So, China's giving Vietnam oil, weapons, jets, and training, all while aggressively warning the US against striking targets in Hanoi (even moving your naval ships dangerously close to Vietnamese targets to dissuade US fighter pilots from seeking them as targets) - is pulling for us?
We have far lost the chance to gain any kind of advantage by spreading propaganda to the Chinese. We have already had a knock-down brawl with them in Korea, and played a game of Cold War chess with them in Vietnam. The Chinese mindset is not very receptible to outside interference to begin with.
Nevertheless, I have a sneaking suspicion that some propaganda arm of the US may still be assisting those that are using the old "Safe Web" technology to circumvent the Great Fire Wall.
Appeasing a country that exists on the brink of failure with nearly $100,000,000 might not sound very intriguing or intelligent at first glance. When you take the time to factor in what it might mean if you allow them to continue making nuclear weapons, and how catasrophic a war with them would be (which is no doubt what it would eventually escalate too) in order to prevent them from using them, well than $95,000,000 doesn't sound so bad anymore. In fact, $95,000,000 sound a lot cheaper then the lives of 8,000-10,0000 US service men.
Politics go beyond embargos and wars. With North Korea, it's going to be a game of chess, not checkers.
I would imagine that there will be a widespread knee-jerk reaction across America to this news. Afterall, our government is using tax dollars to deliver privacy and freedom to a member nation of the "Axis of Evil". I, however, do not mind one bit: You have to capture the hearts and minds of the people that your enemies hold sway over. You know full well that a government such as the one in Iran is doing everything possible to spread lies about the West. If the people remain closed we could end up with a populace similar to North Korea. Those feelings will be passed along to successive generations, and perhaps some day in the distant future, could lead to war - or worse.
Propaganda both prevents and wins wars. Propaganda can serve as a tool of persuasion in trying political struggles between two or more nations. In the case of Iran, it is imperative that we win a large portion of mindshare to use as security in the future. For it would seem that the possibility of armed conflict with Iran is a reality, and we should do what we can to avoid it, considering the implications of such a thing.
Was I the only one that would leave dumb ass messages on my tomb stone so that other students in the computer lab would see them later? Man that was good fun.
It's rather obvious that routine engagement with video games have both beneficial and harmful effects on children. The question that I have never seen made by any media outlet is how do these benefits and harms weigh against each other, and whether or not video game playing can be maintained while engaging in other activities such as sports and study.
Nevertheless, it is refreshing to see video games recieving positive media. And despite this, games such as Grand Theft Auto will forever serve as targets for the anti-game pundits.
Now excuse me while I look up secrets to the new Mario Golf game. I love video games that neither benefit nor harm you in any measurable way, only aim to entertain. This is why I hope Nintendo is still around when I have kids. I would much rather have my daughter playing "Animal Crossing 4: Happy Fun Land" than busting caps into pilots heads in "Grand Theft Aero 2: Jumbojet Bane".
Some industries change, and with that change sometimes the amount of participants decrease while the market expands. In many cases, the products pricing and quality changes along with the market. Just look at the automobile industry.
I don't know if it will be good that smaller game developers will find it impossible to compete in the near future. Perhaps we may never even notice that they went away. Personally, I just think that the best talent outtheir will be hired by the more successful companies, and the quality of games will remain the same.
If a company is going to treat their customers so blatantly bad (leaving his order untouched for weeks) then they deserve bad publicity that comes from the mouths of disatisfied customers. And why oh why would you ignore a customer that has an audience of tens of thousands of people?
I now know that SpeakEasy DSL is perhaps the worst DSL provider around, and will spread the word. That's how it works. You don't let companies treat you like it's a privilege to use their product.
The advancement of KDE and Gnome can occur beneficially without the standardization of either. Despite this, it would be much to the benefit of all Linux companies if they all worked together on one standard desktop, instead of leaving it up to the community. The Open Source community will continue to make new GUIs and make the existing ones better, but Linux companies should be interested in making the best possible operating system for both the server and the work station (what sells).
The server side of things is coming along nicely. The work station side is severely behind the competition, and the reason is directly linked to the failure of all parties to strategically target the GUI togther, instead of independantly using different GUIs that are never really that much better than another on any given Sunday.
"Lucky stands about eight feet tall, and his head and neck can lift almost straight up. He walks on his two back legs and pulls a very large cart of silk flowers. Lucky and Chandler interact, but Chandler does not operate the character. Lucky is controlled by two discreet operators on the sidelines. Lucky grunts, groans and whines in reaction to Chandler's comments and events around him. He can blow his nose, wink, smile, and look around."
Basically, it's a big remote controlled Robie Robot Jr that looks like a dinosaur. By the way, does anyone else remember the Radio Shack Robie Robot Jr, or was I the only person to get one as a kid when I was 6?
Most business articles speak about SCOs claims as if they are absolutely true, and rather non-chalantly at that. It's really amazing, because like you said, this is what the PHBs hear, not the sensible and factual statements.
iSCSI bascially takes native SCSI commands, wraps it up (encapsulates it), and sends it over the wire. In other words, you could use a SCSI scanner over a network without having to resort to PC Anywhere or something.
From the article: "iSCSI (Internet SCSI) over Ethernet is replacing: *SCSI (Small Computer Systems Interface..."
iSCSI is far superior to stadard SCSI for obvious reasons, and its widespread adoption will really spark a massive gain in the SAN (Storage Area Network) market. The technology is there, now we just need more major vendors of SCSI devices (especially storage and image filing systems) to make more SCSI devices that support iSCSI natively and applications that take advantage of it. Combined with practical solutions from vendors of network storage software like Veritas we could see some major spending in IT. And more money being spent on IT is always a good thing.
I don't keep up much with the progress of the Ethernet technologies at hand, so is it realistic to suppose that the practical implementation/creation of 100 Gigabit Ethernet, 1 Terabit Ethernet, and 10 Terabit Ethernet will be seperated by merely two years each?
"Because it is now impossible to sell networking unless it is called Ethernet". Incorrect. You can easily sell network gear that is tagged with the "WiFi" designation.
I really wish that the editors would select more stories about Macintosh computer systems and their associated technologies. I haven't heard about that topic in a while. Thank you.
Ahhhh Mac users. That's what you get for locking yourself into a closed hardware platform and then expecting everyone else (the VAST majority) to support you. You should have stayed x86, boo hoo, poor you.
your post would be sensible and correct. However, we live in a capatilist world. If Microsoft is allowed to influence budding young minds to use their products, develop for their products, and learn their proprietary languages, then they will succeed at the expense of their competitors (and education in general).
Dictators do similar things to the minds of the youth.
..to intrude heavily into an academic environment. I understand that it would silly not to allow some influencing, and let companies spread around a little bit of free "hits", but academic officials should take it upon themselves to prevent any given company the ability to guide the education and goals of their students. This isn't a free iMac in a classroom or two, this is the potential future of computer science in the United States being misdirected by a party that is guilty of monopoly practices, and practices the closed source model (obvioulsy not as healthy to development and learning as is Open SOurce).
I wound you up like my little bitch, didn't I? I would say that I'm at least decent-to-good. I might not be the best of trolls, but I was good enough to make you get in a huff like a little girl.;)
The interface seems to be coming along very well, it looks nice. It also appears as though they are going to integrate the most common desktop applications into one panel (IM, address book, email, etc). It is, however, all ultimately irrelevant. User interface within Windows has been at acceptable to good levels since Windows 95. They aren't going to win any more of the desktop market by making it look fancier. Microsoft should instead be focusing completely on security, performance, interoperability, stability, and flexibility - you know, all of the things that are allowing Linux to kill Microsoft on the server side. In other words, they should attack the competition by improving the things that they are bad at. Drastically lowering prices wouldn't hurt, either.
**For the Windows users that are going to inevitably say "Well my XP box never crashed and I don't have to reboot for a week! I play mad gamez and it stays good! So it's stable, you are just a open source zealot!", just shut up. When the big kids talk about "stability", they mean that a server remains stable indefinately while performing multiple critical tasks. If one task fails, the OS is capable of maintaining peak levels of performance despite the failure of one component/application/process/whatever. Not having to reboot your Win2K Server for 20 or so days when all the box was doing was providing file sharing and running a small Active Directory domain for a measly 100-200 users is not "stable". That kind of stability was surpassed by UNIX over 20 years ago (and every other mainstream OS since, as well). This post was first.
People like to go on profound, philosophical meanderings about MMOGs and MUDs all of the time. I have played a lot of them. You know what? They ain't nothing but games. The difference between "virtual worlds" and your average role playing game is that companies that run MMOGs can get away with making sub-par games and provide crappy customer service. This is because the target audience for MMOGs have proven that they will actually keep paying for this type of customer service and buggy products.
It's all so inane to me. They are crappy games, that's all. I wish people would stop trying to find some mystical and spiritual meaning in them.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting.
Nevertheless, I have a sneaking suspicion that some propaganda arm of the US may still be assisting those that are using the old "Safe Web" technology to circumvent the Great Fire Wall.
Politics go beyond embargos and wars. With North Korea, it's going to be a game of chess, not checkers.
Propaganda both prevents and wins wars. Propaganda can serve as a tool of persuasion in trying political struggles between two or more nations. In the case of Iran, it is imperative that we win a large portion of mindshare to use as security in the future. For it would seem that the possibility of armed conflict with Iran is a reality, and we should do what we can to avoid it, considering the implications of such a thing.
Was I the only one that would leave dumb ass messages on my tomb stone so that other students in the computer lab would see them later? Man that was good fun.
Nevertheless, it is refreshing to see video games recieving positive media. And despite this, games such as Grand Theft Auto will forever serve as targets for the anti-game pundits.
Now excuse me while I look up secrets to the new Mario Golf game. I love video games that neither benefit nor harm you in any measurable way, only aim to entertain. This is why I hope Nintendo is still around when I have kids. I would much rather have my daughter playing "Animal Crossing 4: Happy Fun Land" than busting caps into pilots heads in "Grand Theft Aero 2: Jumbojet Bane".
Just like we like to champion choice in operating system and GUI, software companies have the right to choose their business and development models.
It is up to the OSS crowd to adapt to that, and what better way than innovation? It has already started with OGG.
Hell just froze completely over in perma-frost. What is this story doing on the front page?
I don't know if it will be good that smaller game developers will find it impossible to compete in the near future. Perhaps we may never even notice that they went away. Personally, I just think that the best talent outtheir will be hired by the more successful companies, and the quality of games will remain the same.
I now know that SpeakEasy DSL is perhaps the worst DSL provider around, and will spread the word. That's how it works. You don't let companies treat you like it's a privilege to use their product.
The server side of things is coming along nicely. The work station side is severely behind the competition, and the reason is directly linked to the failure of all parties to strategically target the GUI togther, instead of independantly using different GUIs that are never really that much better than another on any given Sunday.
If I had to choose, I would vote for KDE.
Basically, it's a big remote controlled Robie Robot Jr that looks like a dinosaur. By the way, does anyone else remember the Radio Shack Robie Robot Jr, or was I the only person to get one as a kid when I was 6?
Most business articles speak about SCOs claims as if they are absolutely true, and rather non-chalantly at that. It's really amazing, because like you said, this is what the PHBs hear, not the sensible and factual statements.
iSCSI bascially takes native SCSI commands, wraps it up (encapsulates it), and sends it over the wire. In other words, you could use a SCSI scanner over a network without having to resort to PC Anywhere or something.
From the article: "iSCSI (Internet SCSI) over Ethernet is replacing: *SCSI (Small Computer Systems Interface..."
iSCSI is far superior to stadard SCSI for obvious reasons, and its widespread adoption will really spark a massive gain in the SAN (Storage Area Network) market. The technology is there, now we just need more major vendors of SCSI devices (especially storage and image filing systems) to make more SCSI devices that support iSCSI natively and applications that take advantage of it. Combined with practical solutions from vendors of network storage software like Veritas we could see some major spending in IT. And more money being spent on IT is always a good thing.
I don't keep up much with the progress of the Ethernet technologies at hand, so is it realistic to suppose that the practical implementation/creation of 100 Gigabit Ethernet, 1 Terabit Ethernet, and 10 Terabit Ethernet will be seperated by merely two years each?
"Because it is now impossible to sell networking unless it is called Ethernet". Incorrect. You can easily sell network gear that is tagged with the "WiFi" designation.
I really wish that the editors would select more stories about Macintosh computer systems and their associated technologies. I haven't heard about that topic in a while. Thank you.
Ahhhh Mac users. That's what you get for locking yourself into a closed hardware platform and then expecting everyone else (the VAST majority) to support you. You should have stayed x86, boo hoo, poor you.
Haha, all of this blinding new speed is really helping with my first posts now!
Dictators do similar things to the minds of the youth.
It is unethical on so many levels.
The correct word is actually viruses.
'Virii' is slang.
I wound you up like my little bitch, didn't I? I would say that I'm at least decent-to-good. I might not be the best of trolls, but I was good enough to make you get in a huff like a little girl. ;)
**For the Windows users that are going to inevitably say "Well my XP box never crashed and I don't have to reboot for a week! I play mad gamez and it stays good! So it's stable, you are just a open source zealot!", just shut up. When the big kids talk about "stability", they mean that a server remains stable indefinately while performing multiple critical tasks. If one task fails, the OS is capable of maintaining peak levels of performance despite the failure of one component/application/process/whatever. Not having to reboot your Win2K Server for 20 or so days when all the box was doing was providing file sharing and running a small Active Directory domain for a measly 100-200 users is not "stable". That kind of stability was surpassed by UNIX over 20 years ago (and every other mainstream OS since, as well). This post was first.
It's all so inane to me. They are crappy games, that's all. I wish people would stop trying to find some mystical and spiritual meaning in them.