are supposed to use SQL Sever in MS-land. At the VERY LEAST, the logs for this system must be recorded on an write-only medium, so you can't just run Access to alter the log records.
Maye they are both considered important books in the history of economics. Marx did study Capitalism after all. I am most certainly not a Marxist, but that doesn't change history. In physics, I can appreciate Dirac's theory of the electron without disparaging Plank for completely ignoring relativity. Why can't I study Smith and Marx when I want to understand economics?
As a minor variation .. replace a few of the monitored words with bitmaps of the words in a similar font. If you make it look right in Outlook, 98% of the usrs will see the intented messaged but the filters will not. At least at first, this would get you past the filters.
This is not the first new way of generating electricity in 150 years. The photoelectric effect, which underlies all photocells that gnerate electicity, was explained by Einstein. This was the subject that earned him the Nobel Prize, not relativity. (In defence of the Nobel comittee of 1906, the Prize is supposed to be for work that is of practical benefit. At least at the time, the photoelectric effect must have looked more practical than relativity.)
Secondly, governments are not in the business of spending money. They are 'in the business' of providing common services that can be more effectively done collectively. Courts, police, fire departments, military, highways, schools are example of activities that are done by governments. As you may guess, these services take ... money. Real people do these services and they deserve to be paid with real money. Grrr .. I wish everyone else would just work for free, its so much better for me.
There is good evidence that governments can do certain tasks more efficiently than private industry. The US healthcare system consumes about 13.6% of GDP. The French healthcare system consumes about 10.6%. Which system covers 100% of the population? (France). In which system do doctors still makes housecalls? (France). Which system has a lower infant mortaility rate? (France) Which system requires the doctor's office to spend several minutes verifying that you have insurance and figuring out how much you have to pay for todays visit (US). By the way, the French system doesn't mall all doctors state employees, many doctors are in private practice - they only have to deal with one set of bureactrats to get paid.
Typical .. when the facts don't back a conservative they just say that the facts are irrelivant
So, here is once case where a Microsoft database is essential for crooked governments
Microsoft makes it easy to use a homogenous OS solution. What they make difficult is using heterogenous systems
Gemini May 22 - June 21 A shake-up in human resources may be in the works. ..
I blame Slashdot for getting my 30 day notice yesterday! But, on the bright side my "problem-solving and extraordinary organzational skills are about to pay off in a big way monetarily." SO, IF YOU ARE READING THIS HIRE ME NOW AND "everyone will benefit."
One giant leap backward (34 years) for mankind. (I know its isn't quite true, i just couldn't help myself)
At 150,000 quid, it would certainly end any congestion in both my wallet and my bank account. I guess if you forced everyone to use this or a bus, it would certainly end road congestion since most of us would have to go back to public transportation.
This isn't a patent case.
The guru's are correct, but ask them if they can tell you if they have encountered a real world case where gcc 3.3 wasn't good enough. Now ask the faculty if access to the source code is helpful in the advanced classes. I'll bet the answers will be .... ummmmm no and YES.
But, you are right - gcc needs to improve. And from the boost test results, I would say that gcc is improving rapidly. MS VC++ can compile clean on one platform, gcc is cross patform. Hats off to the gcc team for writing some great code.
See the boost regression tests
The CDV folks are talking about $5 per carot. (of course this is for an ingot that makes the hope diamond look small) each diamond may be expensive, but the cost/kg can be much lower than hiring thugs to maim Africans that live near diamond mines.
Do you really think that you cannot tweak the CDV processes to introduce defects? The scientists making the CDV are dreaming of very fast processors (Si single crystals get replaced by C single crystals - same structure - different band gap). They want to make huge single crystals. If you want to add imperfections, I'm sure that can be arranged. It was really hard to eliminate all of the defects, i'm sure they can dope or otherwise add imperfections.
Clearly, SCO wants money, not the code out. They see open source as a meal ticket. With just a little work, it might be possible to make the IT world fear open source. 1) The SCO code that was released looks as much like BSD code as Linux code.
2) SCO asserts that the code in Linux is worth biillions, and that is was copied illegally
3) There is a stronger arguement that the SCO code was lifted from BSD. SCO managed to violate one of only 4 conditions in the BSD license -they removed the names of the original authors.
4) A gift doesn't loose its value when you give it away. The value of the BSD code is apparently in the billions - at least to SCO.
5) The UC system certainly seems to be strapped for cash. This is one of the largest expenditures in California, and California is clearly in a budget crisis.
6) The second clause of the BSD license is that any binary that uses BSD code needs to acknowledge the original developers. If it were to turn out that an OS lifted BSD networking code, the company that released the OS would also be violating the BSD license.
Stealing a gift is still theft. Denying the value of Open Source, while taking open source code is disengenuous.
1) SCO believes that volating a Unix source code license should cost the guilty part 3 billion 2) It seems SCO managed to do the only thing possible to vioate the BSD license (they removed the copyright) 3) You, Arnold, seem to be the leading candidate for Gov. of California 4) Therefore, if you become governor, your sadly underfuned schools look like they have a 3 billion dollar opportunity to SUE SCO FOR COPYRIGHT VIOATIONS 5) Hey look we got to MAKE LOTS OF MONEY without the pesky ????? step.
Opps ... I meant 'Even California's ballot for the recall (attempt) of the governor has a proposition added to it."
What does matter is the complexity of each ballot. We, in the US, have long complex ballots that contain votes for many elections (President to local dog catcher) and various propositions. Even California's governor's recall vote has a referendum tacked on to it.
Under these conditions, paper is a pain. You need to print different ballots for each city or town. This also gives rise to the disgracefull differences in voting accuracy between districts - it seems that wealthy districts can affort more accurate equiptment, so a larger fraction of the votes are counted. Sadly, this means that you really can buy votes - at least statistically speaking. Rant aside, the complexity of our ballots makes electronic voting attractive.
Look at a BSD code base. tar is on all Unix-like systems. If you don't like the GPL, respect it but don't use it. The BSD folks don't mind if you use thier tar, just remember to give credit where it is due.
A few of us need to find some local LUG members that had a job shipped offshore and form a company that can offer local support for some promising packages - SAMBA, Apache and OpenOffice come to mind. We should learn to set up SAP on Linux. Then, we need to learn how to bid on government contracts and sell services to local companies.
We can think globally, which is why we like OSS, now we need to act locally The Quiet War must be won in the trenches, not in WIPO.
You have entered a strange dimension where geeks rule and Samba has nothing to do with a racial slur.
There are plenty of of more elegant solutions for filesharing that have been developed and implemented in an open manner. AFS was designed at CMU and OpenAFS is largely the result of U of Michigan. This is certainly inovative and it is also open source. Painting 'open source' as a monolithic entity is silly, you may as well say that "I knew an MIT grad and he was a git, so all MIT grads are gits."
I have no reason to make Linux 'act like' Windows at home, where I can run a LInux network. However, at work I don't have that luxury. Networking with Windows is a reality. For this, Samba is an amazingly good piece of kit.
Vizzini (aka McBride): Ha ha, you fool! You've fallen victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this - "Never go in against IBM when intellectual property rights are on the line!" Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha h-! (falls over dead)