Neither "Jesus" seems to have much of a track record individually - it's only when the two work together, complimenting their skills and covering up their weaknesses that things happen. Both extreme socialists (ie communists) and conservatives don't seem to get this.
I don't think of it as a miracle, but it appears that some conservatives and libertarians do. Note that I don't make the claim that socialism (or bureaucratism for that matter) is any better. I just don't think that the whole "free market solves all" method is going to work in every case.
It makes individual sense to do a lot of things that are detrimental to human society, or even local society as a whole. In some cases, it is better to regulate the cost of a particular resource to reflect the actual societal cost of its extraction or use. That's something the "free" market is horrible at.
Conservatives and Libertarians tend to support the idea that we should focus on making the technology cheaper, then people will install it on their own, rather than subsidizing it.
I think conservatives and libertarians feel that we should do nothing, and that Free Market Jesus will come from the sky and solve all problems in one fell swoop...
I can't find anything on the tubes about this apart from the infoworld article (and its mirrors on apparently every site ending with -world.com). We don't know what he's actually said, and/or what his reasoning was.
If he was saying something like "Don't rely on HTML5 being fully implemented just yet, because various things are subject to change", that's just understandable. He may not be saying "don't use it" - just "don't rely on it", or "don't use in a production environment that has to work for the next 20 years unchanged".
If it's an obscure footnote or a procedural glitch, nine times out of ten the judge (or jury if you're in one of those countries) will throw it out anyway
Why do you think laws like the infamous "everyone do archery practice" one from Britain are never enforced?
A good lawyer may use a loophole to force the other party to settle out of court, by scaring the shit out of them - they may even bring the matter to court as a scare tactic, but it's really not (or should not be) an exercise in sophistry...
The president doesn't want you to set that precedent
Re:Autotools do not need a book
on
Autotools
·
· Score: 1
The other compiler is MinGW32 - there are others, like Borland C, and ICC...
I think CMake supports them all.
There are still piles of projects running on Windows. Right now, I'm on Windows (work machine), with KDE 4.4, Inkscape, Gimp, VTK and ITK among other things installed. Remember, lots of devs work on Windows, and quite a large body of users too. Not to mention other environments, like embedded systems which might or might not be able to work with full autotools...
Interesting solution, but it doesn't answer what happens when I don't use GCC - suppose I'm on Windows, using MSVC, or for that matter, on Linux using ICC or clang? Those are still important use cases for cross-platform applications and libraries.
So, let's have a program that knows about all these compilers and platforms, and can generate the appropriate build scripts.
Hello, CMake...;-)
Re:Autotools do not need a book
on
Autotools
·
· Score: 1
Actually building on multiple platforms without maintaining separate build files for each is the problem...
CMake was created to build Kitware's other products, most notably VTK and ITK. To date, I've built both, and other things built on top of them on three platforms, with several variations: GCC on Linux, both 32bit and 64bit, MinGW and Visual C on Windows. I don't need to install anything else apart from CMake and the compiler (and associated Make package) on each of those platforms, run it once, and then run make. On the other hand, just you try running autotools on Windows...
The other option, which I see a lot of projects using, is to have multiple build systems - an autotools one for Unices, and a.sln/.vcproj set for Windows. I don't think I need to point out the fun in maintaining that...
Your country has been kidnapping people around the world, and organized torture (and since it didn't happen in the US, it's okay, right)?
You're no different than China. I don't like either of you.
Except, that with the US, the vast majority of trials have been open, and relatively free and fair. You don't have people held incommunicado for trying to exercise their right to free speech.
You have exactly the same mentality as the western media, that is to over simplifiy things in China and portray them in a stereotype as irrational lunatic. Believe it or not, some people do the same to the west.
Irrational lunatic? Not really. Power-hungry authoritarianism? Possibly...
Take the latest political opponent, Liu Xiaobo, as an example. From western media it looked like he was sent to jail for nothing serious. It turned out he was circulating a letter for signatures, calling for the establishment of a new country with a new name. That is a crime by Chinese law. Now I am not defending Chinese law here but I just wanted to point out things are more complicated than you think, including the "cheap crap" you love to hate.
If you mean the Charter 08, it may be a "crime" by Chinese law, but that's the whole point: Is the Chinese government stable enough to allow its own citizens to debate and discuss the state of their country openly? Is it mature enough to allow criticism of itself and its activities? To allow public consultations of its policies? In a nutshell, will they allow the people whom they claim to represent, discuss their own performance?
Say what you will about western democracy, the critical founding principle there is that the state is always subordinate to the people. There is always freedom to criticize the government, freedom to elect another in its place. Point to Guantanamo all you want, but the fact is, you don't get sent there for merely criticizing the government and asking for change. If you did, all liberals would have been incarcerated in the last administration, and the entire tea party in this one.
It's the same, wherever there's real free speech and democracy. In Europe, you still have people criticizing Sarkozy and Berlusconi, Blair, Brown and others - they may or may not be effective, but they aren't imprisoned for it. In India, we can still assemble and protest, and we can still hold the government responsible.
I'm not seeing that in China in any way. Under the current setup, it's impossible for the people to hold the government accountable in any way - there's never any public debate, or if there is, the rest of the world never gets to hear about it. There just seems to be an endless line of posturing politician-bureaucrats, fighting among themselves, with the entire population as pawns.
As long as those "citizens" have only as much right to put forth their views as Stallman, and not, say, a couple of dozen legislators in their pockets, I might just agree there.
Considering, however, that they tend to spam the entire argument, and then use undue influence to enact measures that are only in their own selfish interests, and detrimental to the general common good, I give them much less benefit of the doubt.
The exploit in question actually includes a SELinux bypass. SELinux and AppArmor are not as great as you think; they are understood well enough that hackers can defeat them, and they are deployed on enough systems that hackers write their exploits so these protections are defeated.
Pretty much everything since Prescott on the Intel side and, err... everything on the AMD side is 64bit. If you have anything you bought since late 2006, good changes that it's a 64bit system...
Buzzword compliance... Look at the rest of their site for some Dilbert-esque lulz
People:
Aiplex is staffed by a strong, coherent, and well-trained team of 100 plus people who have witnessed a sense of growth that is unparalleled in the industry. We have nurtured an atmosphere of teamwork, commitment, and accountability enabling the team to meet business demands consistently.
You've just "witnessed" a "sense" of growth? In other words, you didn't actually grow, you just "witnessed" something that feels like growth... After truthiness, growthiness?
They also seem to be into SEO; sounds like quite a sleazy company...
It may or may not be innocuous, but is it in any way surprising? As of now, they seem to be the only reasonably stable polity in that belt, apart from Saudi Arabia. It's a no-brainer that they would try to exert their influence over their neighbours. In pretty much the same way, and with about the same amount of justification, as you rightly mention, as the Monroe doctrine.
And is it in any way wrong for Afghanistan (and possibly Iraq) to seek better relations with their neighbours, no matter how extremist that neighbour might be? Indeed, the more extremist, the more incentive to appease them.
Not saying that any of it is right, but neither was the CIA-backed coup in Iran... It's all just one travesty after another...
Wouldn't be a particularly legal piece of beef there...
The platform is open, but the branding is not (like Mozilla), and if you want to use Google branding, you have to use Google products.
It's perfectly possible to use Skyhook or anything else on 3rd party apps in the market, and it's perfectly possible for system integrators (ie, device manufacturers) to include Skyhook in the phone.
And in any case, Google doesn't have a monopoly; anti-competitive doesn't come into play here.
"I'm first, so I can sue everyone else into non-existence" is not a valid business model.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I don't know... The possibility of no jail time might mean something - if not to the suppliers, maybe to the buyers.
Same as with alcohol after prohibition was lifted, really...
Neither "Jesus" seems to have much of a track record individually - it's only when the two work together, complimenting their skills and covering up their weaknesses that things happen. Both extreme socialists (ie communists) and conservatives don't seem to get this.
I don't think of it as a miracle, but it appears that some conservatives and libertarians do. Note that I don't make the claim that socialism (or bureaucratism for that matter) is any better. I just don't think that the whole "free market solves all" method is going to work in every case.
It makes individual sense to do a lot of things that are detrimental to human society, or even local society as a whole. In some cases, it is better to regulate the cost of a particular resource to reflect the actual societal cost of its extraction or use. That's something the "free" market is horrible at.
All of which would have probably been devoted to lolcats and pr0n anyway, so not such a big loss...
Conservatives and Libertarians tend to support the idea that we should focus on making the technology cheaper, then people will install it on their own, rather than subsidizing it.
I think conservatives and libertarians feel that we should do nothing, and that Free Market Jesus will come from the sky and solve all problems in one fell swoop...
I can't find anything on the tubes about this apart from the infoworld article (and its mirrors on apparently every site ending with -world.com). We don't know what he's actually said, and/or what his reasoning was.
If he was saying something like "Don't rely on HTML5 being fully implemented just yet, because various things are subject to change", that's just understandable. He may not be saying "don't use it" - just "don't rely on it", or "don't use in a production environment that has to work for the next 20 years unchanged".
Sensationalist article, no corroboration.
If it's an obscure footnote or a procedural glitch, nine times out of ten the judge (or jury if you're in one of those countries) will throw it out anyway
Why do you think laws like the infamous "everyone do archery practice" one from Britain are never enforced?
A good lawyer may use a loophole to force the other party to settle out of court, by scaring the shit out of them - they may even bring the matter to court as a scare tactic, but it's really not (or should not be) an exercise in sophistry...
The president doesn't want you to set that precedent
The other compiler is MinGW32 - there are others, like Borland C, and ICC...
I think CMake supports them all.
There are still piles of projects running on Windows. Right now, I'm on Windows (work machine), with KDE 4.4, Inkscape, Gimp, VTK and ITK among other things installed. Remember, lots of devs work on Windows, and quite a large body of users too. Not to mention other environments, like embedded systems which might or might not be able to work with full autotools...
Interesting solution, but it doesn't answer what happens when I don't use GCC - suppose I'm on Windows, using MSVC, or for that matter, on Linux using ICC or clang? Those are still important use cases for cross-platform applications and libraries.
So, let's have a program that knows about all these compilers and platforms, and can generate the appropriate build scripts.
Hello, CMake... ;-)
Actually building on multiple platforms without maintaining separate build files for each is the problem...
CMake was created to build Kitware's other products, most notably VTK and ITK. To date, I've built both, and other things built on top of them on three platforms, with several variations: GCC on Linux, both 32bit and 64bit, MinGW and Visual C on Windows. I don't need to install anything else apart from CMake and the compiler (and associated Make package) on each of those platforms, run it once, and then run make. On the other hand, just you try running autotools on Windows...
The other option, which I see a lot of projects using, is to have multiple build systems - an autotools one for Unices, and a .sln/.vcproj set for Windows. I don't think I need to point out the fun in maintaining that...
What's the electricity and maintenance cost of the thing, though? Initial investment? Expected lifetime?
The girl may actually turn out to be cheaper in the long run...
Your country has been kidnapping people around the world, and organized torture (and since it didn't happen in the US, it's okay, right)?
You're no different than China. I don't like either of you.
Except, that with the US, the vast majority of trials have been open, and relatively free and fair. You don't have people held incommunicado for trying to exercise their right to free speech.
And Chinese law is sometimes intentionally ambiguous and if you are clever enough you'll have more freedom than you want.
Just so long as you don't criticize anyone in power.
You have exactly the same mentality as the western media, that is to over simplifiy things in China and portray them in a stereotype as irrational lunatic. Believe it or not, some people do the same to the west.
Irrational lunatic? Not really. Power-hungry authoritarianism? Possibly...
Take the latest political opponent, Liu Xiaobo, as an example. From western media it looked like he was sent to jail for nothing serious. It turned out he was circulating a letter for signatures, calling for the establishment of a new country with a new name. That is a crime by Chinese law. Now I am not defending Chinese law here but I just wanted to point out things are more complicated than you think, including the "cheap crap" you love to hate.
If you mean the Charter 08, it may be a "crime" by Chinese law, but that's the whole point: Is the Chinese government stable enough to allow its own citizens to debate and discuss the state of their country openly? Is it mature enough to allow criticism of itself and its activities? To allow public consultations of its policies? In a nutshell, will they allow the people whom they claim to represent, discuss their own performance?
Say what you will about western democracy, the critical founding principle there is that the state is always subordinate to the people. There is always freedom to criticize the government, freedom to elect another in its place. Point to Guantanamo all you want, but the fact is, you don't get sent there for merely criticizing the government and asking for change. If you did, all liberals would have been incarcerated in the last administration, and the entire tea party in this one.
It's the same, wherever there's real free speech and democracy. In Europe, you still have people criticizing Sarkozy and Berlusconi, Blair, Brown and others - they may or may not be effective, but they aren't imprisoned for it. In India, we can still assemble and protest, and we can still hold the government responsible.
I'm not seeing that in China in any way. Under the current setup, it's impossible for the people to hold the government accountable in any way - there's never any public debate, or if there is, the rest of the world never gets to hear about it. There just seems to be an endless line of posturing politician-bureaucrats, fighting among themselves, with the entire population as pawns.
Putting e+ and e- memory together causes a matter-antimatter reaction and releases all magic smoke particles inside your computer
As long as those "citizens" have only as much right to put forth their views as Stallman, and not, say, a couple of dozen legislators in their pockets, I might just agree there.
Considering, however, that they tend to spam the entire argument, and then use undue influence to enact measures that are only in their own selfish interests, and detrimental to the general common good, I give them much less benefit of the doubt.
Yes, better to use Django or PHP instead of either the shitty original or the shittier clone, I guess...
Pretty much any decently setup service is, these days. Except for some specific use cases.
In other words, 99% of users won't be affected even on 64bit
The exploit in question actually includes a SELinux bypass. SELinux and AppArmor are not as great as you think; they are understood well enough that hackers can defeat them, and they are deployed on enough systems that hackers write their exploits so these protections are defeated.
Cue scary Theremin music
Pretty much everything since Prescott on the Intel side and, err... everything on the AMD side is 64bit. If you have anything you bought since late 2006, good changes that it's a 64bit system...
Buzzword compliance... Look at the rest of their site for some Dilbert-esque lulz
People :
Aiplex is staffed by a strong, coherent, and well-trained team of 100 plus people who have witnessed a sense of growth that is unparalleled in the industry. We have nurtured an atmosphere of teamwork, commitment, and accountability enabling the team to meet business demands consistently.
You've just "witnessed" a "sense" of growth? In other words, you didn't actually grow, you just "witnessed" something that feels like growth... After truthiness, growthiness?
They also seem to be into SEO; sounds like quite a sleazy company...
You had me laughing at "respectable"
It may or may not be innocuous, but is it in any way surprising? As of now, they seem to be the only reasonably stable polity in that belt, apart from Saudi Arabia. It's a no-brainer that they would try to exert their influence over their neighbours. In pretty much the same way, and with about the same amount of justification, as you rightly mention, as the Monroe doctrine.
And is it in any way wrong for Afghanistan (and possibly Iraq) to seek better relations with their neighbours, no matter how extremist that neighbour might be? Indeed, the more extremist, the more incentive to appease them.
Not saying that any of it is right, but neither was the CIA-backed coup in Iran... It's all just one travesty after another...
Wouldn't be a particularly legal piece of beef there...
The platform is open, but the branding is not (like Mozilla), and if you want to use Google branding, you have to use Google products.
It's perfectly possible to use Skyhook or anything else on 3rd party apps in the market, and it's perfectly possible for system integrators (ie, device manufacturers) to include Skyhook in the phone.
And in any case, Google doesn't have a monopoly; anti-competitive doesn't come into play here.
"I'm first, so I can sue everyone else into non-existence" is not a valid business model.