IIRC, they test the material from ground zero to see what its atomic signature is. Seems that the reactors that make the material all have signatures that are as unique as fingerprints.
With this information, they can normally follwo the trail to where it came from (went).
... fascinating. When do we vote? November? Release in December? Even if this really is nothing more than a tech issue, after everything else they (the current junta) has lied about, covered up or smugly deceived us with, this to is rather suspect.
...then why not use NASA's solution for the launch pads. Using a treaded vehicle to move it would allow the base to be recycled, or at least provide a platform to build a more solid structure that would then have a longer potential lifetime.
As the snow built up around the base, you would simply drive the vehicle/base forward up and over the new snow/ice. Of course, there is the problem of the extreme cold and what it does to machinery of any kind, and how much weight could be handled under each tread (there would have to be enough space covered by the treads to distribute the weight enough to allow the treads to safely move the base.)
But, a mobile base would allow for some interesting investments to be made in the research capabilities. It would also allow the base to eventually move further inland with much less effort/risk as compared to building a new base closer to the pole (since you would have your habitat right there with you;-). IANAA(I am not an architect), but I can still dream.
... I notice that Mr Moore seems to be "a to the left unskilled Rush Limbaugh". Although I believe there is a tragically desperate need for the real truth of what is being done by the current regime in Washington to be released, I do believe it needs to be tempered with pure journalistic spirit. Mr Moore, though a fun read and rather emotional seems to fall far short of this. I have not seen the movie yet, and based on what I have read here and in his book, I will probably pass.
The reality of Washington is that big business is taking over more and more to the point that it is becoming the fourth branch of power. Unfortunately bigbusiness an unchecked branch and one that has very few "guidelines" as to how it operates. The corporate world lacks checks and balances, and is not elected. It controls or seriously influences most elections now through cash. Without some serious changes to the election system, their control will continue to strengthen over time.
Bush has too much dirt on him to be a viable President in the next election. If he had actually contributed some far reaching advances to the people of our country (besides the wealthiest few), or somehow actually executed Iraq with political skill, he might have had enough political clout here and abroad to be a viable contender. If he does get elected this time, then our country will have a huge uphill battle globally (except for the richest few people). Realistically, voting for Bush is a vote for Microsoft's illegal business practices, greater amounts of pollution in the atmosphere (and in our children, e.g. lead, arsenic and others), a widening economic gap between the top few percent and everyone else and more unregulated business can do what it wants, consequences be damned.
The choices are simple. You may think you have something to gain, but what about your children and your grandchildren. IMO, if you do not care, that says enough about you anyway. If you do care about their future, Bush has to go. If you do not care about the children, any one of a number of excuses might apply for you. Since (if you do not care to value them first), you are unwilling to invest in their future, how about you do not get any of the benefit of their future tax base outside of what you put in for them (less than $2000 per year per child in the US IIRC). Try no Social Security or Health benefits for you as you get older, no economic benefits from stocks you own that their purchases/employment benefit, no future paved roads for you to ride on... Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, you may not have been the one to bring them into this world, but they will be the ones paying for your tax burdens, driving the economy you live off of with their spending and providing care to you in your old age (unless you plan to off yourself at some point soon.)
It is just plain and simple, Bush and his right wing are not Pro-Family. That would mean being pro-child and that would mean the children come before the big business. They almost never vote that way (none to a few votes arguably that I am aware of) and I do not expect them to suddenly change. Anti-Abortion does not mean pro-family. It just means that women do not have a choice on abortion. Pro-church is definitely not pro-child or pro-family. It is only pro-church. I have seen numerous things from the current group and many in the same team who are pro-church, pro-life and pro-business, but I have seen next to nothing from this group that is pro-family, pro-child or pro-citizen in a long time.
BTW, if anyone knows, is it a joke that Guiness is considering putting GW's plan to pardon the illegal immigrants in the US as the largest pardon in history or is it real?
... for helping me with my college savings and retirment savings. I used to spend many hundreds to thousands of dollars per year on audio and video. Now, I spend nothing. If I want to hear a song, I request it. If one station does not have it, I find another (have always found what I am looking for). But, mostly, I have picked up my guitar again (first time since I was married),and started working the keyboard again. It is amazing how much better music feels (if not sounds) when you play it yourself. Another nice benefit is that people never told me how good I was when I listened to music. They do so when I play and sing. You all should try it as well. It takes a few years to get anywhere, but it is easy (If you are mathematically inclined, music seems to be much easier, IMO).
The question is will Microsoft be smart enough to realize this.
In the interest of the right thing actually happening (I know fairy tales and Disney movies have little to do with reality)... I hope they do not realize it and I hope that Mr Amadeu and associates expose MS more for what it really is. Really now, business practices do make a big difference. MS is all about cutting out all competition, stealing any ideas they can and then locking out the rest. If you can not see that, I suggest you invest some time in the study of Standard Oil, IBM, AT&T and others. Look at the telco market now - after AT&T was broken up, all of the services, innovation and lower cost services that became available. Do you (the reader) really think the software world would be less so?
... another tipping of serious government resources to be given to the private sector, specifically, defense and similar contractors.
NASA works primarily because it is government. Yes, it always has the chance to be swayed from one political side to the other (slightly). NASA, though is also one of the few (only?) institutions of the government that has actually returned more money to the economy than it has taken. The thought of slice and dice on NASA is chilling. NASA provides (or provided) a strong platform for bringing initial research from the point of being non-viable in a business sense to a viable and even necessary understanding for businesses.
Take a look at most business today, especially corporations. How far down the road are the looking for a return on investment before they are willing to spend their capital on anything? Not even 4 years in most cases. There are a few exceptions, but normally limited to the pharmaceutical companies. Even most investment funds are geared to a year by year investment strategy, and they have one of the longest look ahead time frames for any product on the market.
I see the same private interests peeking up here as I see in almost all other privatization, schools, parks, roads, etc. The failure of this view is to recognize that by their very nature, all businesses must make a profit, and that means to the exclusion of all things perceived profitless (or not profitable enough). Our space program would have never happened if that had been the view (profit), and more than likely many things from tennis shoes to microwave ovens would either not exist yet or never exist. (Yeah, I know theoretically, all things in time will exist, but realistically, from a profit motive standpoint, most things will not exist, as the profit motive is not strong enough and even a societies available consumption is finite in nature. Basic supply and demand says no (or not enough) demand, no need for a supply.)
One of the problems with advanced cutting edge/bleeding edge research (like the moon missions) is that you have to throw tons of money away to get the advances. But as has been shown time and again (moon shots, Internet, Christopher Columbus, Marco Polo, ), the benefits can be unmistakably life altering. This is something that most businesses are not good at, and in the hands of businesses would slow to a trickle.
IMO, NASA should be returned to its prior years of glory. I say glory because as a nation we glorified it. We stood as a people behind its mission. The bully pulpet of the president was strongly behind it. It was advertised and promoted. If anything should be outsourced, perhaps that would be the best start. We do so well promoting our drug using abusive sports heroes, but we fail to promote that which is essentially most valuable to us as a society, even as a race.
Ignore the parent poster. The one thing I have learned in life is that all
people are special. Some are special and wonderful, some are special and
terrible. Some are just special.
Each and every one of us has strengths
and weaknesses. Each and every one of us has different combinations of talents
and innate skills. If we are lucky these align themselves, but often they do
not. As far as smart being important, it is, but not that much. Other skills
are far more important than "smarts". Being on time, showing respect for
others, keeping promises (making promises you can keep), keeping your mouth
closed unless you have something good to say and many more. I have been
terrible at most (if not all) of these "other" skills at one time or another in
my life (take prioritizing for instance).
Being smart is nice and can
be a leg up on those around you, but only in conjunction with the rest of the
important skills. Being humble does not mean to think you are stupid. All my
life, so many people have told me how smart I am. I used to believe them. As I
have grown older, I have learned to redefine what they say to how smart I am at
one or two things compared to them at those things.
It was not me I had to get over. It was my lack of me. Most people who are passionate about something are also smart about that something. That is not to be confused with skilled at a thing, which is the ability to apply the "smartness".
When I put what others want me to do ahead of what I hunger to do, (like how to get paid the most, or have the best career), that is when I make the biggest mistakes. No one can predict the future, and no one but you can really know what you enjoy. The tests can be helpful if you have no clue about yourself, but they only get you started in a direction. Just do what you love, be very good at it, and do not get sidetracked. You may not get rich, but you may get lucky and find happiness with your career (something most people never find).
Oh, yeah. Some big ones... Stay away from partying too much. Some here will disagree with that, it gets in the way. My Freshman year, I received a D- because I broke loose (almost 20 years ago). My last year in school, I almost hit 4.0 (on a 4 point scale). I was much happier the last year, not the first. I kept trying to be Joe Jock (I was a swimmer) and fit in with my team mates. I never would have. I was too different. What I should have done was hang with the computer geek outcasts (in my day, it was social leprosy) who actually were interested in the same things as myself. I would have received a much better grade, dropped the whole swimming thing (or changed to a different Univ) and been around people whom I could truly share something with besides a ton of partying, liquor and women. That stuff is for people who do not have a life.
But, that just shows how not smart I was with so many other things. Being smart non-traditionally is an Einstein thing (I believe he failed High School - traditional schooling, but pursued his passions, and the rest is history). You just need to find your place, and pursue it. I am certain that until he had E=MC**2, he did not have any Hollywood Starlets knocking at his door. Watch these movies, then think about your question again. I hope you see your choice in a different light. (Keep in mind these are people's lives portrayed by Hollywood, but they are well.)
October Skies
A Beautiful Mind
Rudy
The Other Side Of Heaven
All of these about people who either had or discovered a certain brilliance for something they did. Some started off smart, and had to adjust to our realities. Some started off like the masses and grew into their "smarts". They all did something wonderful and heroic with their abilities.
...I was just wondering if the expansion/contraction might not have something to do with outside forces acting upon the brane (as always, still theory) that our Universe exists in. Think of a piece of rubber sheet with a map of our cosmos on it, then think of it being stretched in different directions, around things, etc. Being stuck in a rather two dimensional viewpoint, we would see contractions and expansions over time, but the time frame may be so great that a very young society (like ours) may not really see the changes.
It may be possible to have a universe that is expanding and contracting at different times based on variables we have no ability to measure, hence never be able to know which way we are going to go, only where we seem to have gone.
For some great educational sources for the non-astro-physicist, see The Elegant Universe excellent program (my six and ten year olds understood most of it). A few other articales are at Sky and Telescope and
Scientific American
...Is just trolling to market his book. Kind of like the Area 51 stories, Yeti, et al.
Yellow Journalism is as old as journalism itself, and it will not change. As always, it as a marketing tool, whether to sell a product or an idea, it is universally based on scant to non-existant evidence.
It is easy to ignore until it touches on something you care about. Then, it is realized as the unfounded attack it is. The damage this stuff causes is far greater than its immediate impact, as it (yellow journalism) makes it harder to believe in remote potentials that are unearthed in everyday science and technology.
Best way to deal with yellow journalists is to discredit them with carfeul facts in a very public forum.
...I work with our teachers and admins... Most of them (with a few notable exceptions) think of computers as support tools. And many of them rarely use the computers at all. As far as using computers as part of the education process, I know of many very succesful uses. But, in each case, the computer was used as a tool to meet an end goal, not as a goal of using the computer.
The problem with computers are the idiot end users who still think in terms of computers as being magic. They probably do not realize it. Even IT people (bosses) I have worked for before think in terms of computers as magic. As long as people say it can be done if you just put a computer to it, this waste will continue at all levels of government and business.
There are very useful computer games out there (learning tools). But they do not make an education, only a small part of it. To make an education, you start with reading, writing, arithmetic, music, art, athletics (not sports) and socialization. These develop the mind in the most critical areas first. Believe it or not, language and physical learning are linked in very fundamental ways. Slashdot Posting and Google
Computers are only useful when the brain is to the point where they are able to be used as a tool. Education by gaming is mostly unsuccesful because the games are written to sell to our lazy entertain me desires, not to our educate me needs..
The other problem with computers is administrations pushing administrative work down on teachers via computers that eats up time they do not have. This I see much more often. Good record keeping on our children in school is important to the needs of the child. But, that requires smaller class sizes, and that means more teachers, less computers.
...but, only MS can place that code in the domain.
They own it, legally or not, and they wield a mighty financial hammer to prevent any use of it that they do not want. They control it. Unless they release it under the GNU or some such similar and appropriate license, I would not use it, and I doubt any OSS coder of worth would either (coding for OSS). Of course, there may be some exceptions, but they always come at a price.
So, to the MS evangelist, tell MS how great a product this is and how important it is to place MS code in the public domain. Tell MS how important it is to participate in the OSS community as an active, honest, open member. If you can convince MS that these are all good things, and MS starts doing these things, then maybe it might be a good idea to include MS technology in core OSS technologies.
... but once business gets a hold on it, that idea will be laid to rest. Heck, why worry about nanos when we already have increasing lead, mercury and other toxins to deal with? Just another way to destroy the planet.
Seriously, though, it is good to read a nice boring article about any technology. It seems like the average dolt has to have something blowing up or a mass kill in a story before they bother to read it (or more likely watch it) anymore.
I agree that the RH9 product was an unacceptably short time for any product from a business perspective.
I do remember using products from MS that were cut off early just as well. True, on the OS side, most have had some form of support for at least a few years. From a business perspective, I have never used a brand new product. I have always waited at least 6 months to see how things fall out. The fact that RH cut RH9 so fast is a bit unnerving, but I am also glad that it was cut fast, as no product is far better than a product with poor support (IMHO).
You are right. All of these things and much more go into TCO. But, TCO is difficult to define as it is really a feel good statistic. I have my definition of TCO, you have yours. Beannies have a much different one from any of ours. You and I (I would think) are much more technically competent than most beannies are and expect a much larger set of things when thinking TCO. Most beannies are overwhelmed by the most basic stuff to us and therefore go running for package deals. If most beannies have to think about it, they toss it to the side (unless it is a beannie thing they are thinking about). This may be bogus for you and I, but it is a non-thinking pricing option for those who do not want to think outside of their office/cubicle, and that is what they want most.
InnerWeb
Re:It is all about marketing to the pointy haired.
on
Red Hat Desktop Unveiled
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And that would differ from Microsoft how? It is not about what you and I think in the end. It is about what the bean counters and the business people think. And what they think has very little to do with what most of us think. They care about cost controls. They care about budgets. They care about expense caps. This allows them to get what is most important to them.
InnerWeb
It is all about marketing to the pointy haired....
on
Red Hat Desktop Unveiled
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
...and this makes much sense!
Now, they can put a dollar amount on TCO for linux boxes. That makes it much easier to sell to a bean counter. They hate not knowing wha the cost is. That is one of the lessons I learned while working for myself. If you can not package it with a fixed dollar amount, most will skip it, even if your dollar range is cheaper than the compeition.
This is something Linux needs to have to go bigtime on the desktop. A marketing and pricing model that the beannies can understand. They have no clue about anything else (beg pardon to those beannies who are actually cl - computer literate). Now, I think you will start to see more Linux usage on the desktop. They will start to approve it more since they can actually pump a fixed cost into their spreadsheets!
...Security, stability and safety are the primary concerns of any computing platform. When you ignore any of the three, you are at risk. Just like risk in the real world, risk in the digital world can have serious impact.
Microsoft, Linux, Apple - all platforms need to have this drilled into their brains, coding, and documentation repeatedly with much force! Microsoft is a target because they have angered so many with their *business* activities and sloppy coding. How long before Linux joins them?
I am an avid Linux user - The only windows machines I have are for client applications that I can not run on Linux.
Most of us (yes, me included) when we scratch an itch, make it work for ourselves, not for the world in general. If we are to produce Secure, Stable and Safe programs, then we need to have a tool set that allows us to build them without thinking about it, or we need to all think about it with each app released into the wild. Asking Joe User to know enough to run a secure platform is like asking all people to be able to self serve everything in their own cars, appliances and bodies (i.e., no mechanics, repairmen or doctors needed).
'It aint gonna happen!' All of these are way to complex and most are changing faster than most people can keep up with. So, it needs to fall back on our shoulders (the developers) to make this happen. The question today (as in so many other days past) is what can we Linux developers learn from Microsoft's mud? What are the issues that are allowing these things to happen and how can we prevent them? I hope everyone has heard this before.
And, more importantly, how do we get qualified people to itch this scratch to completion? It seems to me that the world in general would benefit most from a programming tool set that built these solutions in, and that is not going to be an easy task. Microsoft is trying to address that with.net, and is still not on target (or anywhere close from what I have seen). Java tried to answer that, but it has fallen far short of what is needed.
I really do not have any answers to this. One of my bet friends has explained to me the complexities of building compiler systems and writing your own languages. Those complexities alone are big issues. I would love to read what other/.ers have to say on this issue.
... I simply do not buy any of this technology. I pay for whatever I use (I do not steal), but I do not buy anything that limits my use of what I have purchased. Simple message. No dollars, no go.
If you are worried about not getting your share of music, entertainment, etc, then you need to see all of the alternatives out there. There are plenty of bands not caught up in this madness who are quite good. There is theater, printed books, playing sports, painting, traveling... When you come right down to it, they are really making the easier forms of entertainment (listening to music, watching TV) harder and less competitive to more fulfilling forms of entertainment (playing sports, nature walks, getting out...). As the cost analysis is shifted for more people, I bet they experience slower sales.
So, we switch out one set of problems affecting a small percent of votes for a larger set of issues affecting a larger percentage of votes...
The basic problem is ensuring that the vote is correct and not tampered with. How can you trust a company to not tamper with something as profitable as a vote when you can not trust them to keep to the terms of the contract?
Diebold has proven beyond a doubt that they can not be trusted. They not only did not fulfill their contract, they tried to sneak a patch into a certified machine (thus de-certifying it) before an election. Hmm... If they had not been caught at that, what else could they have gotten away with. How much are local elections worth in bribe money? How much are national elections worth? If all you have is a small number of people to work with in the bribe, how hard is it? Oh, and they have a vested interest in seeing people get elected who support them. They may not use it today, but what about when times get tough and they are comfortable?
I love using computers for work flow. I help companies manage work flow for a living. Yet, there are those who have no business using these technologies at this moment. I would not trust my voting to any computer system yet.
My reasoning has to do with complexity. The more complex a system is the easier it is to pull something off. Complexity hides errors and cheats. A voting system would need to be based on something very simple. It would need to have very strong security safeguards. And, it would have to be completely open to inspection, by anyone at anytime. Anything short of this simply allows mischief to be hidden more easily.
Look at all the fallout in the Florida presidential elections. Most of it was introduced by a company that "messed up" buy disallowing people to vote in the elections. All computer based with little or no over site, tied directly to the winning family. There may be nothing to be seen in this case, but the appearance of impropriety is bad enough to damage the operations of government.
The problems with elections is not liberal or conservative. It is American. People who are drawn to power tend to do what they can get away with to keep power. Why give them one more option to illegally wield power by putting an untrustworthy system into place?
...and whenever we say the government is eroding our freedoms, we need to remember that we are not asserting our rights to prevent that erosion. Yep, most elected officials are crooked. Can't get away from that until we remove the huge sums of money from the election process (donations and such). Diebold may or may not be a company seeking to have an unusual influence on elections. More likely, like so many other companies, they are merely seeking to have an unusual hold on some contracts to supply equipment and services.
As far as the Pres and Co. goes, how do you think he got elected. Any president at some point is merely a puppet to certain private powers that be.
Think about it, why do we even need Tort law? Why do we even need contract law? Why do we even need freedom of press laws? Because people as a whole have some pretty sick individuals. And, those individuals (enough of them) tend to gravitate towards positions of power. Once they get some power, then tend to amplify it without regard for who it hurts.
Another way to understand what is happening is to look at the slow poisoning of the planet. What other effect do you think dumping mercury and lead into the atmosphere and rivers could have? What other effect do you think smog could have? What other effect could adding a grossly increased amount of heat trapping gasses into our atmosphere have? The majority of people do not care. If it kills their grandchildren, they will lament, but they will not care until then.
The reason the freedoms are being eroded and that companies get away with what they do is that most people do not want to give up their TV or their computer games. Most people will sit right in the path of that freight train until they get hit (and then cry foul).
The alternative? Fighting back is expensive and counter to the normal persons goal of having a nice quiet life. Another article on/. today mentioned a memo at Microsoft talking about the reason so many people did not abandon MS's poor products was the "lock-in" of people unwilling to put forth the energy to go to a better product.
Most people are like water, they choose the path of least resistance to arrive at the lowest standard of life. Not to be confused with the highest standards of consumerism. Heck, even I do not exert enough energy in the direction of preserving freedoms. I am too busy trying to ensure food is on the table, and my kids have a chance at college. Until we get past some rather serious social issues, the part where we clean up government is not likely to happen, as those in power will be able to keep it by keeping us divided amongst ourselves.
Years ago, I decided not to get into Java for the very reasons that people are afraid it might die now. I kept on using Perl. I know, it is old, and is taking forever to come out with 6.x. It works, it is free, I have never seen the platform it does not now run on (though I know there are some), and it has a ton of support. Is it perfect? No. What language is?
The real problem here is that the community in general has forgotten what a business is all about. Even my business. To make money. And when the squeeze comes on the primary lines of income (as it always does), the "charity" gets "changed" in ways the community does not approve of.
It is the same reason I will not produce serious applications in.net. I have used it, it is neat, but it is locked up and problematic. If MS wants to make a change that breaks my code, my clients are in trouble. If you think they will not, go back to VB, VC++ et al. MS always makes changes that breaks things, and then they do force the change on you.
Sun is yet another company that has tried to be a gallant knight in shining armor (all in the name of profit). If Sun kills Java for a few billion, what can we say? They own it. If Sun decides to let it go free, what can MS say? No payment?
If we as a community really want to keep Sun's Java alive (not our Java), then we need to make it worth Sun's while to do so. Sun needs to turn a profit. Without that profit, they can not pay the people who write Java to write. Without a profit, there is no gatekeeper.
If we all really want to keep Java, we need to reach into our pockets and pull out some money. If everyone contributed $100.00US to a fund (say the OSDN) earmarked to purchase Java and set it free (or to pay sun to keep it going), you might get what you need. You need to get 10,000,000 people to each pay their $100.00US to the fund (1 billion dollars US). Now, that is only half what the MS people are paying for whatever it is they are paying for, so we all might need to pay more than $200.00 each.
Of course, you could always try to get a few thousand serious developers to start contributing to the development of Java in the wild.
Slashdot Mirror
InnerWeb
With this information, they can normally follwo the trail to where it came from (went).
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
As the snow built up around the base, you would simply drive the vehicle/base forward up and over the new snow/ice. Of course, there is the problem of the extreme cold and what it does to machinery of any kind, and how much weight could be handled under each tread (there would have to be enough space covered by the treads to distribute the weight enough to allow the treads to safely move the base.)
But, a mobile base would allow for some interesting investments to be made in the research capabilities. It would also allow the base to eventually move further inland with much less effort/risk as compared to building a new base closer to the pole (since you would have your habitat right there with you ;-). IANAA(I am not an architect), but I can still dream.
InnerWeb
The reality of Washington is that big business is taking over more and more to the point that it is becoming the fourth branch of power. Unfortunately bigbusiness an unchecked branch and one that has very few "guidelines" as to how it operates. The corporate world lacks checks and balances, and is not elected. It controls or seriously influences most elections now through cash. Without some serious changes to the election system, their control will continue to strengthen over time. Bush has too much dirt on him to be a viable President in the next election. If he had actually contributed some far reaching advances to the people of our country (besides the wealthiest few), or somehow actually executed Iraq with political skill, he might have had enough political clout here and abroad to be a viable contender. If he does get elected this time, then our country will have a huge uphill battle globally (except for the richest few people). Realistically, voting for Bush is a vote for Microsoft's illegal business practices, greater amounts of pollution in the atmosphere (and in our children, e.g. lead, arsenic and others), a widening economic gap between the top few percent and everyone else and more unregulated business can do what it wants, consequences be damned.
The choices are simple. You may think you have something to gain, but what about your children and your grandchildren. IMO, if you do not care, that says enough about you anyway. If you do care about their future, Bush has to go. If you do not care about the children, any one of a number of excuses might apply for you. Since (if you do not care to value them first), you are unwilling to invest in their future, how about you do not get any of the benefit of their future tax base outside of what you put in for them (less than $2000 per year per child in the US IIRC). Try no Social Security or Health benefits for you as you get older, no economic benefits from stocks you own that their purchases/employment benefit, no future paved roads for you to ride on... Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, you may not have been the one to bring them into this world, but they will be the ones paying for your tax burdens, driving the economy you live off of with their spending and providing care to you in your old age (unless you plan to off yourself at some point soon.)
It is just plain and simple, Bush and his right wing are not Pro-Family. That would mean being pro-child and that would mean the children come before the big business. They almost never vote that way (none to a few votes arguably that I am aware of) and I do not expect them to suddenly change. Anti-Abortion does not mean pro-family. It just means that women do not have a choice on abortion. Pro-church is definitely not pro-child or pro-family. It is only pro-church. I have seen numerous things from the current group and many in the same team who are pro-church, pro-life and pro-business, but I have seen next to nothing from this group that is pro-family, pro-child or pro-citizen in a long time.
BTW, if anyone knows, is it a joke that Guiness is considering putting GW's plan to pardon the illegal immigrants in the US as the largest pardon in history or is it real?
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
In the interest of the right thing actually happening (I know fairy tales and Disney movies have little to do with reality)... I hope they do not realize it and I hope that Mr Amadeu and associates expose MS more for what it really is. Really now, business practices do make a big difference. MS is all about cutting out all competition, stealing any ideas they can and then locking out the rest. If you can not see that, I suggest you invest some time in the study of Standard Oil, IBM, AT&T and others. Look at the telco market now - after AT&T was broken up, all of the services, innovation and lower cost services that became available. Do you (the reader) really think the software world would be less so?
InnerWeb
NASA works primarily because it is government. Yes, it always has the chance to be swayed from one political side to the other (slightly). NASA, though is also one of the few (only?) institutions of the government that has actually returned more money to the economy than it has taken. The thought of slice and dice on NASA is chilling. NASA provides (or provided) a strong platform for bringing initial research from the point of being non-viable in a business sense to a viable and even necessary understanding for businesses.
Take a look at most business today, especially corporations. How far down the road are the looking for a return on investment before they are willing to spend their capital on anything? Not even 4 years in most cases. There are a few exceptions, but normally limited to the pharmaceutical companies. Even most investment funds are geared to a year by year investment strategy, and they have one of the longest look ahead time frames for any product on the market.
I see the same private interests peeking up here as I see in almost all other privatization, schools, parks, roads, etc. The failure of this view is to recognize that by their very nature, all businesses must make a profit, and that means to the exclusion of all things perceived profitless (or not profitable enough). Our space program would have never happened if that had been the view (profit), and more than likely many things from tennis shoes to microwave ovens would either not exist yet or never exist. (Yeah, I know theoretically, all things in time will exist, but realistically, from a profit motive standpoint, most things will not exist, as the profit motive is not strong enough and even a societies available consumption is finite in nature. Basic supply and demand says no (or not enough) demand, no need for a supply.)
One of the problems with advanced cutting edge/bleeding edge research (like the moon missions) is that you have to throw tons of money away to get the advances. But as has been shown time and again (moon shots, Internet, Christopher Columbus, Marco Polo, ), the benefits can be unmistakably life altering. This is something that most businesses are not good at, and in the hands of businesses would slow to a trickle.
IMO, NASA should be returned to its prior years of glory. I say glory because as a nation we glorified it. We stood as a people behind its mission. The bully pulpet of the president was strongly behind it. It was advertised and promoted. If anything should be outsourced, perhaps that would be the best start. We do so well promoting our drug using abusive sports heroes, but we fail to promote that which is essentially most valuable to us as a society, even as a race.
InnerWeb
Each and every one of us has strengths and weaknesses. Each and every one of us has different combinations of talents and innate skills. If we are lucky these align themselves, but often they do not. As far as smart being important, it is, but not that much. Other skills are far more important than "smarts". Being on time, showing respect for others, keeping promises (making promises you can keep), keeping your mouth closed unless you have something good to say and many more. I have been terrible at most (if not all) of these "other" skills at one time or another in my life (take prioritizing for instance).
Being smart is nice and can be a leg up on those around you, but only in conjunction with the rest of the important skills. Being humble does not mean to think you are stupid. All my life, so many people have told me how smart I am. I used to believe them. As I have grown older, I have learned to redefine what they say to how smart I am at one or two things compared to them at those things.
It was not me I had to get over. It was my lack of me. Most people who are passionate about something are also smart about that something. That is not to be confused with skilled at a thing, which is the ability to apply the "smartness".
When I put what others want me to do ahead of what I hunger to do, (like how to get paid the most, or have the best career), that is when I make the biggest mistakes. No one can predict the future, and no one but you can really know what you enjoy. The tests can be helpful if you have no clue about yourself, but they only get you started in a direction. Just do what you love, be very good at it, and do not get sidetracked. You may not get rich, but you may get lucky and find happiness with your career (something most people never find).
Oh, yeah. Some big ones... Stay away from partying too much. Some here will disagree with that, it gets in the way. My Freshman year, I received a D- because I broke loose (almost 20 years ago). My last year in school, I almost hit 4.0 (on a 4 point scale). I was much happier the last year, not the first. I kept trying to be Joe Jock (I was a swimmer) and fit in with my team mates. I never would have. I was too different. What I should have done was hang with the computer geek outcasts (in my day, it was social leprosy) who actually were interested in the same things as myself. I would have received a much better grade, dropped the whole swimming thing (or changed to a different Univ) and been around people whom I could truly share something with besides a ton of partying, liquor and women. That stuff is for people who do not have a life.
But, that just shows how not smart I was with so many other things. Being smart non-traditionally is an Einstein thing (I believe he failed High School - traditional schooling, but pursued his passions, and the rest is history). You just need to find your place, and pursue it. I am certain that until he had E=MC**2, he did not have any Hollywood Starlets knocking at his door. Watch these movies, then think about your question again. I hope you see your choice in a different light. (Keep in mind these are people's lives portrayed by Hollywood, but they are well.)
- October Skies
- A Beautiful Mind
- Rudy
- The Other Side Of Heaven
All of these about people who either had or discovered a certain brilliance for something they did. Some started off smart, and had to adjust to our realities. Some started off like the masses and grew into their "smarts". They all did something wonderful and heroic with their abilities.Good luck. Life is full of unexpected treasures.
InnerWeb
It may be possible to have a universe that is expanding and contracting at different times based on variables we have no ability to measure, hence never be able to know which way we are going to go, only where we seem to have gone.
For some great educational sources for the non-astro-physicist, see The Elegant Universe excellent program (my six and ten year olds understood most of it). A few other articales are at Sky and Telescope and Scientific American
InnerWeb
Yellow Journalism is as old as journalism itself, and it will not change. As always, it as a marketing tool, whether to sell a product or an idea, it is universally based on scant to non-existant evidence.
It is easy to ignore until it touches on something you care about. Then, it is realized as the unfounded attack it is. The damage this stuff causes is far greater than its immediate impact, as it (yellow journalism) makes it harder to believe in remote potentials that are unearthed in everyday science and technology.
Best way to deal with yellow journalists is to discredit them with carfeul facts in a very public forum.
InnerWeb
The problem with computers are the idiot end users who still think in terms of computers as being magic. They probably do not realize it. Even IT people (bosses) I have worked for before think in terms of computers as magic. As long as people say it can be done if you just put a computer to it, this waste will continue at all levels of government and business.
There are very useful computer games out there (learning tools). But they do not make an education, only a small part of it. To make an education, you start with reading, writing, arithmetic, music, art, athletics (not sports) and socialization. These develop the mind in the most critical areas first. Believe it or not, language and physical learning are linked in very fundamental ways. Slashdot Posting and Google
Computers are only useful when the brain is to the point where they are able to be used as a tool. Education by gaming is mostly unsuccesful because the games are written to sell to our lazy entertain me desires, not to our educate me needs..
The other problem with computers is administrations pushing administrative work down on teachers via computers that eats up time they do not have. This I see much more often. Good record keeping on our children in school is important to the needs of the child. But, that requires smaller class sizes, and that means more teachers, less computers.
InnerWeb
They own it, legally or not, and they wield a mighty financial hammer to prevent any use of it that they do not want. They control it. Unless they release it under the GNU or some such similar and appropriate license, I would not use it, and I doubt any OSS coder of worth would either (coding for OSS). Of course, there may be some exceptions, but they always come at a price.
So, to the MS evangelist, tell MS how great a product this is and how important it is to place MS code in the public domain. Tell MS how important it is to participate in the OSS community as an active, honest, open member. If you can convince MS that these are all good things, and MS starts doing these things, then maybe it might be a good idea to include MS technology in core OSS technologies.
InnerWeb
Seriously, though, it is good to read a nice boring article about any technology. It seems like the average dolt has to have something blowing up or a mass kill in a story before they bother to read it (or more likely watch it) anymore.
InnerWeb
I do remember using products from MS that were cut off early just as well. True, on the OS side, most have had some form of support for at least a few years. From a business perspective, I have never used a brand new product. I have always waited at least 6 months to see how things fall out. The fact that RH cut RH9 so fast is a bit unnerving, but I am also glad that it was cut fast, as no product is far better than a product with poor support (IMHO).
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
InnerWeb
Now, they can put a dollar amount on TCO for linux boxes. That makes it much easier to sell to a bean counter. They hate not knowing wha the cost is. That is one of the lessons I learned while working for myself. If you can not package it with a fixed dollar amount, most will skip it, even if your dollar range is cheaper than the compeition.
This is something Linux needs to have to go bigtime on the desktop. A marketing and pricing model that the beannies can understand. They have no clue about anything else (beg pardon to those beannies who are actually cl - computer literate). Now, I think you will start to see more Linux usage on the desktop. They will start to approve it more since they can actually pump a fixed cost into their spreadsheets!
InnerWeb
Microsoft, Linux, Apple - all platforms need to have this drilled into their brains, coding, and documentation repeatedly with much force! Microsoft is a target because they have angered so many with their *business* activities and sloppy coding. How long before Linux joins them?
I am an avid Linux user - The only windows machines I have are for client applications that I can not run on Linux.
Most of us (yes, me included) when we scratch an itch, make it work for ourselves, not for the world in general. If we are to produce Secure, Stable and Safe programs, then we need to have a tool set that allows us to build them without thinking about it, or we need to all think about it with each app released into the wild. Asking Joe User to know enough to run a secure platform is like asking all people to be able to self serve everything in their own cars, appliances and bodies (i.e., no mechanics, repairmen or doctors needed).
'It aint gonna happen!' All of these are way to complex and most are changing faster than most people can keep up with. So, it needs to fall back on our shoulders (the developers) to make this happen. The question today (as in so many other days past) is what can we Linux developers learn from Microsoft's mud? What are the issues that are allowing these things to happen and how can we prevent them? I hope everyone has heard this before.
And, more importantly, how do we get qualified people to itch this scratch to completion? It seems to me that the world in general would benefit most from a programming tool set that built these solutions in, and that is not going to be an easy task. Microsoft is trying to address that with .net, and is still not on target (or anywhere close from what I have seen). Java tried to answer that, but it has fallen far short of what is needed.
I really do not have any answers to this. One of my bet friends has explained to me the complexities of building compiler systems and writing your own languages. Those complexities alone are big issues. I would love to read what other /.ers have to say on this issue.
InnerWeb
If you are worried about not getting your share of music, entertainment, etc, then you need to see all of the alternatives out there. There are plenty of bands not caught up in this madness who are quite good. There is theater, printed books, playing sports, painting, traveling... When you come right down to it, they are really making the easier forms of entertainment (listening to music, watching TV) harder and less competitive to more fulfilling forms of entertainment (playing sports, nature walks, getting out ...). As the cost analysis is shifted for more people, I bet they experience slower sales.
I know they slowed my purchases already.
InnerWeb
The basic problem is ensuring that the vote is correct and not tampered with. How can you trust a company to not tamper with something as profitable as a vote when you can not trust them to keep to the terms of the contract?
Diebold has proven beyond a doubt that they can not be trusted. They not only did not fulfill their contract, they tried to sneak a patch into a certified machine (thus de-certifying it) before an election. Hmm... If they had not been caught at that, what else could they have gotten away with. How much are local elections worth in bribe money? How much are national elections worth? If all you have is a small number of people to work with in the bribe, how hard is it? Oh, and they have a vested interest in seeing people get elected who support them. They may not use it today, but what about when times get tough and they are comfortable?
I love using computers for work flow. I help companies manage work flow for a living. Yet, there are those who have no business using these technologies at this moment. I would not trust my voting to any computer system yet.
My reasoning has to do with complexity. The more complex a system is the easier it is to pull something off. Complexity hides errors and cheats. A voting system would need to be based on something very simple. It would need to have very strong security safeguards. And, it would have to be completely open to inspection, by anyone at anytime. Anything short of this simply allows mischief to be hidden more easily.
Look at all the fallout in the Florida presidential elections. Most of it was introduced by a company that "messed up" buy disallowing people to vote in the elections. All computer based with little or no over site, tied directly to the winning family. There may be nothing to be seen in this case, but the appearance of impropriety is bad enough to damage the operations of government.
The problems with elections is not liberal or conservative. It is American. People who are drawn to power tend to do what they can get away with to keep power. Why give them one more option to illegally wield power by putting an untrustworthy system into place?
InnerWeb
As far as the Pres and Co. goes, how do you think he got elected. Any president at some point is merely a puppet to certain private powers that be.
Think about it, why do we even need Tort law? Why do we even need contract law? Why do we even need freedom of press laws? Because people as a whole have some pretty sick individuals. And, those individuals (enough of them) tend to gravitate towards positions of power. Once they get some power, then tend to amplify it without regard for who it hurts.
Another way to understand what is happening is to look at the slow poisoning of the planet. What other effect do you think dumping mercury and lead into the atmosphere and rivers could have? What other effect do you think smog could have? What other effect could adding a grossly increased amount of heat trapping gasses into our atmosphere have? The majority of people do not care. If it kills their grandchildren, they will lament, but they will not care until then.
The reason the freedoms are being eroded and that companies get away with what they do is that most people do not want to give up their TV or their computer games. Most people will sit right in the path of that freight train until they get hit (and then cry foul).
The alternative? Fighting back is expensive and counter to the normal persons goal of having a nice quiet life. Another article on /. today mentioned a memo at Microsoft talking about the reason so many people did not abandon MS's poor products was the "lock-in" of people unwilling to put forth the energy to go to a better product.
Most people are like water, they choose the path of least resistance to arrive at the lowest standard of life. Not to be confused with the highest standards of consumerism. Heck, even I do not exert enough energy in the direction of preserving freedoms. I am too busy trying to ensure food is on the table, and my kids have a chance at college. Until we get past some rather serious social issues, the part where we clean up government is not likely to happen, as those in power will be able to keep it by keeping us divided amongst ourselves.
Innereb
The real problem here is that the community in general has forgotten what a business is all about. Even my business. To make money. And when the squeeze comes on the primary lines of income (as it always does), the "charity" gets "changed" in ways the community does not approve of.
It is the same reason I will not produce serious applications in .net. I have used it, it is neat, but it is locked up and problematic. If MS wants to make a change that breaks my code, my clients are in trouble. If you think they will not, go back to VB, VC++ et al. MS always makes changes that breaks things, and then they do force the change on you.
Sun is yet another company that has tried to be a gallant knight in shining armor (all in the name of profit). If Sun kills Java for a few billion, what can we say? They own it. If Sun decides to let it go free, what can MS say? No payment?
If we as a community really want to keep Sun's Java alive (not our Java), then we need to make it worth Sun's while to do so. Sun needs to turn a profit. Without that profit, they can not pay the people who write Java to write. Without a profit, there is no gatekeeper.
If we all really want to keep Java, we need to reach into our pockets and pull out some money. If everyone contributed $100.00US to a fund (say the OSDN) earmarked to purchase Java and set it free (or to pay sun to keep it going), you might get what you need. You need to get 10,000,000 people to each pay their $100.00US to the fund (1 billion dollars US). Now, that is only half what the MS people are paying for whatever it is they are paying for, so we all might need to pay more than $200.00 each.
Of course, you could always try to get a few thousand serious developers to start contributing to the development of Java in the wild.
InnerWeb