How do you integrate into gameplay the scene where Axel goes, "Silly, some of us don't have next lives," or where Sora cries and says, "You know, I'm sad,"?
Just because the player retains control doesn't mean NPCs can't engage in scripted actions, so one can have scenes where NPCs express themselves effectively.
Movies and text are legitimate story telling mechanisms; games that utilize movies and text are richer than games that do not utilize movies and text, though not necessarily stronger.
Yes, they're legitimate storytelling mechanisms -- but part of the point of a game (as opposed to a movie) is the player's immersion, and taking away control (particularly for a fairly long period of time) reduces that. See Deus Ex for an outstanding example of a game conveying a complex and involved plot without nontrivial use of cutscenes.
Well, yes -- that's his point. The plot movement should be in the game itself: If skipping the cutscenes stops the game from being compelling, then the plot isn't sufficiently well-integrated with the rest of the game.
Current hybrids can't be recharged except by running the gas motor. Modifying them to make it possible to charge their batteries separately, increasing the battery capacity, and increasing their intelligence (with regard to which engine to use) allows them to run in electric-only mode for short trips -- and recharge the batteries off of main power (rather than the gasoline engine) at home.
I've only lived in two parts of the US, California and Texas, and the political differences are substantial. Even in Austin (which is very socially liberal -- not par with Berkeley, but certainly much moreso than most other areas of.ca.us and vastly more socially liberal than other part of Texas), there's much more of a generally Libertarian bent than widely exists in California. As an example: Austinites, while socially liberal, are have much less of a tendency than Californians to support gun control.
That's not to say that I think that proportional representation for the federal government is a bad thing. It is to say that I think that the federal government needs to be smaller in scope, such that states have greater sovereignty within their borders.
I'm trying to figure out if you're trying to be funny or if you're genuinely failing to grok. Mind elucidating?
(Yes, an abyss is something similar to a chasm or large hole... but The Abyss, in caps and otherwise taken in context, is clearly a reference to Hell. The passage should be read metaphorically rather than literally: it refers not to literal visual observation of a physical entryway to Hell, but... well, I've provided enough hints that you should get it by now).
This is exactly what I was saying. How many other open source projects you know which started numbering from 1.0?
Any of them which started as in-house projects and thus began public life already outside of alpha- or beta-level status. That happens from time to time, and doing an initial public release as 1.0 is generally accepted practice under such circumstances (unless enough parts required changes before they could be released publicly to put the proposed release back into pre-release status).
Consider that Linux is 2.6 after 15 years and Apache is still 2.2, while very many people are still using Linux 2.4 or Apache 1.3. At the same time Xen started with 1.0 and is 3.0 after only 3 years. Isn't this different?
From Linux and Apache, sure -- but that's a pretty small selection of projects. Taking a wider look at small, non-mission-critical but actively-developed projects off of SourceForge might establish a wider base for comparison. (You mention folks using older versions of Linux and Apache; there are, by the way, still quite a lot of folks using Xen 2.x).
1.0, the first public release, was in October of 2003. 2.x, while missing some of 3.x's core features, was out and in use for quite some time. Just because you haven't heard of it until recently doesn't mean it hasn't been around.
There are always openings for good people, because there's a need to have people close to the problems who are resourceful and creative and able to solve them. Outsourcing is most effective for gruntwork -- building implementations of code that's already been specced out -- but if you're one of the people who's there on the ground who can look at a problem and see the solutions available even if they're not always within the same specialty, you'll never have trouble finding work.
Don't cowboy things: Learn and follow best practices, but have enough knowledge of the underlying works to be able to play cowboy. You don't want to use that knowledge much -- but when it's necessary, it makes a huge difference. Learn a lot of different things, and don't skip the academic background -- most of it's useless in the Real World, but every so often you really need to know how a state machine works, or how to build a normalized database schema, or how to calculate the big-O notation for an algorithm you're thinking of. Learn the underlying bits: Sometimes it'll help you figure out what's going on at an application level if you can watch the syscalls and understand what they're doing. Don't be a programmer who knows nothing about system administration, or a system administrator who knows nothing about programming; either of those types is crippled.
Databases are important. Know how, why and when to use views, stored procedures, transactions, and all the other crap that the MySQL people used to tell folks were unnecessary, performance-reducing fluff. (Be very sure you know associated best practices; if you're hired to do the backend of a webapp, allowing SQL injection attacks or forcing the database to reparse your SQL statements every time can make for some extremely unhappy coworkers).
Play around with new frameworks. Try writing drivers for some nifty but unsupported hardware. Understand what the different views of revision control are and what the strengths and weaknesses are of each. Learn a variety of scripting languages, and try embedding them in your larger apps. Be sure you know C (not C++, plain C) -- and when to use it, and when not to. Learn how video codecs work. Teach. Volunteer. Do stuff that isn't on this list that I never thought of. Hang out with people who are much, much better than you -- if you can, get an internship at a company full of them.
If all the stuff I told you to do sounds like fun, you're cut out for the job -- you'll love it, be good at it, and never have trouble finding employment.
Ted Kennedy probably has a 'serious need' for that limousine so he doesn't get attacked
(Part of why I hate English is its ambiguity. Did you mean that the limo improves Ted Kennedy's personal security, and thus is legitimately owned to reduce his chances of being physically attacked by any arbitrary 3rd party, or did you mean to assert that most self-proclaimed environmentalists likely consider Ted Kennedy to have a 'serious need' for his limousine, as evidenced by their failure to attack him for owning said vehicle? I'm going to assume the latter).
By bringing up those who attack others over their decisions into this discussion, you're introducing a strawman to this discussion: I am not one of those people, nor do I support them. Folks who go around criticizing others' purchasing decisions... well, let's say I'm not one of them. I do, however, favor economy over ostentacious display in my own personal decisions, and (when in an appropriate context -- such as a discussion where the topic comes up) tend to encourage others to do the same.
Further, I'm level-headed enough not to care about outliers. Does Mr. Kennedy make non-environmentally-sensitive choices with regard to his personal purchasing decisions while supporting large-scale policies consistant with environmentalists' values? Perhaps that's a little hypocritical, but it's not my business, and I don't really care what any individual does; rather, I'm much more concerned (first) about what I do personally, and (second) about which memes are widely propagated (and thus what the population as a whole tends to do over time). Further, if Mr. Kennedy's limousine (via acting as a status symbol) helps him effectively propagate said large-scale policy changes, it may be justified. I don't care: It's not my limousine, and thus not my decision.
There are certainly cases where without knowing the specifics a decision appears hard to justify. Having a 6,000 square foot house for a small nuclear family is one of those. Driving an H3 is another. Those decisions may in many cases be justified given knowledge of the involved individuals' circumstances, and so I'm still not one to blindly criticize -- but when speaking of a template rather than an individual, it's reasonably safe to say that purchasing 1.5-ton vehicles for purposes which don't involve hauling substantial weights of cargo around is typically something done by people having a different set of priorities and concerns than those associated with environmentalism -- regardless of available income.
So... I still believe that I was fully in the right to argue that the assertion that an environmentalist will not typically own a home with more bathrooms than people does not imply that environmentalists are necessarily members of a particular low-income niche. I do, however, clarify that by endorsing this general rule I do not mean to assert that exceptions are nonexistant -- and, further, that I am inclined to provide individuals with every reasonable doubt as to their circumscantes (unknown to me) qualifying as such exceptions. Just because other peoples' circumstances may be exceptional, however, does not release me from making reasonable and justifiable decisions with regard to the larger impact of my actions. If everyone followed that rule, we'd have considerably less energy consumption per capita.
If you live in a civilized country, you probably have MANY things you don't have a 'serious need' for.
So? Your point? Just because I may have things I don't have a 'serious need' for doesn't release me from making responsible decisions in the future.
The responsible individual, of course. You're attacking a strawman: I haven't at any point claimed to be more able to determine what a "serious need" is than anyone else, so please don't read me as claiming that I do.
The key word, though, is "responsible". An individual who actually takes the larger-scale impact of their decisions into account in making those decisions will generally come to different conclusions than one who doesn't. I'm not asking people to come to certain conclusions; rather, I'm asking them to weigh certain elements which might otherwise be disregarded in making those decisions.
Being rich doesn't imply owning a house with more bathrooms than people. Being rich doesn't imply owning a car that weighs more than 1.5 tons. Being an environmentalist (and actually practicing what you preach) does imply purchasing a fuel-efficient vehicle unless you have a serious need for one which is not, and does otherwise imply not wasting scarce or non-renewable resources.
Heating or cooling a 6,000 square foot house uses scarce resources. Moving a 1.5 ton vehicle around the road uses scarce resources. An individual who is serious about protecting the environment, even if they are able to afford the 6,000 square foot house or the 1.5 ton vehicle, will not purchase such items unless they have a legitimate need.
I'm not talking about any proposal on my part (which will lesson the blow and actually get implemented), because I have none and don't claim to have one either. You were suggesting (by responding to a post asking what your solution was) that you might have a proposed course of action -- but all I understand you to have provided in this thread is mere fantasy (read: corrections which require massive-scale actions which are economically suboptimal in the short term) or the same reality that's going to happen anyhow (an economically-forced adjustment occuring after it's too late to avoid the negative consequences associated with the same).
What's the point of yelling to the world that the sky is falling unless there's something you or I can do to stop it?
You may well joyfully paticipate in the utter rape of the Earth before succumbing to the inevitable though, leaving you with far fewer resources at the end of things than you could have arranged.
Yup, that's what's going to happen. I thought you had a proposal which would lessen the blow. If you don't, what's the point of talking about it?
I suspect you're going the wrong way; with the hardware support in VT and Pacifica, Xen and VMWare are going to get a lot faster.
VMware gets faster. Xen gets a mode in which it acts more like VMware (can run unmodified operating systems), but is slower than otherwise on account of needing to virtualize drivers rather than having a guest modified to pass requests in an optimal manner. OpenVZ still wins for performance, while Xen wins for flexibility.
I used to use UML fairly heavily, but the real-world I/O performance was awful, even with the skas patches applied on the host. Xen's a dog too right now (as far as I/O operations are concerned -- particularly video) when doing VMX domains [which use hardware-supported virtualization rather than a paravirtualization-aware guest], but on native domains the performance hit isn't nearly as bad as it is with UML. Do some I/O-heavy (rather than CPU-heavy) benchmarking, and the difference becomes fairly visible. This is particularly true on a multiprocessor box where the Xen Dom0 has a core to itself to use for driving I/O.
(Also, Xen has had live migration for a long time now. OpenVZ will have Virtuozzo's implementation in the not-distant future, but I'm not aware of any plans to bring live migration to UML at all).
OpenVZ, on the other hand, *does* have a design which makes it inherently better as far as performance is concerned. It's not nearly as flexible as Xen (in terms of being able to mix guests' kernels and operating systems), but from the design I'd expect that I/O overhead would be practically nonexistant. UML was a damn cool piece of hackery in its day, and still has practical uses -- but as a server virtualization tool, there are getting to be tools out better suited to the job.
The interviewee keeps talking about Xen 3 like it's not out yet, but that's untrue.
Indeed, Xen 3 has been stable long enough that they're presently at 3.0.2. It's not prerelease anymore, and support for x86_64 and hardware-supported virtualization has been out and about for a while. I have semi-production (used by in-house staff only, but there are folks who can't work if it's down) systems running on Xen3 x86_64 DomUs, and the host they're on has been up (and running unattended) for 117 days now.
Sun has a OpenSolaris port to Xen (though I think it may be in-house-only still), and I have some good friends working on a microkernel OS targeted at embedded operation with a Xen DomU port pending (such that they -- and people working on it -- will be able to run it in parallel with the OS they use as their development platform). Being able to run more than one kernel -- indeed, more than one operating system -- is a big plus on the Xen side of things.
So you broke your laptop computer with a screwdriver, voided your warranty and they don't want to deal with you. Wow, how shocking. Do you really think any other laptop manufacturer would act differently?
Yes. He didn't say they wouldn't honor his warranty -- he said they wouldn't sell him (as in, with him willing to pay full price for) replacement parts. Refusing to sell a customer replacement parts for a reasonably modern system is above and beyond bad customer service.
Just because the comedians laugh about it doesn't mean it's really happening with the level of frequency you assume. It's just a meme. Memes aren't always accurate.
It's that flip-flopping meaning of the term that we're discussing. Or at least trying to discuss, but Moulton keeps trying to change the subject of Intelligent Design to non-stupid industrial design, and the subject of Creationism to creativity, or whatever he can come up with to avoid directly answering the questions I'm asking.
On reading the posts in question, I'm inclined to take the position that Moulton is not an individual trying to discuss Intelligent Design through an intellectually dishonest tactic, but rather merely a troll.
Then there are the charlitans who want you to believe "Intelligent Design" has nothing to do with religion or even evolution, and try to divert the conversation by pretending it's about PEOPLE designing things intelligently, so they try to imply the anti-ID people are actually for PEOPLE designing things UNINTELLIGENTLY.
Huh? I've never heard that argument attempted, consequently leading your objection itself to sound like the strawman. Could you perhaps provide a pointer or two?
Anime and Asimov have taught us that autonomous machines will inevitably rise up against us...
Where did Asimov say that? (The movie was a perversion of the Zeroth Law -- in the books, when it appeared, the effort needed to negate the First Law for even nonlethal harm to a human was damaging to the robot involved).
Apple zealots, OSS zealots, and now California zealots? Great. I was really hoping we could up the flame ratio around here.
Well, since you asked...
California has the issue that the parts that have good jobs have unreasonable housing prices and unfriendly people; and the areas that have friendly people and reasonable housing prices have lousy jobs.
Austin, TX has the small-town feel of the Northern California communities (think Chico); friendly people; a socially liberal atmosphere (but, being Texas, still a healthy respect for 2nd amendment rights and homeowners' ability to protect their property); no state income tax; reasonable housing prices (by the standards of places that aren't Texas) and actual available tech industry jobs.
Granted, there are issues when leaving the People's Republic of Left Texas -- rumor is that the rest of the state is infested with Republicans.
your process sounds like it would work for any OS, possibly except for the windows registry.
The Registry is a big chunk of it, but there's more to it than that: In Linux, the tools for finding out what's going on under the hood (what shared libraries are used by any given application; what exactly happens at any given boot stage, including the areas before regular userland is invoked; whether any files have been modified; which specific code in which files is invoked for user authentication and login; etc) are readily available, well-documented, and understood by any sufficiently competant system administrator or systems-level programmer. In Windows, a great deal of this is off in black-box area -- folks might have some understanding from the documentation if they've read it, but the MSDN documentation isn't written by the same folks who write the code, and it's often incomplete or just plain wrong.
Also, Linux is more amenable to being worked with when booting from read-only media and mounting the primany drives unwritable: several core tools can be invoked with different base paths to run from and programs generally don't require write access to the drive unless there's a good reason for it. This too makes forensics and recovery work much easier.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because the player retains control doesn't mean NPCs can't engage in scripted actions, so one can have scenes where NPCs express themselves effectively.
Yes, they're legitimate storytelling mechanisms -- but part of the point of a game (as opposed to a movie) is the player's immersion, and taking away control (particularly for a fairly long period of time) reduces that. See Deus Ex for an outstanding example of a game conveying a complex and involved plot without nontrivial use of cutscenes.
Well, yes -- that's his point. The plot movement should be in the game itself: If skipping the cutscenes stops the game from being compelling, then the plot isn't sufficiently well-integrated with the rest of the game.
Current hybrids can't be recharged except by running the gas motor. Modifying them to make it possible to charge their batteries separately, increasing the battery capacity, and increasing their intelligence (with regard to which engine to use) allows them to run in electric-only mode for short trips -- and recharge the batteries off of main power (rather than the gasoline engine) at home.
I've only lived in two parts of the US, California and Texas, and the political differences are substantial. Even in Austin (which is very socially liberal -- not par with Berkeley, but certainly much moreso than most other areas of .ca.us and vastly more socially liberal than other part of Texas), there's much more of a generally Libertarian bent than widely exists in California. As an example: Austinites, while socially liberal, are have much less of a tendency than Californians to support gun control.
That's not to say that I think that proportional representation for the federal government is a bad thing. It is to say that I think that the federal government needs to be smaller in scope, such that states have greater sovereignty within their borders.
I'm trying to figure out if you're trying to be funny or if you're genuinely failing to grok. Mind elucidating?
(Yes, an abyss is something similar to a chasm or large hole... but The Abyss, in caps and otherwise taken in context, is clearly a reference to Hell. The passage should be read metaphorically rather than literally: it refers not to literal visual observation of a physical entryway to Hell, but... well, I've provided enough hints that you should get it by now).
Any of them which started as in-house projects and thus began public life already outside of alpha- or beta-level status. That happens from time to time, and doing an initial public release as 1.0 is generally accepted practice under such circumstances (unless enough parts required changes before they could be released publicly to put the proposed release back into pre-release status).
From Linux and Apache, sure -- but that's a pretty small selection of projects. Taking a wider look at small, non-mission-critical but actively-developed projects off of SourceForge might establish a wider base for comparison. (You mention folks using older versions of Linux and Apache; there are, by the way, still quite a lot of folks using Xen 2.x).
1.0, the first public release, was in October of 2003. 2.x, while missing some of 3.x's core features, was out and in use for quite some time. Just because you haven't heard of it until recently doesn't mean it hasn't been around.
There are always openings for good people, because there's a need to have people close to the problems who are resourceful and creative and able to solve them. Outsourcing is most effective for gruntwork -- building implementations of code that's already been specced out -- but if you're one of the people who's there on the ground who can look at a problem and see the solutions available even if they're not always within the same specialty, you'll never have trouble finding work.
Don't cowboy things: Learn and follow best practices, but have enough knowledge of the underlying works to be able to play cowboy. You don't want to use that knowledge much -- but when it's necessary, it makes a huge difference. Learn a lot of different things, and don't skip the academic background -- most of it's useless in the Real World, but every so often you really need to know how a state machine works, or how to build a normalized database schema, or how to calculate the big-O notation for an algorithm you're thinking of. Learn the underlying bits: Sometimes it'll help you figure out what's going on at an application level if you can watch the syscalls and understand what they're doing. Don't be a programmer who knows nothing about system administration, or a system administrator who knows nothing about programming; either of those types is crippled.
Databases are important. Know how, why and when to use views, stored procedures, transactions, and all the other crap that the MySQL people used to tell folks were unnecessary, performance-reducing fluff. (Be very sure you know associated best practices; if you're hired to do the backend of a webapp, allowing SQL injection attacks or forcing the database to reparse your SQL statements every time can make for some extremely unhappy coworkers).
Play around with new frameworks. Try writing drivers for some nifty but unsupported hardware. Understand what the different views of revision control are and what the strengths and weaknesses are of each. Learn a variety of scripting languages, and try embedding them in your larger apps. Be sure you know C (not C++, plain C) -- and when to use it, and when not to. Learn how video codecs work. Teach. Volunteer. Do stuff that isn't on this list that I never thought of. Hang out with people who are much, much better than you -- if you can, get an internship at a company full of them.
If all the stuff I told you to do sounds like fun, you're cut out for the job -- you'll love it, be good at it, and never have trouble finding employment.
(Part of why I hate English is its ambiguity. Did you mean that the limo improves Ted Kennedy's personal security, and thus is legitimately owned to reduce his chances of being physically attacked by any arbitrary 3rd party, or did you mean to assert that most self-proclaimed environmentalists likely consider Ted Kennedy to have a 'serious need' for his limousine, as evidenced by their failure to attack him for owning said vehicle? I'm going to assume the latter).
By bringing up those who attack others over their decisions into this discussion, you're introducing a strawman to this discussion: I am not one of those people, nor do I support them. Folks who go around criticizing others' purchasing decisions... well, let's say I'm not one of them. I do, however, favor economy over ostentacious display in my own personal decisions, and (when in an appropriate context -- such as a discussion where the topic comes up) tend to encourage others to do the same.
Further, I'm level-headed enough not to care about outliers. Does Mr. Kennedy make non-environmentally-sensitive choices with regard to his personal purchasing decisions while supporting large-scale policies consistant with environmentalists' values? Perhaps that's a little hypocritical, but it's not my business, and I don't really care what any individual does; rather, I'm much more concerned (first) about what I do personally, and (second) about which memes are widely propagated (and thus what the population as a whole tends to do over time). Further, if Mr. Kennedy's limousine (via acting as a status symbol) helps him effectively propagate said large-scale policy changes, it may be justified. I don't care: It's not my limousine, and thus not my decision.
There are certainly cases where without knowing the specifics a decision appears hard to justify. Having a 6,000 square foot house for a small nuclear family is one of those. Driving an H3 is another. Those decisions may in many cases be justified given knowledge of the involved individuals' circumstances, and so I'm still not one to blindly criticize -- but when speaking of a template rather than an individual, it's reasonably safe to say that purchasing 1.5-ton vehicles for purposes which don't involve hauling substantial weights of cargo around is typically something done by people having a different set of priorities and concerns than those associated with environmentalism -- regardless of available income.
So... I still believe that I was fully in the right to argue that the assertion that an environmentalist will not typically own a home with more bathrooms than people does not imply that environmentalists are necessarily members of a particular low-income niche. I do, however, clarify that by endorsing this general rule I do not mean to assert that exceptions are nonexistant -- and, further, that I am inclined to provide individuals with every reasonable doubt as to their circumscantes (unknown to me) qualifying as such exceptions. Just because other peoples' circumstances may be exceptional, however, does not release me from making reasonable and justifiable decisions with regard to the larger impact of my actions. If everyone followed that rule, we'd have considerably less energy consumption per capita.
So? Your point? Just because I may have things I don't have a 'serious need' for doesn't release me from making responsible decisions in the future.Who determines that need?
The responsible individual, of course. You're attacking a strawman: I haven't at any point claimed to be more able to determine what a "serious need" is than anyone else, so please don't read me as claiming that I do.
The key word, though, is "responsible". An individual who actually takes the larger-scale impact of their decisions into account in making those decisions will generally come to different conclusions than one who doesn't. I'm not asking people to come to certain conclusions; rather, I'm asking them to weigh certain elements which might otherwise be disregarded in making those decisions.
Huh?
Being rich doesn't imply owning a house with more bathrooms than people. Being rich doesn't imply owning a car that weighs more than 1.5 tons. Being an environmentalist (and actually practicing what you preach) does imply purchasing a fuel-efficient vehicle unless you have a serious need for one which is not, and does otherwise imply not wasting scarce or non-renewable resources.
Heating or cooling a 6,000 square foot house uses scarce resources. Moving a 1.5 ton vehicle around the road uses scarce resources. An individual who is serious about protecting the environment, even if they are able to afford the 6,000 square foot house or the 1.5 ton vehicle, will not purchase such items unless they have a legitimate need.
Understand?
I'm not talking about any proposal on my part (which will lesson the blow and actually get implemented), because I have none and don't claim to have one either. You were suggesting (by responding to a post asking what your solution was) that you might have a proposed course of action -- but all I understand you to have provided in this thread is mere fantasy (read: corrections which require massive-scale actions which are economically suboptimal in the short term) or the same reality that's going to happen anyhow (an economically-forced adjustment occuring after it's too late to avoid the negative consequences associated with the same).
What's the point of yelling to the world that the sky is falling unless there's something you or I can do to stop it?
You may well joyfully paticipate in the utter rape of the Earth before succumbing to the inevitable though, leaving you with far fewer resources at the end of things than you could have arranged.
Yup, that's what's going to happen. I thought you had a proposal which would lessen the blow. If you don't, what's the point of talking about it?
So what's your better idea that's actually going to happen?
Xen for OpenSolaris was released back in February.
Barely counts. No disk I/O on Xen 3, no x86_64 support, no live migration... etc. It isn't usable, so I don't consider it released.
I suspect you're going the wrong way; with the hardware support in VT and Pacifica, Xen and VMWare are going to get a lot faster.
VMware gets faster. Xen gets a mode in which it acts more like VMware (can run unmodified operating systems), but is slower than otherwise on account of needing to virtualize drivers rather than having a guest modified to pass requests in an optimal manner. OpenVZ still wins for performance, while Xen wins for flexibility.
I used to use UML fairly heavily, but the real-world I/O performance was awful, even with the skas patches applied on the host. Xen's a dog too right now (as far as I/O operations are concerned -- particularly video) when doing VMX domains [which use hardware-supported virtualization rather than a paravirtualization-aware guest], but on native domains the performance hit isn't nearly as bad as it is with UML. Do some I/O-heavy (rather than CPU-heavy) benchmarking, and the difference becomes fairly visible. This is particularly true on a multiprocessor box where the Xen Dom0 has a core to itself to use for driving I/O.
(Also, Xen has had live migration for a long time now. OpenVZ will have Virtuozzo's implementation in the not-distant future, but I'm not aware of any plans to bring live migration to UML at all).
OpenVZ, on the other hand, *does* have a design which makes it inherently better as far as performance is concerned. It's not nearly as flexible as Xen (in terms of being able to mix guests' kernels and operating systems), but from the design I'd expect that I/O overhead would be practically nonexistant. UML was a damn cool piece of hackery in its day, and still has practical uses -- but as a server virtualization tool, there are getting to be tools out better suited to the job.
The interviewee keeps talking about Xen 3 like it's not out yet, but that's untrue.
Indeed, Xen 3 has been stable long enough that they're presently at 3.0.2. It's not prerelease anymore, and support for x86_64 and hardware-supported virtualization has been out and about for a while. I have semi-production (used by in-house staff only, but there are folks who can't work if it's down) systems running on Xen3 x86_64 DomUs, and the host they're on has been up (and running unattended) for 117 days now.
Sun has a OpenSolaris port to Xen (though I think it may be in-house-only still), and I have some good friends working on a microkernel OS targeted at embedded operation with a Xen DomU port pending (such that they -- and people working on it -- will be able to run it in parallel with the OS they use as their development platform). Being able to run more than one kernel -- indeed, more than one operating system -- is a big plus on the Xen side of things.
So you broke your laptop computer with a screwdriver, voided your warranty and they don't want to deal with you. Wow, how shocking. Do you really think any other laptop manufacturer would act differently?
Yes. He didn't say they wouldn't honor his warranty -- he said they wouldn't sell him (as in, with him willing to pay full price for) replacement parts. Refusing to sell a customer replacement parts for a reasonably modern system is above and beyond bad customer service.
Just because the comedians laugh about it doesn't mean it's really happening with the level of frequency you assume. It's just a meme. Memes aren't always accurate.
On reading the posts in question, I'm inclined to take the position that Moulton is not an individual trying to discuss Intelligent Design through an intellectually dishonest tactic, but rather merely a troll.
Huh? I've never heard that argument attempted, consequently leading your objection itself to sound like the strawman. Could you perhaps provide a pointer or two?
Well, since you asked...
California has the issue that the parts that have good jobs have unreasonable housing prices and unfriendly people; and the areas that have friendly people and reasonable housing prices have lousy jobs.
Austin, TX has the small-town feel of the Northern California communities (think Chico); friendly people; a socially liberal atmosphere (but, being Texas, still a healthy respect for 2nd amendment rights and homeowners' ability to protect their property); no state income tax; reasonable housing prices (by the standards of places that aren't Texas) and actual available tech industry jobs.
Granted, there are issues when leaving the People's Republic of Left Texas -- rumor is that the rest of the state is infested with Republicans.
your process sounds like it would work for any OS, possibly except for the windows registry.
The Registry is a big chunk of it, but there's more to it than that: In Linux, the tools for finding out what's going on under the hood (what shared libraries are used by any given application; what exactly happens at any given boot stage, including the areas before regular userland is invoked; whether any files have been modified; which specific code in which files is invoked for user authentication and login; etc) are readily available, well-documented, and understood by any sufficiently competant system administrator or systems-level programmer. In Windows, a great deal of this is off in black-box area -- folks might have some understanding from the documentation if they've read it, but the MSDN documentation isn't written by the same folks who write the code, and it's often incomplete or just plain wrong.
Also, Linux is more amenable to being worked with when booting from read-only media and mounting the primany drives unwritable: several core tools can be invoked with different base paths to run from and programs generally don't require write access to the drive unless there's a good reason for it. This too makes forensics and recovery work much easier.