Why does it have to be corn versus cane? Has anybody done a study of the engery density of sugar beets? They grow an a northern clime (like Wisconsin or Idaho or Germany), the tubar yields high surgar content, and the waste (both foilage and mash) can be used for compost or animal fodder. What kind of engery density can you get from that? They would be socially responsible because they are grown in developed countries, produce only reusable waste, and would not be produced by peasants toiling in slave labor. They also would most likely be grown on existing agricultural land instead of slashed-and-burned rain forrest. As part of the US's screwed up agricultural price support system, we pay farmers *not to grow* extra corn and soy. Perhaps we can take all that fallow agricultural land and have them grow sugar beets instead.
Isn't Vi part of POSIX and Unix Specification?
on
Vim 7 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
IIRC, the presence of vi and ex are part of required compliance for POSIX and the Single UNIX Specification. So, it is not just there by convention or convenience, but is a requirement for guaranteed inter-operaability, along with ed, sed, and awk. Or does POSIX simply define the behavior of those tools and not require their presence?
All of SGI's existing common stock and the unsecured subordinated debentures will be cancelled upon confirmation of the plan by the court and receive no recovery.
What just happened is that the new CEO & CFO cut a deal to enrich bankers (who held "secured" bonds) at the cost of the people who put their trust and money in SGI. So the guys who really belived in SGI all these years, who supported it, and who bought SGI's stock or bonds just got completely 100% screwed by a back room deal.
Well at least *some* of the employees will get to keep their jobs, but I'll bet the ones with their retirement plans in SGI stock will be hopping mad.
One of our lesser intelligent users setup a click script thinking he was going to do us a favor (unbeknownst to us). Within a couple of hours, Google cancelled our AdSense account. We tried to appeal to them but there are no humans available to speak to. So we gave up and tried to pursue other online advertisers and lo-behold, discovered that no one would speak to us because we were apparently on some sort of blacklist hosted by Google.
Combinded with the other comments so far, here is what we can deduce:
Borderline cases just get kicked. Other folks with less egregious suspected fraud just got kicked off of Adsense, but were able to sign up with Yahoo or some other service
Confirmed cases of deliberate fraud get blacklisted.
Although you personally were not to blame, your case was indeed one of deliberate fraud and Google was smart enough to figure it out. In this sense, Google is acting responsibly. In borderline cases where they can not be completely sure, they play it safe. They may not trust a site and are unwilling to do business with it again themselves, but they don't publically malign it. In cases where they know for a fact that real deliberate fraud occured, it is responsible of them to warn others.
The article says that ODF *just now* got approved as ISO standard and asks "Now the question: Will OpenXML get the same treatment, despite its technical weaknesses?". Your answer is basically that OpenXML should not be an ISO standard because its not already an ISO standard, while ODF is a standard. That says nothing about the inherent weakness of OpenXML
Now the examples given at Groklaw show the real technical weakness of OpenXML/MSXML. It is basically a byzantine nightmare of complexity to(humanly) read and therefore hard to parse. It also is encumbered by patent issues.
I once took a try at using the MS Office 2003 XML capabilities (such as they are) via VBA, but enventially gave up and took a different route, partially because the "XML" output by Office was a LSD trip to write a handler for. Instead I just inserted plain text via the Office Document model. So, yes, MS Office XML sucks, but for valid reasons other than not already being an ISO standard.
It seems like a good portion of the articles are getting tagged "Troll" or "Stupid" or "Evil".
First of all, how does this help classify and search the articles? It doesn't, if every third article is "evil" and "troll".
Secondly, please refresh your memory of what a "troll" is. Here is the official Slashdot definition.
Troll -- A Troll is similar to Flamebait, but slightly more refined. This is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses. A Troll might mix up vital facts or otherwise distort reality, to make other readers react with helpful "corrections." Trolling is the online equivalent of intentionally dialing wrong numbers just to waste other people's time.
Just because you think an article or comment is wrong and stupid does not make it a "troll". A "troll" is purposeful malicious misdirection intended to lead the discussion astray. Just because you disagree with Cringely, Dvorak, et al (and think they are totally off the wall), it does not mean they are trolls. They may indeed be stupid, but they are not trolls. Any opinion presented constructively is not a troll, even if it is wrong.
As far as I am concerned, the "tagging beta" should filter out all the "troll", "stupid", "evil", "FUD", and other non-helpful tags, because they are not objective descriptions to classify the article, but only negative opinion (and I think we can all read and form our own opinions).
With XML, you have a standarized generic output that could be parsed by any number of clients. Thus, the AJAX/javascript browers-based client is just one of many ways to access and display the data. You could also be serving the data to a java Swing app or a MS VB app, and the server wouldn't care. By using XML, you keep everything portable and generic.
Now, if you are writing somthing to serve your kids' photos to grandma and you know she will only view it on your webpage, then you can get away without using XML because you only expect one type of client, which you yourself will code anyway. If you are providing a web-service to serve up weather data that other people can integrate into an application, or (an even better example) grabbing third party generated weather data, you will appreciate having the data in XML because of its portablility and especially its structured organization.
As an example, I am working on a way to grab the text of some government regulations and integrate them into a web application that will reference the appropriate regulation based upon some simple questions that the user will answer. The morons that host the reg are serving up valid but sloppy and fairly unorganzied HTML. So, if I want to zero in on, say, Part 3, subpart 301, paragraph(b)(3), I have to code a very specific parser to search and find what I want. But if they had everything in XML, I would just zero in on the named element tag that I want.
Censorship is limitation on content. This proposal does not limit content, nor does it pose an unreasonable burden on the viewer or the website.
Requiring a MetaTag does not rise to censorship, because it does not limit content. It's truth in advertising. It's also is trivial to implement. Requiring a home page with a enter button (that would set a cookie or session to signify acceptance for the rest of the site) also does not limit content. It too is trivial to implement. It would also probably withstand challange in court since it is no more restrictive than the brown paper cover over a magazine, which is already required in many places.
If this proposal limited content or imposed an onerous burden, then I too would call it censorship. But it does neither.
Its also his job as head of the executive branch to see that the Treasury Department issues Social Security checks. Do you think he personally signs every one of them or do you think he appoints somebody else to do it?
Secondly, there are these things call "Executive Orders". They are official orders from the President to all the Executive Agencies. If any Federal Officer runs afoul of an Executive Order, he can expect to be disciplined within the agency. Entire agencies have been "called on the carpet" by the Office of Managment and Budget.
For some strange reason, ther term "Unitary Executive" gets all the left-wing crazies bent out of shape, but it really means "separation of powers". What is Executive is wholly (and solely) Executive. What is Judicial is wholly (and solely) Judicial. What is Legislative is wholly (and solely) Legislative. Unitary Executive means that all executive functions are performed within the executive branch and are subject to the Executive Branch's chain of command. No branch may meddle in the internal affairs and running of the others. This is basic constitutional law in the US. The term "Unitary Executive" is primarily used to argue that the creation of "independent prosecutors" are unconstitutional , since prosecution is an executive function and all executive functions fall under the President and his appointed officers (like the Attorney General), while "independent prosecutors" are appointed by and answerable to Judges (thus running afoul of separation of powers).
Several thousand governments at various levels such as State, County, Parish, City, Township, School District, Water District, etc, etc, etc. Plus over a hundred independent Federal Agencies from the FCC to NASA to the Smithsonian Instutution. All of which make independent buying decisions.
You WILL upgrade whether you like it or not, because MS will End-Of-Life XP as soon as possible and cut off updates to everything but Vista. You and I both can see that coming. I guarantee you that there are enough yet-to-be-discovered critical flaws in XP as to make it unsafe to run 2 or 3 years from now. When they stop patching XP, you will be forced to upgrade to Vista. You (and I) will take it and say "Thank you Sir, may I have another".
Not sure if Ubuntu is the way to go, but Oracle having its own Linux-OS would be great for all the reasons that you mentioned about fiddling with the kernel parameters and installing lib_compat_this, lib_compat_that, Patch_set_this and Patch_set_that.
Imagine if all that was obviated because the DB installer was also the OS installer. Basically, you would start with a blank unpartitioned hdd (or array of blanks), boot the DVD, answer a few pointy-clicky questions in the Oracle installer, go get a cup of coffee and read the newspaper while the files copy, and 30 minutes later you'll have a fully configured Oracle DB on RAID. Headache free install. And, you would never have to worry about your OS updates breaking Oracle. Sweet.
Several years ago (circa 1999 or Redhat version 6 ), I read that Oracle on Linux was developed and targeted for Suse. I remember this because I was having issues tweaking RH for an Oracle 8 install, and a lot of the mail lists mentioned that some of the tweaks were not necessary for SuSE. So I would guess that it would be just a bit easier for Oracle to adopt Suse outright, if that is what their developers are already using.
In most states, the very first statute on the books is to adopt British Common Law. For example in Missouri the following
Common law in force--effect on statutes.
1.010. The common law of England and all statutes and acts of parliament made prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, which are not local to that kingdom and not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, or the statute laws in force for the time being, are the rule of action and decision in this state, any custom or usage to the contrary notwithstanding, but no act of the general assembly or law of this state shall be held to be invalid, or limited in its scope or effect by the courts of this state, for the reason that it is in derogation of, or in conflict with, the common law, or with such statutes or acts of parliament; but all acts of the general assembly, or laws, shall be liberally construed, so as to effectuate the true intent and meaning thereof.
In Florida
2.01 Common law and certain statutes declared in force.--The common and statute laws of England which are of a general and not a local nature, with the exception hereinafter mentioned, down to the 4th day of July, 1776, are declared to be of force in this state; provided, the said statutes and common law be not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the Legislature of this state.
In Virginia they recently modified it in 2005.
1-200. (Effective October 1, 2005) The common law.
The common law of England, insofar as it is not repugnant to the principles of the Bill of Rights and Constitution of this Commonwealth, shall continue in full force within the same, and be the rule of decision, except as altered by the General Assembly.
Virginia also honnors ancient acts of Parliament
1-201. (Effective October 1, 2005) Acts of Parliament.
The right and benefit of all writs, remedial and judicial, given by any statute or act of Parliament, made in aid of the common law prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, not local to England, shall still be saved, insofar as the same are consistent with the Bill of Rights and Constitution of this Commonwealth and the Acts of Assembly.
Similiar language is usually the first enumerated statute in every state, except Louisiana which uses the Napoleanic Civil Code.
This guy is blowing smoke. If the USA thought he was the kind of guy that they put in GTMO, do you really think they would extradite him through the British court system? The fact that the the US Justice Department is pursuing this in British courts is a pretty good indication that this is a Judicial proceeding, not a covert intelligence operation. We extradite people through judical proceedings everyday. I'm not aware of a single case where a judicial extradition has resulted in the prisoner going to GTMO.
If the US & UK goverments had decided this guy was going to GTMO, he would not be in the custody of the police and he would not be in court.
First to dispense with TFA: since they are developing stuff for Windows, they will never be rid of it, nor should they. So they will always run Windows in-house to some extent.
But why can't they sell their product to other people? They have all the right parts to replace a Windows/Active Directory infrustructure. They have a desktop (Suse), they have a respected directory server (eDirecotry/NDS), they have general purpose servers (Suse), Zenworks to mananage it all, and they have an entrenched legacy product (i.e. a foot in the door) for which they can provide an upgrade path. Most importantly, they have them integrated seemlessly in their Open Enterprise Server. But they still can't get the sale. Its because their pricing provides no advantage over Microsoft A Novell Open Enterprise Server per user license per year is $230 retail. A MS Win2K3 10 user CAL is $1199 retail (or $119.9 per user). That's retail. MS, being the bigger company, has the ability to come even lower in enterprise or site licensing. Sadly, Novell doesn't seem able to do the math.
They should take the chance that they could make up the difference in revenue by going with volume over price. More licneses for less each, instead of fewer licenses for more each. They have to realize that every Windows installation is going to lead to an Exchange installation instead of a Groupwise installation. If they could build the market share in the network products, the revenue in services and add-on products will follow.
Wouldn't they just be lost in the pack with a general purpose server? Being certified for Oracle or DB2 is already done by others. They should instead pick their own niche and run with it. From the other comments here, it looks like they are choosing some sort of media streaming niche. I'm not sure how many offices *really* need one of those for business. I think they should go with a custom PDC/Directory Server/Single-Sign-On niche, as there is real need in every office for that without the extortionate cost of the MS-AD Client Access Licenses. Such a move would build on their desktop integration expertise.
I had high hopes for Novell's Open Enterprise Server in this area by combining Suse, Novell eDirectory (NDS), and ZenWorks, but their per user pricing model does not seem to offer anything over MS CALs, which is probably why they are failing.
Xandros CEO Andreas Typaldos. "The Xandros Server platform was designed to map that vision of how modern businesses really work. Our platform connects communities of users, services, and IT architectures, whether they are local or dispersed. It offers a new, user-centric operating philosophy that has enabled the design of powerful features and protocols such as community management, task workflow automation, and centralized remote administration."
Tsk Tsk, Mr. Typaldos. Please ditch the PHB-gibberish and speak English. Xandros is a desktop company, so you should "leverage" that strength. If you make a general purpose linux server, then it will either 1) be a jack of all trades but master of none, or 2)be lost in the crowd of general purpose linux servers.
So try on this "vision". You are a desktop company, so connect your desktops. What would really distinguish your company and provide "added-value" is to make a Xandros-Domain Controller by integrating Samba, a Directory Server (perhaps using the now open-source Redhat/Netscape DS), along with a slick admin gui. Provide support for an office running mixed Xandros and windows clients. It could be based on Linux, but it's linux-ness should be almost invisable and irrelavent.
What was wrong with the html bookmarks file? Was it broke? Did it not work?
Granted that SQLite has a small footprint,but not as small as a flat ascii file like html or xml. And why add complexity? It is very nice to be able to "export" a bookmarks file by just coping it or by opening a text browser and cutting and pasting into an email. I understand that SQLite's storage is also just a flat file, but is it in a commonly understood human readable format like html or xml? Or do I have to learn to parse a whole new file layout?
Perhaps Slashdot is being Trolled By AdSense
on
Sudo vs. Root
·
· Score: 1
A few weeks back, Slashdot ran a story from Wall Stree Journal about an "original content" scam that takes advantage of Google. Basically, writers are paid to pump out senseless "original content" articles (sometimes rehashing other sources, sometime outright nonsense). This is because apparantly, Google will drive down your page rank if you don't have "original content". So you see all these "blogs" and "news sites" that have crappy, useless, or wrong content,.... but plastered all over the pages are Google AdSense adverts.
Now, apparantly they just submit the pages directly to slashdot, and they get swallowed hook, line, and sinker. Perhaps the slashdot editors should look for a pattern. Do certain submitters only submit stories that are plastered with AdSense? Multiple submitters at the same IP? Not that an advertising supported site is wrong per se, but come on....
The Republicans kept the promises made in the "Contract with America". They promised to bring certain issues to a vote in the House, and they passed them in the House with a simple majority (Some Constitutional provisions that required 2/3s votes failed because the Democrates refused to go along). But you must remember that passing a bill in one House does not make it law. The Senate and the President must also approve. The Democrates in the Senate simply refused to pass the same bills approved by the House and Clinton vetoed some of the proposals that did manage to make it through the Senate. As noted in Wikipedia "despite the failure of many sections of the Contract to pass the Senate or overcome President Clinton's veto, the Republican leadership did introduce bills that would have implemented virtually everything they had promised to introduce in the Contract."
So, while politicians may still richly deserve our cynicism, if you are basing it on this one issue, you are doing so wrongly. They kept their promises, but were frustrated by the system and their opponents (which is not necessarily bad, since the system was designed that way on purpose).
C is C is C (or rather, it ought to be, because that was the whole point of C).
The OpenBSD people pride themselves on being correct. I would expect that they would have written tight, neat, standards complient C. The BSD libraries are not ripped off from GNU. So, MS should have no problem compiling and linking a non-GPL version of the BSD code. Beside just using GCC would not emcumber you if you link against your own libs and headers, would it? How do you think the BSD people do it and avoid the GPL while using GCC?
Replacing embedded systems USB will be the Key
on
Microsoft Origami Unfolds
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Over-hyped yes, but this will still have a niche of practical applications.
First, it runs standard XP, which means you can now have your standard business applications in a smaller form factor.
Secondly, it is about the size as the Day-Runner that I used to carry around with me in the early-90s. OK, so now imagine a leather book-style case (like the day runner) that will hold a fold-up USB keyboard and mouse. You basically have an ultra light laptop.
I think the real niche for this is to replace traditionally embedded one-application devices like inventory systems. You can now have a much more full feature general computer. So now you can put a shoulder strap on this, plug in a USB device (like a bar-code or RFID reader) do your inventory, look up items on the locally cached database, and run custom designed perl-scripts on the data right there in the field. You will also be able to get away from highly proprietary systems and instead have lots of competing software and USB devide vendors and much better integration into your networks (since it is just a pc).
The bottom line is that you can now squeeze a standard PC into a smaller form factor. This will displace some embedded devices in places that we haven't even thought of yet. At this point, I see very little need for XP-embedded or CE, if I can have the full featured version running standard software. And remember, this is generation one. Future generations will probably have even a smaller form-factor with more powerful hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does it have to be corn versus cane? Has anybody done a study of the engery density of sugar beets? They grow an a northern clime (like Wisconsin or Idaho or Germany), the tubar yields high surgar content, and the waste (both foilage and mash) can be used for compost or animal fodder. What kind of engery density can you get from that? They would be socially responsible because they are grown in developed countries, produce only reusable waste, and would not be produced by peasants toiling in slave labor. They also would most likely be grown on existing agricultural land instead of slashed-and-burned rain forrest. As part of the US's screwed up agricultural price support system, we pay farmers *not to grow* extra corn and soy. Perhaps we can take all that fallow agricultural land and have them grow sugar beets instead.
IIRC, the presence of vi and ex are part of required compliance for POSIX and the Single UNIX Specification. So, it is not just there by convention or convenience, but is a requirement for guaranteed inter-operaability, along with ed, sed, and awk. Or does POSIX simply define the behavior of those tools and not require their presence?
Well at least *some* of the employees will get to keep their jobs, but I'll bet the ones with their retirement plans in SGI stock will be hopping mad.
Although you personally were not to blame, your case was indeed one of deliberate fraud and Google was smart enough to figure it out. In this sense, Google is acting responsibly. In borderline cases where they can not be completely sure, they play it safe. They may not trust a site and are unwilling to do business with it again themselves, but they don't publically malign it. In cases where they know for a fact that real deliberate fraud occured, it is responsible of them to warn others.
The article says that ODF *just now* got approved as ISO standard and asks "Now the question: Will OpenXML get the same treatment, despite its technical weaknesses?". Your answer is basically that OpenXML should not be an ISO standard because its not already an ISO standard, while ODF is a standard. That says nothing about the inherent weakness of OpenXML
Now the examples given at Groklaw show the real technical weakness of OpenXML/MSXML. It is basically a byzantine nightmare of complexity to(humanly) read and therefore hard to parse. It also is encumbered by patent issues.
I once took a try at using the MS Office 2003 XML capabilities (such as they are) via VBA, but enventially gave up and took a different route, partially because the "XML" output by Office was a LSD trip to write a handler for. Instead I just inserted plain text via the Office Document model. So, yes, MS Office XML sucks, but for valid reasons other than not already being an ISO standard.
First of all, how does this help classify and search the articles? It doesn't, if every third article is "evil" and "troll".
Secondly, please refresh your memory of what a "troll" is. Here is the official Slashdot definition. Just because you think an article or comment is wrong and stupid does not make it a "troll". A "troll" is purposeful malicious misdirection intended to lead the discussion astray. Just because you disagree with Cringely, Dvorak, et al (and think they are totally off the wall), it does not mean they are trolls. They may indeed be stupid, but they are not trolls. Any opinion presented constructively is not a troll, even if it is wrong.
As far as I am concerned, the "tagging beta" should filter out all the "troll", "stupid", "evil", "FUD", and other non-helpful tags, because they are not objective descriptions to classify the article, but only negative opinion (and I think we can all read and form our own opinions).
With XML, you have a standarized generic output that could be parsed by any number of clients. Thus, the AJAX/javascript browers-based client is just one of many ways to access and display the data. You could also be serving the data to a java Swing app or a MS VB app, and the server wouldn't care. By using XML, you keep everything portable and generic.
Now, if you are writing somthing to serve your kids' photos to grandma and you know she will only view it on your webpage, then you can get away without using XML because you only expect one type of client, which you yourself will code anyway. If you are providing a web-service to serve up weather data that other people can integrate into an application, or (an even better example) grabbing third party generated weather data, you will appreciate having the data in XML because of its portablility and especially its structured organization.
As an example, I am working on a way to grab the text of some government regulations and integrate them into a web application that will reference the appropriate regulation based upon some simple questions that the user will answer. The morons that host the reg are serving up valid but sloppy and fairly unorganzied HTML. So, if I want to zero in on, say, Part 3, subpart 301, paragraph(b)(3), I have to code a very specific parser to search and find what I want. But if they had everything in XML, I would just zero in on the named element tag that I want.
Censorship is limitation on content. This proposal does not limit content, nor does it pose an unreasonable burden on the viewer or the website.
Requiring a MetaTag does not rise to censorship, because it does not limit content. It's truth in advertising. It's also is trivial to implement. Requiring a home page with a enter button (that would set a cookie or session to signify acceptance for the rest of the site) also does not limit content. It too is trivial to implement. It would also probably withstand challange in court since it is no more restrictive than the brown paper cover over a magazine, which is already required in many places.
If this proposal limited content or imposed an onerous burden, then I too would call it censorship. But it does neither.
That's when Congress holds a hearing and cuts off the money to the offending program.
Its also his job as head of the executive branch to see that the Treasury Department issues Social Security checks. Do you think he personally signs every one of them or do you think he appoints somebody else to do it?
First, Executive Agencies can and do fine each other under civil enforcement actions. For example see this EPA site about enforcing against other Federal (Executive) agencies http://www.epa.gov/compliance/federalfacilities/en forcement/index.html.
Secondly, there are these things call "Executive Orders". They are official orders from the President to all the Executive Agencies. If any Federal Officer runs afoul of an Executive Order, he can expect to be disciplined within the agency. Entire agencies have been "called on the carpet" by the Office of Managment and Budget.
For some strange reason, ther term "Unitary Executive" gets all the left-wing crazies bent out of shape, but it really means "separation of powers". What is Executive is wholly (and solely) Executive. What is Judicial is wholly (and solely) Judicial. What is Legislative is wholly (and solely) Legislative. Unitary Executive means that all executive functions are performed within the executive branch and are subject to the Executive Branch's chain of command. No branch may meddle in the internal affairs and running of the others. This is basic constitutional law in the US. The term "Unitary Executive" is primarily used to argue that the creation of "independent prosecutors" are unconstitutional , since prosecution is an executive function and all executive functions fall under the President and his appointed officers (like the Attorney General), while "independent prosecutors" are appointed by and answerable to Judges (thus running afoul of separation of powers).
Several thousand governments at various levels such as State, County, Parish, City, Township, School District, Water District, etc, etc, etc. Plus over a hundred independent Federal Agencies from the FCC to NASA to the Smithsonian Instutution. All of which make independent buying decisions.
You WILL upgrade whether you like it or not, because MS will End-Of-Life XP as soon as possible and cut off updates to everything but Vista. You and I both can see that coming. I guarantee you that there are enough yet-to-be-discovered critical flaws in XP as to make it unsafe to run 2 or 3 years from now. When they stop patching XP, you will be forced to upgrade to Vista. You (and I) will take it and say "Thank you Sir, may I have another".
Not sure if Ubuntu is the way to go, but Oracle having its own Linux-OS would be great for all the reasons that you mentioned about fiddling with the kernel parameters and installing lib_compat_this, lib_compat_that, Patch_set_this and Patch_set_that.
Imagine if all that was obviated because the DB installer was also the OS installer. Basically, you would start with a blank unpartitioned hdd (or array of blanks), boot the DVD, answer a few pointy-clicky questions in the Oracle installer, go get a cup of coffee and read the newspaper while the files copy, and 30 minutes later you'll have a fully configured Oracle DB on RAID. Headache free install. And, you would never have to worry about your OS updates breaking Oracle. Sweet.
Several years ago (circa 1999 or Redhat version 6 ), I read that Oracle on Linux was developed and targeted for Suse. I remember this because I was having issues tweaking RH for an Oracle 8 install, and a lot of the mail lists mentioned that some of the tweaks were not necessary for SuSE. So I would guess that it would be just a bit easier for Oracle to adopt Suse outright, if that is what their developers are already using.
For example in Missouri the following
In Florida In Virginia they recently modified it in 2005.
Virginia also honnors ancient acts of Parliament Similiar language is usually the first enumerated statute in every state, except Louisiana which uses the Napoleanic Civil Code.
This guy is blowing smoke. If the USA thought he was the kind of guy that they put in GTMO, do you really think they would extradite him through the British court system? The fact that the the US Justice Department is pursuing this in British courts is a pretty good indication that this is a Judicial proceeding, not a covert intelligence operation. We extradite people through judical proceedings everyday. I'm not aware of a single case where a judicial extradition has resulted in the prisoner going to GTMO.
If the US & UK goverments had decided this guy was going to GTMO, he would not be in the custody of the police and he would not be in court.
This is slightly offtopic....but
First to dispense with TFA: since they are developing stuff for Windows, they will never be rid of it, nor should they. So they will always run Windows in-house to some extent.
But why can't they sell their product to other people? They have all the right parts to replace a Windows/Active Directory infrustructure. They have a desktop (Suse), they have a respected directory server (eDirecotry/NDS), they have general purpose servers (Suse), Zenworks to mananage it all, and they have an entrenched legacy product (i.e. a foot in the door) for which they can provide an upgrade path. Most importantly, they have them integrated seemlessly in their Open Enterprise Server. But they still can't get the sale. Its because their pricing provides no advantage over Microsoft A Novell Open Enterprise Server per user license per year is $230 retail. A MS Win2K3 10 user CAL is $1199 retail (or $119.9 per user). That's retail. MS, being the bigger company, has the ability to come even lower in enterprise or site licensing. Sadly, Novell doesn't seem able to do the math.
They should take the chance that they could make up the difference in revenue by going with volume over price. More licneses for less each, instead of fewer licenses for more each. They have to realize that every Windows installation is going to lead to an Exchange installation instead of a Groupwise installation. If they could build the market share in the network products, the revenue in services and add-on products will follow.
Wouldn't they just be lost in the pack with a general purpose server? Being certified for Oracle or DB2 is already done by others. They should instead pick their own niche and run with it. From the other comments here, it looks like they are choosing some sort of media streaming niche. I'm not sure how many offices *really* need one of those for business. I think they should go with a custom PDC/Directory Server/Single-Sign-On niche, as there is real need in every office for that without the extortionate cost of the MS-AD Client Access Licenses. Such a move would build on their desktop integration expertise.
I had high hopes for Novell's Open Enterprise Server in this area by combining Suse, Novell eDirectory (NDS), and ZenWorks, but their per user pricing model does not seem to offer anything over MS CALs, which is probably why they are failing.
So try on this "vision". You are a desktop company, so connect your desktops. What would really distinguish your company and provide "added-value" is to make a Xandros-Domain Controller by integrating Samba, a Directory Server (perhaps using the now open-source Redhat/Netscape DS), along with a slick admin gui. Provide support for an office running mixed Xandros and windows clients. It could be based on Linux, but it's linux-ness should be almost invisable and irrelavent.
What was wrong with the html bookmarks file? Was it broke? Did it not work?
,but not as small as a flat ascii file like html or xml. And why add complexity? It is very nice to be able to "export" a bookmarks file by just coping it or by opening a text browser and cutting and pasting into an email. I understand that SQLite's storage is also just a flat file, but is it in a commonly understood human readable format like html or xml? Or do I have to learn to parse a whole new file layout?
Granted that SQLite has a small footprint
A few weeks back, Slashdot ran a story from Wall Stree Journal about an "original content" scam that takes advantage of Google. Basically, writers are paid to pump out senseless "original content" articles (sometimes rehashing other sources, sometime outright nonsense). This is because apparantly, Google will drive down your page rank if you don't have "original content". So you see all these "blogs" and "news sites" that have crappy, useless, or wrong content,.... but plastered all over the pages are Google AdSense adverts.
Now, apparantly they just submit the pages directly to slashdot, and they get swallowed hook, line, and sinker. Perhaps the slashdot editors should look for a pattern. Do certain submitters only submit stories that are plastered with AdSense? Multiple submitters at the same IP? Not that an advertising supported site is wrong per se, but come on....
The Republicans kept the promises made in the "Contract with America". They promised to bring certain issues to a vote in the House, and they passed them in the House with a simple majority (Some Constitutional provisions that required 2/3s votes failed because the Democrates refused to go along). But you must remember that passing a bill in one House does not make it law. The Senate and the President must also approve. The Democrates in the Senate simply refused to pass the same bills approved by the House and Clinton vetoed some of the proposals that did manage to make it through the Senate. As noted in Wikipedia "despite the failure of many sections of the Contract to pass the Senate or overcome President Clinton's veto, the Republican leadership did introduce bills that would have implemented virtually everything they had promised to introduce in the Contract."
So, while politicians may still richly deserve our cynicism, if you are basing it on this one issue, you are doing so wrongly. They kept their promises, but were frustrated by the system and their opponents (which is not necessarily bad, since the system was designed that way on purpose).
C is C is C (or rather, it ought to be, because that was the whole point of C).
The OpenBSD people pride themselves on being correct. I would expect that they would have written tight, neat, standards complient C. The BSD libraries are not ripped off from GNU. So, MS should have no problem compiling and linking a non-GPL version of the BSD code. Beside just using GCC would not emcumber you if you link against your own libs and headers, would it? How do you think the BSD people do it and avoid the GPL while using GCC?
Over-hyped yes, but this will still have a niche of practical applications. First, it runs standard XP, which means you can now have your standard business applications in a smaller form factor.
Secondly, it is about the size as the Day-Runner that I used to carry around with me in the early-90s. OK, so now imagine a leather book-style case (like the day runner) that will hold a fold-up USB keyboard and mouse. You basically have an ultra light laptop.
I think the real niche for this is to replace traditionally embedded one-application devices like inventory systems. You can now have a much more full feature general computer. So now you can put a shoulder strap on this, plug in a USB device (like a bar-code or RFID reader) do your inventory, look up items on the locally cached database, and run custom designed perl-scripts on the data right there in the field. You will also be able to get away from highly proprietary systems and instead have lots of competing software and USB devide vendors and much better integration into your networks (since it is just a pc).
The bottom line is that you can now squeeze a standard PC into a smaller form factor. This will displace some embedded devices in places that we haven't even thought of yet. At this point, I see very little need for XP-embedded or CE, if I can have the full featured version running standard software. And remember, this is generation one. Future generations will probably have even a smaller form-factor with more powerful hardware.