To quote Einstein (or at least some web site that claimed he said this, consider this my revenge against profs that try to get me to properly reference things), "research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing."
However, if it was put that way to the public it probably wouldn't raise those millions, so they will often put it differently. When it comes to things like taking pictures at a "micro-miniscule" scale, it seems likely to me that the methods of magnification need research, and even after implementation need to be compared for relative benefits and weaknesses in different situations. So this research may not be as useless as it first appears.
Another thing: some research has no practicality at all. Other research initially has none, but develops it later (non-Euclidean geometry). It's difficult to distinguish between the two ahead of time.
What if those extreme examples exemplify a norm of lesser problems that we never hear about? For instance, what if lots of Everquest players feed their kids but don't give them the love and attention they need? At one point (maybe still, I don't know), there were many support groups for people that had "lost" their husband to Everquest. If there are enough people like that to sustain ONE support group, that's pretty bad in and of itself, but MANY???
What about the guy who died in the internet cafe (I think it was dehydration in South Korea) and the guy who was too busy playing Everquest to make sure his child didn't die?
On the other hand, I've used the net for probably some 4 hours today alone, and it may well have some role in molding the well-rounded individual whose post you're currently reading. Hmmm... Another good reason I don't have kids, I guess.
Fine, but the 1% who ARE developers may save the other 99% of our collective ass when we desperately need to get the information out of a certain format into another one.
I can't think of anything about software that bothers me more than things that make my computer do things against my will, or stop it from carrying out my will. Other examples include MS making their office formats proprietary, spam, popup windows, and so on. I adapt and learn, of course, and many of these issues are no longer issues to me due to technical solutions, many of which are also open source. But it seems to me that the whole net would be nicer if we just stuck to open source in the first place.
I personally have no such needs, have never had such needs, and as such don't really know what software would support that. I was merely congratulating the first guy.
However, from a quick search, it seems to me that Kontact does exactly what you're saying.
PHProjekt also supports the group calendar, at least.
I love how the "Go use a proprietary product" crowd has nothing to say in response to someone (you) who actually has a good response to the question. Nice job.:)
I'm not even a CS student (I'm Engineering Physics), and I still had to learn some microcontroller assembly language.
While I admit that it helps you understand the device more, I have to say it's much less intuitive and enjoyable than high-level programming (not that I'm the type to find scripting fun, but you know what I mean).
If Microsoft had few enough exploits that they had a security record worth protecting by saying "it's just a crash", perhaps the editors wouldn't feel it necessary to be so sarcastic?
Especially given that Microsoft is a company that charges for their product, where OpenBSD is free.
Actually I've got 2.6.1 up and running... And doing it without reading the documentation was a fairly painful experience.
And yes, I'm using grub.
Compiling the kernel isn't the problem, although there should really just be one command that does bzImage, modules, and modules_install all together.
The problems are dependencies and things not working the same way. I bitch about Windows' failings compared to Linux as much as the next guy, but at least in Windows I can get things to work without wading through documentation. Also my network driver was subdivided in a weird way. How was I to know whether I was DECchip or generic DECchip? In my experience, Gentoo does a fairly good job of solving the dependencies problem but fails miserably as a general use distro due to its compile times. Vectorlinux is what I'm using now, but one of its (non-bundled, I might add) package tools (slapt-get or swaret) is really going to have to get better I think.
CURRENT KNOWN computer viruses do not evolve. You could, in principle, write some kind of a virus that replicated itself a lot (probably many times on each infected machine) that induced a random change in the code. In theory, you could even have them create their own sandboxes on an infected machine and test themselves a little before releasing them out onto the rest of the machine. You would then essentially create digital life, which would compete for things like hard drive space, RAM, processor power, bandwidth... There was a brief section of The Happy Mutant Handbook (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/157 3225029/002-9812208-7453627?v=glance) that deals with an individual's experiences causing "digital evolution" on his home pc.
And even apart from that, one could perhaps argue that the sudden jumps in person-modified code in current viruses would be a reasonable use of the word evolve.
Looking at the site (http://www.opensistemas.com/Gentoo_for_Zaurus.715.0.html#) shows the Zaurus doing the "emerge" part and the main PC doing the compiling.
Wow, that's hilarious AND informative. You deserve mods-a-plenty. I agree with the Smoking Gun people, i.e. I especially like the table that compares the number of Google hits for fuck versus those for mom, apple pie, and other "normal" terms.
Still though, from reading the link, the lawyer that prepared that never argued in front of a judge, so it remains debatable whether the reference would have been considered credible.
While I love the spirit of openness for both source and encyclopedia knowledge, there are a couple of things that I've been wondering about here.
1. Will scholarly publications view this as a valid source of accurate information?
2. Once people realize there's a free encyclopedia out there that rivals expensive ones (I don't know Wikipedia well enough to know whether it lags, rivals, or surpasses, but I suspect that if it isn't already, it's only a matter of time until it's a serious contender), will they abandon the paid ones? If so, it'll be interesting to see the effects of abandoning our existing knowledge infrastructure.
Threat deterrent: So everyone should have guns so that nobody uses them? Lovely logic there. It's practically the fucking cold war.
Self defense: How is that different than threat deterrent? Oh, you said "there are three", maybe you realized.
Entertaining sport: While I won't deny that there is some entertainment to be had, if that was the sole reason for guns I'm pretty sure you could do just as well with non-lethal devices, except of course for the "fun" of using something that's actually capable of killing.
Armed populace: So the primary purpose of guns is so that everyone can have guns. Wonderful.
And to think it was ME that got the -1, troll. Unbelievable.
It seems to me that while you MAY argue that the primary purpose of some hunting rifles (hunting) is perfectly legal, that most guns' primary purpose is not.
Excluding guns designed exclusively for hunting, what primary purpose do guns have other than killing?
Automatics, particularly. What legal purpose could need that kind of rate of fire?
Actual conversation between the lead singer of my band and his overly Christian aunt:
"Holy cow!" "Cows aren't holy, Mike." "In India they are." "Well, they're wrong."
What does this have to do with software, you ask? Uh... Well... Christians try to bind everyone to Christianity and Microsoft tries to bind everyone to Windows. Yeah. Think about it.:)
Uh... maybe people are LESS likely to have sex if they watch porn? That would seem to be the logical conclusion to me.
Also, and perhaps sadly, I think the original poster may have a point about people not rising up against the government if they get their porn. I mean, you don't see many Americans rising up against George W.
From the post: "Personally, I'm looking for a serious apology (or at least a retraction) for the 'alleged' link between this ugly little nasty and Open Source / Linux users."
I don't know what it is with people trying to represent such large groups. Every group has nasty people in it! Since Linux is generally more efficient once set up (IMHO, anyway), then OF COURSE people will use it to do nasty things like serve spam and make DOS attacks and so on. I don't get why people are so patriotic all the time... "He's American! No AMERICAN could be evil!" Sigh...
Well... You might be hard pressed to convince Mr. Arar of that, at least in the short term.
Further, and more disturbingly, you're essentially saying that the government can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING it wants to in the short term, since it will only be bound by the constitution after the significant amount of time it takes to challenge it in court.
Slashdot Mirror
To quote Einstein (or at least some web site that claimed he said this, consider this my revenge against profs that try to get me to properly reference things), "research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing."
However, if it was put that way to the public it probably wouldn't raise those millions, so they will often put it differently. When it comes to things like taking pictures at a "micro-miniscule" scale, it seems likely to me that the methods of magnification need research, and even after implementation need to be compared for relative benefits and weaknesses in different situations. So this research may not be as useless as it first appears.
Another thing: some research has no practicality at all. Other research initially has none, but develops it later (non-Euclidean geometry). It's difficult to distinguish between the two ahead of time.
What if those extreme examples exemplify a norm of lesser problems that we never hear about? For instance, what if lots of Everquest players feed their kids but don't give them the love and attention they need? At one point (maybe still, I don't know), there were many support groups for people that had "lost" their husband to Everquest. If there are enough people like that to sustain ONE support group, that's pretty bad in and of itself, but MANY???
What about the guy who died in the internet cafe (I think it was dehydration in South Korea) and the guy who was too busy playing Everquest to make sure his child didn't die?
On the other hand, I've used the net for probably some 4 hours today alone, and it may well have some role in molding the well-rounded individual whose post you're currently reading. Hmmm... Another good reason I don't have kids, I guess.
Fine, but the 1% who ARE developers may save the other 99% of our collective ass when we desperately need to get the information out of a certain format into another one.
I can't think of anything about software that bothers me more than things that make my computer do things against my will, or stop it from carrying out my will. Other examples include MS making their office formats proprietary, spam, popup windows, and so on. I adapt and learn, of course, and many of these issues are no longer issues to me due to technical solutions, many of which are also open source. But it seems to me that the whole net would be nicer if we just stuck to open source in the first place.
I personally have no such needs, have never had such needs, and as such don't really know what software would support that. I was merely congratulating the first guy.
However, from a quick search, it seems to me that Kontact does exactly what you're saying.
PHProjekt also supports the group calendar, at least.
I love how the "Go use a proprietary product" crowd has nothing to say in response to someone (you) who actually has a good response to the question. Nice job. :)
I'm trying to play two cards. One is price, one is security.
Unless you're claiming that MS is significantly more secure than OpenBSD, your point fails completely.
And if you ARE claiming that, you may wish to read up on the subject.
I'm not even a CS student (I'm Engineering Physics), and I still had to learn some microcontroller assembly language.
While I admit that it helps you understand the device more, I have to say it's much less intuitive and enjoyable than high-level programming (not that I'm the type to find scripting fun, but you know what I mean).
If Microsoft had few enough exploits that they had a security record worth protecting by saying "it's just a crash", perhaps the editors wouldn't feel it necessary to be so sarcastic?
Especially given that Microsoft is a company that charges for their product, where OpenBSD is free.
Actually I've got 2.6.1 up and running... And doing it without reading the documentation was a fairly painful experience.
And yes, I'm using grub.
Compiling the kernel isn't the problem, although there should really just be one command that does bzImage, modules, and modules_install all together.
The problems are dependencies and things not working the same way. I bitch about Windows' failings compared to Linux as much as the next guy, but at least in Windows I can get things to work without wading through documentation. Also my network driver was subdivided in a weird way. How was I to know whether I was DECchip or generic DECchip? In my experience, Gentoo does a fairly good job of solving the dependencies problem but fails miserably as a general use distro due to its compile times. Vectorlinux is what I'm using now, but one of its (non-bundled, I might add) package tools (slapt-get or swaret) is really going to have to get better I think.
Yes. Yes it is.
*Resumes waiting for Firebird 0.8 and a good distro with kernel 2.6.x*
Following the daily camera link on that search yields an article that claims Mr. Richter himself answered this number: (303) 550-9828
u mnists/ article/0,1713,BDC_2490_2615380,00.html
(article is at this URL):
http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/opinion_col
CURRENT KNOWN computer viruses do not evolve. You could, in principle, write some kind of a virus that replicated itself a lot (probably many times on each infected machine) that induced a random change in the code. In theory, you could even have them create their own sandboxes on an infected machine and test themselves a little before releasing them out onto the rest of the machine. You would then essentially create digital life, which would compete for things like hard drive space, RAM, processor power, bandwidth... There was a brief section of The Happy Mutant Handbook (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/157 3225029/002-9812208-7453627?v=glance) that deals with an individual's experiences causing "digital evolution" on his home pc.
And even apart from that, one could perhaps argue that the sudden jumps in person-modified code in current viruses would be a reasonable use of the word evolve.
Looking at the site (http://www.opensistemas.com/Gentoo_for_Zaurus.715 .0.html#) shows the Zaurus doing the "emerge" part and the main PC doing the compiling.
Wow, that's hilarious AND informative. You deserve mods-a-plenty. I agree with the Smoking Gun people, i.e. I especially like the table that compares the number of Google hits for fuck versus those for mom, apple pie, and other "normal" terms.
Still though, from reading the link, the lawyer that prepared that never argued in front of a judge, so it remains debatable whether the reference would have been considered credible.
While I love the spirit of openness for both source and encyclopedia knowledge, there are a couple of things that I've been wondering about here.
1. Will scholarly publications view this as a valid source of accurate information?
2. Once people realize there's a free encyclopedia out there that rivals expensive ones (I don't know Wikipedia well enough to know whether it lags, rivals, or surpasses, but I suspect that if it isn't already, it's only a matter of time until it's a serious contender), will they abandon the paid ones? If so, it'll be interesting to see the effects of abandoning our existing knowledge infrastructure.
Threat deterrent: So everyone should have guns so that nobody uses them? Lovely logic there. It's practically the fucking cold war.
Self defense: How is that different than threat deterrent? Oh, you said "there are three", maybe you realized.
Entertaining sport: While I won't deny that there is some entertainment to be had, if that was the sole reason for guns I'm pretty sure you could do just as well with non-lethal devices, except of course for the "fun" of using something that's actually capable of killing.
Armed populace: So the primary purpose of guns is so that everyone can have guns. Wonderful.
And to think it was ME that got the -1, troll. Unbelievable.
It seems to me that while you MAY argue that the primary purpose of some hunting rifles (hunting) is perfectly legal, that most guns' primary purpose is not.
Excluding guns designed exclusively for hunting, what primary purpose do guns have other than killing?
Automatics, particularly. What legal purpose could need that kind of rate of fire?
Actual conversation between the lead singer of my band and his overly Christian aunt:
:)
"Holy cow!"
"Cows aren't holy, Mike."
"In India they are."
"Well, they're wrong."
What does this have to do with software, you ask? Uh... Well... Christians try to bind everyone to Christianity and Microsoft tries to bind everyone to Windows. Yeah. Think about it.
Uh... maybe people are LESS likely to have sex if they watch porn? That would seem to be the logical conclusion to me.
Also, and perhaps sadly, I think the original poster may have a point about people not rising up against the government if they get their porn. I mean, you don't see many Americans rising up against George W.
From the post: "Personally, I'm looking for a serious apology (or at least a retraction) for the 'alleged' link between this ugly little nasty and Open Source / Linux users."
I don't know what it is with people trying to represent such large groups. Every group has nasty people in it! Since Linux is generally more efficient once set up (IMHO, anyway), then OF COURSE people will use it to do nasty things like serve spam and make DOS attacks and so on. I don't get why people are so patriotic all the time... "He's American! No AMERICAN could be evil!" Sigh...
How many gigs is the hard drive? :D
Yes! Combine the legendary stability and security (I know, I know, separate firewall box) of Windows with the vastly superior set of OSS apps! :D
I can't access the SCO site (go figure), but look at this article:
9 ,0 0.asp
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,11447
Uh... How can SCO confirm they're experiencing a DDOS if it doesn't start til Feb. 1?
"I call this ruling proof that the system works."
Well... You might be hard pressed to convince Mr. Arar of that, at least in the short term.
Further, and more disturbingly, you're essentially saying that the government can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING it wants to in the short term, since it will only be bound by the constitution after the significant amount of time it takes to challenge it in court.