I can see ease of use. It is what most people were trained on. Try driving on the left side of the road if you learned to drive on the right side.
Performance on systems that do have hardware with no linux drivers, I can see that. (Did you just install a straight *nix install without recompiling for your hardware platform?)
Security? Not likely. Until I can rip the guts out of MS OS without tripping the OS itself up and thus eliminate potential security threats, *nix will be a tough one to beat.
*nix can be insecure, but not near as easily a MS OSs can be insecure.
MS OS is a great game platform, so my son likes it for that, and it allows me to see what my clients that have windows see, so I use it for that.
I switch MS OS and *nix all the time on people that use *my* computers and most of them are starting to switch to linux. Many of my clients already have switched to linux (or Mac OSX).
The only reason MS is more successful IMO is that they were able to do things in the market that are illegal, but not punishable unless caught, prosecuted and held to that punishment. Like Robber Barons of old, they have learned how to not pay for their trangressions.
I would go with MS if they came out with a realiable, secure, easy to use system that did not bundle a bunch of extra crud in the OS (or at least gives me the no extra cost ability to recompile without stuff I do not need). And the price would have to be right.
We do not allow most commercial produce in our house anymore because of these concerns. What is really making my wife mad is the problems with cross-contamination in the field. How can we guarentee their modified stuff will not ruin our natural lines? We have a few friends who grow and harvest natural food on rotated land (useing fallow fields to reinvograte the land). It costs us a bit more, but we notice a marked difference in taste and quality of the food. For lettuce, my wife insists on Romain for some reason.;-)
Followed your link. One of the professors out here (in the IUPU system) is doing research into the protein that captures light and how it might be used/functionally duplicated in a robotics implant for certain visually impaired individuals. Talking to him was a rather nice change (going back to college in your late thirties can make you a bit of an outsider.);-) Your website commentaries reminded me of his conversations on his science. Thanks for the good stuff.
There is a difference between executing a model wrong and a model not working. The Internet hype forgot to take into account competition from radio, tv and other sources. Google might (if it is really doing this) reach that critical mass. Wireless can be a lot cheaper than wired to put into place. Though, if you are a cell phone user, it sure does not seem that way.;-)
I do not think the realm of real science is to blame. Most scientists I know do not like the *hype* and would love to solve the social problems. But, you can not change a person unless they want to change. Some psuedo-scientists are out for profit and without a moral compass, but they are looking for business and revenue, not science.
I think the worlds of business, politics and press are to blame. Probably joe average as well. People want it now. People seem to (most people) not support things that take more than a few years to happen, so they do not pay attention to things that take a few decades, or worse centuries.
If people did not demand so much hype and storytelling (infotainment), then maybe life would be less fiction and more truth. I doubt I will live to see the day that happens, but I can hope.
Providing an atmosphere is nice, but will not make Mars *liveable*. The bigger concern is the lack of a radiation shield like Earth. Even if the people live in safe housing, plants and crops would be hard to cover in large enough quantities to be useable. The magnetic field surrounding the Earth and the ozone layer do protect us (mostly) from the harmful radiations of space (our Sun and others).
How are we going to protect Mars form that? Until we figure out a way to do that, the rest is rather useless (on Mars). How are we going to increase the gravity of Mars to prevent the Atmosphere from leaking off very fast? True, it will take a long time in our standards, but how much can be leaked off before it is not useable again?
Actually, the part about Intelligent Deisgn that makes me laugh the hardest is how terrible the design of the human body (or other animals/plants) are in the first place. Is this really the best a Super Intelligence could do? It may be far superior to what we can do, but we are not even children in the realm of creating.
The very concept that ID relies upon to further itself, that the design is so complicated and perfect is where it first starts to fall apart. The design is poor, breaks down often, does not last very long, is vulnerable to self-complications,... The list is huge as to what the problems are with the design. We are close (within a few hundred years) to being able to do the same or better on a small scale. We are definately nowhere near being a *Super Intelligence* (not even within a few thousand years).
The *real* problem with ID, using its own arguments is the assumption that these genetically based life forms are all that complicated or wonderful. They are not. Genes have many incredible issues that are problematic at best. How many conceptions abort themselves because they have an error? How many people live life with a *condition* because of a genetic error? How many people have mental illness because of genetic issues? This is good?
Does Microsoft have a plan to interact with the Linux world? If so, what is it, and what publicly useable evidence is there for it? Basically, why would someone who has learned the value of open standards want to go back to closed standards no matter what the platform, or are the standards from MS being opened (not just viewable, but useable and unrestricted)?
OSS has its place in this world. Proprietary software has its place in this world, but I have a serious issue with data lock. For many of my clients, I have helped them dump MS and other systems that use proprietary data formats in favor of open standards (format) data. The cost savings and work flow improvement have always been positive and in many cases surprisingly large. They still have MS and other companies software, but without the data lock-in on their core/business data.
I am curious as to how MS plans to work with platforms based on open standards. My experience with the past feels like bait and switch. Microsoft has/has purchased some really great products. I would love to be able to tell someone MS has a great product, and it will not get in the way of future upgrades/migrations. Yet, most of what I have read tells me that they are headed in the other direction.
Ever here of marketing? Many individuals/companies use *charitable* donations to generate inexpensive goodwill advertising, break open new markets and/or generate a deeper customer base in existing markets.
I do not know Bill Gates personally, but the timing of said large contributions is funny at best. Maybe I am a cynic after all these years, but when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, one tends to think it is a duck.
Microsoft has done good things. They have also done incredibly illegal and bad things. Which way you place your bet on their future conduct depends on how much faith you have in them and how you interpret their past conduct. I tend to think once a criminal, best bet is on future criminal activity. Businesses are not in business to follow the law and be good citizens, unless it is profitable to do so.
I know many teachers in business and ethics, and many business leaders argue otherwise. I would like to believe them, but the actions of too many companies (and politicians) leave me no doubt about the way I think. There is a reason for the expression "actions speak louder than words".
There are many forms of evil, some blatant and obvious, as your link points out and some smart, cunning and quiet. Whether BPL is *evil* or not, I do not know (as I have not followed what is happening there), but there are many Corporations that are evil. There are many people who do evil things as well. You can not judge evil by its clothing or its visible actions, only by its intent. Stupid people do things that seem evil in the name of good, and evil people do things that appear good with *evil* (selfish?) intent. Not a conspiracy, but each person/company has its own agenda and its own way of doing what it does. Homicide/Suicide Bombers are but one type of individual who would do great harm in there own selfish goals. Destroying the environment, stealing privacy, or destroying others services (RF), are another.
It is not how obvious the act nor how visible the act that determines how evil (or bad) the person (company), but the intent. As far as Al Quaeda, they are definately evil (James Bond style), as far as this BPL, are they trying to produce a system that does no harm? or are they wrecklessly pursuing an agenda without regards for any harm they do?
No more than ten people can watch a DVD at the same time? Holy Cow, I need to cancel my son's parties. He has 15 to 25 people over every other weekend.
And, given that this was not the only incident that MS abused customer information or lied to people about what or why they were collecting data, I'd rather not trust them with access to my personal information. You do not need to give away bank numbers to cause great harm.
I have set this up already for a few. The regular secure network is not wireless. The wireless is there for the clients.
With HIPPA (and reputation alone), a wired network is not that hard to install so that it is easy to add new systems whenever you want. A wireles network always remains vulnerable to attack as you HAVE NO CONTROL over who can try to access it. As soon as a bug in the current security scheme is discovered, you are vulnerable, and probably not even aware of it.
The crackers to be afraid of are the ones you never see. Physical security is, as always, the first step in computer security.
You need to study how the code you write is converted into machine code or byte code and then executed. It is all mathematical. It is easy to miss this if your background in math never made it past calculus into set theory, or if your background in computers never went into compilers very much.
Vectors are mathematics, comparisons are mathematic, sorting is mathematic, and so on. When you write software, you define sets of problems, and sets of solutions to those problems (though different methods say it in different ways.) If you ever read higher order mathematical problems, you would find that they read like programs.
As far as not having to know math, people calculate trajectories and velocities all the time without the foggiest notion that they are in fact carrying out some comlicated mathematics. Just because you do not know how what you are doing is mathematical does not mean what you are doing is not mathematical.
My favorite comment from anyone about the first movie was from a child (15) who noted that one of the major themes in the movie was the inate fear of accepting something alien to your experiences. He went on to say our fears and prejudices that we are so unwilling to give up are the things that doom ourselves and our world (maybe not those exact words, but you get the idea..)
He thought this movie was about religion, specifically in the refusal to accept research/facts that are counter to certain views in faith that we are (most of us) raised with as the absolute truth.
InnerWeb
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers!
on
Glass In Spaaaaace
·
· Score: 1
Hmm.. From the Earth, it is very expensive to transport. I wonder what the cost would be from the moon.
Some of us were talking about this in front of an older friend of my wife. She listened to us and asked about the temperature changes, the moodiness of the congress over spending money for it, and the problem with things getting off course. To which she actually replied, it sounds like we were talking about menopause.
Slashdot Mirror
Performance on systems that do have hardware with no linux drivers, I can see that. (Did you just install a straight *nix install without recompiling for your hardware platform?)
Security? Not likely. Until I can rip the guts out of MS OS without tripping the OS itself up and thus eliminate potential security threats, *nix will be a tough one to beat.
*nix can be insecure, but not near as easily a MS OSs can be insecure.
MS OS is a great game platform, so my son likes it for that, and it allows me to see what my clients that have windows see, so I use it for that.
I switch MS OS and *nix all the time on people that use *my* computers and most of them are starting to switch to linux. Many of my clients already have switched to linux (or Mac OSX).
The only reason MS is more successful IMO is that they were able to do things in the market that are illegal, but not punishable unless caught, prosecuted and held to that punishment. Like Robber Barons of old, they have learned how to not pay for their trangressions.
I would go with MS if they came out with a realiable, secure, easy to use system that did not bundle a bunch of extra crud in the OS (or at least gives me the no extra cost ability to recompile without stuff I do not need). And the price would have to be right.
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
I take it you have issues with Monsanto as well, then? Talk about playing with big systems we depend on.
InnerWeb
That's incredibly funny. I had to walk away I was laughing so hard.
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
Followed your link. One of the professors out here (in the IUPU system) is doing research into the protein that captures light and how it might be used/functionally duplicated in a robotics implant for certain visually impaired individuals. Talking to him was a rather nice change (going back to college in your late thirties can make you a bit of an outsider.) ;-) Your website commentaries reminded me of his conversations on his science. Thanks for the good stuff.
InnerWeb
There is a difference between executing a model wrong and a model not working. The Internet hype forgot to take into account competition from radio, tv and other sources. Google might (if it is really doing this) reach that critical mass. Wireless can be a lot cheaper than wired to put into place. Though, if you are a cell phone user, it sure does not seem that way. ;-)
InnerWeb
I think the worlds of business, politics and press are to blame. Probably joe average as well. People want it now. People seem to (most people) not support things that take more than a few years to happen, so they do not pay attention to things that take a few decades, or worse centuries.
If people did not demand so much hype and storytelling (infotainment), then maybe life would be less fiction and more truth. I doubt I will live to see the day that happens, but I can hope.
InnerWeb
How are we going to protect Mars form that? Until we figure out a way to do that, the rest is rather useless (on Mars). How are we going to increase the gravity of Mars to prevent the Atmosphere from leaking off very fast? True, it will take a long time in our standards, but how much can be leaked off before it is not useable again?
InnerWeb
It sounds like he is trying to describe Johari Windows to the press. That was first introduced to me almost 20 years ago. That was one cool class.
InnerWeb
The very concept that ID relies upon to further itself, that the design is so complicated and perfect is where it first starts to fall apart. The design is poor, breaks down often, does not last very long, is vulnerable to self-complications, ... The list is huge as to what the problems are with the design. We are close (within a few hundred years) to being able to do the same or better on a small scale. We are definately nowhere near being a *Super Intelligence* (not even within a few thousand years).
The *real* problem with ID, using its own arguments is the assumption that these genetically based life forms are all that complicated or wonderful. They are not. Genes have many incredible issues that are problematic at best. How many conceptions abort themselves because they have an error? How many people live life with a *condition* because of a genetic error? How many people have mental illness because of genetic issues? This is good?
InnerWeb
OSS has its place in this world. Proprietary software has its place in this world, but I have a serious issue with data lock. For many of my clients, I have helped them dump MS and other systems that use proprietary data formats in favor of open standards (format) data. The cost savings and work flow improvement have always been positive and in many cases surprisingly large. They still have MS and other companies software, but without the data lock-in on their core/business data.
I am curious as to how MS plans to work with platforms based on open standards. My experience with the past feels like bait and switch. Microsoft has/has purchased some really great products. I would love to be able to tell someone MS has a great product, and it will not get in the way of future upgrades/migrations. Yet, most of what I have read tells me that they are headed in the other direction.
InnerWeb
I do not know Bill Gates personally, but the timing of said large contributions is funny at best. Maybe I am a cynic after all these years, but when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, one tends to think it is a duck.
Microsoft has done good things. They have also done incredibly illegal and bad things. Which way you place your bet on their future conduct depends on how much faith you have in them and how you interpret their past conduct. I tend to think once a criminal, best bet is on future criminal activity. Businesses are not in business to follow the law and be good citizens, unless it is profitable to do so.
I know many teachers in business and ethics, and many business leaders argue otherwise. I would like to believe them, but the actions of too many companies (and politicians) leave me no doubt about the way I think. There is a reason for the expression "actions speak louder than words".
InnerWeb
It is not how obvious the act nor how visible the act that determines how evil (or bad) the person (company), but the intent. As far as Al Quaeda, they are definately evil (James Bond style), as far as this BPL, are they trying to produce a system that does no harm? or are they wrecklessly pursuing an agenda without regards for any harm they do?
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
Microsoft, FTC reach privacy settlement
And, given that this was not the only incident that MS abused customer information or lied to people about what or why they were collecting data, I'd rather not trust them with access to my personal information. You do not need to give away bank numbers to cause great harm.
InnerWeb
With HIPPA (and reputation alone), a wired network is not that hard to install so that it is easy to add new systems whenever you want. A wireles network always remains vulnerable to attack as you HAVE NO CONTROL over who can try to access it. As soon as a bug in the current security scheme is discovered, you are vulnerable, and probably not even aware of it.
The crackers to be afraid of are the ones you never see. Physical security is, as always, the first step in computer security.
InnerWeb
Vectors are mathematics, comparisons are mathematic, sorting is mathematic, and so on. When you write software, you define sets of problems, and sets of solutions to those problems (though different methods say it in different ways.) If you ever read higher order mathematical problems, you would find that they read like programs.
As far as not having to know math, people calculate trajectories and velocities all the time without the foggiest notion that they are in fact carrying out some comlicated mathematics. Just because you do not know how what you are doing is mathematical does not mean what you are doing is not mathematical.
InnerWeb
He thought this movie was about religion, specifically in the refusal to accept research/facts that are counter to certain views in faith that we are (most of us) raised with as the absolute truth.
InnerWeb
-InnerWeb
I never would have thought of that!
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
InnerWeb