I'm going to strongly criticize you... nothing personal...just pointing out your flawed reasoning... Your explanation (in the 2nd message) doesn't really further your view.)
I agree with your view that you can get a better idea from a website. But I disagree with your reasoning...
(all emphasis in quotes added by me)
You say that "I'm pretty open to people doing whatever with their life, as long as it doesn't affect their work." Yet you also say "a couple of candidates whose "extracuricular" activities have made me decide against interviewing them."
You are being hypocritical there. Either you support people doing whatever they want on their time or you don't! This is especially true given that he was doing "this" during his EXTRACURRICULAR time. Now, if he was doing this at work, or if he showed up stoned to work, you have a case. But this isn't such a case. You may FEAR that might happen (if you hire this guy) but you have no proof. You don't even have many good reasons. Something LOOKED "suspicious" in a photo but who knows what was going on? Maybe he was tired and drunk, and this was his only time he did this.
What you are carrying out is discrimination. Plain and simple. It might not be illegal, and corporations do it all the time. However, that doesn't mean it is right. I find it UNACCEPTABLE to evaluate someone based on their "outside-work" activities. I don't want to build a world like that...
"...from reading his site it was clear that his attitude to work wasn't the kind that a professional software developer should have."
What exactly is the RIGHT attitude? Last time I checked, software developers--or for that matter other professions--did not have attitude as part of their qualifications. Maybe we should add attitude as a requirement for university degrees? Maybe you could quantify and draw up some requires for "attitude" that an incorporated into a degree program. While we are at it, we can incorporate all the other desired attitudes and behvarious that corporations have been clamouring for. Let's see... Rebellious? BAD! Honest? BAD. Can cook corporate books? GOOD! Will be a corporate slave? GREAT (extra points). Openly criticizes Windows/Linux/MacOS/OpenBSD/etc? Bad! Spends all this extracurricular time worshipping our corporation? Good!
What I said above is harsh and seems a bit silly. But is it? Will you hire someone like me? No, I don't take drugs and I don't go to clubs. But I am an anti-capitalist. Maybe all software developers are capitalists so I shouldn't be hired? While we are on the topic of drugs, how about someone that is pro-drugs (in favour of legalization of drugs eg. liberatarian-right, anarchists, some leftists, some socialists, etc). Is that good or bad? Maybe these guys that are in favour of drugs are addicted to drugs. That's why they want it legalized right? And we all know that good software engineers can't be pro-drugs (Richard Stallman is not a true software engineer after all).
Why shoot yourself in the foot with your own site?
Because it is HIS/HER personal site. He is spending his own time, his own resources, etc on it. Just because it doesn't conform to YOUR views doesn't mean it is wrong. Should we all just keep our mouth and our minds shut? Should we just become corporate slaves unable to criticize anything? Unable to do anything that is deemed too controversial? Do you really want to live in such a world?
...how you could think I'm some extremist nazi boss who only wants corporate drones working for him (which I don't think I am!)
Well, just because you think you are not something doesn't mean you aren't!;) Anyway, I don't think you are an extremist. You probably aren't a fascist of any type either (simply because fascists are a tiny minority in the world and they don't express their opinions without strong ideological backing). You are probably even a good guy
I'm surprised you can find that specific information through google. How many people are there with your same name? How about your girlfriend? Are you sure they are the same people? Either you are an amazing internet researcher (in which case I award you the title of Google Master) or the girlfriends you thought bad were someone else;) OR I suck at googling;)
On a serious note, the difference between YOU searching for stuff and a COMPANY searching for info is that the company is FAR more powerful than you. If a company blacklists you, you are in big trouble (especially if they share that information with others). If you blacklist a company, it makes little difference.
An entity like a corporation is FAR more powerful than an individual. If you research stuff, I don't care; if a corporation does, I do care. Similarly, if the government does it, I care too (since they are powerful).
I'm not into personal sites like that (I'm more into opinions and thoughts). Anyway, I think the best thing to do with pictures and other "sensitive" stuff is to put them in a password-protected area or something. Some services allow that and if they don't, you can always create it yourself (if you know a bit of programming, and have the time).
I think using a password area and maybe set up accounts for every family members (they aren't that many are there?:) ) or have a general name/pass is the best way to go. Send the password to the family members in an e-mail or something.
BTW, something that's even more "sensitive" than pictures are opinions. I know that I will be attacked 5 years in the future for my opinions I write now:(...
...if your going to lose your job for expressing an opinion move company before it happens.
The problem is that the world is practicing capitalism, which means corporations rule. How do you know another company isn't going to fire you? One corporation will likely have the same opinion as another. Right now, it's not so bad. Most corporations have no idea what is going on (they lag technology) and don't even mine blogs for data. But in 10 years, watch out. Companies will probably search the internet for information on someone before hiring them (i.e. this will a new background check). It's too bad most people succumb to this sytem--and actively support it:(
Mel Gibson's movie? Man, you are going to get fired for sure...;)
BTW, your Beyonce comment is hilarious hehe:) I have never seen "scientific interest" being applied to that before;)
The latter is worse...because it is driven by corporations. Eventually the people who had the annoying websites improved them (they were mostly newbies and once they learned a bit, they changed). In the latter case, you won't see any change since they profit from it.
Having said this, advertising is a tough thing to comment on. A lot of free websites/services/etc are supported by advertising. Without ads these things won't exist. For instance, my website is hosted on a free provider which has a pop-up ad. If advertising were eliminated, I wouldn't have that free service (given that I'm unemployed and can't afford to host anything, it's disadvantageous to me). Other examples include online review sites, etc.
This is just like the debate over television. Are the intrusive ads on television good or bad? Without them, you wouldn't have free tv, and even the cable bills you pay will go up. Yet at the same time, they are undesirable.
I personally support the "free" stuff so advertising is ok with me. I think the best thing to do is to realize that you are being influenced and start developing resistance to it. For instance, television stations are not selling YOU their programs. Instead, they are selling YOU to the advertisers. This is the first point to realize...
I am so glad I found someone else who shares that opinion with me. I simply cannot believe how easily people support the concept of termination simply because a business didn't like what you said.
If you get fired for something that impacts the business, it's fine. But when someone fires you for saying 'George Bush sucks', or 'Linux sucks', or 'Environmental policy x sucks', it's going over the line. It's amazing how these same people don't say anything when CEOs resign (with benefits, golden parachute, etc) for their lying, cheating and stealing. Yet if you say 'the world sucks', you are sure to be fired.
I know the masses think we lost the war and that everyone will be a corporate slave...but please: support the resistance!
If what you are saying is true, how come blogs are very popular? People might not visit YOUR blog, or mine (we both suck:) ), but they are very influential. If blogs are not popular, how did Andrew Sullivan (conservative columnist) become influential?
It depends what you are looking for. The problem is finding a site that is tailored for your interests. Blogs are great too but again, you need to find one that you like. I find that blogs are great when it comes to econopolitics, or controversial opinions. Mainstream media pretty much censors non-conformist views but blogs don't...
To sum up, you won't find anything "useful" on personal websites/blogs/etc. But you WILL find lots of opinions and different ways of thinking...
If you do that, the WHOLE world will at war. You need to start tolerating people... People who type in caps probably don't know it is an unacceptable practice. Most of them are newbies. Just tell them not to do it:)
What you are talking about is trivial compared to the potential abuse of a system without paper trails! The Florida thing wasn't really a problem. If you didn't like it, take it up with the courts--the COURTS are at fault under your reasoing. Here, with the no-trail electronic voting, the SYSTEM will be at fault. This is FAR worse. You have absolutely no recourse.
No, that's not going to solve it; What you are saying is a subtle change which can be exploited. What needs to happen is address the concerns. The person in the article basically points out several problems: closed-source, no paper trail, political contributions, etc. The solutions are simple: ensure the software is open-source (screw the IP claims of the company--the interviewee mentions it), keep a paper trail, ban contributions and political affiliations, etc...
The people who keep bringing up the myth of the liberal media are conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals for everything. They cannot answer any of the posed questions and end up bashing the journalists who ask the question. Examples: war in Iraq is not going badly--it's just the liberal media painting a fake picture; large number of countries support the invasion of Iraq--it's just the liberal media pointing out the unilateral nature of it; the economy is doing well--it's just the liberal media exaggerating the unemployment figures; etc.
As far as why people from the 60's and 70's are more respected than modern day people... those were idealists and people who had principles. There are very few people nowadays who have any sort of ideals. Find me a liberal--or even a conservative--that can stack up against their counterparts from the 60's & 70's. You'll find very few... Speaking as a leftist (although not from USA), I can say that liberals have lost their ideals and have started worshipping the Democrats, who incidentally are slaves to the corporations:(
Actually, reading that excerpt, it sounds ALMOST IDENTICAL to the situation now. Everything that Bush Sr. was warning against has happened or is looming in the horizon...
Since most politics is driven by ideologies, time means nothing. For instance, Bush's "pre-emptive" (aka preventive) perpetual war for peace strategy was developed more than 5 years ago. Similarly, Patriot Act II is already drafted and will be passed as soon as Al-Qaida carries out their next attack against USA. And so on...
Clearly you are stereotyping everyone. I completely disagree with your conservative views but let me comment on the following...
Frankly bush is an idiot to do anythign he has to surround himself with somewhat intelligent people to figure things out.
I agree that Bush is one of the dumbest presidents I have seen or heard of. However, isn't it a dangerious thing to have a dumb president being surrounded by smarter people? You will end up with the "advisors" influencing and pretty much controlling the contry. This is exactly how the Bush administration is right now. The neoconservatives run the show. This has happened many times in history, where dumb kings/rulers/leaders were influenced and "controlled" by their advisors and those that surround them. One needs to look no further than the collapse of the Roman empire. Who brought it down?
It is far more preferable to have a smarter leader with dumb advisors than a dumb one with smart advisors!!!
What you are saying makes no sense until you mention what you are comparing. Red Hat (or for that matter SuSE) enterprise versions might be expensive but how about the competition? If you don't get Linux, what are you going to get? Windows and Solaris are the same price (or more). I'm unemployed and not up to date on prices:( but Windows XP professional runs at something like $199. This isn't so bad compared to workstation versions from Red Hat (Red Hat WS) or SuSE. Windows Server is the same thing...
Having said that, the 64-bit Linux stuff ARE very expensive. I guess they are trying to milk as much as they can out of large corporations:)
If he supports the open-source-software movement, then he can use 'we'. It all depends on context. If he goes around claiming 'we' when talking about software development, it isn't appropriate. But if he talks about 'we' when talking about open source software vs proprietary ones, then 'we' is appropriate...
Yes but the thing is that if you are not business oriented (i.e. home users, workstation, etc), Red Hat wouldn't be ideal for you anymore. Sure, you can get the business oriented ones but they will likely be tailored for enterprises. For example, will it have Mozilla Firebird? How about plug-ins for it? Most likely not.
Red Hat's business strategy essentially means that home users and others will not be using it anymore...
If you are making a business decision, the financial situation matters. You don't want to spend thousands of dollars upgrading the system and then end up with a bankrupted company with no upgrades, support, etc.
Why are Microsoft products so popular? One of the reasons is because IT managers would rather go with a safe product from Micrsofot than a riskier, often better, product from others. If I were an IT manager I wouldn't do that (I'm a bit more risky) but most managers are risk-averse.
If you are a newbie, I think the commercial distributions are the way to go. This essentially means Mandrake or SuSE. SuSE is better, most stable, etc. Mandrake is more user friendly, etc but is not as stable (Mandrake often packages cutting-edge versions, long before SuSE or others will touch them).
I haven't used Debian in a while but it isn't really a newbie OS (then again, many things might have changed in the last two years or so). The best thing about Debian, from a newbie perspective, is apt-get.
The reason I think commercial ones are good for newbies is because the support is better. The UI is designed better, the updates are more friendly, etc.
The simple fact that they can get there, and the USA cannot, will more than make the point for Chinese superiority.
What makes you think USA can't get there? If USA spends 1/10th of what they spend on their imperialistic wars, NASA will be there overnight...
The Chinese citizens don't seem to care much about space. Refer to the recent stories coming out of China about them sending their first human to space. It wasn't a big deal for most of them--many didn't even know of the event. They have bigger problems, such as the massive unemployment due to the economic restructuring.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to strongly criticize you... nothing personal...just pointing out your flawed reasoning... Your explanation (in the 2nd message) doesn't really further your view.)
...how you could think I'm some extremist nazi boss who only wants corporate drones working for him (which I don't think I am!)
;) Anyway, I don't think you are an extremist. You probably aren't a fascist of any type either (simply because fascists are a tiny minority in the world and they don't express their opinions without strong ideological backing). You are probably even a good guy
I agree with your view that you can get a better idea from a website. But I disagree with your reasoning...
(all emphasis in quotes added by me)
You say that "I'm pretty open to people doing whatever with their life, as long as it doesn't affect their work." Yet you also say "a couple of candidates whose "extracuricular" activities have made me decide against interviewing them."
You are being hypocritical there. Either you support people doing whatever they want on their time or you don't! This is especially true given that he was doing "this" during his EXTRACURRICULAR time. Now, if he was doing this at work, or if he showed up stoned to work, you have a case. But this isn't such a case. You may FEAR that might happen (if you hire this guy) but you have no proof. You don't even have many good reasons. Something LOOKED "suspicious" in a photo but who knows what was going on? Maybe he was tired and drunk, and this was his only time he did this.
What you are carrying out is discrimination. Plain and simple. It might not be illegal, and corporations do it all the time. However, that doesn't mean it is right. I find it UNACCEPTABLE to evaluate someone based on their "outside-work" activities. I don't want to build a world like that...
"...from reading his site it was clear that his attitude to work wasn't the kind that a professional software developer should have."
What exactly is the RIGHT attitude? Last time I checked, software developers--or for that matter other professions--did not have attitude as part of their qualifications. Maybe we should add attitude as a requirement for university degrees? Maybe you could quantify and draw up some requires for "attitude" that an incorporated into a degree program. While we are at it, we can incorporate all the other desired attitudes and behvarious that corporations have been clamouring for. Let's see... Rebellious? BAD! Honest? BAD. Can cook corporate books? GOOD! Will be a corporate slave? GREAT (extra points). Openly criticizes Windows/Linux/MacOS/OpenBSD/etc? Bad! Spends all this extracurricular time worshipping our corporation? Good!
What I said above is harsh and seems a bit silly. But is it? Will you hire someone like me? No, I don't take drugs and I don't go to clubs. But I am an anti-capitalist. Maybe all software developers are capitalists so I shouldn't be hired? While we are on the topic of drugs, how about someone that is pro-drugs (in favour of legalization of drugs eg. liberatarian-right, anarchists, some leftists, some socialists, etc). Is that good or bad? Maybe these guys that are in favour of drugs are addicted to drugs. That's why they want it legalized right? And we all know that good software engineers can't be pro-drugs (Richard Stallman is not a true software engineer after all).
Why shoot yourself in the foot with your own site?
Because it is HIS/HER personal site. He is spending his own time, his own resources, etc on it. Just because it doesn't conform to YOUR views doesn't mean it is wrong. Should we all just keep our mouth and our minds shut? Should we just become corporate slaves unable to criticize anything? Unable to do anything that is deemed too controversial? Do you really want to live in such a world?
Well, just because you think you are not something doesn't mean you aren't!
I'm surprised you can find that specific information through google. How many people are there with your same name? How about your girlfriend? Are you sure they are the same people? Either you are an amazing internet researcher (in which case I award you the title of Google Master) or the girlfriends you thought bad were someone else ;) OR I suck at googling ;)
On a serious note, the difference between YOU searching for stuff and a COMPANY searching for info is that the company is FAR more powerful than you. If a company blacklists you, you are in big trouble (especially if they share that information with others). If you blacklist a company, it makes little difference.
An entity like a corporation is FAR more powerful than an individual. If you research stuff, I don't care; if a corporation does, I do care. Similarly, if the government does it, I care too (since they are powerful).
Sivaram Velauthapillai
I'm not into personal sites like that (I'm more into opinions and thoughts). Anyway, I think the best thing to do with pictures and other "sensitive" stuff is to put them in a password-protected area or something. Some services allow that and if they don't, you can always create it yourself (if you know a bit of programming, and have the time).
:) ) or have a general name/pass is the best way to go. Send the password to the family members in an e-mail or something.
:( ...
I think using a password area and maybe set up accounts for every family members (they aren't that many are there?
BTW, something that's even more "sensitive" than pictures are opinions. I know that I will be attacked 5 years in the future for my opinions I write now
Sivaram Velauthapillai
...if your going to lose your job for expressing an opinion move company before it happens.
:(
;)
:) I have never seen "scientific interest" being applied to that before ;)
The problem is that the world is practicing capitalism, which means corporations rule. How do you know another company isn't going to fire you? One corporation will likely have the same opinion as another. Right now, it's not so bad. Most corporations have no idea what is going on (they lag technology) and don't even mine blogs for data. But in 10 years, watch out. Companies will probably search the internet for information on someone before hiring them (i.e. this will a new background check). It's too bad most people succumb to this sytem--and actively support it
Mel Gibson's movie? Man, you are going to get fired for sure...
BTW, your Beyonce comment is hilarious hehe
Sivaram Velauthapillai
The latter is worse...because it is driven by corporations. Eventually the people who had the annoying websites improved them (they were mostly newbies and once they learned a bit, they changed). In the latter case, you won't see any change since they profit from it.
Having said this, advertising is a tough thing to comment on. A lot of free websites/services/etc are supported by advertising. Without ads these things won't exist. For instance, my website is hosted on a free provider which has a pop-up ad. If advertising were eliminated, I wouldn't have that free service (given that I'm unemployed and can't afford to host anything, it's disadvantageous to me). Other examples include online review sites, etc.
This is just like the debate over television. Are the intrusive ads on television good or bad? Without them, you wouldn't have free tv, and even the cable bills you pay will go up. Yet at the same time, they are undesirable.
I personally support the "free" stuff so advertising is ok with me. I think the best thing to do is to realize that you are being influenced and start developing resistance to it. For instance, television stations are not selling YOU their programs. Instead, they are selling YOU to the advertisers. This is the first point to realize...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
I am so glad I found someone else who shares that opinion with me. I simply cannot believe how easily people support the concept of termination simply because a business didn't like what you said.
If you get fired for something that impacts the business, it's fine. But when someone fires you for saying 'George Bush sucks', or 'Linux sucks', or 'Environmental policy x sucks', it's going over the line. It's amazing how these same people don't say anything when CEOs resign (with benefits, golden parachute, etc) for their lying, cheating and stealing. Yet if you say 'the world sucks', you are sure to be fired.
I know the masses think we lost the war and that everyone will be a corporate slave...but please: support the resistance!
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If what you are saying is true, how come blogs are very popular? People might not visit YOUR blog, or mine (we both suck :) ), but they are very influential. If blogs are not popular, how did Andrew Sullivan (conservative columnist) become influential?
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Political correctness has nothing to do with naming conventions!
Anyway, I agree with you that a blog is pretty much a website (I even call my main page news/weblog).
Sivaram Velauthapillai
It depends what you are looking for. The problem is finding a site that is tailored for your interests. Blogs are great too but again, you need to find one that you like. I find that blogs are great when it comes to econopolitics, or controversial opinions. Mainstream media pretty much censors non-conformist views but blogs don't...
To sum up, you won't find anything "useful" on personal websites/blogs/etc. But you WILL find lots of opinions and different ways of thinking...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If you do that, the WHOLE world will at war. You need to start tolerating people... People who type in caps probably don't know it is an unacceptable practice. Most of them are newbies. Just tell them not to do it :)
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Someone mod this up... Even conservatives will agree with some of his views--especially the stuff from the Founding Fathers...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
What you are talking about is trivial compared to the potential abuse of a system without paper trails! The Florida thing wasn't really a problem. If you didn't like it, take it up with the courts--the COURTS are at fault under your reasoing. Here, with the no-trail electronic voting, the SYSTEM will be at fault. This is FAR worse. You have absolutely no recourse.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
No, that's not going to solve it; What you are saying is a subtle change which can be exploited. What needs to happen is address the concerns. The person in the article basically points out several problems: closed-source, no paper trail, political contributions, etc. The solutions are simple: ensure the software is open-source (screw the IP claims of the company--the interviewee mentions it), keep a paper trail, ban contributions and political affiliations, etc...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
The people who keep bringing up the myth of the liberal media are conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals for everything. They cannot answer any of the posed questions and end up bashing the journalists who ask the question. Examples: war in Iraq is not going badly--it's just the liberal media painting a fake picture; large number of countries support the invasion of Iraq--it's just the liberal media pointing out the unilateral nature of it; the economy is doing well--it's just the liberal media exaggerating the unemployment figures; etc.
:(
As far as why people from the 60's and 70's are more respected than modern day people... those were idealists and people who had principles. There are very few people nowadays who have any sort of ideals. Find me a liberal--or even a conservative--that can stack up against their counterparts from the 60's & 70's. You'll find very few... Speaking as a leftist (although not from USA), I can say that liberals have lost their ideals and have started worshipping the Democrats, who incidentally are slaves to the corporations
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Actually, reading that excerpt, it sounds ALMOST IDENTICAL to the situation now. Everything that Bush Sr. was warning against has happened or is looming in the horizon...
Since most politics is driven by ideologies, time means nothing. For instance, Bush's "pre-emptive" (aka preventive) perpetual war for peace strategy was developed more than 5 years ago. Similarly, Patriot Act II is already drafted and will be passed as soon as Al-Qaida carries out their next attack against USA. And so on...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Clearly you are stereotyping everyone. I completely disagree with your conservative views but let me comment on the following...
Frankly bush is an idiot to do anythign he has to surround himself with somewhat intelligent people to figure things out.
I agree that Bush is one of the dumbest presidents I have seen or heard of. However, isn't it a dangerious thing to have a dumb president being surrounded by smarter people? You will end up with the "advisors" influencing and pretty much controlling the contry. This is exactly how the Bush administration is right now. The neoconservatives run the show. This has happened many times in history, where dumb kings/rulers/leaders were influenced and "controlled" by their advisors and those that surround them. One needs to look no further than the collapse of the Roman empire. Who brought it down?
It is far more preferable to have a smarter leader with dumb advisors than a dumb one with smart advisors!!!
Sivaram Velauthapillai
She reminds me of Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh...
;)
Wait until the conservatives come after you for that... then again, Slashdot is like Hollywood: no conservatives for miles...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
What you are saying makes no sense until you mention what you are comparing. Red Hat (or for that matter SuSE) enterprise versions might be expensive but how about the competition? If you don't get Linux, what are you going to get? Windows and Solaris are the same price (or more). I'm unemployed and not up to date on prices :( but Windows XP professional runs at something like $199. This isn't so bad compared to workstation versions from Red Hat (Red Hat WS) or SuSE. Windows Server is the same thing...
:)
Having said that, the 64-bit Linux stuff ARE very expensive. I guess they are trying to milk as much as they can out of large corporations
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If you copy, you won't get the support. You'll likely have to buy WS for each workstation. It's still affordable...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Maybe you meant to say Nunavet instead of Ontario? :)
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If he supports the open-source-software movement, then he can use 'we'. It all depends on context. If he goes around claiming 'we' when talking about software development, it isn't appropriate. But if he talks about 'we' when talking about open source software vs proprietary ones, then 'we' is appropriate...
Just my feeling.. I'm open to suggestions....
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Yes but the thing is that if you are not business oriented (i.e. home users, workstation, etc), Red Hat wouldn't be ideal for you anymore. Sure, you can get the business oriented ones but they will likely be tailored for enterprises. For example, will it have Mozilla Firebird? How about plug-ins for it? Most likely not.
Red Hat's business strategy essentially means that home users and others will not be using it anymore...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If you are making a business decision, the financial situation matters. You don't want to spend thousands of dollars upgrading the system and then end up with a bankrupted company with no upgrades, support, etc.
Why are Microsoft products so popular? One of the reasons is because IT managers would rather go with a safe product from Micrsofot than a riskier, often better, product from others. If I were an IT manager I wouldn't do that (I'm a bit more risky) but most managers are risk-averse.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
If you are a newbie, I think the commercial distributions are the way to go. This essentially means Mandrake or SuSE. SuSE is better, most stable, etc. Mandrake is more user friendly, etc but is not as stable (Mandrake often packages cutting-edge versions, long before SuSE or others will touch them).
I haven't used Debian in a while but it isn't really a newbie OS (then again, many things might have changed in the last two years or so). The best thing about Debian, from a newbie perspective, is apt-get.
The reason I think commercial ones are good for newbies is because the support is better. The UI is designed better, the updates are more friendly, etc.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
The simple fact that they can get there, and the USA cannot, will more than make the point for Chinese superiority.
What makes you think USA can't get there? If USA spends 1/10th of what they spend on their imperialistic wars, NASA will be there overnight...
The Chinese citizens don't seem to care much about space. Refer to the recent stories coming out of China about them sending their first human to space. It wasn't a big deal for most of them--many didn't even know of the event. They have bigger problems, such as the massive unemployment due to the economic restructuring.
Sivaram Velauthapillai