Except that fire has never before or since caused the collapse of a steel-structure building.
And never before or since has a fully-fueled Boeing jetliner crashed into a high-rise building. That's like saying Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn't happen because atom bombs have never before or since caused hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Dude, I think this is just another incarnation of the anti-Mac trolls who pose as arrogant Mac users. They used to always have a standard post whining about how Macs were only meant for artistic types and other such nonsense in the same vein, followed by an exhortation for people who didn't fit in not to use Macs.
Re:Easier to Kill Intel or Microsoft than Google
on
The Final Days of Google
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The algorithmic model is as old as Babbage and Lady Ada, that's 150 years old!
You'll be really shocked when you find out how old integers are.
Um, no. Vader didn't kill Anakin Skywalker, because Anakin Skywalker was still alive, reasserted himself, and saved Luke from the Emperor in Return of the Jedi.
No doubt there's some interdependence, but rural areas (and farming for that matter) are still oversubsidized, at least in the United States, for two reasons: the disproportionate political power of sparsely-populated states (to wit, Alaska has several hundred-million-dollar bridges to nowhere and is building more to service towns of less than 10,000 while transport infrastructure is literally breaking down in urban areas) and the political power of the agriculture lobby (the corn lobby, for instance, has managed to get the right mix of tariffs and subsidies for some crap they call "high fructose corn syrup" to replace real sugar in tons of mass-produced food products, a major cause of the obesity epidemic--to say nothing of enriching spoiled farmers in Iowa who want to continue their rural middle-American lifestyle while running third world agriculture out of the market).
I'm sure you enjoy living in a town with 5,000 people, one Wal-Mart, and a gas station. How does it feel to only have things like roads and electrical services because people who live in cities decided to subsidize your lifestyle?
I can see those who know little about computers who are looking for quality rather than bargain basement pricing steering away from Dell because they will be the new "cheap Wal-Mart computers".
As opposed to those who know more about computers steering away from Dell because they were cheap Wal-Mart-esque computers already, and have been for years?/p?
Read up on comparative advantage. Chances are, engineers and developers are usually right--they could do marketing, or accounting, or management--but if they did, you'd have to train an accountant or manager or marketeer to become an engineer or developer, and they don't have the chops.
I think the point was more about language than artistic depth, and in many ways the best series of today are artistically richer and deeper than the TV series of yesteryear. Nonetheless, look up old political speeches from the 60's and 70's (for instance). There has been a remarkable decline there.
There have been affluent people ever since the beginning of civilization. Yuppies were a largely 1980's phenomenon. Equating the two sounds a lot like you're defining your terms as you go just to avoid losing the argument.
Well, if your decision to switch is based upon some vague bug that was introduced in an OS update at some point for some undefined "hardware" you were trying to use at the time, I don't think we can draw any broad conclusions from your personal experience. So what the fuck are you telling me about it for?
People like me who don't like OS X because things like Samba are broken out of the box. Or perhaps people like me, who are sick of OS X's bad driver support. OS X update, internal wireless doesn't work anymore or the system starts kernel panicking due to a graphic driver update etc.
In other words, people who did something stupid to fuck up their Mac OS X box? Other than Samba (which I don't use), "bad driver support", Software Update, AirPort, and graphics drivers have NEVER been that kind of problem for anyone I've ever even heard of except for you. Which puts you firmly into the group of people who think like computers instead of thinking like a human being when you use a computer--people who are so completely unlike normal users in their usage patterns that a UI based around normal human beings is actually worse for them.
There you go, redefining "yuppie". A "yuppie" is a "Young Urban Professional", usually from the 1980's. He drives BMW because it's more sporty, and Mercedes-Benz is too "old money". He wears a pinstriped suit with a pinstriped shirt and suspenders, works 80 hours a week, and may very well go to prison for selling junk bonds. Sometimes he takes over companies and liquidates them. See the Oliver Stone film "Wall Street". Someone who eats organic food is a "hippie".
It was really the Spanish-American war that brought the country back together--the South bitterly hated the North even after the war, especially when the North did "reconstruction", their failed military occupation of the South. It wasn't until a hundred years later that the South finally quit segregation and stopped lynching Negroes. Rebellious groups continued their activities for decades--haven't you heard of the Ku Klux Klan? Finally, Lincoln was "a visionary and a very ethical man" according to the history books, because the history books were written by the Union. In reality, I think most presidents, given the situation Lincoln was in, would have risen to the challenge, and many of them would have done so more ethically and with more vision.
The CIvil War was a "more civilized time"? When one half of the country slaughtered countless thousands for the right to keep slaves and the other half of the country slaughtered countless thousands in order to keep in control of the other half? You're crazy.
threatened by the Justices behaving like philosopher-kings finding new "laws" in the Constitution that the oafs in Congress should've passed (practice often derided as "legislating from the bench").
People who complain about this remind me of whiny sports fans who blame the refs every time they lose a game. First off, let's be perfectly clear on one thing--most law is case law, i.e. law that is made by the precedent of judicial rulings. This allows the law to grow organically from case analysis rather than simply being handed down from Congress every so often. This is a vital feature of the system of common law we inherited from Great Britain, so if you have a problem with it, take it up with them.
It also protects us from the tyranny of the majority. The civil rights rulings of the 1960's are a perfect example of this--the "will of the people", the laws Congress did pass, all this stuff you people claim to protect, were in this case part of a horrifically evil system that oppressed people for no reason other than their racial origin. It was the Supreme Court, upholding the principles of the Constitution, which stopped this.
I'm not saying the Court never makes bad rulings--they clearly do, particularly in cases like Kelo. But majority rule makes bad decisions far more often, and it's vital that there be some way to put majority rule in check in situations where it is clearly acting unjustly. And that will necessarily involve overturning what Congress and the President do from time to time.
You can't deny that ideological zealots make up a vast proportion of Linux users, though. Let's take as a given that people who choose Linux over Mac OS X do so because of the differences between Linux and Mac OS X. What are those differences? Well, there's the kernel and filesystem, but people who choose an OS based on those things are usually either server admins (who won't run MP3 players on their servers anyway) or a vanishingly small proportion of the market. What's left? There's the UI--and since iTunes' biggest virtue is its adherence to the Mac OS X UI, people who prefer Linux UI's aren't going to be interested. (Why port to Windows, while still using the Mac UI? Because many/most Windows users use Windows because of the Windows monopoly. Linux users clearly don't have that problem.) And then, after that, all that's left is the ideological difference between open and closed source. So it's pretty clear to see why Apple isn't interested in porting iTunes to Linux--the only market segment I've left out is people who are too poor to buy a Mac so they use Linux instead, and poor people aren't an attractive market segment.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, there's the impact shock, for one.
The Windsor Tower Fire was not caused by aircraft impact, nor was it of comparable size (and thus weight) to the WTC.
And never before or since has a fully-fueled Boeing jetliner crashed into a high-rise building. That's like saying Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn't happen because atom bombs have never before or since caused hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Dude, I think this is just another incarnation of the anti-Mac trolls who pose as arrogant Mac users. They used to always have a standard post whining about how Macs were only meant for artistic types and other such nonsense in the same vein, followed by an exhortation for people who didn't fit in not to use Macs.
You'll be really shocked when you find out how old integers are.
Um, no. Vader didn't kill Anakin Skywalker, because Anakin Skywalker was still alive, reasserted himself, and saved Luke from the Emperor in Return of the Jedi.
This week, we're going to harvest crabs in dangerous seas! Next week: harvesting crabs in dangerous seas!
No doubt there's some interdependence, but rural areas (and farming for that matter) are still oversubsidized, at least in the United States, for two reasons: the disproportionate political power of sparsely-populated states (to wit, Alaska has several hundred-million-dollar bridges to nowhere and is building more to service towns of less than 10,000 while transport infrastructure is literally breaking down in urban areas) and the political power of the agriculture lobby (the corn lobby, for instance, has managed to get the right mix of tariffs and subsidies for some crap they call "high fructose corn syrup" to replace real sugar in tons of mass-produced food products, a major cause of the obesity epidemic--to say nothing of enriching spoiled farmers in Iowa who want to continue their rural middle-American lifestyle while running third world agriculture out of the market).
I'm sure you enjoy living in a town with 5,000 people, one Wal-Mart, and a gas station. How does it feel to only have things like roads and electrical services because people who live in cities decided to subsidize your lifestyle?
As opposed to those who know more about computers steering away from Dell because they were cheap Wal-Mart-esque computers already, and have been for years?/p?
Read up on comparative advantage. Chances are, engineers and developers are usually right--they could do marketing, or accounting, or management--but if they did, you'd have to train an accountant or manager or marketeer to become an engineer or developer, and they don't have the chops.
What? Spirit is close to getting to home plate with Gertrude Weise?
What happens if you have to fill out a form with your phone number?
I think the point was more about language than artistic depth, and in many ways the best series of today are artistically richer and deeper than the TV series of yesteryear. Nonetheless, look up old political speeches from the 60's and 70's (for instance). There has been a remarkable decline there.
I think you misspelled "SPARTAAAAAAAAAA!".
Communicating poorly, and then acting smug when you are misunderstood, is not cleverness.
There have been affluent people ever since the beginning of civilization. Yuppies were a largely 1980's phenomenon. Equating the two sounds a lot like you're defining your terms as you go just to avoid losing the argument.
Well, if your decision to switch is based upon some vague bug that was introduced in an OS update at some point for some undefined "hardware" you were trying to use at the time, I don't think we can draw any broad conclusions from your personal experience. So what the fuck are you telling me about it for?
In other words, people who did something stupid to fuck up their Mac OS X box? Other than Samba (which I don't use), "bad driver support", Software Update, AirPort, and graphics drivers have NEVER been that kind of problem for anyone I've ever even heard of except for you. Which puts you firmly into the group of people who think like computers instead of thinking like a human being when you use a computer--people who are so completely unlike normal users in their usage patterns that a UI based around normal human beings is actually worse for them.
There you go, redefining "yuppie". A "yuppie" is a "Young Urban Professional", usually from the 1980's. He drives BMW because it's more sporty, and Mercedes-Benz is too "old money". He wears a pinstriped suit with a pinstriped shirt and suspenders, works 80 hours a week, and may very well go to prison for selling junk bonds. Sometimes he takes over companies and liquidates them. See the Oliver Stone film "Wall Street". Someone who eats organic food is a "hippie".
It was really the Spanish-American war that brought the country back together--the South bitterly hated the North even after the war, especially when the North did "reconstruction", their failed military occupation of the South. It wasn't until a hundred years later that the South finally quit segregation and stopped lynching Negroes. Rebellious groups continued their activities for decades--haven't you heard of the Ku Klux Klan? Finally, Lincoln was "a visionary and a very ethical man" according to the history books, because the history books were written by the Union. In reality, I think most presidents, given the situation Lincoln was in, would have risen to the challenge, and many of them would have done so more ethically and with more vision.
Are you kidding? Have you ever seen (or seen pictures of) Stallman, or Richie or Thompson? Most of us have bearded heroes.
The CIvil War was a "more civilized time"? When one half of the country slaughtered countless thousands for the right to keep slaves and the other half of the country slaughtered countless thousands in order to keep in control of the other half? You're crazy.
People who complain about this remind me of whiny sports fans who blame the refs every time they lose a game. First off, let's be perfectly clear on one thing--most law is case law, i.e. law that is made by the precedent of judicial rulings. This allows the law to grow organically from case analysis rather than simply being handed down from Congress every so often. This is a vital feature of the system of common law we inherited from Great Britain, so if you have a problem with it, take it up with them.
It also protects us from the tyranny of the majority. The civil rights rulings of the 1960's are a perfect example of this--the "will of the people", the laws Congress did pass, all this stuff you people claim to protect, were in this case part of a horrifically evil system that oppressed people for no reason other than their racial origin. It was the Supreme Court, upholding the principles of the Constitution, which stopped this.
I'm not saying the Court never makes bad rulings--they clearly do, particularly in cases like Kelo. But majority rule makes bad decisions far more often, and it's vital that there be some way to put majority rule in check in situations where it is clearly acting unjustly. And that will necessarily involve overturning what Congress and the President do from time to time.
You can't deny that ideological zealots make up a vast proportion of Linux users, though. Let's take as a given that people who choose Linux over Mac OS X do so because of the differences between Linux and Mac OS X. What are those differences? Well, there's the kernel and filesystem, but people who choose an OS based on those things are usually either server admins (who won't run MP3 players on their servers anyway) or a vanishingly small proportion of the market. What's left? There's the UI--and since iTunes' biggest virtue is its adherence to the Mac OS X UI, people who prefer Linux UI's aren't going to be interested. (Why port to Windows, while still using the Mac UI? Because many/most Windows users use Windows because of the Windows monopoly. Linux users clearly don't have that problem.) And then, after that, all that's left is the ideological difference between open and closed source. So it's pretty clear to see why Apple isn't interested in porting iTunes to Linux--the only market segment I've left out is people who are too poor to buy a Mac so they use Linux instead, and poor people aren't an attractive market segment.