The Novell resources that are called upon will primarily be people in New Zealand. This is a first world country with local people at all levels of business and technical expertise. Novell New Zealand will no doubt be hiring more people (New Zealand citizens, residents, tax payers) to support this project.
Of course, some of the money will go to the USA. This buys the benefits of the security of dealing with a larger more stable (one hopes) corporate entity.
Re:Last Of The Well Behaved Editors
on
Vim 6.4 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If I had the points, I'd mod you up. I'm not familiar with ZDE or Scite, but I work with data transferred between different companies with a variety of systems. We end up writing custom adapter scripts to correct this kind of data format. End of line and end of file characters and character sequences are not universally standard. But sometimes they are completely and uniquely querky.
I don't mind that so much. What winds me up is when they ask us to write export adaptor scripts to screw the data up again to their preferred screwed-format as we return files to them!
How do you classify something as 10x safer than something else? Do they expect 10x less people to die, 10x less frequent explosive disasters, or are the events themselves 10x less dangerous, meaning astronauts could survive?
Well, you're not far off. In a complex, even chaotic system, you can develop metrics - or measurable elements. It is not the same as certainty, but it's better than having no clue.
Each component has a failure rating
Each system has a failure frequency
Each potentially failing system has a level of redundancy
Each potentially failing system has a degree of impact on other systems and the entire system.
Formulae which take all this into account can model and rate the safety of the system as a whole. Of course, this means nothing if you're riding on the shuttle that explodes. But it does provide a means of measuring safety.
I write software for the PocketPC (like iPAQs, etc.) We do printing and communications via either Compact Flash connections, bluetooth, or IrDA. By far the easiest to configure is IrDA. In fact, there is almost no configuration required. Just point the unit at the printer and hit 'Go'. No plugging in cables, no partnering devices. I can walk into a customer's office for the first time, spot an Infrared port on their printer, and print from my iPAQ with one tap of the screen. I know of no other protocol that can do that.
At training sessions we sometimes have 10 or 15 users with bluetooth, iPAQs, mobile printers and mobile phones. That up to 45 Bluetooth devices in the room. Now you try to partner the correct iPAQ with the mobile and printer of the right user. It's a bloody circus. With Infrared, there is great simplicity.
I know that IrDA is going out of fashion with some manufacturers, but I hope it continues.
Also, I think it is reasonable to teach the short-comings of an incomplete theory like evolution. That will show students the process of science.
Unless of course evolution has become a pseudo-religious believe (because we must reject any notion of God's creation). In which case, hide the problems and act like evolution is a complete unchallenged model.
Do people on slashdot want to understand intellegent Christians, or just flame them down?
Four Points:
Some aspects of Intellegent Design are unprovable and therefore, outside the realm of science. However, some is provable. For example, in Forenzics, was this fire started by a person?
Much of the Bible is unprovable. Christians do not always agree on what bits are literal, and what is figurative. Those who believe it do not generally do so for scientific reasons. But they don't like the unchallenged assertion that what they believe is completely untrue.
There is growing unease at the almost evangelical promotion and defence of evolution (often spelt with a capital E) as though it was more than a theory. It is still the best theory going for several reasons, but it is no where near the maturity of a model like the periodic table (which fits observation practically without gaps). The theories of evolution are likely to continue to fork and change and even be replaced in large chunks.
Darwin and Newton were both Bible believing Christians, so don't dis us too much.
Many Christians like myself think there is a long way to go to understand the origin of ourselves and the world. We suspect that many questions like "why we are here" will be best answered in our faith. Many questions about the process by which it took place will be best answered by science.
However, until scientists abandon their "religious" teaching of evolution like it was "truth", Christians will be uncomfortable with school science curriculum.
Hey, that was an interesting, but anonymous post from Toronto. (see parent post)
Now if you would log in and post under your name, you would probably have been modded up. Posting anonymously leaves you with a score of zero and hardly anyone reads your post.
"Cultural change" with respect to what?
With respect to the Educational IT culture.
This is a case in New Zealand, how do you factor "cultural changes" across the globe with 1 migration to Linux?
I don't think I said across the globe. NZ is my country, those are mine and my children's schools, IT is my field, it is my culture.
this is an 18 month contract and there is no certainty with what will happen after that
Too true. Just a beginning.
You say a "few" years. How many years might that be?
No idea. Vague notions, I'll grant you. A change in culture is slow, it affects some people sooner than others. I would expect small effects will be noted in two years when more high school graduates have been exposed to alternative desktops.
"beginning of the end of the desktop monopoly"? I seriously doubt that. If this works out for NZ and others follow suit, then that's great. However you need more than zeal and Orwellian references to bring down a monopoly.
Yes, you are right. My argument was general and over-simplified, and therefore lacked precision. Perfect for Slashdot, really.
But I believe my point was valid and I stand by it.
Do New Zealand schools not suffer under a random set of badly written windows programs which they call there teaching method?
When I was in a New Zealand school, we had Apple ][, and the only educational software was Lode Runner, Castle Wolfenstein (the original - none of this 3D rubbish) and pong. There may have been something else, I don't remember.
You have free speech, but still have to buy your own microphone.
You are free to travel, but buy your own ticket.
You're free to choose, but pay the expenses of your own distro.
Supporting thousands of kids on desktops costs something. If you don't think so, then you try it. So who should carry the cost? These are state schools, the tax payer pays.
Businesses may at times contribute, but that tends to lead to businesses wanting something back. Microsoft is happy to negotiate with schools. All they want is that the school perpetuates Microsoft's desktop monopoly.
So the freedom we need is the practical freedom to educate kids without the curriculum being written by the mega-multi-nationals.
In a few years, people will no longer be saying, "everyone knows Windows... we expect new employees to know Windoze... it would cost too much to re-train our staff who only know Whindoes..."
It's the beginning of the end of the desktop monopoly. Kids will no longer be programmed with a view to maintaining the power structures of the status quo.
Try taking kid with eczema to your family doctor. Basically, main-stream professionals have little idea other than the steroids that the drug multi-nationals pump out.
Then search the web for parents who have gone from dispair to joy by trying out gluten free diets, milk alternatives, etc. Yes, it's true that we don't all have the skills to separate genuine peer-reviewed research from the internet cranks. But on the positive side, the internet has put knowledge and publication in the hands of common people.
Now, if your doctor is unable to help, be it through lack of knowledge in a specific area, lack of time, energy, enthusiasm... you have somewhere else to look.
You can still talk with your doctor about implementing alternative solutions that you've found.
I think good doctors are willing to see that it is high time that patients were willing to question the received wisdom of the health profession. There is a necessary check and balance here. And we are not all numb-skulls believing every internet crank with a miracle cure...
The OS community (and those who appreciate and respect it - like many on slashdot) seem to be pleased when there is some big name take-up on open source software.
When you write software for pleasure, you like others to use it.
When others make loads of money from it, the feeling is mixed.
I think that the Scientifically enclined can respond to this kind of thing better by NOT getting angry and sad (which are emotional responses). - no offence if that's just the way it makes you feel...
But my point is that scientists do not need to emotionally defend a scientific theory from those who disagree. I'm sure you would accept that there may come future theories which could radically change the way we view the evolutionary history of life. Future generations may even look at our current theories the way we think of the world on a turtle's back.
Theories are good theories if they help describe the realm we are modelling. Theories are not truth. For example, we can make use of both a wave theory and a particle theory of light. I don't know if either is 'true', but they both help us understand light.
So we may enjoy, perhaps even have great enthusiasm for great theories. But we should not feel threatened when people reject them. If our theories stand up to testing and sustained criticism (some of which you may find irrational) then they are good theories. But still, they may not last for ever.
I agree that this would be too complicated a definition of science. But it may be valuable as a definition of scientific process for a school science program.
It seems that they are trying to get away from a pre-determined conclusion that there is a 'natural explanation' to be sought. Clearly, they think that there may be some super-natural explanations. Perhaps it is a fair point that budding scientists should not determine the nature of the explanation before conducting the science.
What are you doing telling everyone that Russell Crowe is a New Zealander???
We've been doing a pretty good job up till now convincing the world he's an Aussie. The Aussies can have iTunes if they promise to keep Russell Crowe.
Slashdot Mirror
gowen, you must be new here! It doesn't need to be funny to be modded funny. Geeks do humour by formula.
Your reply should have been:
In Korea, the new mammal finds you!
Oh, how my sides hurt.
The Novell resources that are called upon will primarily be people in New Zealand. This is a first world country with local people at all levels of business and technical expertise. Novell New Zealand will no doubt be hiring more people (New Zealand citizens, residents, tax payers) to support this project.
Of course, some of the money will go to the USA. This buys the benefits of the security of dealing with a larger more stable (one hopes) corporate entity.
If I had the points, I'd mod you up. I'm not familiar with ZDE or Scite, but I work with data transferred between different companies with a variety of systems. We end up writing custom adapter scripts to correct this kind of data format. End of line and end of file characters and character sequences are not universally standard. But sometimes they are completely and uniquely querky.
I don't mind that so much. What winds me up is when they ask us to write export adaptor scripts to screw the data up again to their preferred screwed-format as we return files to them!
How do you classify something as 10x safer than something else? Do they expect 10x less people to die, 10x less frequent explosive disasters, or are the events themselves 10x less dangerous, meaning astronauts could survive?
Well, you're not far off. In a complex, even chaotic system, you can develop metrics - or measurable elements. It is not the same as certainty, but it's better than having no clue.
Each component has a failure rating
Each system has a failure frequency
Each potentially failing system has a level of redundancy
Each potentially failing system has a degree of impact on other systems and the entire system.
Formulae which take all this into account can model and rate the safety of the system as a whole. Of course, this means nothing if you're riding on the shuttle that explodes. But it does provide a means of measuring safety.
Good
Bad
I write software for the PocketPC (like iPAQs, etc.) We do printing and communications via either Compact Flash connections, bluetooth, or IrDA. By far the easiest to configure is IrDA. In fact, there is almost no configuration required. Just point the unit at the printer and hit 'Go'. No plugging in cables, no partnering devices. I can walk into a customer's office for the first time, spot an Infrared port on their printer, and print from my iPAQ with one tap of the screen. I know of no other protocol that can do that.
At training sessions we sometimes have 10 or 15 users with bluetooth, iPAQs, mobile printers and mobile phones. That up to 45 Bluetooth devices in the room. Now you try to partner the correct iPAQ with the mobile and printer of the right user. It's a bloody circus. With Infrared, there is great simplicity.
I know that IrDA is going out of fashion with some manufacturers, but I hope it continues.
Also, I think it is reasonable to teach the short-comings of an incomplete theory like evolution. That will show students the process of science.
Unless of course evolution has become a pseudo-religious believe (because we must reject any notion of God's creation). In which case, hide the problems and act like evolution is a complete unchallenged model.
Four Points:
Many Christians like myself think there is a long way to go to understand the origin of ourselves and the world. We suspect that many questions like "why we are here" will be best answered in our faith. Many questions about the process by which it took place will be best answered by science.
However, until scientists abandon their "religious" teaching of evolution like it was "truth", Christians will be uncomfortable with school science curriculum.
Hey, that was an interesting, but anonymous post from Toronto. (see parent post)
Now if you would log in and post under your name, you would probably have been modded up. Posting anonymously leaves you with a score of zero and hardly anyone reads your post.
Good questions: worth some answers.
"Cultural change" with respect to what?
With respect to the Educational IT culture.
This is a case in New Zealand, how do you factor "cultural changes" across the globe with 1 migration to Linux?
I don't think I said across the globe. NZ is my country, those are mine and my children's schools, IT is my field, it is my culture.
this is an 18 month contract and there is no certainty with what will happen after that
Too true. Just a beginning.
You say a "few" years. How many years might that be?
No idea. Vague notions, I'll grant you. A change in culture is slow, it affects some people sooner than others. I would expect small effects will be noted in two years when more high school graduates have been exposed to alternative desktops.
"beginning of the end of the desktop monopoly"? I seriously doubt that. If this works out for NZ and others follow suit, then that's great. However you need more than zeal and Orwellian references to bring down a monopoly.
Yes, you are right. My argument was general and over-simplified, and therefore lacked precision. Perfect for Slashdot, really.
But I believe my point was valid and I stand by it.
Do New Zealand schools not suffer under a random set of badly written windows programs which they call there teaching method?
When I was in a New Zealand school, we had Apple ][, and the only educational software was Lode Runner, Castle Wolfenstein (the original - none of this 3D rubbish) and pong. There may have been something else, I don't remember.
Gratis versus Libre
- You have free speech, but still have to buy your own microphone.
- You are free to travel, but buy your own ticket.
- You're free to choose, but pay the expenses of your own distro.
Supporting thousands of kids on desktops costs something. If you don't think so, then you try it. So who should carry the cost? These are state schools, the tax payer pays.Businesses may at times contribute, but that tends to lead to businesses wanting something back. Microsoft is happy to negotiate with schools. All they want is that the school perpetuates Microsoft's desktop monopoly.
So the freedom we need is the practical freedom to educate kids without the curriculum being written by the mega-multi-nationals.
In a few years, people will no longer be saying, "everyone knows Windows... we expect new employees to know Windoze... it would cost too much to re-train our staff who only know Whindoes..."
It's the beginning of the end of the desktop monopoly. Kids will no longer be programmed with a view to maintaining the power structures of the status quo.
Try taking kid with eczema to your family doctor. Basically, main-stream professionals have little idea other than the steroids that the drug multi-nationals pump out.
Then search the web for parents who have gone from dispair to joy by trying out gluten free diets, milk alternatives, etc. Yes, it's true that we don't all have the skills to separate genuine peer-reviewed research from the internet cranks. But on the positive side, the internet has put knowledge and publication in the hands of common people.
Now, if your doctor is unable to help, be it through lack of knowledge in a specific area, lack of time, energy, enthusiasm... you have somewhere else to look.
You can still talk with your doctor about implementing alternative solutions that you've found.
I think good doctors are willing to see that it is high time that patients were willing to question the received wisdom of the health profession. There is a necessary check and balance here. And we are not all numb-skulls believing every internet crank with a miracle cure...
Now if he can just grasp the concept of NULL, he can do SQL.
I was willing to put the Gnome/KDE dispute aside. But if they start spelling Click with a 'K', I will not forgive.
I need that in calories. How many mars bars?
The OS community (and those who appreciate and respect it - like many on slashdot) seem to be pleased when there is some big name take-up on open source software.
When you write software for pleasure, you like others to use it.
When others make loads of money from it, the feeling is mixed.
More specifically, the VIRTUAL MACHINE architecture addresses this problem. The .NET/Mono framework is another stab.
I suspect that we have not yet seen the VM architecture in its full maturity.
I've been using a mouse like that for years.
I think that the Scientifically enclined can respond to this kind of thing better by NOT getting angry and sad (which are emotional responses). - no offence if that's just the way it makes you feel...
But my point is that scientists do not need to emotionally defend a scientific theory from those who disagree. I'm sure you would accept that there may come future theories which could radically change the way we view the evolutionary history of life. Future generations may even look at our current theories the way we think of the world on a turtle's back.
Theories are good theories if they help describe the realm we are modelling. Theories are not truth. For example, we can make use of both a wave theory and a particle theory of light. I don't know if either is 'true', but they both help us understand light.
So we may enjoy, perhaps even have great enthusiasm for great theories. But we should not feel threatened when people reject them. If our theories stand up to testing and sustained criticism (some of which you may find irrational) then they are good theories. But still, they may not last for ever.
I agree that this would be too complicated a definition of science. But it may be valuable as a definition of scientific process for a school science program.
It seems that they are trying to get away from a pre-determined conclusion that there is a 'natural explanation' to be sought. Clearly, they think that there may be some super-natural explanations. Perhaps it is a fair point that budding scientists should not determine the nature of the explanation before conducting the science.
Great, now they just need to switch to Gnome!
What are you doing telling everyone that Russell Crowe is a New Zealander???
We've been doing a pretty good job up till now convincing the world he's an Aussie. The Aussies can have iTunes if they promise to keep Russell Crowe.
Thanks, I appreciated your thoughful reply.