I've had things that have taken ages to resolve because I've either had to play around with something or just hunt high and low in newsgroups/weblists hoping to hit the right keyword "hanging" or "hangs" or "stalls".
Fortunately, always resolved in time, but it's not comforting. Source code of the tools would be as a final insurance policy - that I could always put breakpoints etc. in.
Speaking of the "boot welded shut" (and a good reason for looking at Linux, I recently had an error related to a connection between a database server and IIS.
I searched through various articles on microsoft.com. The error message had a number of possibilities.
I had to go through various things, before getting to what the problem was. What annoyed me was this: if there's a dozen different reasons, how about a dozen different error codes, or more explanation on the error message.
I've had times when the error has relied on me hunting high and low in newsgroups. It really annoys me. Let's say I still couldn't find the reason. I could contact Microsoft, but what if they were to put up a "not interested". That would be completely stuck.
I was thinking. If I was running OSS, at worst, I could check out the source, maybe put some tracing in, or get someone in to do it for me. That's a kind of insurance - if the tools don't work, you can get someone to help you find out why, because you are not reliant on a sole supplier.
It's the fact that the source code is open that makes it worthwhile.
If I was running my own company, downloaded Apache and found a bug, I'd fix it and return the fix back to the appropriate people.
OK, now I've given away some "intellectual property", maybe a couple of hours worth. But a) it's probably worthless "intellectual property" on it's own without the rest of Apache b) I can't compile it up without releasing the source code to my customers, so I may as well give it back as there's no "hiding the code from theives" protection. c) Some people might also test out my change and find any problems with it. d) I get my change into the next release, so don't have to patch it next time.
I probably in some ways get more back (testing) for my couple of hours than I give.
In fact, many markets run without a central control. There's no-one out there running the "plumbers" market, setting price, terms, whatever. I can look in the yellow pages, ask friends, or even do it myself.
If my plumber dies or emigrates or quits, I can find another one. He can do the same stuff with the pipes and flanges and other plumbing stuff that I don't touch.
And guess what, THAT MARKET WORKS!!! Yeah, there are bad, dangerous and idiot plumbers, but there's also brilliant plumbers if you do your homework.
and not yet up to 10 (unless service packs and drivers are counted).
So far:-
1. Anti-virus
2. Firefox
3. Thunderbird
4. Java Run Time
5. WinRar (coming off soon, as have found a.net winzip equivalent).
6. Nero burn.
Next up are:-
7. Open Office
8. Paint Shop Pro
9. Pinnacle video software
10. #develop
"Google today announced that in order to protect itself from any further potential litigation over people using Axa's trade name", all sites referencing the term "Axa" will be removed.
That would, I imagine be quite hard to litigate against.
If you are insured with them, don't renew. Tell them why.
I'm fed up with companies trying to assert things that vaguely might belong to them. IMO you don't have rights to people not using your name. I've seen plenty of comparison adverts in the UK for cars, and that's perfectly legal.
What's their big problem anyway? I search for Axa because I want Axa and get some results for someone else? Well, maybe the "someone else" does it better and I might discover that? That, is what we in the free world call competition. If not, I'll find the site PDQ.
I've met people who like PDF because "it can't be edited". Whilst not strictly true, it's much easier to go editing a Word document, so if you want it untampered, PDF is better.
I think you are right to state this point, that people are currently giving IBM huge creds for their behaviour over Linux.
I'm glad IBM are fighting SCO, but I don't for one minute believe it's altruistic.
The question is, which model do you want? The "companies make money out of hardware/consulting" or "companies make money out of software" (OK it's usually a mixture). The IBM model means they make a profit with more opportunity for openness, which can give everyone more opportunities.
But it isn't going to be "free". Whether you hand over 20UKP for one with an application form or not, someone has to pay for it. It's either going to be you and me through a cheque to HM Government, or you and me via taxation/VAT etc.
The ironic thing is that Blair is the leader of the Labour party: which was historically established to protect the rights of the working class (ie Socialist, left wing). Blair however seems to see his mission to kiss the arse of Corporate Britain and fuck the workers because if they disagree they're probably don't understand what he's saying.
This is basically a socialist/communist move. Just because your basic rate of tax hasn't gone up, doesn't mean that this isn't a socialist government. Look at how much regulation (increased power of state) and how many more government jobs there are. At the same time, their relationship with business is interesting. As a government, they don't want to really deliver anything, as then a minister is responsible. So, business in that respect is fine. They also understand that if you don't suck up to big business, they'll go elsewhere (nice big fat grants etc). At the same time, small businesses are getting hit with more and more regulations that are a big overhead to them. Then again, a small business going under doesn't make the news like a large electronics company moving abroad.
Both Bush and Blair strike me as shining examples of why Universal Suffrage doesn't work. Personally I think you should have to pass an exam before you can vote. Only simple stuff like: "Who are the leaders of the 3 main parties?", "Who is the Constituional head of state?". Let's face it, if you can't answer questions like that a) you're not well enough informed to vote and b) you don't fucking deserve to be able to vote.
Sadly, universal suffrage is the only way to really do it. In earlier times, property owners could vote (more a hangover from feudal times). At that time, it probably had the side effect that only those with education got to vote. Don't worry too much, though. Most people who don't give a shit about politics vote less.
2. If you've got nothing to hide, then why worry about it, and if you've got something to hide, then it's something you're just gonna have to deal with.
So, you don't mind the government installing cameras in your bedrooms and bathrooms then? Because, after all you've got nothing to hide.
Define capitalism. If you have a look at the entry on Wikipedia, there are numerous definitions.
The big difference between capitalism and free markets is the idea of investment, that you can invest in business on a risk/return basis.
However, there are tens of thousands of businesses like this, some employing very small numbers of people with no major influence.
What you maybe mean is corporatism, where corporations do not simply trade in a market, but distort the rules of the market to their own ends either through political influence, trade controls or bullying. Which is IMO the opposite of a free market.
In the late 90s, I met a lot of asshats who were studying computers because they could make a lot of money. Not because they were interested or talented, just for the money.
I'm glad to say that many of these people have quit the industry now. They're probably estate agents now.
Yes, but those 35,000 applicants all aspire to being self-employed personal trainers earning 40 pounds/hour. Compare that to the career opportunities for science graduates and can you blame them?
That's a bit like kids playing basketball as a way out of the ghetto. Of course, there's the odd Shaquille or Mike Jordan, but most people go nowhere.
Slashdot Mirror
I've had things that have taken ages to resolve because I've either had to play around with something or just hunt high and low in newsgroups/weblists hoping to hit the right keyword "hanging" or "hangs" or "stalls".
Fortunately, always resolved in time, but it's not comforting. Source code of the tools would be as a final insurance policy - that I could always put breakpoints etc. in.
I searched through various articles on microsoft.com. The error message had a number of possibilities.
I had to go through various things, before getting to what the problem was. What annoyed me was this: if there's a dozen different reasons, how about a dozen different error codes, or more explanation on the error message.
I've had times when the error has relied on me hunting high and low in newsgroups. It really annoys me. Let's say I still couldn't find the reason. I could contact Microsoft, but what if they were to put up a "not interested". That would be completely stuck.
I was thinking. If I was running OSS, at worst, I could check out the source, maybe put some tracing in, or get someone in to do it for me. That's a kind of insurance - if the tools don't work, you can get someone to help you find out why, because you are not reliant on a sole supplier.
If I was running my own company, downloaded Apache and found a bug, I'd fix it and return the fix back to the appropriate people.
OK, now I've given away some "intellectual property", maybe a couple of hours worth. But a) it's probably worthless "intellectual property" on it's own without the rest of Apache b) I can't compile it up without releasing the source code to my customers, so I may as well give it back as there's no "hiding the code from theives" protection. c) Some people might also test out my change and find any problems with it. d) I get my change into the next release, so don't have to patch it next time.
I probably in some ways get more back (testing) for my couple of hours than I give.
If my plumber dies or emigrates or quits, I can find another one. He can do the same stuff with the pipes and flanges and other plumbing stuff that I don't touch.
And guess what, THAT MARKET WORKS!!! Yeah, there are bad, dangerous and idiot plumbers, but there's also brilliant plumbers if you do your homework.
For people who sit at a desk and do the same thing day in day out, phones are fine though.
That's a good price. Good to see that the dollar-to-pound thing isn't being done.
I'm not sure if I can read notes, either. Sometimes I'm phoning someone at a hotel or something, and I have a reservation number.
That's why I still use a Palm.
I'd like a programmable handheld and my Palm III is basically C++
So far:- 1. Anti-virus 2. Firefox 3. Thunderbird 4. Java Run Time 5. WinRar (coming off soon, as have found a .net winzip equivalent).
6. Nero burn.
Next up are:-
7. Open Office
8. Paint Shop Pro
9. Pinnacle video software
10. #develop
Haven't most people switched to PHP or ASP now?
"Google today announced that in order to protect itself from any further potential litigation over people using Axa's trade name", all sites referencing the term "Axa" will be removed.
That would, I imagine be quite hard to litigate against.
I'm fed up with companies trying to assert things that vaguely might belong to them. IMO you don't have rights to people not using your name. I've seen plenty of comparison adverts in the UK for cars, and that's perfectly legal.
What's their big problem anyway? I search for Axa because I want Axa and get some results for someone else? Well, maybe the "someone else" does it better and I might discover that? That, is what we in the free world call competition. If not, I'll find the site PDQ.
If it's saved as a .SXW, then opened, how does it compare with a .DOC?
A lot of the problems are to do with the switch, not the running. In other words, they are one-off costs.
For most conversions, I've found no problems, with a few minor issues, where some manual adjustment has been required. Then, it's in .SXW.
I've met people who like PDF because "it can't be edited". Whilst not strictly true, it's much easier to go editing a Word document, so if you want it untampered, PDF is better.
I'm glad IBM are fighting SCO, but I don't for one minute believe it's altruistic.
The question is, which model do you want? The "companies make money out of hardware/consulting" or "companies make money out of software" (OK it's usually a mixture). The IBM model means they make a profit with more opportunity for openness, which can give everyone more opportunities.
But it isn't going to be "free". Whether you hand over 20UKP for one with an application form or not, someone has to pay for it. It's either going to be you and me through a cheque to HM Government, or you and me via taxation/VAT etc.
This is basically a socialist/communist move. Just because your basic rate of tax hasn't gone up, doesn't mean that this isn't a socialist government. Look at how much regulation (increased power of state) and how many more government jobs there are. At the same time, their relationship with business is interesting. As a government, they don't want to really deliver anything, as then a minister is responsible. So, business in that respect is fine. They also understand that if you don't suck up to big business, they'll go elsewhere (nice big fat grants etc). At the same time, small businesses are getting hit with more and more regulations that are a big overhead to them. Then again, a small business going under doesn't make the news like a large electronics company moving abroad.
Both Bush and Blair strike me as shining examples of why Universal Suffrage doesn't work. Personally I think you should have to pass an exam before you can vote. Only simple stuff like: "Who are the leaders of the 3 main parties?", "Who is the Constituional head of state?". Let's face it, if you can't answer questions like that a) you're not well enough informed to vote and b) you don't fucking deserve to be able to vote.
Sadly, universal suffrage is the only way to really do it. In earlier times, property owners could vote (more a hangover from feudal times). At that time, it probably had the side effect that only those with education got to vote. Don't worry too much, though. Most people who don't give a shit about politics vote less.
So, you don't mind the government installing cameras in your bedrooms and bathrooms then? Because, after all you've got nothing to hide.
Then again, the population of the UK were in the majority, in favour of the fuel disputes, until about 6 months later, when the support had waned.
Ask people a question, you'll often get a different answer to when they've had a chance to really debate and think about it.
Most people on the survey said that they would have one, but not if they had to pay for it. Who else is? The fucking tooth fairy?
The big difference between capitalism and free markets is the idea of investment, that you can invest in business on a risk/return basis.
However, there are tens of thousands of businesses like this, some employing very small numbers of people with no major influence.
What you maybe mean is corporatism, where corporations do not simply trade in a market, but distort the rules of the market to their own ends either through political influence, trade controls or bullying. Which is IMO the opposite of a free market.
I'm glad to say that many of these people have quit the industry now. They're probably estate agents now.
That's a bit like kids playing basketball as a way out of the ghetto. Of course, there's the odd Shaquille or Mike Jordan, but most people go nowhere.
Telework, try and buy more locally produced goods, run a more efficient car, use buses and trains more, switch off lights when not in use.
OK, maybe not solutions, but they'll certainly slow the effects of global warming.
Compared with negatives like chopping down rainforests, and people driving 4l SUVs to go and pick up the shopping, how much of a + is this?
No doubt he'll be able to fly in it.