Germany was *not* a democracy before the WW1, sadly. The democratic revolution of 1848/49 had been fought down by the aristocratic class, 'democracy' which deserved the name took only place in a few independent cities, like Hamburg and such.
The democracy of Weimar, after WW1, was, by design, the most free society that existed in those days. But people weren't used to it, and didn't knew how to use the system. It ended in a populistic desaster which led to Hitler.
You're an idiot. You didn't seem to have learned a single thing from history. What brings you to the conclusion that Germany 'has always been a savage nation'?
Did you know, for instance, that:
a) the german 'nation' has been founded in 1871. Prior to that date, all that existed were about 50 small independent states.
b) in its first 30 years of existence, the german nation build a diplomatic network of treaties with all surrounding neighbors that made it impossible for anyone to attack germany or one of its allys (which were, basically, everybody except france).
c) didn't participate in the imperialistic colonialism of the late 19th century (that is, until Bismarck resigned somewhere in 1890).
Have you ever counted how many different graphics card are available for MacOS? Uhmm, let me do it for you. So, we have.... ATI... this or that nVidia product...
MacOS supports few hardware, specifically selected. But these things work like a charm.
But you're building those bridges with binary drivers and closed source. What's the point? You might as well use free software on Windows because the end-result is the same. You're still using a closed source system. Why do you think Linux has a greater marketshare than arguably better systems like MacOSX, BeOS, or QNX? It's not the price because BeOS didn't get any attention even when they made it cost-free. It's not the applications because MacOSX has many more. It's not the variety of supported platforms because the majority of Linux users use x86. The primary reason why Linux is winning is because Linux is open source. That's the distinguishing feature of Linux. It's the whole POINT of Linux.
Wrong. BeOS, QNX and OS-X are not as popular as Linux because they do not support the range of hardware (not processor architectures, actual add-on hardware, I mean) that Linux does. Every one of those OS is picky about its hardware, except Linux.
Not everybody in the world runs on ideology.
Re:Are they honest or just desperate?
on
Fishing for Ideas
·
· Score: 1
This is quite a smart move by MS, if you ask me. 300,000 USD is nothing when running an R&D department, but for an individual with a cool idea this is a whole lot of money.
All humans desire the right to self determination. To say that somehow only we rich, industrialized nations can handle freedom is a bit elitist, don't you think?
However, you should not forget that this whole democracy thing is a western idea. The arabic world has different understanding of personal freedom than we (US/Europe) have; in a way much more conservative.
And yet, India holds regularly elections... it's, after all, a democracy (with more or less all of its faults... which are power-greedy politicians and narrow-minded people)
Actually, ironically, war can be pretty good for the economy. Look at Germany throughout the 30s; it managed to get out of the great depression and become a (super) power just because of its war preparations.
Not that I encourage people to kill each other to raise the IT salaries.
Yet Mr. Tanenbaum developed the Minix OS on his own, which gives you some 'authority'. And despite being a simple student at the time, Linus got into the argument!
Except that Epic released UT2k3 along with a Linux Client on the *same* disk as the win32 version (without extra-costs) and maintained a Patch for old UT on Linux?
... or you could have looked at the bottom of the mail where the unsubscribe links and privacy policy are printed. Considering that NYTis a fairly respectable company, these can be considered safe.
Which brings us the crucial point: money. From my knowledge, the technology for settling on the moon is more or less invented. The point is that it would cost an awesome lot to actually realise such a project and lift it into space.
The problem is not inventing the technology itself, but making it affordable. A single shuttle-mission costs about 400 million US-$. So the twenty or so shuttles sent to ISS cost NASA about 8 billion dollars. Now, if the technology could be refined so that it only cost about 40 million to launch a shuttle (still a lot), and then think about how many more missions could be sent with the saved money.
Sorry, but the stuff is far too ridiculous to be true. I mean, such a wild mixture of modern mathematics and physics is just hilarious. Go, have a good laugh about it, and then let it rest in piece. I doubt the original poster meant this serious;)
The fact that the civil service term is longer is indeed some sort of 'punishment' or - euphemistically phrased - a motivation to join the military. However, the term durations of both correlate with each other; I think I remember a supreme court-ruling that says that the civil service may not be significantly longer than the military one.
Still, nowadays only a fraction of young adults get drafted in the military anyways. You only need to attend civil service if you wan't to be 100% sure that you don't get into the army.
Im my opinion, though, they can scrap that whole concept. It's just plain injust and out of date. I mean, where'S the justice than men must choose between military/civil-service and woman don't. And what do we need a military with roughly 50,000 well-trained/equipped troops and some more 200,000 (+500,000 reserve) with neither good training nor good equipment for. German politics, ah, don't get me started....
Re:Cable is Better in YOUR area
on
DSL Rising
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Some european countries *do* have wide-spread cable-tv network, like germany and its 90+% coverage. The problem is that most parts aren't upstream-capable, and since most cable networks are still in the hands of the former public monopolies nobody invests into the infrastructure in large scales.
Amen. I once had the opportunity to get a ride in Transrapid on its testing-track in Emsland. The speed wasn't the main thing that made me speechless. It was the the silence within the train. I mean, we were travelling at 420 kph and it wasn't any louder than on an average ICE/TGV. And note, the train didn't have any sound-dampening at that time as it was a testing vehicle.
And you should also note that a maglev track only requires two square meters per meter of track, compared to 20 m^2 or more for conventional tracks.
NASA made it onto the moon with technology that seems, politely spoken, old and crappy by now. Mir served in space for several years using mostly, so-called, 'sub-standard' parts by western definition; still it flew and didn't cause anybody to die.
I don't see why there must be so much money spend only to do something we've already done before? I mean, getting a base to the moon, a man/woman on Mars or some probes to Pluto et al would be waaay much of a better use for all that money, in my opinion.
Apparently, germany, for example, is spending only about 25 billion dollars on defense, with a total budget of about 220 billion dollar and a GDP of 1.7 trillion.
Do the math yourself. 17% is really hiiiigh. No way to argue that.
Out of these two political systems, my choice is the latter. Communism has never worked, and will never work. Perhaps a mix a la Sweden is nirvana? Just prepare yourself in paying the taxes to keep it running.
Doesn't lie the truth somewhere in the middle in between these two. Communism is a great idea by design, but a failure in reality. Capitalism in its pure form is, again by design, much more unjust than communism. However, in reality it works better for all parts.
But why does it work better? Isn't it a sort of balance. A balance between corporate interests and personal/social ones. Companies need to be sound so they can continue giving people jobs. But the people need to be happy, too; 'only a happy worker is a good one'.
What I want to say is that shareholder value isn't everything. It can be an indicator that things go well/wrong. but in the end its about the people (and not some 1% in the upper ten-thousands).
Slashdot Mirror
Germany was *not* a democracy before the WW1, sadly. The democratic revolution of 1848/49 had been fought down by the aristocratic class, 'democracy' which deserved the name took only place in a few independent cities, like Hamburg and such.
The democracy of Weimar, after WW1, was, by design, the most free society that existed in those days. But people weren't used to it, and didn't knew how to use the system. It ended in a populistic desaster which led to Hitler.
Fact #1:
:)
You're an idiot. You didn't seem to have learned a single thing from history. What brings you to the conclusion that Germany 'has always been a savage nation'?
Did you know, for instance, that:
a) the german 'nation' has been founded in 1871. Prior to that date, all that existed were about 50 small independent states.
b) in its first 30 years of existence, the german nation build a diplomatic network of treaties with all surrounding neighbors that made it impossible for anyone to attack germany or one of its allys (which were, basically, everybody except france).
c) didn't participate in the imperialistic colonialism of the late 19th century (that is, until Bismarck resigned somewhere in 1890).
Get your facts straight. Please.
But that's the difference between MacOS and Linux. Apple certifies everything. You do not even think of using an S3 Savage, under Linux though....
Have you ever counted how many different graphics card are available for MacOS? Uhmm, let me do it for you. So, we have.... ATI... this or that nVidia product...
MacOS supports few hardware, specifically selected. But these things work like a charm.
Wrong. BeOS, QNX and OS-X are not as popular as Linux because they do not support the range of hardware (not processor architectures, actual add-on hardware, I mean) that Linux does. Every one of those OS is picky about its hardware, except Linux.
Not everybody in the world runs on ideology.
This is quite a smart move by MS, if you ask me. 300,000 USD is nothing when running an R&D department, but for an individual with a cool idea this is a whole lot of money.
At least MS is honest and tells you to go and patent your idea, or they'll steal it from you. An honest thief, one could say... ;)
You just have to keep in mind that if the Iraqi air defense had a success rate of 40% half the U.S. would have been shot down already!
All humans desire the right to self determination. To say that somehow only we rich, industrialized nations can handle freedom is a bit elitist, don't you think?
However, you should not forget that this whole democracy thing is a western idea. The arabic world has different understanding of personal freedom than we (US/Europe) have; in a way much more conservative.
simply disgusting... anybody remember vietnam and the bodycounts back then?
Which is nothing different than a reversed Carnot-cycle.
And yet, India holds regularly elections... it's, after all, a democracy (with more or less all of its faults... which are power-greedy politicians and narrow-minded people)
Actually, ironically, war can be pretty good for the economy. Look at Germany throughout the 30s; it managed to get out of the great depression and become a (super) power just because of its war preparations.
Not that I encourage people to kill each other to raise the IT salaries.
Yet Mr. Tanenbaum developed the Minix OS on his own, which gives you some 'authority'. And despite being a simple student at the time, Linus got into the argument!
Except that Epic released UT2k3 along with a Linux Client on the *same* disk as the win32 version (without extra-costs) and maintained a Patch for old UT on Linux?
I remember Transgaming's website to be a bit non-talkative about where to get the 'free' version.
So, here's a link: WineX.
... or you could have looked at the bottom of the mail where the unsubscribe links and privacy policy are printed. Considering that NYTis a fairly respectable company, these can be considered safe.
At worst, you may have caught NYT on a bad day.
Which brings us the crucial point: money. From my knowledge, the technology for settling on the moon is more or less invented. The point is that it would cost an awesome lot to actually realise such a project and lift it into space.
The problem is not inventing the technology itself, but making it affordable. A single shuttle-mission costs about 400 million US-$. So the twenty or so shuttles sent to ISS cost NASA about 8 billion dollars. Now, if the technology could be refined so that it only cost about 40 million to launch a shuttle (still a lot), and then think about how many more missions could be sent with the saved money.
Sorry, but the stuff is far too ridiculous to be true. I mean, such a wild mixture of modern mathematics and physics is just hilarious. Go, have a good laugh about it, and then let it rest in piece. I doubt the original poster meant this serious ;)
The fact that the civil service term is longer is indeed some sort of 'punishment' or - euphemistically phrased - a motivation to join the military. However, the term durations of both correlate with each other; I think I remember a supreme court-ruling that says that the civil service may not be significantly longer than the military one.
Still, nowadays only a fraction of young adults get drafted in the military anyways. You only need to attend civil service if you wan't to be 100% sure that you don't get into the army.
Im my opinion, though, they can scrap that whole concept. It's just plain injust and out of date. I mean, where'S the justice than men must choose between military/civil-service and woman don't. And what do we need a military with roughly 50,000 well-trained/equipped troops and some more 200,000 (+500,000 reserve) with neither good training nor good equipment for. German politics, ah, don't get me started....
Some european countries *do* have wide-spread cable-tv network, like germany and its 90+% coverage. The problem is that most parts aren't upstream-capable, and since most cable networks are still in the hands of the former public monopolies nobody invests into the infrastructure in large scales.
Sad, but true.
Amen. I once had the opportunity to get a ride in Transrapid on its testing-track in Emsland. The speed wasn't the main thing that made me speechless. It was the the silence within the train. I mean, we were travelling at 420 kph and it wasn't any louder than on an average ICE/TGV. And note, the train didn't have any sound-dampening at that time as it was a testing vehicle.
And you should also note that a maglev track only requires two square meters per meter of track, compared to 20 m^2 or more for conventional tracks.
NASA made it onto the moon with technology that seems, politely spoken, old and crappy by now. Mir served in space for several years using mostly, so-called, 'sub-standard' parts by western definition; still it flew and didn't cause anybody to die.
I don't see why there must be so much money spend only to do something we've already done before? I mean, getting a base to the moon, a man/woman on Mars or some probes to Pluto et al would be waaay much of a better use for all that money, in my opinion.
Apparently, germany, for example, is spending only about 25 billion dollars on defense, with a total budget of about 220 billion dollar and a GDP of 1.7 trillion.
Do the math yourself. 17% is really hiiiigh. No way to argue that.
Out of these two political systems, my choice is the latter. Communism has never worked, and will never work. Perhaps a mix a la Sweden is nirvana? Just prepare yourself in paying the taxes to keep it running.
Doesn't lie the truth somewhere in the middle in between these two. Communism is a great idea by design, but a failure in reality. Capitalism in its pure form is, again by design, much more unjust than communism. However, in reality it works better for all parts.
But why does it work better? Isn't it a sort of balance. A balance between corporate interests and personal/social ones. Companies need to be sound so they can continue giving people jobs. But the people need to be happy, too; 'only a happy worker is a good one'.
What I want to say is that shareholder value isn't everything. It can be an indicator that things go well/wrong. but in the end its about the people (and not some 1% in the upper ten-thousands).