More the framework than either of those. Really, the problem seems to be one of scaling to me. (as a computer person) We've got a system that was designed to elegantly run with approximately 10^ 7 or 10^8 users, and we're at 10^9 users + now. Thus our processes are all scaling badly. We're having problems with overload on certain portions, and underwork in others. When you get a system as big and complex as ours is, and resources are no longer as abundant as they were in the beginning, management of the processes and rules aligning said system becomes much more complex. This would not be that much of a problem if we were training people to be effective at designing and managing infrastructure and then electing them to office based upon the criteria of, "How good are you at making our society work well." Instead our criteria are rather.... skewed. I don't give a damn whether someone was a crackhead when they were 25. Can they make good decisions? Generally, the answer is 'No, but they have a good face for focus groups.'
And if you really look at American politics, the only people willing to take the mudwar that is a modern campaign are the most driven and focused upon a single goal. This is not necessarily the best trait in a leader of 200 million people, let alone 'the free world,' a title our President has made obsolete.
I'm so angry at the way our politics work I can't even think about it.
This information is all public- you could get info on how much your neighbors had given before the election. Everything's supposedly public, but the grouping of it all is a little hard to track. There's a website out there somewhere that has all this data mapped out.
I personally prefer this to the other option of, "Gee, Bush got 100 million last week.... wonder where that came from..."
The sense of outrage is crushed by the lack of a decent political system to accomadate it. Who's going to actually stand up to our politicians? Commies? Democrats? There are no real non-money biased political organizations out there that anyone can even remotely consider mainstream. The system is designed to stamp them out, look at the green party. And the Libertarians. And of course, look at Ross Perot. There's no room for dissent beyond the approved dissent, and we need major change, and we have no leaders because of the smear-based media. The US is lamed by its politics now instead of uplifted, because we've become so shallow.
Hand me one too. Make sure it's not a Bud, though, I just can't stand that piss-weak stuff. It's nowhere near as fast as a good northwestern Imperial Stout, either.
Who says he won't? He does, but then the cash cow will slow its moo'ing for him again in another five, ten years and he'll just build the rest of them.
I wouldn't mind if he'd let Spielberg direct one. Or them all. Or just remake the entire set from scratch as actually GREAT movies.
I bet your corporation / company does more evil than they do, and has a worse way of looking at privacy than this.
Additionally, if you're going to call me a moron, you might as well not do it anonymously. Otherwise you're less than a man, not even approaching a moron.
Email contents and usage. The contents of your Gmail account also are stored and maintained on Google servers in order to provide the service. Google's computers process the information in your email for various purposes, including formatting and displaying the information to you, delivering targeted related information (such as advertisements and related links), preventing unsolicited bulk email (spam), backing up your email, and other purposes relating to offering you Gmail. Because we keep back-up copies of data for the purposes of recovery from errors or system failure, residual copies of email may remain on our systems for some time, even after you have deleted messages from your mailbox or after the termination of your account. Google employees do not access the content of any mailboxes unless you specifically request them to do so (for example, if you are having technical difficulties accessing your account) or if required by law, to maintain our system, or to protect Google or the public.
Why feel guilty? It's a good database, with a pile of space. You're going to forget, your hard drive is going to die, your house is going to burn down with all your notes inside, you're going to get fired. What's left? Your Hotmail account, your Gmail account. I pay 20$ a year for virtually infinite data storage with incredible reliability. With Gmail, I get it for free. I pass e-mail between the two for redundancy and as a result the only thing that will kill all my data is an apocalypse or massive economic failure.
Trainspotting. Renton and Tommy. Renton, the heroin addict, and tommy the good little athlete boy that ends up worse off than he is. It's one of the blackest movies ever done, and the book was better.:>
"The zealots moan about it but do nothing so 2 years later when politics interfere there is still no superior OSS alternative, let alone a comparable one"
The tone of this statement makes it a troll. Whether you care or not, the very fact that this software was proprietary made it less useful in this case, because there were people who did not want to be locked into a particular type of situation.
You've missed my point that the very development of a viable alternative is the thing that broke the whole BitKeeper phenomenon apart.
Uh... the zealot (Tridgell) DID do something about it, and the proprietary software kings bitched and moaned, and now there is change and a new tool.
Just a correction to your trolling. You're right BitKeeper was more feature-rich, but they also tried to preserve their monopoly on knowledge management and that is really what started the debate.
The real problem with this kind of comparison is that versioning is black-and-white inbetween OSS and proprietary. OSS comes out with a new version once a week to incorporate all the bugfixes, while proprietary software aggregates them into many more patches. This doesn't seem like a big difference, but when it comes down to it a customer can write a large piece new version for OSS out of self-interest and have its fixes published to all other users of said software. This will be quite a bit rarer than Non-OSS. There are a lot of fringe benefits to this type of development.
Commercial quality software is getting better, though. People are expecting more. Look at OSX, it's higher quality than ever before, and I'd say that XP probably beats out 3.1. Game implementation HAS to be close to flawless these days, and installs are much more effective than they have been.
Regardless, I'm rooting for OSS to become a more accepted business model.
Meh. I've started doing yoga, I'm surrounded by women and they're all open to talking after class. Additionally, I'm redistributing the stretch mark-causing fat I got programming (gaming, really) throughout my earlier life. Thus, The 'appearance' card doesn't quite cut it for me....
Down with ties. In summation. I want to staple one end of mine to the ceiling.
Tridge's development was not useless. This way they can read the logs and old source and changes, which is quite a necessary part of the entire process. One might be willing to say vital.
Suits are coming back to the geek community. There are programmers where I work wearing suits, and I'm almost a geek. Some people don't wear them, but as people get more and more competitive, they will wear more suits. As more suits are worn, the more they come back.
Heh. Does this look like a prettier version of MS's printer admin stuff to anyone else?
The thing that's missing is seamless functionality and implementation, as usual. Coding cool stuff and coding pretty, highly portable stuff are two different things, and it's hard to get people to do one for free.
Meh. If there are 'commies' in America, they're more likely to read Slashdot. Slashdotters fit (as I remember) the general characteristics of communists: Privelidged, intelligent, well-meaning people with a slightly skewed and/or idealistic and/or innocent view of the way the world works.
I personally am a bit of a Marxist, and become more of one everytime I read about Enron or WorldCom or Microsoft or George W. Bush. I apologize if that offends your sense of Americanism. I also eat French Fries.
Point is, though, Marx would (IMHO) say that Europe is very much closer to what he thought was a logical society than Soviet Russia ever really was.... He definitely put a limitation on how much development a country needed to start down the road of socialism. (a ruined word)
America, well, I would say he'd call America approaching the bottom of its swing into totalitarianism of the wealthy. The New Yorker had a cartoon of one businessman talking to another saying, "This is the best time for consolidation since Feudalism," a few months ago.
The country I'd guess might make it to a supportable, non-militaristic, non-dictatorship, Socialist style state first would be India..... However, since I've always been idealistic and uneducated about an entire half of the world, I'm willing to say that I'm an idiot to expect that and know for sure that I'm avoiding educating myself on it for a reason.
Socialists were never stupid, just ignorant. Reading the literature of the time (Wright, Sinclair, Orwell, etc) shows some of the most interesting people of a generation captured by an ideal and disillusioned by a system....
Open Source Software leading to social systems changing is an interesting development in culture but hardly surprising considering that the cream of the privileged and intelligent in the Gen X and Y generations all were drawn to computers as youth, and OS is in some ways a more technically efficient way to run systems that everyone uses than what we use now.
Politics is changing because of our technology, just look at MoveOn and SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth. (commentary reserved here)
They're just toying with you while they steal all your credit records. They've looked up your IP, hacked into your ISP to get your credit card numbers, looked those up and found your SSN, applied for more with that and found your bank account numbers in your credit report, and are just waiting for you to make enough to make all their hard work worth it.
Rambus made some of the best product out there for a little while, and the hate around here for their product was quite visceral because of their rather shady tactics. Lots of companies make good products but then piss off their users.
EX: I dislike Microsoft quite a bit for various reasons, but I still love their natural keyboards. They're wonderful and make my poor computer-abused wrists happy.
So my love of good products is not complete. There are other considerations in my loving a company or a product.
I would guess that there have been other search engines that have had something like the same ideals, but only because they were unable to sell it at the time. My memory defeats me on WHICH search engines they were, but someone around here probably coded the things, so they might take offense to this type of comment.
Google became popular pretty quick and gets a lot of PR, but search HAS been around forever and the question in my mind is whether or not there have been other engines that were pushed out of the 'not being evil' market by them in the past. I'd guess yes, but they were already destined to die off for other reasons.
What's interesting about the level of 'google love' around here is that it is counter to the standard approach to any large company... Is this massively effective PR combined with a fit for compatibility, or is the compatibility manufactured? Google strikes me as a company run by very smart people, and having the nerds on your side when you run a large piece of the computer world seems like one of the more 'duh' ideas in history....
New toys have cost this much in the past, and then become cheaper over time. Just like anything else in this industry, really.
AMD seems to be aiming at a different market - 2k is not that much for a server that can handle the web hits their new chips should be able to...... if they can get their reliability up with Intel's....
Slashdot Mirror
More the framework than either of those. Really, the problem seems to be one of scaling to me. (as a computer person) We've got a system that was designed to elegantly run with approximately 10^ 7 or 10^8 users, and we're at 10^9 users + now. Thus our processes are all scaling badly. We're having problems with overload on certain portions, and underwork in others. When you get a system as big and complex as ours is, and resources are no longer as abundant as they were in the beginning, management of the processes and rules aligning said system becomes much more complex. This would not be that much of a problem if we were training people to be effective at designing and managing infrastructure and then electing them to office based upon the criteria of, "How good are you at making our society work well." Instead our criteria are rather.... skewed. I don't give a damn whether someone was a crackhead when they were 25. Can they make good decisions? Generally, the answer is 'No, but they have a good face for focus groups.'
And if you really look at American politics, the only people willing to take the mudwar that is a modern campaign are the most driven and focused upon a single goal. This is not necessarily the best trait in a leader of 200 million people, let alone 'the free world,' a title our President has made obsolete.
I'm so angry at the way our politics work I can't even think about it.
This information is all public- you could get info on how much your neighbors had given before the election. Everything's supposedly public, but the grouping of it all is a little hard to track. There's a website out there somewhere that has all this data mapped out.
I personally prefer this to the other option of, "Gee, Bush got 100 million last week.... wonder where that came from..."
The sense of outrage is crushed by the lack of a decent political system to accomadate it. Who's going to actually stand up to our politicians? Commies? Democrats? There are no real non-money biased political organizations out there that anyone can even remotely consider mainstream. The system is designed to stamp them out, look at the green party. And the Libertarians. And of course, look at Ross Perot. There's no room for dissent beyond the approved dissent, and we need major change, and we have no leaders because of the smear-based media. The US is lamed by its politics now instead of uplifted, because we've become so shallow.
Hand me one too. Make sure it's not a Bud, though, I just can't stand that piss-weak stuff. It's nowhere near as fast as a good northwestern Imperial Stout, either.
Who says he won't? He does, but then the cash cow will slow its moo'ing for him again in another five, ten years and he'll just build the rest of them.
I wouldn't mind if he'd let Spielberg direct one. Or them all. Or just remake the entire set from scratch as actually GREAT movies.
Really? The number I got on Wikipedia was 25... 20 terrabytes of data =~ LoC
I bet your corporation / company does more evil than they do, and has a worse way of looking at privacy than this.
Additionally, if you're going to call me a moron, you might as well not do it anonymously. Otherwise you're less than a man, not even approaching a moron.
Email contents and usage. The contents of your Gmail account also are stored and maintained on Google servers in order to provide the service. Google's computers process the information in your email for various purposes, including formatting and displaying the information to you, delivering targeted related information (such as advertisements and related links), preventing unsolicited bulk email (spam), backing up your email, and other purposes relating to offering you Gmail. Because we keep back-up copies of data for the purposes of recovery from errors or system failure, residual copies of email may remain on our systems for some time, even after you have deleted messages from your mailbox or after the termination of your account. Google employees do not access the content of any mailboxes unless you specifically request them to do so (for example, if you are having technical difficulties accessing your account) or if required by law, to maintain our system, or to protect Google or the public.
Why feel guilty? It's a good database, with a pile of space. You're going to forget, your hard drive is going to die, your house is going to burn down with all your notes inside, you're going to get fired. What's left? Your Hotmail account, your Gmail account. I pay 20$ a year for virtually infinite data storage with incredible reliability. With Gmail, I get it for free. I pass e-mail between the two for redundancy and as a result the only thing that will kill all my data is an apocalypse or massive economic failure.
Trainspotting. Renton and Tommy. Renton, the heroin addict, and tommy the good little athlete boy that ends up worse off than he is. It's one of the blackest movies ever done, and the book was better. :>
doesn't this imply that MS Office is actually HARDER to use than OO.o?
Causing that kind of media frenzy about how they were right once fourty years ago is priceless. Great job on some PR firm's part.
"The zealots moan about it but do nothing so 2 years later when politics interfere there is still no superior OSS alternative, let alone a comparable one"
The tone of this statement makes it a troll. Whether you care or not, the very fact that this software was proprietary made it less useful in this case, because there were people who did not want to be locked into a particular type of situation.
You've missed my point that the very development of a viable alternative is the thing that broke the whole BitKeeper phenomenon apart.
Uh... the zealot (Tridgell) DID do something about it, and the proprietary software kings bitched and moaned, and now there is change and a new tool.
Just a correction to your trolling. You're right BitKeeper was more feature-rich, but they also tried to preserve their monopoly on knowledge management and that is really what started the debate.
The real problem with this kind of comparison is that versioning is black-and-white inbetween OSS and proprietary. OSS comes out with a new version once a week to incorporate all the bugfixes, while proprietary software aggregates them into many more patches. This doesn't seem like a big difference, but when it comes down to it a customer can write a large piece new version for OSS out of self-interest and have its fixes published to all other users of said software. This will be quite a bit rarer than Non-OSS. There are a lot of fringe benefits to this type of development.
Commercial quality software is getting better, though. People are expecting more. Look at OSX, it's higher quality than ever before, and I'd say that XP probably beats out 3.1. Game implementation HAS to be close to flawless these days, and installs are much more effective than they have been.
Regardless, I'm rooting for OSS to become a more accepted business model.
Meh. I've started doing yoga, I'm surrounded by women and they're all open to talking after class. Additionally, I'm redistributing the stretch mark-causing fat I got programming (gaming, really) throughout my earlier life. Thus, The 'appearance' card doesn't quite cut it for me....
Down with ties. In summation. I want to staple one end of mine to the ceiling.
Tridge's development was not useless. This way they can read the logs and old source and changes, which is quite a necessary part of the entire process. One might be willing to say vital.
Suits are coming back to the geek community. There are programmers where I work wearing suits, and I'm almost a geek. Some people don't wear them, but as people get more and more competitive, they will wear more suits. As more suits are worn, the more they come back.
I hate my tie.
Heh. I write ^&%^$& VBS code so I stare at a little printer window like this all *ing day.
Short Topic Blurb asked for dumb-wussy-user input, so I gave it to you.
Heh. Does this look like a prettier version of MS's printer admin stuff to anyone else?
The thing that's missing is seamless functionality and implementation, as usual. Coding cool stuff and coding pretty, highly portable stuff are two different things, and it's hard to get people to do one for free.
Meh. If there are 'commies' in America, they're more likely to read Slashdot. Slashdotters fit (as I remember) the general characteristics of communists: Privelidged, intelligent, well-meaning people with a slightly skewed and/or idealistic and/or innocent view of the way the world works.
I personally am a bit of a Marxist, and become more of one everytime I read about Enron or WorldCom or Microsoft or George W. Bush. I apologize if that offends your sense of Americanism. I also eat French Fries.
Point is, though, Marx would (IMHO) say that Europe is very much closer to what he thought was a logical society than Soviet Russia ever really was.... He definitely put a limitation on how much development a country needed to start down the road of socialism. (a ruined word)
America, well, I would say he'd call America approaching the bottom of its swing into totalitarianism of the wealthy. The New Yorker had a cartoon of one businessman talking to another saying, "This is the best time for consolidation since Feudalism," a few months ago.
The country I'd guess might make it to a supportable, non-militaristic, non-dictatorship, Socialist style state first would be India..... However, since I've always been idealistic and uneducated about an entire half of the world, I'm willing to say that I'm an idiot to expect that and know for sure that I'm avoiding educating myself on it for a reason.
Socialists were never stupid, just ignorant. Reading the literature of the time (Wright, Sinclair, Orwell, etc) shows some of the most interesting people of a generation captured by an ideal and disillusioned by a system....
Open Source Software leading to social systems changing is an interesting development in culture but hardly surprising considering that the cream of the privileged and intelligent in the Gen X and Y generations all were drawn to computers as youth, and OS is in some ways a more technically efficient way to run systems that everyone uses than what we use now.
Politics is changing because of our technology, just look at MoveOn and SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth. (commentary reserved here)
They're just toying with you while they steal all your credit records. They've looked up your IP, hacked into your ISP to get your credit card numbers, looked those up and found your SSN, applied for more with that and found your bank account numbers in your credit report, and are just waiting for you to make enough to make all their hard work worth it.
:>
Not EXACTLY true.
Rambus made some of the best product out there for a little while, and the hate around here for their product was quite visceral because of their rather shady tactics. Lots of companies make good products but then piss off their users.
EX: I dislike Microsoft quite a bit for various reasons, but I still love their natural keyboards. They're wonderful and make my poor computer-abused wrists happy.
So my love of good products is not complete. There are other considerations in my loving a company or a product.
I would guess that there have been other search engines that have had something like the same ideals, but only because they were unable to sell it at the time. My memory defeats me on WHICH search engines they were, but someone around here probably coded the things, so they might take offense to this type of comment.
Google became popular pretty quick and gets a lot of PR, but search HAS been around forever and the question in my mind is whether or not there have been other engines that were pushed out of the 'not being evil' market by them in the past. I'd guess yes, but they were already destined to die off for other reasons.
What's interesting about the level of 'google love' around here is that it is counter to the standard approach to any large company... Is this massively effective PR combined with a fit for compatibility, or is the compatibility manufactured? Google strikes me as a company run by very smart people, and having the nerds on your side when you run a large piece of the computer world seems like one of the more 'duh' ideas in history....
New toys have cost this much in the past, and then become cheaper over time. Just like anything else in this industry, really.
AMD seems to be aiming at a different market - 2k is not that much for a server that can handle the web hits their new chips should be able to...... if they can get their reliability up with Intel's....
Gotta love the first 3/5 comments I could see mentioning that Google did something like it too.
But none of this is a 'first' thing - I mean, it's just a more advanced version of a tool that has existed since the beginning of my time - grep.
I'm amazed to not see it in the blurb, considering the love affair with Google. I know it works better than 'find' for me.