Nonsense, it says "general truths or general laws", an entirely different meaning intended. That phrase is used in contrast to one such as "Absolute Truths" or Truth. And no I will not define those as they are of no concern or interest to science, that is philosophy.
You are committing a logical fallacy. The definition of science I've given, it is well known. It does not include any notion of truth or Truth. I don't have to define anything outside that realm for this thread. If you wish to discuss philosophy, or why religion fails at attempts at either philosophy or science as various religion's claims sometimes overlap those two fields that's another topic.
You are very funny, your big iron Unix admins that are handling your money, insurance, etc. are using init, not launchd which is used by Apple Lifestyle Hipsters(tm). Serious computing is obviously not your forte, but don't worry there are plenty of managers and executives that think because they understand some things about consumer grade crap systems they know about real computer operation. You could join their esteemed ranks, or maybe even be a systemd developer
I worked in science for over a decade but never saw truth with capital T either defined in science or stated as goal of science. Maybe you don't know what the goals or purpose of science are.
Let Webster help you, first definition is what we are discussing: ": knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation
: a particular area of scientific study (such as biology, physics, or chemistry) : a particular branch of science
: a subject that is formally studied in a college, university, etc. "
There is no notion of "Truth" there, useful information is the best one could hope for, and any physicist will tell you that it is quite possible the fundamental workings and principals of the universe might be unknowable and untestable though they hope that is not the case.
Wrong, science as "natural philosophy" is an outdated concept from 17-19th century. Science now is considered outside the realm of philosophy. The Latin degree names are just holdover, but you are free to imagine yourself in that quaint era.
No, people who have successfully done Unix administration for over two decades on multiple flavors (SunOS/Solaris, IRIX, HP/UX, AIX, etc.) with deep knowledge of system builds, configuration, provisioning, maintenance, troubleshooting, are serious admins.
no, that's an extremely efficient way to travel compared to individual cars. Did you know a diesel bus can get over 150 passenger miles / gallon compared to 49 for jet?
we actually have a mac server, launchd doesn't always launch the 3fd party stuff (like nagios client for example) for whatever reason. I'd take init for it any day of the week
Someone should invent a general purpose app that could read internet served magazines in a universal markup language format. We could call it a Web Peruser.
what core things about init need to be done better? Parallel starting of scripts, trivial do that and so there are many parallelizing versions of init out there. Something that monitors and restarts? script can do that. aything else needed, I sure don't need my logging in a database instead of a text log file, and systemd fanboys who point out text logging from the journal possible don't seem to comprehend that's if everything is working that will happen. KISS
Serious admins already have that point of view, no reason to sway. Kids who experiment and only worry about their desktop or hobby system might have another.
Regardless of the particulars of this project, it's good people are waking up and realizing what a bloated feature-creeped rube goldberg contraption systemd is, a non-Unix non-Unix-way solution no serious Linux/Unix admin wants, it hinders troubleshooting and configuration. Systemd is what happens when inexperienced people with high IQ fly off on a tagent without engineering ability.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense, it says "general truths or general laws", an entirely different meaning intended. That phrase is used in contrast to one such as "Absolute Truths" or Truth. And no I will not define those as they are of no concern or interest to science, that is philosophy.
wrong, they act from their religious viewpoint. you just don't see how dangerous a human invention that religion is
You are committing a logical fallacy. The definition of science I've given, it is well known. It does not include any notion of truth or Truth. I don't have to define anything outside that realm for this thread. If you wish to discuss philosophy, or why religion fails at attempts at either philosophy or science as various religion's claims sometimes overlap those two fields that's another topic.
-- Homer
You are very funny, your big iron Unix admins that are handling your money, insurance, etc. are using init, not launchd which is used by Apple Lifestyle Hipsters(tm). Serious computing is obviously not your forte, but don't worry there are plenty of managers and executives that think because they understand some things about consumer grade crap systems they know about real computer operation. You could join their esteemed ranks, or maybe even be a systemd developer
Seeking answers to your questions about "truth" are in the realm of philsophy, that is no concern of science.
"Science is the best method of obtaining Truth"
I worked in science for over a decade but never saw truth with capital T either defined in science or stated as goal of science. Maybe you don't know what the goals or purpose of science are.
Let Webster help you, first definition is what we are discussing:
": knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation
: a particular area of scientific study (such as biology, physics, or chemistry) : a particular branch of science
: a subject that is formally studied in a college, university, etc. "
There is no notion of "Truth" there, useful information is the best one could hope for, and any physicist will tell you that it is quite possible the fundamental workings and principals of the universe might be unknowable and untestable though they hope that is not the case.
Wrong, science as "natural philosophy" is an outdated concept from 17-19th century. Science now is considered outside the realm of philosophy. The Latin degree names are just holdover, but you are free to imagine yourself in that quaint era.
Suppose the global temperature does not warm year after year, and that provable by science.
No, science is not the pursuit of Truth, that would be philosophy down the hall.
You are definitely part of the problem.
it's a lot more than just nagios, and it's a frequent lament in osx forums about launchd's flakiness
No, people who have successfully done Unix administration for over two decades on multiple flavors (SunOS/Solaris, IRIX, HP/UX, AIX, etc.) with deep knowledge of system builds, configuration, provisioning, maintenance, troubleshooting, are serious admins.
but Yosemite update will be free too
no, that's an extremely efficient way to travel compared to individual cars. Did you know a diesel bus can get over 150 passenger miles / gallon compared to 49 for jet?
how about those other perusers on iphone (firefox, chrome, etc.)?
we actually have a mac server, launchd doesn't always launch the 3fd party stuff (like nagios client for example) for whatever reason. I'd take init for it any day of the week
Someone should invent a general purpose app that could read internet served magazines in a universal markup language format. We could call it a Web Peruser.
So you can't afford the Apple lifestyle, get a better job you fucking hippie.
what core things about init need to be done better? Parallel starting of scripts, trivial do that and so there are many parallelizing versions of init out there. Something that monitors and restarts? script can do that. aything else needed, I sure don't need my logging in a database instead of a text log file, and systemd fanboys who point out text logging from the journal possible don't seem to comprehend that's if everything is working that will happen. KISS
no, not when the file is for human admin, writing a file parser for a simple file format is trivial, not a valid objection.
Serious admins already have that point of view, no reason to sway. Kids who experiment and only worry about their desktop or hobby system might have another.
Regardless of the particulars of this project, it's good people are waking up and realizing what a bloated feature-creeped rube goldberg contraption systemd is, a non-Unix non-Unix-way solution no serious Linux/Unix admin wants, it hinders troubleshooting and configuration. Systemd is what happens when inexperienced people with high IQ fly off on a tagent without engineering ability.
it doesn't "just work", the plist configuration is needlessly complex
surely, as has happened before with other multimedia tech, there is an application in the porn market that will make it take off
Her mother Nut is the sky god, you're saying she can't visit?