China can, and will, do exactly what they want. They already have an elaborate censorship scheme in place to "protect" their citizens. Now apparently, they think Google needs replacing.
The point being, that China can impose whatever they like, and Chinas citizens and any other people in the world do NOT have a say in it. There are people like Peacefide trying to enable circumventors so that people behind server-side blocking are able to freely view the internet, and I say good on them.
If you can't face up to the Chinese government directly (and let's face it, who wants to:P) the best bet is to go behind their backs.
Computers can be unpredictable. I mean.. look at the AI in some of today's games. Then think how much more money that the government can expend on buying that technology and improving it. With all of their resources, the simulations become much better and more lifelike. With enough chaos programming in there, it can be preparing for almost anything.
Computers are completely predictable. They are machines and the random seeds are so weak (compared to the randomness of people) that there is no way a computer can simulate the mind/battle plan of someone.
For example, take Saddam. What if there was a lot of close quarted combat just outside of Baghdad. It wouldn't surprise me if he just dropped a fat ass missile over everyone, even his own people. How the hell do you simulate something as sick as that? I couldn't bare to even write the code. How could I tell (looking back to the gulf war) that the bastard was going to set up _military_ installations in buildings such as hospitals and schools, then try and get the public to look at the attacking force as a civilian killer?
What kind of full-immersion simulation would forget something as simple and fundamental in battles as mines?
It was, in fact, an example. Intel can only go so far. From the article: "The debate over the use of computer simulations large and small was sharpened when Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace, the commander of the Army V Corps based in Kuwait, remarked that the guerrilla-style resistance of Iraqi militia groups made for an enemy that was "different from the one we war-gamed against.""
I'd rather have a soldier who is confident (not cocky, though) and better prepared than a person who has just gone through basic only.
That wasn't quite the point I was making. There is no substitute for experience. If a troop does a massive amount of training, and aces it. The troop will be more inclined to think about what a peice of piss this will be. He is more likely to let his guard down. The best soldier is one that knows what he's getting into, without the simulations telling him what it's going to be similar to, because chaces are, it won't be anything like a simulation.
Relevant quote from the article: "Mr. Gardner stresses that nothing will ever replace "muddy boots" training." Right on the button
I'm trying to get my head around how this will actually help any kind of armed force. Simulations _are_ useful for doing wargame situations etc... But how are you supposed to simulate humans?
I can just see marines that have been through hundreds of simulations walk on to a battlefield and into a landmine, because the simulation never said anything about that.
Simulation closes peoples minds. Training is important, but you can't forget how unpredictable a human is. The trainee walks on to the battlefield (or whatever he/she is being trained for) and thinks s/he is ready, but a simulation can not possibly exhaust every situation.
Do you think the publicity you will lose over this lawsuit in the linux/unix community is worth it?
Even though you (SCO) have a large base in the commercial industry, wouldn't you agree that the general opinion of your company will greatly sink if this goes through?
Linux is only free if you don't value your time. Personally, I make a hobby out of it, but Corporations have to think (and do think) what linux is going to cost them in resources, not just money.
When you said "Now in the linux camp you can get free and supportless", Thats not quite true, you can get support from people, it's just a lower level of support. The people that support you for free software normally write the stuff, so their sole pupose in life probably isn't helping people.
Most distro's do have support in the form of a mailing list, or a forum or a bug database or something, it just isn't as convienient as the Redhat "Call us and we make it all better" support desk.
Ahhh, now I know why Gentoo gets such a bad publicity wrap...
Because morons like these use it and spam advertisements anywhere they can! Well thats great, but I use Gentoo too, and I officially think you are rather silly...
I have a logitech wireless mouse that is perfectly egg-shaped, fits in my left or right hand.
It has a scroll-wheel/butoon and works fine under windows and linux.
You, sunshine, need to get a grip, and perhaps some brains/manners.
that was quite possibly the stupidist post i've ever read.
"a web browser that doubles as a full-access file manager with the ability to run programs
Just like mozilla, only with a functional file manager."
duuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. sorta like a web browser? hey! thats kinda like opera too!
I think the point he was trying to make, is not that Microsoft explorer etc... does these things, but they do it insecurely.
Konqueror and Nautilus are bound by Linux's user system (i.e. Normal users can't play with roots files) which means your system is generally safe, but personal information is still mildly insecure.
And also, even if you run a perl script as a user, all the files in/etc have the proper permissions (if your any kind of sysadmin:) and nothing should be able to change.
Konqueror had such an insecurity (It didnt check if SSL certificates matched the URL's), but around a week after it was released (The KDE version in question), a patch was distributed to fix it.
Slashdot Mirror
The point being, that China can impose whatever they like, and Chinas citizens and any other people in the world do NOT have a say in it. There are people like Peacefide trying to enable circumventors so that people behind server-side blocking are able to freely view the internet, and I say good on them.
If you can't face up to the Chinese government directly (and let's face it, who wants to :P) the best bet is to go behind their backs.
Yeah, I've also heard there's a story floating about concerning the new "evil bit" in TCP/IP! ;-)
Not just _one_ story, but around about _5_ stories. In the same day!
Computers can be unpredictable. I mean.. look at the AI in some of today's games. Then think how much more money that the government can expend on buying that technology and improving it. With all of their resources, the simulations become much better and more lifelike. With enough chaos programming in there, it can be preparing for almost anything.
Computers are completely predictable. They are machines and the random seeds are so weak (compared to the randomness of people) that there is no way a computer can simulate the mind/battle plan of someone.
For example, take Saddam. What if there was a lot of close quarted combat just outside of Baghdad. It wouldn't surprise me if he just dropped a fat ass missile over everyone, even his own people. How the hell do you simulate something as sick as that? I couldn't bare to even write the code. How could I tell (looking back to the gulf war) that the bastard was going to set up _military_ installations in buildings such as hospitals and schools, then try and get the public to look at the attacking force as a civilian killer?
What kind of full-immersion simulation would forget something as simple and fundamental in battles as mines?
It was, in fact, an example. Intel can only go so far. From the article: "The debate over the use of computer simulations large and small was sharpened when Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace, the commander of the Army V Corps based in Kuwait, remarked that the guerrilla-style resistance of Iraqi militia groups made for an enemy that was "different from the one we war-gamed against.""
I'd rather have a soldier who is confident (not cocky, though) and better prepared than a person who has just gone through basic only.
That wasn't quite the point I was making. There is no substitute for experience. If a troop does a massive amount of training, and aces it. The troop will be more inclined to think about what a peice of piss this will be. He is more likely to let his guard down. The best soldier is one that knows what he's getting into, without the simulations telling him what it's going to be similar to, because chaces are, it won't be anything like a simulation.
Relevant quote from the article:
"Mr. Gardner stresses that nothing will ever replace "muddy boots" training."
Right on the button
I'm trying to get my head around how this will actually help any kind of armed force. Simulations _are_ useful for doing wargame situations etc... But how are you supposed to simulate humans?
I can just see marines that have been through hundreds of simulations walk on to a battlefield and into a landmine, because the simulation never said anything about that.
Simulation closes peoples minds. Training is important, but you can't forget how unpredictable a human is. The trainee walks on to the battlefield (or whatever he/she is being trained for) and thinks s/he is ready, but a simulation can not possibly exhaust every situation.
Just a thought...
Do you think the publicity you will lose over this lawsuit in the linux/unix community is worth it?
Even though you (SCO) have a large base in the commercial industry, wouldn't you agree that the general opinion of your company will greatly sink if this goes through?
When you said "Now in the linux camp you can get free and supportless", Thats not quite true, you can get support from people, it's just a lower level of support. The people that support you for free software normally write the stuff, so their sole pupose in life probably isn't helping people.
Most distro's do have support in the form of a mailing list, or a forum or a bug database or something, it just isn't as convienient as the Redhat "Call us and we make it all better" support desk.
whats an air gap?
Because morons like these use it and spam advertisements anywhere they can! Well thats great, but I use Gentoo too, and I officially think you are rather silly...
I have a logitech wireless mouse that is perfectly egg-shaped, fits in my left or right hand. It has a scroll-wheel/butoon and works fine under windows and linux. You, sunshine, need to get a grip, and perhaps some brains/manners.
DOCTOR SPENSER: Ah! Its the administrator!
ADMINISTRATOR: Very good very good
PING MACHINE: *Ping!*
ADMINISTRATOR: Ah! I See you have the machine that goes *ping!* This ones my favourite! You see we leased this back off the company we sold it to!
CROWD: *applaud*
that was quite possibly the stupidist post i've ever read. "a web browser that doubles as a full-access file manager with the ability to run programs Just like mozilla, only with a functional file manager." duuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. sorta like a web browser? hey! thats kinda like opera too!
I think the point he was trying to make, is not that Microsoft explorer etc... does these things, but they do it insecurely. Konqueror and Nautilus are bound by Linux's user system (i.e. Normal users can't play with roots files) which means your system is generally safe, but personal information is still mildly insecure. And also, even if you run a perl script as a user, all the files in /etc have the proper permissions (if your any kind of sysadmin :) and nothing should be able to change.
Konqueror had such an insecurity (It didnt check if SSL certificates matched the URL's), but around a week after it was released (The KDE version in question), a patch was distributed to fix it.