Whoa, there, fella. To say "I only want his money" is to eschew his viciousness, his immorality, his absurd competitiveness, and his complete lack of doing anything not in his best interests. To ONLY want his money is to keep on the side of Mother Theresa.
I, definitely, would only want his money.
(Don't bother pointing to the Gates foundation. With as much money as he now has, it hasn't really cost him anything to do what he did, and he waited this long to do it, so that it's not a sacrifice to him at all. I don't see a splendid benefactor, when I see him. I see a man who looks back on his history of nastiness and sees a guy with a long cloak and a farming implement slowly approaching. Nothing to see there, the guys still an jerk.)
Nah, she was holding playdough. She was baiting them.
I think the security guys are morons, but this one left them with no choice. Without the playdough, things would be different, but with it, it's the right reaction.
You beat the tar out of him, he's humiliated, and goes away for a few days, then he comes back and shoots you in the back.
You didn't win a war, there, you won a fight. The two are not the same thing.
You fight him, make it clear that you're going to win, and then talk with him such that he gets a way out and hostilities turn into a mutually acceptable relationship -- that's winning a war. You need the fists, but you also need some intelligent action.
This is not to say that there are not occasions where the fists are the ONLY intelligent thing, but that means your opponent is one stupid piece of crap. Such people exist, and they're more likely to be part of a bar fight, but I don't think the metaphor extends to nations often, if at all, as nations are large groups of people, not just one Saddam.
If the EU is going to impose sanctions on Microsoft like this, and we are not, then this means that there is essentially a $690 million trade restriction on Microsoft. For Microsoft to behave the same way in the EU that it behaves here, they need to pay a fee of $690 million.
That smacks of protectionism, and we have to retaliate.
Let's charge Microsoft $690 million to behave that way in the US.
I just hate iTunes. I know other people like it, but it seems to me that non-tech people find iTunes easy, and tech folks don't. As a tech guy, iTunes drives me insane. It doesn't do what I want, doesn't do things my way, does things I don't expect, etc.
This is very interesting. It is, of course, untrue at almost every level and clause. (The clause "The fact that we have it out there gives us a good business" seems true, though you could argue that it takes a lot more than that.) But this two paragraph set constitutes is a big lie. Or I should say Big Lie. It doesn't matter that it's wrong, some will believe and parrot it. The more energy you spend fighting it, the more people will hear it, and some believe it. Even if you (if you were a senator, FTC commissioner, DOJ head, etc.) don't believe it, you can still grin and use it as an argument against... something.
That's where things get interesting. Why is Microsoft saying this? Is this just the normal self-importance of Microsoft, or the naivite of Craig Mundie, or does Microsoft have a plan to annoy Google by making Google Microsoft's child? I suppose it could be used over and over in arguments against Google, where MS and Google disagree, but is there something in specific?
"Hating the French and Mexicans is high fashion among the Dixie Republicans and Midwesterners, I doubt they even know why. " Of course they don't know why. That would undermine the whole point. The reason they hate them is because they are told to, and they are told to because they find it reassuring, and therefore respond to the message, causing the media to be happy with the results of baiting them -- Feedback loop. The media get more reinforcement for this by politicians and corporations which find this useful. Hating someone else establishes an Us/Them relationship, and makes them feel a tighter Us bond. It also keeps them from blaming the people who actually took their jobs away and from listening to reasonable foreign policy opinions.
(BTW -- I've been to Madagascar, a former French-conquered country, and I think the French govt/corporation system is flat-out evil.)
OK, I'm hoping the real article is not nearly as silly as this blurb. I'm sure it talks about this situation in more reasonable terms. But the blurb focuses on eye position and implies that it has meaning on a letter level.
While the issue of eye position is interesting, we are NOT focusing on a letter. We are not reading letters, much less looking at them.
Hold you arm out. Raise your thumb. Look at it. The space of the back of your thumb, at that distance is special. That's your fovea -- the area of your eye which has the greatest acuity. When you read, depending on font size and text distance, that area covers multiple lines of text, and usually more than one word. Focusing on a letter means picking that letter as a point in the text, and seeing the areas around it.
A strong reader is picking up both the words below and left and right of the word he/she is reading at that fraction of a second.
Yes, it's interesting to ask where we fixate. Yes, it's VERY interesting that we go crosseyed and that begs the question of whether we do it systematically to reduce the amount of new data which is common in both foveas, either to increase speed by processing both independently, or to reduce the amount in common and thus reduce the load that reading takes (you'd possibly see that in a "difficult" or unfamiliar word). However, we do NOT look at letters. They're just a spot.
Someone asked here about other languages, do we do the same thing for Kanji, Hangul, etc.? Is suspect that things might be different there, as I suspect that this behavior that they've found is strongly connected with syllable boundaries in English. However, eye-trackers are notoriously inaccurate (unless you're willing to have a coil surgically implanted in your eye, and even then, it ain't fantastic) and so their letter accuracy information must come from AVERAGES ACROSS MULTIPLE OBSERVATIONS. This should lead us to ask what their dataset was and what behavior they saw on specific character clusters. (That, in turn leads us to question if they got enough data to get much accuracy on those clusters.)
It would be nice to see the original article, as opposed to this fluff piece.
You're heading in the right direction, though going way too far. All the gnu utils we want SHOULD be in the standard Solaris 10 setup, in/usr/local. I know,/. had a conversation about this just a little while ago, but it's still true. GNU's tar, GNU's grep, GNU's text utils in general. Can we have a top which behaves (in interactive mode) more like linux's -- can it watch for a window size change, for instance? When we install Solaris, we should not have to spend a while installing stuff that should have been there already.
Furthermore, if root has to start with/sbin/sh for compatibility reasons, that doesn't mean that sh has to suck. It can have command completion, etc, without breaking compatibility. Also, it should actually work, with respect to aliases.
It's one thing to maintain backwards compatibility, it's another to provide an archaic CLI experience.
Make a little movie about how Viacom sucks, how they violated your copyright, etc. (Just tell the story.) Then post that video with the original video they pulled INSIDE it. Do it fast, so it can get slashdotted, and you've just made a shit-storm for viacom, and gotten some personal publicity for you and your little youtube thingie.
You can't have it both ways. If it's fine to join and vote against it, it's fine to jump in and vote for it. For Google to have clean hands, here, it would have needed to jump in and demand rules changes or a stay on the vote.
"What kind of Congress would waste months of time and disillusion millions of Americans by impeaching a President when they know they will never be able to get a conviction in the Senate..... oh wait, n/m...."
I know you're going for a laugh, but it has to be said: "A congress which watched the constitution with even half as much attention as it watched it's ass."
I love movies that use a gimmick right from the start. Such movies almost always tend to have bad writing/directing, and thus stink on the whole. I wonder if they've written an ending for this? The brother have three other writers working with them. Not many writing credits on them. Best movie of the bunch is Dragonheart. Most of the other titles are kind of embarrassing.
Sigh.
We'll see.
Hey, you all notice that any picture of Trixie has an M on her shirt? That's because Trixie's name is Mitchi.
Bizzare. Seems like for years, the tuning idea is find the biggest sector size you can live with. Benchmark with different sector sizes (going up and up) and find the diminishing return. This because seeks are slow and reads are fast.
I now benefit from SMALLER sector sizes. Reads are slow and seeks are fast. So that means I need to tune my filesystems and databases DOWNWARD to, say, 128 byte blocks. Or 64 bytes blocks? CPU overhead of 10 times the number of reads is probably very little compared to that tedious pull time.
Can somebody with a math bent try to quantify this?
1. Fibre will now get backhoed (metaphorically) whenever sewer workers do any major work -- which means a talented technician needs to be around all the time sewer work is being done. To make a reliable network, there would need to be alternate paths to clusters of buildings/neighborhoods, etc. Is that possible in sewers? Are sewere designed with multiple paths, in case of blockage?
2. Blockage. Fibers are long things. They might snag stuff. Will flow break them? Do you glue them to the walls? THen the fibre is rigidly in place -- What happens when a pipe cracks and that causes a shift? Or when there's a tremor and things shift. Or do you glue up conduit?
3. Entry into the building. This requires a wet to dry interface. Things go wrong in such things. This means the people doing it need to be both plumbers and fibre people. Seems expensive, and seems like it opens up liability issues.
4. Or do you install wireless in the pipes and never actually enter the dryspace?
If these things worked well, then you could do an end-run around the telcos for last mile. How big is a sewer pipe into the home or into an apartment building? Can we design robots to creep those spaces?
No, the problem with the IA-64 was not that it was slow running x86 code. The problem was that it was slow running x86 code and not that great at running non-x86 code. Spectacular performance on non-x86 would have made it a much greater success, but it was lackluster from the start. After so long spent on designing a new chip, you'd expect some real results -- it was not much better than the alternatives. "Why bother?", the world said, and says even now.
Quit en masse. You are a jelled team. A team like that is worth way more than the sum of its parts. Negotiate with that in mind. If you can find someone to hire most or all of you, you can continue to do things the right way, continue to work with your pals, make more money, and not worry about the previous company: they're not worse off than if you stayed -- they're moving to a different skill set, and would have a period of crap productivity/rewrite anyhow. This gives them the opportunity to do the RIGHT thing, which is to hire a bunch of.NET heads who LIKE to work that way.
I'll give you a quicker cure -- legislate network neutrality. Enforce it. Real network neutrality, where every packet is treated the same, means VoIP which kinda sucks but doesn't suck that much. Acceptable VoIP to anywhere in the US with any system you want to use will kill the ILECs (the telco monopolies) in the next 10 years. They'll just become ISPs. Bandwidth will appear magically as the billions the US spent on phone calls get spent on ISP services.
My worst RSI pain came from a trackball. I'm seeing a lot of posts here presenting trackballs as great and mice as bad. I don't think mice are good fro RSIs, but I know from experience that trackballs CAN be even worse. Buy whatever, but be ready to trash it -- don't assume it's a cure all.
> So should I remove my TV input card, my NIC, or my sound card to make room? >... And how do I reinstall an operating system if the setup program doesn't > recognize SATA?
No, you should buy a new motherboard, one with a crappy implementation of NIC and sound right there on it, with a faster, cooler processor than you currently have. Your OS comment makes me assume you're running windows. You should already be good at reinstalling that.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoa, there, fella. To say "I only want his money" is to eschew his viciousness, his immorality, his absurd competitiveness, and his complete lack of doing anything not in his best interests. To ONLY want his money is to keep on the side of Mother Theresa.
I, definitely, would only want his money.
(Don't bother pointing to the Gates foundation. With as much money as he now has, it hasn't really cost him anything to do what he did, and he waited this long to do it, so that it's not a sacrifice to him at all. I don't see a splendid benefactor, when I see him. I see a man who looks back on his history of nastiness and sees a guy with a long cloak and a farming implement slowly approaching. Nothing to see there, the guys still an jerk.)
Nah, she was holding playdough. She was baiting them.
I think the security guys are morons, but this one left them with no choice. Without the playdough, things would be different, but with it, it's the right reaction.
You beat the tar out of him, he's humiliated, and goes away for a few days, then he comes back and shoots you in the back.
You didn't win a war, there, you won a fight. The two are not the same thing.
You fight him, make it clear that you're going to win, and then talk with him such that he gets a way out and hostilities turn into a mutually acceptable relationship -- that's winning a war. You need the fists, but you also need some intelligent action.
This is not to say that there are not occasions where the fists are the ONLY intelligent thing, but that means your opponent is one stupid piece of crap. Such people exist, and they're more likely to be part of a bar fight, but I don't think the metaphor extends to nations often, if at all, as nations are large groups of people, not just one Saddam.
If the EU is going to impose sanctions on Microsoft like this, and we are not, then this means that there is essentially a $690 million trade restriction on Microsoft. For Microsoft to behave the same way in the EU that it behaves here, they need to pay a fee of $690 million.
That smacks of protectionism, and we have to retaliate.
Let's charge Microsoft $690 million to behave that way in the US.
I just hate iTunes. I know other people like it, but it seems to me that non-tech people find iTunes easy, and tech folks don't. As a tech guy, iTunes drives me insane. It doesn't do what I want, doesn't do things my way, does things I don't expect, etc.
This is very interesting. It is, of course, untrue at almost every level and clause. (The clause "The fact that we have it out there gives us a good business" seems true, though you could argue that it takes a lot more than that.) But this two paragraph set constitutes is a big lie. Or I should say Big Lie. It doesn't matter that it's wrong, some will believe and parrot it. The more energy you spend fighting it, the more people will hear it, and some believe it. Even if you (if you were a senator, FTC commissioner, DOJ head, etc.) don't believe it, you can still grin and use it as an argument against... something.
That's where things get interesting. Why is Microsoft saying this? Is this just the normal self-importance of Microsoft, or the naivite of Craig Mundie, or does Microsoft have a plan to annoy Google by making Google Microsoft's child? I suppose it could be used over and over in arguments against Google, where MS and Google disagree, but is there something in specific?
"Hating the French and Mexicans is high fashion among the Dixie Republicans and Midwesterners, I doubt they even know why. " Of course they don't know why. That would undermine the whole point. The reason they hate them is because they are told to, and they are told to because they find it reassuring, and therefore respond to the message, causing the media to be happy with the results of baiting them -- Feedback loop. The media get more reinforcement for this by politicians and corporations which find this useful. Hating someone else establishes an Us/Them relationship, and makes them feel a tighter Us bond. It also keeps them from blaming the people who actually took their jobs away and from listening to reasonable foreign policy opinions.
(BTW -- I've been to Madagascar, a former French-conquered country, and I think the French govt/corporation system is flat-out evil.)
OK, I'm hoping the real article is not nearly as silly as this blurb. I'm sure it talks about this situation in more reasonable terms. But the blurb focuses on eye position and implies that it has meaning on a letter level.
While the issue of eye position is interesting, we are NOT focusing on a letter. We are not reading letters, much less looking at them.
Hold you arm out. Raise your thumb. Look at it. The space of the back of your thumb, at that distance is special. That's your fovea -- the area of your eye which has the greatest acuity. When you read, depending on font size and text distance, that area covers multiple lines of text, and usually more than one word. Focusing on a letter means picking that letter as a point in the text, and seeing the areas around it.
A strong reader is picking up both the words below and left and right of the word he/she is reading at that fraction of a second.
Yes, it's interesting to ask where we fixate. Yes, it's VERY interesting that we go crosseyed and that begs the question of whether we do it systematically to reduce the amount of new data which is common in both foveas, either to increase speed by processing both independently, or to reduce the amount in common and thus reduce the load that reading takes (you'd possibly see that in a "difficult" or unfamiliar word). However, we do NOT look at letters. They're just a spot.
Someone asked here about other languages, do we do the same thing for Kanji, Hangul, etc.? Is suspect that things might be different there, as I suspect that this behavior that they've found is strongly connected with syllable boundaries in English. However, eye-trackers are notoriously inaccurate (unless you're willing to have a coil surgically implanted in your eye, and even then, it ain't fantastic) and so their letter accuracy information must come from AVERAGES ACROSS MULTIPLE OBSERVATIONS. This should lead us to ask what their dataset was and what behavior they saw on specific character clusters. (That, in turn leads us to question if they got enough data to get much accuracy on those clusters.)
It would be nice to see the original article, as opposed to this fluff piece.
Um... to make money?
You're heading in the right direction, though going way too far. All the gnu utils we want SHOULD be in the standard Solaris 10 setup, in /usr/local. I know, /. had a conversation about this just a little while ago, but it's still true. GNU's tar, GNU's grep, GNU's text utils in general. Can we have a top which behaves (in interactive mode) more like linux's -- can it watch for a window size change, for instance? When we install Solaris, we should not have to spend a while installing stuff that should have been there already.
/sbin/sh for compatibility reasons, that doesn't mean that sh has to suck. It can have command completion, etc, without breaking compatibility. Also, it should actually work, with respect to aliases.
Furthermore, if root has to start with
It's one thing to maintain backwards compatibility, it's another to provide an archaic CLI experience.
Hey, these are great answers! Thanks.
No, you're missing the obvious answer:
Make a little movie about how Viacom sucks, how they violated your copyright, etc. (Just tell the story.) Then post that video with the original video they pulled INSIDE it. Do it fast, so it can get slashdotted, and you've just made a shit-storm for viacom, and gotten some personal publicity for you and your little youtube thingie.
You can't have it both ways. If it's fine to join and vote against it, it's fine to jump in and vote for it. For Google to have clean hands, here, it would have needed to jump in and demand rules changes or a stay on the vote.
"What kind of Congress would waste months of time and disillusion millions of Americans by impeaching a President when they know they will never be able to get a conviction in the Senate..... oh wait, n/m...."
I know you're going for a laugh, but it has to be said: "A congress which watched the constitution with even half as much attention as it watched it's ass."
I love movies that use a gimmick right from the start. Such movies almost always tend to have bad writing/directing, and thus stink on the whole. I wonder if they've written an ending for this? The brother have three other writers working with them. Not many writing credits on them. Best movie of the bunch is Dragonheart. Most of the other titles are kind of embarrassing.
Sigh.
We'll see.
Hey, you all notice that any picture of Trixie has an M on her shirt? That's because Trixie's name is Mitchi.
Bizzare. Seems like for years, the tuning idea is find the biggest sector size you can live with. Benchmark with different sector sizes (going up and up) and find the diminishing return. This because seeks are slow and reads are fast.
I now benefit from SMALLER sector sizes. Reads are slow and seeks are fast. So that means I need to tune my filesystems and databases DOWNWARD to, say, 128 byte blocks. Or 64 bytes blocks? CPU overhead of 10 times the number of reads is probably very little compared to that tedious pull time.
Can somebody with a math bent try to quantify this?
Baucus is a moron. On the surface of it, this looks like a good idea. I'll support the program, not the man.
On one hand, this is a really a great idea.
But it gives me some warning flags:
1. Fibre will now get backhoed (metaphorically) whenever sewer workers do any major work -- which means a talented technician needs to be around all the time sewer work is being done. To make a reliable network, there would need to be alternate paths to clusters of buildings/neighborhoods, etc. Is that possible in sewers? Are sewere designed with multiple paths, in case of blockage?
2. Blockage. Fibers are long things. They might snag stuff. Will flow break them? Do you glue them to the walls? THen the fibre is rigidly in place -- What happens when a pipe cracks and that causes a shift? Or when there's a tremor and things shift. Or do you glue up conduit?
3. Entry into the building. This requires a wet to dry interface. Things go wrong in such things. This means the people doing it need to be both plumbers and fibre people. Seems expensive, and seems like it opens up liability issues.
4. Or do you install wireless in the pipes and never actually enter the dryspace?
If these things worked well, then you could do an end-run around the telcos for last mile. How big is a sewer pipe into the home or into an apartment building? Can we design robots to creep those spaces?
Why don't we just invade some place with a lot of oil, then?
Oh, wait...
No, the problem with the IA-64 was not that it was slow running x86 code. The problem was that it was slow running x86 code and not that great at running non-x86 code. Spectacular performance on non-x86 would have made it a much greater success, but it was lackluster from the start. After so long spent on designing a new chip, you'd expect some real results -- it was not much better than the alternatives. "Why bother?", the world said, and says even now.
Quit en masse. You are a jelled team. A team like that is worth way more than the sum of its parts. Negotiate with that in mind. If you can find someone to hire most or all of you, you can continue to do things the right way, continue to work with your pals, make more money, and not worry about the previous company: they're not worse off than if you stayed -- they're moving to a different skill set, and would have a period of crap productivity/rewrite anyhow. This gives them the opportunity to do the RIGHT thing, which is to hire a bunch of .NET heads who LIKE to work that way.
Do well by doing GOOD.
"You maniacs! You [shat on our constitution again]! Damn you! Damn you all to hell!"
I'll give you a quicker cure -- legislate network neutrality. Enforce it. Real network neutrality, where every packet is treated the same, means VoIP which kinda sucks but doesn't suck that much. Acceptable VoIP to anywhere in the US with any system you want to use will kill the ILECs (the telco monopolies) in the next 10 years. They'll just become ISPs. Bandwidth will appear magically as the billions the US spent on phone calls get spent on ISP services.
My worst RSI pain came from a trackball. I'm seeing a lot of posts here presenting trackballs as great and mice as bad. I don't think mice are good fro RSIs, but I know from experience that trackballs CAN be even worse. Buy whatever, but be ready to trash it -- don't assume it's a cure all.
> So should I remove my TV input card, my NIC, or my sound card to make room? ... And how do I reinstall an operating system if the setup program doesn't
r .html
>
> recognize SATA?
No, you should buy a new motherboard, one with a crappy implementation of NIC and sound right there on it, with a faster, cooler processor than you currently have. Your OS comment makes me assume you're running windows. You should already be good at reinstalling that.
OR
Buy an $18 adapter that lets you attach a SATA drive to your existing IDE controller:
http://www.satacables.com/html/sata_to_ide_adapte