I have never used SuSE anyway. I have installed it a couple of time, and I found it bloated and needlessly complicated.
Some companies may buy SuSE, because of the Microsoft deal, but I strongly doubt it. SCO has shown that legal threats do not work. Do you really think IBM will beg for mercy if Novell (or Microsoft) knocks on the door, legal papers in hand? Do you think HP will do the same? What about Sun? I don't think so.
As a matter of fact, the Novell/Microsoft deal may be excellent for the future of Linux: I can see a lot of companies (HP, IBM, Red Hat, Mandriva, Sun, etc) get together and pool legal resources to fight any such threat. And that means -- worst case scenario -- that their combined economic power will simply crush any attempt by Microsoft to be "legally" naughty. The fact is, Linux cannot be stopped right now: there is simply too much interest and too much money at stake for too many people. And I suspect Microsoft knows this: it's simply trying to dip a toe in the water, see how this Linux thing really is working, try to work out some sort of compromise and preserve its profit margin. But it knows it can't fight Linux anymore (or, at least, some parts of Microsoft know that -- some other parts may ignore it).
Open source is an idea whose time has come. And it was Victor Hugo who said: "You can't fight an idea whose time has come". Again, I suspect Microsoft knows this. Hence the Novell deal.
Yes, I know there is more to a solar panel than painting a piece of glass black. Happy?;-)
However, let me point out that there are two types of solar panels out there: photovoltaics and thermal solar. The design I was talking about is, of course, a "thermal solar" type of panel, that does not generate electricity (that's a photovoltaics) but that uses the heat radiated by the sun.
Of course, someone out there is going to say: "Aha! But thermal solar can also be used to generate electricity", to which I reply: yes, but these use a Stirling Engine, and not the simple fluid-heating mechanism that I described in my first post. See here for an example of a Solar Stirling engine used to generate electricity.
A lot of people who think solar panels are inefficient and/or too expensive think about photovoltaics, and not heat-transfer solar panels. The latter being, of course, much more simple in design and less expensive, while still providing important functions.
Actually, I happened to see one design of solar still the other day, that was touted as both cheap and small.
The design used something pretty close to a solar panel: a flat white plastic surface, with a thick, dark-tinted, glass panel. Between the plastic back of the panel and the glass, the inventor put a black felt surface, on top of a black plastic sheet. The felt that was wetted by a plastic tube in which (very) small holes had been punched to create a drip.
The felt, the plastic sheet and the glass panel together were able to evaporate huge amounts of water, that then condensed in a small collector and was taken away to a water tank. The designer said that the total cost for this design was about US$ 50, but that was not including a photovoltaic solar panel to power a pump to bring water to the system and pump the purified water out. When the felt or the plastic sheet were too dirty to work correctly, all that was needed was to clean them of their impurities, and they were ready to be re-used. Most of the materials could could come from a recycling process, and be recycled, with a very smallish environmental cost.
Supposedly, this design was able to provide pure, drinkable water for a family of four. Of coruse, the whole thing had to be oriented south, and would work a lot better in a sunny country. I remember the system being installed in Puerto Rico to purify brackish water for human consumption, but the designer added it could also be used for desalination purposes. The main drawbacks, from what I understood, is that (a) the entire system needed to be "primed" for a couple of days before working at top efficiency and (b) that the design itself was so simple and so cheap few people believed it really worked.
Let's assume for a moment the 2006 US House/Senate election goes this way: Republicans keep control of both through a series of smallish victories, Democrats gain a few seats, and the results are explained away in the mainstream media as "fluke results", "margin of error", etc...
How do you prove that foul play (hacking) has been involved?
Do you even have a plan in place to check the results?
Please note that this is a very serious question. There was a saying, a few years back, that said a novice hacker is someone known in a small circle, a confirmed hacker is someone who is known all over the Internet, and a great hacker is someone who is totally invisible.
What if the election was subtly hacked, in a way that left lingering doubts (51%-vs-48% kind of results and all that), but no solid proof?
is this: what would happen if a (google-based) Chinese blogger runs afoul of the Chinese Government?
Will Google remove the blog? Or will it take a stand for freedom of speech? "Don't Be Evil" is a nice motto, but Google has proved time and again it is willing to compromise to do business in China.
Have these things been happening to US journalists? If they have not, and neither have journalists in the other high-ranking nations, then how is this ranking conducted? Isn't that like ranking all the students who made 100% on their tests?
Take a look at this page, where you can find a list of attacks against freedom of the press, that were committed in, or by, the United States and its administration.
You can agree -- or disagree -- with this list, but the fact is that there is a basis for the US low ranking.
Are they wanting reporters to be above the law or what? What does that have to do with their freedom to publish what they want?
Nice troll. RSF simply assumes journalists should be granted the following rights:
Freedom not to reveal (or be pressured to reveal) their sources, in case the whistle-blower can lose life and limb because he spoke to a journalist.
Freedom of speech, just because saying 'Fush Buck' should not be cause enough to be sent to prison.
Freedom not to be bothered, investigated, spied upon, kicked or threatened by goons, just because they chose to exert their rights not to reveal their sources or their freedom of speech.
As a side note: your comments clearly reveals your lack of understanding of even the most basic universal human rights.
Three of us, in a small company, interviewed for different jobs at Google. My boss shot for a system manager job, a co-worker tried to get in as a systems engineer and I tried a lowly tech position (hey, I was deliberately aiming low).
The results? Zero persons hired. And we are all card-carrying, Linux-using, OpenBSD-loving, certified nerds. Heck, just check my Journal if you don't believe me (Last entry: "How to compile gcc-4.1.1 on Solaris 8").
My co-worker went through two (2) phone interviews before being dumped by Google.
I went through four (4) phone interviews (about 45 minutes to one hour each) -- without too many problems, I might add -- before finding a true system administrator job and saying 'no' to Google. All of my interviews went great, but I figured the aggravation and time lost were not worth it. Besides, it was quite obvious that the whole process was going to last a loooong time, and I have a family to feed (meaning: I could not afford to wait for Google to decide).
My boss went through something like 8+ phone interviews, plus one day-long in-person interview in one of Google's European Office. That day-long (from 9:00am to 4:00pm) interview included one interview by video-phone with a manager in the USA. Said my boss after the whole day: "Most difficult thing I have ever done in my life". Then he was dumped by Google.
(All the names have been changed to protect the guilty, of course):-)
The moral of the story: it's tough kids. It's even worse than that. It's double-extra tough, with a heaping plate of steaming geekiness on the side. Is it worth it? Hey, don't ask me, I don't know. What I know is that we all now have great jobs, that are well paid, and did not take all this insanity to get. But these jobs are not 'cool' Google jobs, of course. YMMV.
Ask me again in a couple of years, when I try to get another job at the Googleplex...
Have you checked with the MS rep?
on
Donating Software?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Two things:
Have you checked with your Mirosoft rep to make sure you can do this?
If "yes", then google it, I know there are web sites where non-profit orgs can post their needs.
This being said, I can't remember the web sites addresses right now. Google is your friend.
I don't know about the USA, but in my (European) country, trying to approach the "government" goes like this:
Are you someone famous? If not, government officials don't want to hear from you. [and by famous, I mean: "tabloid famous", the kind of pretty face politicians want to be seen with]
Are you rich? If you are rich, have you given money to such-and-such politician campaign? If not, government officials don't want to hear from you.
Are you supported by thousands of angry voters? If not, government officials don't want to hear from you.
Are you supported by a massive media campaign? Or: is your media communication successful? If not, government officials don't want to hear from you.
In other words, unless you can mobilize media, public opinion or vast sums of money, government officials don't want to hear from you. And most geeks are not very good at presenting their ideas to the public, or being media darlings. Which explains why important legal battles have been lost in the recent past... Most people/voters simply did not care enough to mobilize and most politicians are ready to sell their souls to The Almighty Buck (or Euro).
And, frankly, these are the only things politicians care about these days: money, media and votes. Rather than approaching governements that don't give a hoot about you, I believe it is much more important to crack these three things. And all of them go hand-in-hand: get enough money, and you can get media exposure, and you'll mobilize normally apathetic voters (for instance). It's a sad state of affairs, but it's true: politicians are not here to serve their fellow citizens, they are in this line of work to further their own private ambitions. And as long as we have a professional political class, this can only get worse. But I digress.
Of course, I am not Eric Schmidt, who, as the CEO of Google is able to mobilize enormous amount of money and media attention. YMMV.
You mean... Google uses Slackware Linux? AH! I knew it!:-)
More seriously, re-read TFA summary: Google Slack is a configuration manager, and not necessarily Slackware-Linux-related. OTOH, The fact that the Google engineers used that adjective may be an hommage to the oldest surviving Linux distribution.
"Slack" is, after all, a perfectly valid ajective in the English language. Even though it has deep religious overtones for the Subgeniuses out there... This being said, Slackware is still, for me one of the best Linux distribution out there.
As far as I can tell, none of the people involved in this study has any background in medical research:
From TFA:
DOES TELEVISION CAUSE AUTISM? by: Michael Waldman Johnson Graduate School of Management Cornell University
Sean Nicholson Policy Analysis and Management Cornell University and NBER
Nodir Adilov Department of Economics Indiana University-Purdue University Nodir's vita
Now, don't misunderstand me: they may have very interesting things to say, but IMHO, a solid background in medicine and especially autism should be required to launch "bombshells" of this nature... This being said, my 2 1/2 years old is never going to watch TV again. Just to be on the safe side.
Essentially (yes, I did not RTFA) we are talking about injecting nano-particles into the frying oil to make it last longer?
Even though some nano-materials could be highly dangerous to human health? In other words, we may end up with highly dangerous cancer-causing products used in kitchens? To fry greasy stuff that we know are bad for our health anyway? Talk about a double whammy: if your heart attack does not kill you, cancer from nano-particles will. And do you want fries with that?
We do not want to spend time for any OSS bug fixing so our main requirement was -official support for all OSS products-
Simple solutions:
Make sure your programmers know OSS (Linux or otherwise) inside and out.
Do not buy that support, since your programmers already know how to support themselves, fix bugs and/or know enough to select stable versions of OSS tools, instead of relying on the latest-and-greatest (and buggy) tools from a vendor.
The same thing happened to me in my last job, a mixed Sun/Linux shop: people complaining about the price of Linux. Why? Because (a) only SuSE Linux was approved for a certain tool, and that tool was considered as critical by the company and (b) because company's policies and bean counters demanded official support from a reputable vendor for everything that was bought. The result? Thousands of Euros spent on buying expensive, gold-plated, 24/7 support contracts. That were almost never used, since both the programming and sysadmin teams had plenty of experience using Linux servers.
Which makes perfect sense really: Sun support is sometimes cheaper than some Linux vendors, because Sun understands that software support also means hardware lock-in. Microsoft can be cheaper than Linux because, let's face it, all the OEM Windows installed on brand-new computers subsidize the dev tools (C# and Visual what-have-you) while support is essential to the survival of many Linux distributions. Heck, giving the software away for free and selling support contracts is the entire business plan of many Linux distributors! Also, Microsoft understands that, if you, as a developer, buy Visual Thingamajig 2006, you are locked into their platforms, and so are your clients. And that means more money, in the long run, for Microsoft. Why do you think they have recently started to offer programming tools for free? Not out of the goodness of their hearts, that's for sure.
So, Linux, cheaper? Only if you solid in-house experience. I have also seen companies replacing hundreds of Sun and Windows 2000 R&D workstations by Linux/AMD machines. Why? The official reason was: "Linux is cheaper and good enough to provide the 90% functionalities we need, AMD is cheaper AND more powerful than SPARC CPUs, and everyone here likes (and knows) UNIX systems better anyway"... And that was the VP of R&D speaking.
So, back to the point above: Linux is cheaper... as long as you have enough experience in-house not to need expensive support contracts.
I'm sorry but I disagree with you on a fundamental level about *nix and learning. IMHO slackware and the rest of the *nixs are broken at the very core in that they require learning to be useful.
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, just like everyone else.
But, if this is truly your opinion, may I suggest Mac OS X? I believe it is -- so far -- the best answer that is available right now to your requests.
Other than that, the only possibility that I see would be for something like HAL, from "2001: A Space Odyssey", or the voice interface of "Outland". Since both are science-fiction movies, I am afraid your dream OS is still somewhere in the distant future.:-)
What does Slackware offer the newbie Linux user that something like Ubuntu doesn't?
The thing is (as far as I know) with Ubuntu (and many other distributions), you can use Linux just like you can use Windows: without knowing much, and without having to learn how to use a command line. It's nice, smooth, and not too hard. But you don't learn that much.
(Please note this is not to criticize Ubuntu, or any other distribution: Ubuntu is a great answer to a tough problem, how to make Linux useful for complete newbies).
With Slackware, you will have to learn. Sure, it will be tough, at first. But what you learn, you will be able to use on any Linux distributions, and on many other UN*Xes. I started with Slackware and I am today managing 10+ Solaris servers, as well as 12+ SuSE server. IMHO, what I learned under Slackware has been invaluable to the job I am doing today. YMMV, of course, but everyone I know who uses Slackware credit it with .
What selling points does Slackware have for the interested & experienced Linux geek?
Slackware is interesting for hard-core Linux Geeks because:
You have to learn. See above.
You get to compile tons of stuff, which is also a great learning experience. Plus, you learn how to be independent from one distribution.
Everything is open, everything is readable, everything is understandable. All configuration files and utilities are simple text and shell files. All the software compiled on Slackware, including the kernel, is vanilla: no annoying distribution-specific patches.
Slackware is your distribution, your way. Except you don't have to waste countless hours to compile everything, like you have to do under Gentoo or with LFS. It's usually faster and simpler to install than either of these Linux distributions. Install it, and you have the basis of a rock-solid Linux system, ready to go, and ready to go your way, not the "Debian", the "Red Hat" or the "Mandriva" way. That's a big difference.
Try Slackware, you may find yourself hooked!
And, again: this is not an attack on such-or-such distribution. I love all distributions, but Slackware always had -- and always will -- have a special place in my heart. And on my computers.
Yep, finally we got Slackware 11, and the list of changes and improvements is impressive.
Just as an aside: Patrick Volkerding is one of the unsung heroes of Open Source. Slackware is after all the oldest Linux distribution still in operation, and it is also one of the most stable and well-managed. And this is quite an achievement, considering it still is a one-man operation, and that Patrick went through some tough times recently, with his health problems and the birth of his cute baby... Hey, I am a dad, too, and I know how tough it is wih a new-born in the house!
So, thanks for everything Patrick! You are "The Man" and Slackware rocks!
And, yes, I am a (very) satisfied Slackware customer. How did you ever guess?:-)
You mean, you mean... [trembling lower lips]... Microsoft actually lied to us?!?
I can't believe this, I just can't! What's going to happen to the world now that we can't trust Microsoft??!! [Starts bawling uncontrollably] Please, Microsoft, say it ain't so! Waaaah!
All joke aside, with more than 140 thousand viruses that target Windows platforms, I am not so sure Windows Vista being delayed will have such an economic impact on european countries...
Surprisingly, [some] people discover the NSA has been spying on them illegally, without a warrant or a FISA court authorization. Congress promptly passes a bill to legalize these wiretaps.
Amazingly, [some] people discover the US military has been illegally torturing detainees, in flagrant contradiction with the Geneva Conventions (which, incidentally, happen to protect US troops from the same treatment). Congress promptly passes a bill to legalize torture.
Hmmm... Can you spot a pattern here? What's next? The coronation of George W. Bush as the emperor-for-life of the United States? What about the return of public flogging and/or public execution of people who dissent with our beloved Emperor?
And, remember, people: We have always been at war with Oceania and its Islamofascists. Ignorance is Strength! War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Long Live the Great Emperor!
In other words (and this is coming from someone who loves the USA): what the fsck are you people waiting for??? Get rid of that chimp already!!
Some european companies (F-Secure/Finland, Panda Software/Spain, etc) are involved in anti-virus protection and provide security products for Windows.
Microsoft Vista is going to integrate a lot of security products -- anti-virus is just one -- that will squeeze these european companies out of a market.
The above action can be qualified as "unfair competition" and "monopoly abuse" by the European Commission, since Microsoft owns... what? 97% 98%? of the market.
The logical conclusion of the European Commission is that Microsoft should not incorporate these security features in Vista.
To make sense of this decision, you have to remember that the European Union was based, as far as the economy is concerned, on the idea of "fair competition" meaning that monopolies should be banned, and major companies (or states) cannot squeeze smaller competitors out of a market. Whether the squeeze is due to state protectionism, unfair tariffs or a dominant position -- which is the case here -- is irrelevant.
So, yes, it sounds ridiculous and bureaucratic at first sight, but it makes economic sense. And it may even provide better products in the end (I don't trust Microsoft products anyway).
Of course, this may be just FUD, but I am pretty certain it qualifies as unlawful data collection and breach of privacy in my jurisdiction. Try to hijack my microphone, Google, and I will sue you to kingdom come. You have been warned.
A note to self: make sure the Google toolbar is uninstalled on every family computer ASAP.
Make a copy of every document, every email, every recommendation. Make you own copy, on a USB key, and don't keep only on your work computer.
Update you resume and start looking for a new job. Now. With this out of the way...
Clearly explain the problems and potentiel consequences (the means $$$ consequences) to every manager and partner one last time.
Point out every legal dispositions that may require the company to protect internal and client information: Sarbanes-Oaxley, etc. Support this by pointing out the amount of money paid by companies that had breaches and/or data stolen following a major security problem.
Provide low/no-cost solutions to the situation at hand: OpenBSD/Linux firewalls, programs like TrueCrypt for the laptops, Snort, Nessus, NMap, Wireshark and other software that can help secure a network.
Remember: managers only understand money matters. Point out the financial risks any chance you get and you will probably have their full and undivided attention.
Again, if all else fail, just get out of the company as quickly as possible, and keep that paper trail on your USB key for the next decade or so... Or, even better, keep two copies, one on the USB key and the other on a CD-ROM.
It reminds me of the day when -- in a security-conscious software publisher -- the CFO wanted everyone to be a Wifi network. During a meeting on this subject, I simply pointed out that anyone with a Wifi card could probably snoop on the network traffic from one of the offices above ours. The Wifi project disappeared before you could say "war driving"...
Slashdot Mirror
I have never used SuSE anyway. I have installed it a couple of time, and I found it bloated and needlessly complicated.
Some companies may buy SuSE, because of the Microsoft deal, but I strongly doubt it. SCO has shown that legal threats do not work. Do you really think IBM will beg for mercy if Novell (or Microsoft) knocks on the door, legal papers in hand? Do you think HP will do the same? What about Sun? I don't think so.
As a matter of fact, the Novell/Microsoft deal may be excellent for the future of Linux: I can see a lot of companies (HP, IBM, Red Hat, Mandriva, Sun, etc) get together and pool legal resources to fight any such threat. And that means -- worst case scenario -- that their combined economic power will simply crush any attempt by Microsoft to be "legally" naughty. The fact is, Linux cannot be stopped right now: there is simply too much interest and too much money at stake for too many people. And I suspect Microsoft knows this: it's simply trying to dip a toe in the water, see how this Linux thing really is working, try to work out some sort of compromise and preserve its profit margin. But it knows it can't fight Linux anymore (or, at least, some parts of Microsoft know that -- some other parts may ignore it).
Open source is an idea whose time has come. And it was Victor Hugo who said: "You can't fight an idea whose time has come". Again, I suspect Microsoft knows this. Hence the Novell deal.
No offence taken!
Yes, I know there is more to a solar panel than painting a piece of glass black. Happy? ;-)
However, let me point out that there are two types of solar panels out there: photovoltaics and thermal solar. The design I was talking about is, of course, a "thermal solar" type of panel, that does not generate electricity (that's a photovoltaics) but that uses the heat radiated by the sun.
Of course, someone out there is going to say: "Aha! But thermal solar can also be used to generate electricity", to which I reply: yes, but these use a Stirling Engine, and not the simple fluid-heating mechanism that I described in my first post. See here for an example of a Solar Stirling engine used to generate electricity.
A lot of people who think solar panels are inefficient and/or too expensive think about photovoltaics, and not heat-transfer solar panels. The latter being, of course, much more simple in design and less expensive, while still providing important functions.
Actually, I happened to see one design of solar still the other day, that was touted as both cheap and small.
The design used something pretty close to a solar panel: a flat white plastic surface, with a thick, dark-tinted, glass panel. Between the plastic back of the panel and the glass, the inventor put a black felt surface, on top of a black plastic sheet. The felt that was wetted by a plastic tube in which (very) small holes had been punched to create a drip.
The felt, the plastic sheet and the glass panel together were able to evaporate huge amounts of water, that then condensed in a small collector and was taken away to a water tank. The designer said that the total cost for this design was about US$ 50, but that was not including a photovoltaic solar panel to power a pump to bring water to the system and pump the purified water out. When the felt or the plastic sheet were too dirty to work correctly, all that was needed was to clean them of their impurities, and they were ready to be re-used. Most of the materials could could come from a recycling process, and be recycled, with a very smallish environmental cost.
Supposedly, this design was able to provide pure, drinkable water for a family of four. Of coruse, the whole thing had to be oriented south, and would work a lot better in a sunny country. I remember the system being installed in Puerto Rico to purify brackish water for human consumption, but the designer added it could also be used for desalination purposes. The main drawbacks, from what I understood, is that (a) the entire system needed to be "primed" for a couple of days before working at top efficiency and (b) that the design itself was so simple and so cheap few people believed it really worked.
Let's assume for a moment the 2006 US House/Senate election goes this way: Republicans keep control of both through a series of smallish victories, Democrats gain a few seats, and the results are explained away in the mainstream media as "fluke results", "margin of error", etc...
How do you prove that foul play (hacking) has been involved?
Do you even have a plan in place to check the results?
Please note that this is a very serious question. There was a saying, a few years back, that said a novice hacker is someone known in a small circle, a confirmed hacker is someone who is known all over the Internet, and a great hacker is someone who is totally invisible.
What if the election was subtly hacked, in a way that left lingering doubts (51%-vs-48% kind of results and all that), but no solid proof?
is this: what would happen if a (google-based) Chinese blogger runs afoul of the Chinese Government?
Will Google remove the blog? Or will it take a stand for freedom of speech? "Don't Be Evil" is a nice motto, but Google has proved time and again it is willing to compromise to do business in China.
Take a look at this page, where you can find a list of attacks against freedom of the press, that were committed in, or by, the United States and its administration.
You can agree -- or disagree -- with this list, but the fact is that there is a basis for the US low ranking.
Simply read the following page, here they explain their methodology.
Nice troll. RSF simply assumes journalists should be granted the following rights:
As a side note: your comments clearly reveals your lack of understanding of even the most basic universal human rights.
The results? Zero persons hired. And we are all card-carrying, Linux-using, OpenBSD-loving, certified nerds. Heck, just check my Journal if you don't believe me (Last entry: "How to compile gcc-4.1.1 on Solaris 8").
(All the names have been changed to protect the guilty, of course)
The moral of the story: it's tough kids. It's even worse than that. It's double-extra tough, with a heaping plate of steaming geekiness on the side. Is it worth it? Hey, don't ask me, I don't know. What I know is that we all now have great jobs, that are well paid, and did not take all this insanity to get. But these jobs are not 'cool' Google jobs, of course. YMMV.
Ask me again in a couple of years, when I try to get another job at the Googleplex...
This being said, I can't remember the web sites addresses right now. Google is your friend.
In other words, unless you can mobilize media, public opinion or vast sums of money, government officials don't want to hear from you. And most geeks are not very good at presenting their ideas to the public, or being media darlings. Which explains why important legal battles have been lost in the recent past... Most people/voters simply did not care enough to mobilize and most politicians are ready to sell their souls to The Almighty Buck (or Euro).
And, frankly, these are the only things politicians care about these days: money, media and votes. Rather than approaching governements that don't give a hoot about you , I believe it is much more important to crack these three things. And all of them go hand-in-hand: get enough money, and you can get media exposure, and you'll mobilize normally apathetic voters (for instance). It's a sad state of affairs, but it's true: politicians are not here to serve their fellow citizens, they are in this line of work to further their own private ambitions . And as long as we have a professional political class, this can only get worse. But I digress.
Of course, I am not Eric Schmidt, who, as the CEO of Google is able to mobilize enormous amount of money and media attention. YMMV.
You mean... Google uses Slackware Linux? AH! I knew it! :-)
More seriously, re-read TFA summary: Google Slack is a configuration manager, and not necessarily Slackware-Linux-related. OTOH, The fact that the Google engineers used that adjective may be an hommage to the oldest surviving Linux distribution.
"Slack" is, after all, a perfectly valid ajective in the English language. Even though it has deep religious overtones for the Subgeniuses out there... This being said, Slackware is still, for me one of the best Linux distribution out there.
From TFA:
Now, don't misunderstand me: they may have very interesting things to say, but IMHO, a solid background in medicine and especially autism should be required to launch "bombshells" of this nature... This being said, my 2 1/2 years old is never going to watch TV again. Just to be on the safe side.
Essentially (yes, I did not RTFA) we are talking about injecting nano-particles into the frying oil to make it last longer?
Even though some nano-materials could be highly dangerous to human health? In other words, we may end up with highly dangerous cancer-causing products used in kitchens? To fry greasy stuff that we know are bad for our health anyway? Talk about a double whammy: if your heart attack does not kill you, cancer from nano-particles will. And do you want fries with that?
Then again, this is business as usual in the USA, so I guess it will probably be used soon.
Simple solutions:
The same thing happened to me in my last job, a mixed Sun/Linux shop: people complaining about the price of Linux. Why? Because (a) only SuSE Linux was approved for a certain tool, and that tool was considered as critical by the company and (b) because company's policies and bean counters demanded official support from a reputable vendor for everything that was bought. The result? Thousands of Euros spent on buying expensive, gold-plated, 24/7 support contracts. That were almost never used, since both the programming and sysadmin teams had plenty of experience using Linux servers.
Which makes perfect sense really: Sun support is sometimes cheaper than some Linux vendors, because Sun understands that software support also means hardware lock-in. Microsoft can be cheaper than Linux because, let's face it, all the OEM Windows installed on brand-new computers subsidize the dev tools (C# and Visual what-have-you) while support is essential to the survival of many Linux distributions. Heck, giving the software away for free and selling support contracts is the entire business plan of many Linux distributors! Also, Microsoft understands that, if you, as a developer, buy Visual Thingamajig 2006, you are locked into their platforms, and so are your clients. And that means more money, in the long run, for Microsoft. Why do you think they have recently started to offer programming tools for free? Not out of the goodness of their hearts, that's for sure.
So, Linux, cheaper? Only if you solid in-house experience. I have also seen companies replacing hundreds of Sun and Windows 2000 R&D workstations by Linux/AMD machines. Why? The official reason was: "Linux is cheaper and good enough to provide the 90% functionalities we need, AMD is cheaper AND more powerful than SPARC CPUs, and everyone here likes (and knows) UNIX systems better anyway"... And that was the VP of R&D speaking.
So, back to the point above: Linux is cheaper... as long as you have enough experience in-house not to need expensive support contracts.
I'm sorry but I disagree with you on a fundamental level about *nix and learning. IMHO slackware and the rest of the *nixs are broken at the very core in that they require learning to be useful.
:-)
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, just like everyone else.
But, if this is truly your opinion, may I suggest Mac OS X? I believe it is -- so far -- the best answer that is available right now to your requests.
Other than that, the only possibility that I see would be for something like HAL, from "2001: A Space Odyssey", or the voice interface of "Outland". Since both are science-fiction movies, I am afraid your dream OS is still somewhere in the distant future.
The thing is (as far as I know) with Ubuntu (and many other distributions), you can use Linux just like you can use Windows: without knowing much, and without having to learn how to use a command line. It's nice, smooth, and not too hard. But you don't learn that much.
(Please note this is not to criticize Ubuntu, or any other distribution : Ubuntu is a great answer to a tough problem, how to make Linux useful for complete newbies).
With Slackware, you will have to learn . Sure, it will be tough, at first. But what you learn, you will be able to use on any Linux distributions, and on many other UN*Xes. I started with Slackware and I am today managing 10+ Solaris servers, as well as 12+ SuSE server. IMHO, what I learned under Slackware has been invaluable to the job I am doing today. YMMV, of course, but everyone I know who uses Slackware credit it with .
What selling points does Slackware have for the interested & experienced Linux geek?
Slackware is interesting for hard-core Linux Geeks because:
Try Slackware, you may find yourself hooked!
And, again: this is not an attack on such-or-such distribution. I love all distributions, but Slackware always had -- and always will -- have a special place in my heart. And on my computers.
Yep, finally we got Slackware 11, and the list of changes and improvements is impressive.
:-)
Just as an aside: Patrick Volkerding is one of the unsung heroes of Open Source. Slackware is after all the oldest Linux distribution still in operation, and it is also one of the most stable and well-managed. And this is quite an achievement, considering it still is a one-man operation, and that Patrick went through some tough times recently, with his health problems and the birth of his cute baby... Hey, I am a dad, too, and I know how tough it is wih a new-born in the house!
So, thanks for everything Patrick! You are "The Man" and Slackware rocks!
And, yes, I am a (very) satisfied Slackware customer. How did you ever guess?
You mean, you mean... [trembling lower lips]... Microsoft actually lied to us?!?
I can't believe this, I just can't! What's going to happen to the world now that we can't trust Microsoft??!! [Starts bawling uncontrollably] Please, Microsoft, say it ain't so! Waaaah!
All joke aside, with more than 140 thousand viruses that target Windows platforms, I am not so sure Windows Vista being delayed will have such an economic impact on european countries...
Hmmm... Can you spot a pattern here? What's next? The coronation of George W. Bush as the emperor-for-life of the United States? What about the return of public flogging and/or public execution of people who dissent with our beloved Emperor?
And, remember, people: We have always been at war with Oceania and its Islamofascists. Ignorance is Strength! War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Long Live the Great Emperor!
In other words (and this is coming from someone who loves the USA): what the fsck are you people waiting for??? Get rid of that chimp already!!
The logical conclusion of the European Commission is that Microsoft should not incorporate these security features in Vista.
To make sense of this decision, you have to remember that the European Union was based, as far as the economy is concerned, on the idea of "fair competition" meaning that monopolies should be banned, and major companies (or states) cannot squeeze smaller competitors out of a market. Whether the squeeze is due to state protectionism, unfair tariffs or a dominant position -- which is the case here -- is irrelevant.
So, yes, it sounds ridiculous and bureaucratic at first sight, but it makes economic sense. And it may even provide better products in the end (I don't trust Microsoft products anyway).
WTF happened to "Don't Be Evil", Google?
Of course, this may be just FUD, but I am pretty certain it qualifies as unlawful data collection and breach of privacy in my jurisdiction. Try to hijack my microphone, Google, and I will sue you to kingdom come. You have been warned.
A note to self: make sure the Google toolbar is uninstalled on every family computer ASAP.
With this out of the way...
Remember: managers only understand money matters. Point out the financial risks any chance you get and you will probably have their full and undivided attention.
Again, if all else fail, just get out of the company as quickly as possible, and keep that paper trail on your USB key for the next decade or so... Or, even better, keep two copies, one on the USB key and the other on a CD-ROM.
It reminds me of the day when -- in a security-conscious software publisher -- the CFO wanted everyone to be a Wifi network. During a meeting on this subject, I simply pointed out that anyone with a Wifi card could probably snoop on the network traffic from one of the offices above ours. The Wifi project disappeared before you could say "war driving"...
Slashdot T-Shirts!!!
;-)
Imagine proudly advertising to the entire world that you are a complete nerd! Yay!