Showing my age, I saw the title and flashed on a port to the really *big* iron. Consoles, eh? You kids don't even know you're alive! Games should be printed out in EBCDIC after showing in green screen. And get off my damn lawn!
Well, by that argument, why not release the chip spec to the FOSS community and close the firmware office? Save a bundle on personnel costs, gain access to the *entire* computing market instead of locking into the (shrinking) Windows segment, score points with the geeks who recommend corporate purchases . . .
The earlier pre-releases had major bitness issues on my Mandrake 10.1 x86-64 machine, but rc3 and now 1.0 work fine. You do need to specify paths for Qt libs and includes, but that's probably a Mandrake thing. I'm looking forward to using it to create vocal part CD's for my various choirs. The notation output to Lilypond will also get my attention: think individual voices on a vocal score highlighted to match the midi/audio output.
A great package with wonderfully helpful developers: mad props to Chris, Richard and Guillaume!
It seems to me the scientician, no less than the religious, relies heavily on the reports of others, to the point of excercising the same faith they deride.
You accept a scientific theory because it explains observation; surely religious faith explains observations as well. Because these observations aren't necessarily subject to verification in a laboratory in no way implies that the fit between observation and explanation is any less effective.
The clash between the scientician and the spiritist comes when they try to conflate the two world views: each explains but in different terms and from different assumptions.
Finally, I think you will find that an atheist, at least originally, was by definition one who believes there is NO god. Atheism has since been watered down to encompass strong and weak forms; the weak atheism is hard to separate from agnosticism, which explicitly doesn't know. Strong atheists not only lack the belief in a deity, but also actively believe there is no deity. Given that, even in the scientific world-view, it is to all intents and purposes impossible to prove a negative, the assertion "There is no deity" requires as much faith as "There is a deity" and of exactly the same kind.
Rather ironically, you seem to be rejecting the basis of the Scientific Method, in that under the SM, an investigator makes observations presumably "wondering why", then formulates a hypothesis and attempts to test it. Some hypotheses are more readily tested than others, of course, but in general, the process leads to a Theory. The whole process is theoretically (!) open to scrutiny by other interested scienticians and in due course, results are reported.
The irony comes in when the second level of individuals are involved, those who have participated neither in the research nor in the challenge: many of us accept pretty much without question concepts like a GUT, string theory, blazars and I suppose, the dark side of the moon. We do so without the empirical evidence you seem to require, placing reliance on the reports of others. This is logically indistinguishable from the act of faith you decry. This faith takes the form of beliefs "which actually answer questions they claim to", as an example, the one about conservation of angular momentum explaining planetary orbits.
I think you are being a bit dogmatic in rejecting any and all forms of belief unless it is acknowledged to be false: that stance requires that all belief be insane, even as you state it in exactly the same terms of faith as those you protest.
Atheists are no less guided by faith than the spiritual folk they deride, it's just that their faith is selective: some forms of faith are acceptable, others are not. At least the spiritual stance is more open, and hence more honest.
I've scavenged a couple of analog VU meters from an old tape deck, and I'm thinking of mounting them in a walnut case for that Victoriam elegance, and hooking them up to the HDD activity light and the NIC activity light in my main box. They need a suitably sized resistor in series to drop the voltage down to a useful range, but that shouldn't be hard.
My other project is to take my firewall machine (PII-233 vintage) and mount the essentials inside an old Heathkit tuner case. I'll then connect it into my stereo and rip my CD collection onto it, controlling it by VNC or some such from the main box.
... that this site is a wonderfully clever troll? Once you get past the notion that anyone could possibly be serious about Eigenmusic, satire is all that makes sense. A tip of the hat to the creators!
Without meaning to offend intrinsicchaos, this post perfectly illustrates the problem: to many people, the GUI is the OS, the two are inseparable: Linux is seen not as one OS with a variety of pretty faces, but as a variety of intrinsically chaotic OSes. The original article makes a related point: that the GUI has two aspects. One is the eye candy shown to users and the other is the API exposed to programs which use the GUI. The real need for standardisation is on the API side, not particularly the visible one. Regrettably, users and enthusastic advocates focus on the visible and hence the GUI flamewars. Intrinsicchaos is stating the article's point (let there be a standard API) from a user's point of view (let there be a standard appearance).
But in baltimore they go for the Natty Boh. I don't even like cheap bear anymore
So, how many beer does it take for you to make a run at this bear? And let's not get into the speculation about gender! I guess if it's cheap, though . . .
Central to the problem is the fact that the majority of management decisions are driven by dollars, which are the easiest way to keep score. It's very difficult to put customer satisfaction on a P&L, while an increase in sales from a Q&D solution is easily visible. It's tempting to favour the decision which produces the most easily measured result. The difference between Q&D and C&P is the balance between more cash now with the risk of increased expense vs more expense now with the probability of lower but sustained cash to follow. As many posters have said, each business makes the decision differently, according to corporate style, immediate cash-flow needs, available talent and so forth.
ISTR that one of the forces operating at the time was that the state was no longer able to control the information available to individuals, who were increasingly aware of the gap between what amounted to desinformatsiya and the truth.
Re:Interesting, but some methodological holes
on
Addicted to Information?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
ISTM the emphasis might be a bit backwards: the addiction to information is more a symptom than a cause of ADD. I have ADD and have had since the 50's , when there was only one TV channel. I read voraciously, usually several books at once and could never stay focussed at school. The availability of all these new channels of information only provides new sources of distraction. It is entirely possible that real ADD, the lack of ability to control the focus of attention, might be more prevalent that suspected.
Depends, I guess, on what you think a "right" might be. I agree completely that the term is far too loosely thrown around these days; any self-identified group with a grievance gets the attention of your political whores by asserting "rights". OTOH, a government willing to assert that, regardless of natural law, citizens in Estonia have the fundamental right of access to information and communication, is a rare example of enlightenment in the political arena. Consider that one of the causes of the downfall of the Soviet regime was access to the Internet, with the consequent free exchange of information and ideas.
You should have a look at this which is a calendar add-in for Mozilla. It produces shareable calendars as well. I have used it solo and quite liked it. Earlier experience with it was quite favourable, though I've had to move onto the company mandated app.
Just finished a technothriller (hey, even brain cells need a rest!) by R.J. Pineiro, called "CyberTerror". One of the main plot elements involved hacking the maintenance database at Boeing, such that malware was stealthily distributed with the auto apdate feature of the maintenance computers in the field. The result was a plane which crashed into a city, having completely over-ridden human control. I agree with the article that fly-by-wire technology is a two-edged sword, but ISTM the hack-protection needs to be at a deeper level in the system as well as just in the cockpit.
Slashdot Mirror
Showing my age, I saw the title and flashed on a port to the really *big* iron. Consoles, eh? You kids don't even know you're alive! Games should be printed out in EBCDIC after showing in green screen. And get off my damn lawn!
Well, by that argument, why not release the chip spec to the FOSS community and close the firmware office? Save a bundle on personnel costs, gain access to the *entire* computing market instead of locking into the (shrinking) Windows segment, score points with the geeks who recommend corporate purchases . . .
But won't someone please think of the children! Seriously, though, that upgrade path marks you as one sick puppy. My respects, sir, and my admiration.
Catalyzing DHMO into its components . . .
A delightful bit of irony, in the way your .sig reflects the theme of the more reasoned comments here.
The earlier pre-releases had major bitness issues on my Mandrake 10.1 x86-64 machine, but rc3 and now 1.0 work fine. You do need to specify paths for Qt libs and includes, but that's probably a Mandrake thing. I'm looking forward to using it to create vocal part CD's for my various choirs. The notation output to Lilypond will also get my attention: think individual voices on a vocal score highlighted to match the midi/audio output. A great package with wonderfully helpful developers: mad props to Chris, Richard and Guillaume!
It seems to me the scientician, no less than the religious, relies heavily on the reports of others, to the point of excercising the same faith they deride. You accept a scientific theory because it explains observation; surely religious faith explains observations as well. Because these observations aren't necessarily subject to verification in a laboratory in no way implies that the fit between observation and explanation is any less effective. The clash between the scientician and the spiritist comes when they try to conflate the two world views: each explains but in different terms and from different assumptions. Finally, I think you will find that an atheist, at least originally, was by definition one who believes there is NO god. Atheism has since been watered down to encompass strong and weak forms; the weak atheism is hard to separate from agnosticism, which explicitly doesn't know. Strong atheists not only lack the belief in a deity, but also actively believe there is no deity. Given that, even in the scientific world-view, it is to all intents and purposes impossible to prove a negative, the assertion "There is no deity" requires as much faith as "There is a deity" and of exactly the same kind.
Rather ironically, you seem to be rejecting the basis of the Scientific Method, in that under the SM, an investigator makes observations presumably "wondering why", then formulates a hypothesis and attempts to test it. Some hypotheses are more readily tested than others, of course, but in general, the process leads to a Theory. The whole process is theoretically (!) open to scrutiny by other interested scienticians and in due course, results are reported. The irony comes in when the second level of individuals are involved, those who have participated neither in the research nor in the challenge: many of us accept pretty much without question concepts like a GUT, string theory, blazars and I suppose, the dark side of the moon. We do so without the empirical evidence you seem to require, placing reliance on the reports of others. This is logically indistinguishable from the act of faith you decry. This faith takes the form of beliefs "which actually answer questions they claim to", as an example, the one about conservation of angular momentum explaining planetary orbits. I think you are being a bit dogmatic in rejecting any and all forms of belief unless it is acknowledged to be false: that stance requires that all belief be insane, even as you state it in exactly the same terms of faith as those you protest. Atheists are no less guided by faith than the spiritual folk they deride, it's just that their faith is selective: some forms of faith are acceptable, others are not. At least the spiritual stance is more open, and hence more honest.
I've scavenged a couple of analog VU meters from an old tape deck, and I'm thinking of mounting them in a walnut case for that Victoriam elegance, and hooking them up to the HDD activity light and the NIC activity light in my main box. They need a suitably sized resistor in series to drop the voltage down to a useful range, but that shouldn't be hard. My other project is to take my firewall machine (PII-233 vintage) and mount the essentials inside an old Heathkit tuner case. I'll then connect it into my stereo and rip my CD collection onto it, controlling it by VNC or some such from the main box.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this chap
I don't know whether to be saddened or amused by a /. reader having the WWN bookmarked.
Y'know, for just a second, I read that as "the IP od others bard work".
Well, I suppose that lox up the fish jokes!
Surely it would be a beowoof cluster?
... that this site is a wonderfully clever troll? Once you get past the notion that anyone could possibly be serious about Eigenmusic, satire is all that makes sense. A tip of the hat to the creators!
Without meaning to offend intrinsicchaos, this post perfectly illustrates the problem: to many people, the GUI is the OS, the two are inseparable: Linux is seen not as one OS with a variety of pretty faces, but as a variety of intrinsically chaotic OSes. The original article makes a related point: that the GUI has two aspects. One is the eye candy shown to users and the other is the API exposed to programs which use the GUI. The real need for standardisation is on the API side, not particularly the visible one. Regrettably, users and enthusastic advocates focus on the visible and hence the GUI flamewars. Intrinsicchaos is stating the article's point (let there be a standard API) from a user's point of view (let there be a standard appearance).
The good old fashioned way is best! After all, "spare the rod, spoil the child"!
Central to the problem is the fact that the majority of management decisions are driven by dollars, which are the easiest way to keep score. It's very difficult to put customer satisfaction on a P&L, while an increase in sales from a Q&D solution is easily visible. It's tempting to favour the decision which produces the most easily measured result. The difference between Q&D and C&P is the balance between more cash now with the risk of increased expense vs more expense now with the probability of lower but sustained cash to follow. As many posters have said, each business makes the decision differently, according to corporate style, immediate cash-flow needs, available talent and so forth.
ISTR that one of the forces operating at the time was that the state was no longer able to control the information available to individuals, who were increasingly aware of the gap between what amounted to desinformatsiya and the truth.
ISTM the emphasis might be a bit backwards: the addiction to information is more a symptom than a cause of ADD. I have ADD and have had since the 50's , when there was only one TV channel. I read voraciously, usually several books at once and could never stay focussed at school. The availability of all these new channels of information only provides new sources of distraction. It is entirely possible that real ADD, the lack of ability to control the focus of attention, might be more prevalent that suspected.
Depends, I guess, on what you think a "right" might be. I agree completely that the term is far too loosely thrown around these days; any self-identified group with a grievance gets the attention of your political whores by asserting "rights". OTOH, a government willing to assert that, regardless of natural law, citizens in Estonia have the fundamental right of access to information and communication, is a rare example of enlightenment in the political arena. Consider that one of the causes of the downfall of the Soviet regime was access to the Internet, with the consequent free exchange of information and ideas.
Well, a neighbour has a bike made, s'welp me, by the "Dae Yung Bicycle Co." ISTM, technology might have gone a bit far!
You should have a look at this which is a calendar add-in for Mozilla. It produces shareable calendars as well. I have used it solo and quite liked it. Earlier experience with it was quite favourable, though I've had to move onto the company mandated app.
Just finished a technothriller (hey, even brain cells need a rest!) by R.J. Pineiro, called "CyberTerror". One of the main plot elements involved hacking the maintenance database at Boeing, such that malware was stealthily distributed with the auto apdate feature of the maintenance computers in the field. The result was a plane which crashed into a city, having completely over-ridden human control. I agree with the article that fly-by-wire technology is a two-edged sword, but ISTM the hack-protection needs to be at a deeper level in the system as well as just in the cockpit.