Rule #1: doesn't matter how fast you output a security update, if it's not being installed.
Rule #2: Security updates tend not to be installed if they break things.
With MS, the cure was often worse than the disease. Also, this is one benefit of Firefox being a product the user has to go and get - if they can find Firefox once, they can probably go find it again. Firefox update helps too.
Long distance service got cheaper. Since I rarely call anyone outside of my city, that's not much of a benefit for me.
It's a benefit for a lot of people.
Equipment got cheaper, since you could then provide your own (no reason why this couldn't have been done pre-breakup, in fact I often did so though it was technically forbidden).
Mainly because, since it was forbidden, no one sold it?
WE knew what it cost to send a guy with a truck to fix your phone, so they built (expensive) phones that wouldn't break over a 20 or 30 year lifetime. Nowdays all the phones are cheap crap that you're lucky if it lasts a year.
I see no proof that current phones don't last a while. And the old phones lasted forever because they were big, analog, featureless pieces of shit.
Actually, they work reasonably well in most places, in spite of politicians who pander for votes by promising to cut the taxes for their rich buddies. Public education tends to be underfunded, not because it wastes money teaching, but because the pols keep dumping additional social-service-agency jobs and requirements onto the schools without providing funding to cover the costs (e.g. the misnamed "No Child Left Behind" law that fails to provide funding for the mandates it requires).
No idea where you live, but if it's in the US and local schools are nice where you live it's because you're rich, plain and simple. That's not the case for most Americans.
Just my opinion , but i don't like infrastructes such as water,power , telephone lines and hospitals privatised . It has never reduced costs as they had said(well gave the reason as to why they did it) The trains are worse and more expensive than ever and telephone line costs have gone up.
Telephone in the US got cheaper when the Bells were broken up, especially for equipment. And as far as social services, we in the US have a somewhat different set of challenges, so things like compulsory public education and public hospitals almost never work.
Erm, no. The claims were not true. You can tell by the way that it was written.
That's basically my point. The claims I was referring to were our claims of Maureen's bias, which we all knew were probably true, but which came off as ad hominem attacks. Now we have a "smoking gun" that is as near to irrefutable as possible.
First, thanks for doing that, I assume you showered afterward.
Second, this actually a very good thing. Previously, whenever people would claim she wasn't professional, it sounded mildly of whining and an ad hominem attack intended to discredit the reporter. Even though the claims were probably true.
Now, one need only point to this article, which is absolute filth, and clearly betrays something substantially beyond bias.
I presume that every Linux user here understands that BSODs are usually caused by driver bugs, rather than OS bugs? The reason 2K and XP have fewer BSODs is largely due to the Windows Driver validation that Microsoft do now. You can still make any PC BSOD just by finding all the bugs in the nVidia or ATi drivers, though:)
Horseshit. Unless that hardware also includes "memory" which win9X wasn't good at "protecting," for instance.
Only you can decide what is and is not important to you. At this point, he's made it clear he considers it okay to withhold your paycheck. I can't tell if it's a bluff, or if he's serious (from what little we have here), but be aware that he is likely holding it hostage. Normally a boss thinks he has control becasue he can fire someone or stop paying them. With only a short time left, he feels he can no longer control you, so he's using that paycheck as his way to make sure you stay in line.
Whatever he thinks, it's not OK to withhold the check for work performed. If he's slandering an employee and ultimately follows through on the threat to withhold pay, lawyer up and contact the company's legal department, and see how fast they capitulate.
The police here don't actually do hard stuff like going after burglars and muggers, it's too much work and it's not sexy and it may be dangerous to them.
Instead, they spend their time hanging out on motorways fining speeders despite modern cars running like on rails at our speed limit.
Wow. Has the US been outsourcing our cops? That sounds pretty familiar...
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
What about D, the cost of the public relations nightmare when your car is called the "New Pinto?"
(Note: I am of course, assuming that we're talking about the very common case of a contribution to an existing project. If you create a whole huge public project on your own when your employment contract forbids it, then you're just insanely stupid.)
Oh, well that does make a difference. I'll confess I thought you were out of your mind.;) Presumably if the company is involved with using OSS already they know what the GPL is, but I do realize that it doesn't always work that way.
I agree with you that I may have underemphasised just how badly you can hurt yourself through such actions.
Heh! Note to 23 year olds in your first jobs: GPL'ing the company's IP will get you fuX0r3d.
In biology class, one of the things you learn is that plants have the most energy-to-size ratio (i forget the actual term). Then you have the primary group of animals (cows, rabbits, anything that eats plants), then the first tier of carnivores (animals that eat the plant eaters), then you have another tier that eats the first tier of carnivores (us, generally).
That's not quite how it works. Plants have to photosynthesize enough to grow and maintain "operations," herbivores have to eat enough plants to grow and maintain "operations," etc. Eventually a top predator is ultimately eating a lot of plants more because there are a lot of middlemen.
As you go up the food chain, you get less energy from the meat.
There's generally more energy in meat, and it's denser so you spend a lot less time eating meat calories. Of course, finding and killing that meat is a different story. I expect the answer to our question is one of relative scarcity or competitive ability - perhaps a different predator took away the market?
But it's not one of energy density, most definitely.
First of all, in many cases, it doesn't matter. The license is more important than the name on the copyright. If your work is based on, say, GPL'd code, then even if the company does own your work, it doesn't matter, because their only choices are to release it under the GPL, or simply supress it.
GPL doesn't apply to something you don't have the right to contribute, so that's not going to work. And if you do release company IP under GPL, they can sue you into the stone age and they'll win.
Second, it's easy to write in exceptions to those contracts. The last one I signed even had a place for you to list previously existing projects that were yours, not the company's. I wrote in "Debian GNU/Linux",
That's they way. Actually, in some states, companies can't claim things you develop on your own time that aren't related to your work. Any stipulation in a contract is invalid. California I believe works that way.
Zonk posts a story from a submitter that wrote the page being submitted for the story, who, as it turns out, blatantly plagarized the content from Bryant and O'Hallaron's Computer Systems book.
If you RTFA, they aren't trying to remove evolution from the curriculum at all. They just want all views to be allowed to coexist. There's absolutely nothing wrong with teaching both sides of a controversy.
Yes there is. Teaching creationism as fact or even an alternate viewpoint has absolutely no place in a science class. If you want to teach creationism in a religion class, and represent a broad spectrum of religions, fine. Or if you have a parochial school, you can teach your little nuts that the world is 4000 years old. But not in a public school.
As for the "both sides," I think other religions would see this as a multi-sided coin, or maybe a D20 for the DD freaks here. I think the Vikings would be offended that the possibility has been left out of mankind being created from a cow licking a salty ice-block.
Corporations did not originally have the rights of persons nor did the founding fathers intend for it to be this way.
You have a Ouija board? How the hell do you know?
Nothing more pompous than the whole "Founding fathers didn't intend..." crap. Founding fathers didn't intend basically anything about our society. They didn't intend for blacks and women to vote either, so I don't see what relevance their opinions have on matters for which they are over 200 years out of date.
But corporations were not intended to have the rights of individuals. That legal fiction in the US is a perversion.
Don't know where to start parsing that completely inconsistent statement. 1. Corporations do have most of the rights of individuals legally, so you have the "legal" part right. So 2) that pretty much rules out the fiction part. 3) As for the "intended" part, the question is "by whom?" By your own admission this is a law on the books in the US, and it's not "bench legislation," so it's clear that lawmakers intended it.
So corporations are intended to have rights of individuals, it's legal, not a fiction, and you've basically just passed your opinion as fact and the slashbot mod Borg rewarded you with a +5. Congrats.
He NEVER said he invented the internet. He is just as responsible for creating the internet as Lee, DARPA, or anyone else.
1. Tell me how creating in his usage isn't inventing. What portion of the internet did he "create" exactly? Does he mean he was in office while other people helped further the internet?
2. To say he had as much influence on the internet as DARPA is an unmitigated joke. What did he do? If any politician is responsible indircetly for the internet it's Eisenhower for making (D)ARPA.
That would certainly let schrodinger's cat out of the bag!
Or at least half of it.
INtegrated google world.
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Google O/S (linux/bsd), running Google Office (OpenOffice), with free integration with webservices (Google Maps, Google Groups, Google Mail, Picasa) that have unlimited usage/storage.
Yep. And the funny thing is that Google has a real chance to do what MS has been trying to ram down people's throats for years - namely, "sell" web-based applications. Difference is google would rather just put inobtrusive ads on your workspace, while MS wants you to subscribe. Easier and cheaper always win.
The other thing is the potential to integrate all your communication and work tools. Imagine better collaboration, documentation, and email sofware seamlessly integrated. Guarantee you Google's already working on it. How MS has avoided making Outlook better I have no idea. Guess it's that whole monopoly thing, they don't have to.
The question is how and when they roll out GMail. It has to be close - I use it all the time and love it. I imagine they're still refining the business model? When the public at large starts using that and realizes that it beats the crap out of everything else, and starts having their mail forwarded to their gmail accounts because it's better...google wins.
I this way, Google can jump OSS as the biggest threat to MS. Imagine people running all their apps as java apps (or similar) served by google. It's hardware-agnostic. It's OS-agnostic. Watch MS try making a TCO argument there:
MS: OK, how much is the GOffice software?
Google: It's free from google.
MS: OK, I remember this crap from the linux days. It's impossible to maintain, right?
Google: No, google maintains it. You don't even install it. You just run it.
MS: So how much does *that* cost?
Google: That's free too.
MS: So when do you pay?
Google: You don't. Advertisers do.
MS: Uh oh...
This has the potential to do in a *non-evil* way everything MS tried to do between the combined nebulous efforts of Passport and the failed part of its.Net initiative. And people will love it.
Do you think Gates is upset that google can be used to search for "firefox"? The truth is, changing out of windows would be like trying to change from gasoline to power cars- all the vehicles out there have internal combustion engines, and the infastructure to fuel them is in place- so even if we have a great alternative (biodiesel, cars that run on boogers... whatever), it would require a wholesale hardware change... The changeover period would be rough.... As much fun as it is to love to hate Microsoft, they are successful- sort of like when you make fun of some guy with a gold chain and a Firebird- sure he is an a--ho--, but he gets all the ladies....
I have no idea what that was supposed to mean. Mix in a few more metaphors and it might just make sense.
If you run testing/unstable you run fairly current software, and you're not that much further behind come the release, and at release time Sarge will be fairly representative of the "stable state of the art". It's just that in the couple of years between now and Etch, things will progress without being reflected in a stable Debian release. But come the next release, Debian will be there again.
Well, not only is there nothing wrong with it, but things called "companies" that have to "make money" don't mind having software that is a whole year out of date if it means having something actually stable. So basically by "irrelevant," people mean "irrelevant to 13 year olds." Hey, a year is like 12% of their lifespan, so it seems pretty long.
People always talk about how different "flavor of the month" linuxes are going to replace Red Hat, Suse, Debian, etc. I haven't seen it yet.
It's like a staircase with widely spaced but high steps. other distros have closer steps but they're not so high... does that makes sense? I've only had one beer.
Nah. Finish the rest of the 12 pack and get back to me. Better yet, come over my place and we'll split it.
Slashdot Mirror
Rule #2: Security updates tend not to be installed if they break things.
With MS, the cure was often worse than the disease. Also, this is one benefit of Firefox being a product the user has to go and get - if they can find Firefox once, they can probably go find it again. Firefox update helps too.
Never underestimate the power of alcohol.
It's a benefit for a lot of people.
Equipment got cheaper, since you could then provide your own (no reason why this couldn't have been done pre-breakup, in fact I often did so though it was technically forbidden).
Mainly because, since it was forbidden, no one sold it?
WE knew what it cost to send a guy with a truck to fix your phone, so they built (expensive) phones that wouldn't break over a 20 or 30 year lifetime. Nowdays all the phones are cheap crap that you're lucky if it lasts a year.
I see no proof that current phones don't last a while. And the old phones lasted forever because they were big, analog, featureless pieces of shit.
Actually, they work reasonably well in most places, in spite of politicians who pander for votes by promising to cut the taxes for their rich buddies. Public education tends to be underfunded, not because it wastes money teaching, but because the pols keep dumping additional social-service-agency jobs and requirements onto the schools without providing funding to cover the costs (e.g. the misnamed "No Child Left Behind" law that fails to provide funding for the mandates it requires).
No idea where you live, but if it's in the US and local schools are nice where you live it's because you're rich, plain and simple. That's not the case for most Americans.
Telephone in the US got cheaper when the Bells were broken up, especially for equipment. And as far as social services, we in the US have a somewhat different set of challenges, so things like compulsory public education and public hospitals almost never work.
That's basically my point. The claims I was referring to were our claims of Maureen's bias, which we all knew were probably true, but which came off as ad hominem attacks. Now we have a "smoking gun" that is as near to irrefutable as possible.
First, thanks for doing that, I assume you showered afterward.
Second, this actually a very good thing. Previously, whenever people would claim she wasn't professional, it sounded mildly of whining and an ad hominem attack intended to discredit the reporter. Even though the claims were probably true.
Now, one need only point to this article, which is absolute filth, and clearly betrays something substantially beyond bias.
Got fulltext? Link is nuked, and I'd rather not give them my ad revenue.
Horseshit. Unless that hardware also includes "memory" which win9X wasn't good at "protecting," for instance.
Whatever he thinks, it's not OK to withhold the check for work performed. If he's slandering an employee and ultimately follows through on the threat to withhold pay, lawyer up and contact the company's legal department, and see how fast they capitulate.
Instead, they spend their time hanging out on motorways fining speeders despite modern cars running like on rails at our speed limit.
Wow. Has the US been outsourcing our cops? That sounds pretty familiar...
What about D, the cost of the public relations nightmare when your car is called the "New Pinto?"
Oh, well that does make a difference. I'll confess I thought you were out of your mind. ;) Presumably if the company is involved with using OSS already they know what the GPL is, but I do realize that it doesn't always work that way.
I agree with you that I may have underemphasised just how badly you can hurt yourself through such actions.
Heh! Note to 23 year olds in your first jobs: GPL'ing the company's IP will get you fuX0r3d.
That's not quite how it works. Plants have to photosynthesize enough to grow and maintain "operations," herbivores have to eat enough plants to grow and maintain "operations," etc. Eventually a top predator is ultimately eating a lot of plants more because there are a lot of middlemen.
As you go up the food chain, you get less energy from the meat.
There's generally more energy in meat, and it's denser so you spend a lot less time eating meat calories. Of course, finding and killing that meat is a different story. I expect the answer to our question is one of relative scarcity or competitive ability - perhaps a different predator took away the market?
But it's not one of energy density, most definitely.
GPL doesn't apply to something you don't have the right to contribute, so that's not going to work. And if you do release company IP under GPL, they can sue you into the stone age and they'll win.
Second, it's easy to write in exceptions to those contracts. The last one I signed even had a place for you to list previously existing projects that were yours, not the company's. I wrote in "Debian GNU/Linux",
That's they way. Actually, in some states, companies can't claim things you develop on your own time that aren't related to your work. Any stipulation in a contract is invalid. California I believe works that way.
The submitter's full name is Adam Piquepaille.
Yes there is. Teaching creationism as fact or even an alternate viewpoint has absolutely no place in a science class. If you want to teach creationism in a religion class, and represent a broad spectrum of religions, fine. Or if you have a parochial school, you can teach your little nuts that the world is 4000 years old. But not in a public school.
As for the "both sides," I think other religions would see this as a multi-sided coin, or maybe a D20 for the DD freaks here. I think the Vikings would be offended that the possibility has been left out of mankind being created from a cow licking a salty ice-block.
You have a Ouija board? How the hell do you know?
Nothing more pompous than the whole "Founding fathers didn't intend..." crap. Founding fathers didn't intend basically anything about our society. They didn't intend for blacks and women to vote either, so I don't see what relevance their opinions have on matters for which they are over 200 years out of date.
Then precisely what "conditions" did Gore provide that all other Congresscritters in office during that time can't?
Don't know where to start parsing that completely inconsistent statement. 1. Corporations do have most of the rights of individuals legally, so you have the "legal" part right. So 2) that pretty much rules out the fiction part. 3) As for the "intended" part, the question is "by whom?" By your own admission this is a law on the books in the US, and it's not "bench legislation," so it's clear that lawmakers intended it.
So corporations are intended to have rights of individuals, it's legal, not a fiction, and you've basically just passed your opinion as fact and the slashbot mod Borg rewarded you with a +5. Congrats.
1. Tell me how creating in his usage isn't inventing. What portion of the internet did he "create" exactly? Does he mean he was in office while other people helped further the internet?
2. To say he had as much influence on the internet as DARPA is an unmitigated joke. What did he do? If any politician is responsible indircetly for the internet it's Eisenhower for making (D)ARPA.
Or at least half of it.
Yep. And the funny thing is that Google has a real chance to do what MS has been trying to ram down people's throats for years - namely, "sell" web-based applications. Difference is google would rather just put inobtrusive ads on your workspace, while MS wants you to subscribe. Easier and cheaper always win.
The other thing is the potential to integrate all your communication and work tools. Imagine better collaboration, documentation, and email sofware seamlessly integrated. Guarantee you Google's already working on it. How MS has avoided making Outlook better I have no idea. Guess it's that whole monopoly thing, they don't have to.
The question is how and when they roll out GMail. It has to be close - I use it all the time and love it. I imagine they're still refining the business model? When the public at large starts using that and realizes that it beats the crap out of everything else, and starts having their mail forwarded to their gmail accounts because it's better...google wins.
I this way, Google can jump OSS as the biggest threat to MS. Imagine people running all their apps as java apps (or similar) served by google. It's hardware-agnostic. It's OS-agnostic. Watch MS try making a TCO argument there:
This has the potential to do in a *non-evil* way everything MS tried to do between the combined nebulous efforts of Passport and the failed part of its .Net initiative. And people will love it.
I have no idea what that was supposed to mean. Mix in a few more metaphors and it might just make sense.
Bullshit. Video games are.
Well, not only is there nothing wrong with it, but things called "companies" that have to "make money" don't mind having software that is a whole year out of date if it means having something actually stable. So basically by "irrelevant," people mean "irrelevant to 13 year olds." Hey, a year is like 12% of their lifespan, so it seems pretty long.
People always talk about how different "flavor of the month" linuxes are going to replace Red Hat, Suse, Debian, etc. I haven't seen it yet.
It's like a staircase with widely spaced but high steps. other distros have closer steps but they're not so high... does that makes sense? I've only had one beer.
Nah. Finish the rest of the 12 pack and get back to me. Better yet, come over my place and we'll split it.