Windows 8 minus most the Windows 8 features is just an improved version of Windows 7.
I have problems with Windows 8, like the importing of images and videos. On Windows 7, I was able to define specific paths, what those paths should contain, how filenames should be constructed etc. Windows 8 doesn't give me any of these options, it just dumps them into "My Pictures".
These aren't Windows 8 'features', they're just removed features. This isn't better for people like me that have to end up writing custom software to bring back functionality that used to be there.
Linux is not exactly famous for backwards compatibility, stable APIs, and not breaking existing applications.
I can run applications made back in 1993 without a problem, no recompilation needed either. It's trivial to fakeroot your outdated environment and applications and run them. It's certainly not famous, but it is certainly reliable at running old applications without any issues. Kernel API is fully backwards compatible and ancient userland works fine on the latest version of Linux.
Wine, than native Linux binaries, especially if they were compiled for a different distribution.
Sounds like you just don't know what you're doing. If you're depending distribution specific libc, other dependencies, create a fakeroot/container of your 'working' environment and run it in that from whatever other distribution you're using.
But...the reverse problem is that "mainframe migration" projects often end up becoming case studies of how Big Consulting Company X was paid hundreds of millions to not deliver a working system. I believe I read about DWP's "Universal Credit" project that has Accenture, IBM or Oracle written all over it.
I work in the consulting industry, I have always delivered. That said, some of these can be absurdly difficult to deliver. You have to work with 3rd party vendors that are obstructive because they see they're on the way out. When in government you have to deal with various policies to do with change requests, importing of new software to the network, hardware and software acquisition and through no fault of your own, these organisations are very slow moving and can take months in some instances approve. Never mind when you get rejected and you have to spend excessive amounts of time trying to convince the client that they do want it because it's in their best interests and there are no alternatives that are sufficient.
Generally people assume the contractors are just messing about and fail to deliver a project because of poor organisation and such. The problem I find more common is that the client ties the hands of the consulting firm and obstructionists prevent the firm delivering much of anything.
Except even in your example that situation was not accepted or shrugged off.
AMD didn't shrug off their problems, they changed their firm to mitigate the risk.
Rather, I am saying that when companies run into serious problems they need to be taken seriously and addressed in a manner that they no longer pose a strategic risk to their position.
AMD's position in my opinion is 2nd best against vendors when it comes to processor/chips, this hasn't compromised that. They have other revenue streams, so they can survive a hit.
AMD clearly needs more leverage in the supply chain.
Their leverage is that they can exit the market and kill industries in the process. This however is equivalent to a nuclear bomb in my mind and shouldn't be used to fight some temporary resource contention issues which is apparently affecting the wider industry too. They're probably looking at alternatives right now, but I suspect the options aren't very desirable.
Sure it does, because this is how you assess risk and determine where to focus your business.
Their role in that market requires that they have the ability to produce products.
Or exploit it for other purposes, such as selling off research, as they have done numerous times.
If their lack of control over their supply chain is making their future in that market questionable then they need to make a choice.
Tech markets tend to have a lot of various issues continuously which is reflected price changes. I remember other significant problems like when Taiwan got hit by a natural disaster and many harddrive companies were unable to produce harddrives in quantities desired due to component demands. This isn't really a different situation or something new.
I'm saying that any company that is dependent on a single supplier, unable to innovate, and ultimately left bidding against wealthier companies for scrap time on increasingly leveraged production lines is fucked.
You seem confused. AMD's primary income is from selling research, not producing processors.
I am saying that if they don't solve this problem they're already dead and just don't know it.
They've always had the option to leave the microprocessor market entirely.
And when you're in that position... possibly some risk taking is warranted.
Except this still isn't their primary income, it is secondary.
I repeat... fatalism is for losers.
I repeat my question, because it really sounds like you're saying this. You're saying it;'s better to be dead than a loser?
Scientists were well aware that if the active cooling systems were shut down, suffered a powerless, sensors damaged, a meltdown could occur easily. There are no melt-down counter measures that can be shut down in generation four reactors.
Especially if you are ignorant enough to stick it on a platform in the middle of the ocean.
Because apparently oceans cause melt downs, you really have convoluted logic.
Regardless, you have failed to answer the question and repeatedly ignored answers to your points, completing not acknowledging anything. You're a waste of time to talk to.
I am not interested in your red herring and strawman arguments. You can move the goal posts all you want, but I have sufficiently countered each post; which shows your clear lack of understanding on the subject matter.
1) Charnobyl is not a generation four reactor. 2) it was a weapons grade uranium enrichment centre and continued operations for enrichment and power generation until December 1995 with no further incidents. 3) Pripyat is still alive and well today (many people snuck back into the town despite warnings), it has a booming tourist industry (mostly showing off a few blocks of flats and a closed down theme park from soviet rule).
you seem to think all you have to do is call each and every failure a one off
No, I think the 1970s and 1980s hippies that forced the U.S. government to stop funding and research into additional safety systems through passive cooling methods resulted in stagnation of the technology which had international consequences because international nuclear research were head quartered in the U.S.
All nuclear meltdowns were a result of the reactors overheating. Even the latest Fukushima was the result of an active cooling system not having a backup power supply (despite international regulations and knowing the area was prone to natural disasters).
If you're concerned about landmass, natural disasters, security, nuclear waste, nuclear weapons. This is what you do:
Build a generation four nuclear reactor (with all it's passive safety systems) on an offshore platform. Offshore platforms are not prone to natural disasters. There is no landmass consumption. They are easy to secure from the stand point that you can develop the platform as secure as you need it to be. The power generation capabilities of a nuclear power plant go far beyond that of any other power source we have access to, so there isn't a big issue transporting power using sea cables. You have an additional safety system where the water surrounding the reactor can be used as yet another passive cooling system. Using the generation four reactors, we can use the nuclear waste that has accumulated over the years for the reactor. We can even reuse that nuclear waste repeatedly until it is no longer nuclear waste. If we want to get rid of nuclear weapons, we can reuse the nuclear content from the weapons to power our cities (I heard a figure that reusing the nuclear waste the UK has, we could power the UK with predicted power growths for the next 10,000 years easily with just nuclear waste).
On top of that, there is a lot of money to be saved at this point and we are able to bring back industries to our countries that rely purely on power consumption and endorse a cleaner environment by looking at electricity centric production systems with cheap, clean energy.
The power generated by solar and wind isn't sufficient to travel long distances. This is an unrealistic dream. Let's use a reliable renewable source of energy that isn't as destructive, doesn't require massive amounts of land mass, costly maintenance etc. Like generation 4 nuclear reactors.
Sitting in a datacenter on a military base in the continental US means you can be pretty confident that you're not going to be in a combat zone
There should always be an aura of alertness, readiness where this is concerned, period. If you don't, the enemy will penetrate your defences and do massive damage.
If you are, then something has already gone horribly wrong and a hacker being able to field strip an M16 isn't going to help much.
As someone who served in the military and could potentially be considered a 'hacker'. I disagree with your assessment that it wouldn't help much. Sometimes a few people is what makes the absolute difference, even when the situation shouldn't be considered one that has gone to hell.
Sure, you don't need to be able to do a dozen pullups to get the server up on the rack, but to be a 'part' of the military system, you do need that. Every truck mechanic, cook and phone tech who is wearing the uniform has done that.
There are a few reasons why that is the case in the British army, I can't speak for the U.S. army. Here are some primary reasons behind the fitness regime for some non-combat roles which I think also apply to hackers:
Endurance: You need to build up the ability to stay awake as long as necessary to get a job done and done well. Someone who is of average physical fitness will fail. Readiness: Someone who exercises regularly in a military form will be capable of dropping everything and immediately being ready to perform a task. This improves your reaction speed. Assertiveness: This may sound ridiculous, but military fitness also builds your mind when it comes to getting tasks done. You won't wait around for someone else to do it, you'll try to deal with it yourself and get things done. Immune response: I'm not going to describe this, it should be obvious. Discipline: I don't mean the sort where you follow orders per say. But if you're capable of pushing yourself through the pain of pushing yourself beyond what your body is telling you while getting fit, you find that you're far more capable when it comes to tasks that don't give as much pain because you've developed that discipline to push further.
Personally, I'm not sure why you can't do this with contractors
As I understand it, contractors can quit at any time, even at the cost of failing to deliver a project, it's hard to legally battle anything about the work produced if it's reached the expected work to the point of time the person quit and wouldn't be a federal issue. Legally, a military person cannot decide to just quit one day he doesn't want to do it any more.
You might not influence MTV culture, but you are part of nerd culture.
What is nerd culture?
I admit I am technical, I like technical subjects, science fiction, programming, participate in hacker spaces.
We all have a responsibility to make our own corners of the world better, and one of the problems nerd culture is plagued with is sexism.
I have little idea what you mean by this? I picked up my copy of 2600 and I struggle to find anything sexist in this, please clarify?
work with others to make your culture better for all nerds.
I haven't really seen any sexism taking place in the activities I enjoy. They do seem male dominated, but I am not seeing any sexism which causes that? Back to my copy of 2600, what would you suggest I do to improve 2600 as a subscriber?
Those roosters are starting to come home to roost; about once a month now, fetishist porn stars are ending up behind bars for maiming or killing people with drugs or various cutting tools.
I doubt it will come to that. Unusual fetishes do not translate to maiming or killing people.
You can argue until you see blue, but it is -in fact- completely caused by an DRM scheme.
It's caused by central architecture design that has a single point of failure. It doesn't matter if it was DRM or not. You could do similar things in the opensource world. Take out the DNS servers for ubuntu.com and now you can't access the default repositories that are all subdomains on ubuntu.com, you can't install software and by extension, use that software the normal way now through just opening your package manager.
What matters is that you cannot play an game (or can use hardware you payed for) if that DRM verification mechanic is interrupted (by an DDOS attack)
Certificate signing through certificate authorities do not require the authority to even be online to operate. In fact, this is how signed code works with offline xbox systems. It's also how software is validated through Linux repositories identify they come from the genuine source.
You really assume that any game is so great that people would spent every waking hour playing them and doing absolutely nothing else?
Of course not, I just don't think that you would spend your free time on Slashdot if you had that good of a game. You would play your game instead. I am not saying you don't go out to a Christmas party, go eat foods etc.
More likely, you're just hand waving and trying to desperately create a distraction to take the focus away from the road-to-hell that's being paved in the commercial gaming sector.
No, you're just trying to read too much into the motives of my post rather than applying common sense to my comment.
Slashdot Mirror
Stick it in your fakeroot/container environment?
I have problems with Windows 8, like the importing of images and videos. On Windows 7, I was able to define specific paths, what those paths should contain, how filenames should be constructed etc. Windows 8 doesn't give me any of these options, it just dumps them into "My Pictures".
These aren't Windows 8 'features', they're just removed features. This isn't better for people like me that have to end up writing custom software to bring back functionality that used to be there.
I can run applications made back in 1993 without a problem, no recompilation needed either. It's trivial to fakeroot your outdated environment and applications and run them. It's certainly not famous, but it is certainly reliable at running old applications without any issues. Kernel API is fully backwards compatible and ancient userland works fine on the latest version of Linux.
Sounds like you just don't know what you're doing. If you're depending distribution specific libc, other dependencies, create a fakeroot/container of your 'working' environment and run it in that from whatever other distribution you're using.
You can still get support past 2020 for exorbitant fees, no problem.
Note: Not OP.
What's small and/or low resolution about my browser/display?
[Screenshot]
I work in the consulting industry, I have always delivered. That said, some of these can be absurdly difficult to deliver. You have to work with 3rd party vendors that are obstructive because they see they're on the way out. When in government you have to deal with various policies to do with change requests, importing of new software to the network, hardware and software acquisition and through no fault of your own, these organisations are very slow moving and can take months in some instances approve. Never mind when you get rejected and you have to spend excessive amounts of time trying to convince the client that they do want it because it's in their best interests and there are no alternatives that are sufficient.
Generally people assume the contractors are just messing about and fail to deliver a project because of poor organisation and such. The problem I find more common is that the client ties the hands of the consulting firm and obstructionists prevent the firm delivering much of anything.
These things tend to be vendor supported at incredible costs.
AMD didn't shrug off their problems, they changed their firm to mitigate the risk.
AMD's position in my opinion is 2nd best against vendors when it comes to processor/chips, this hasn't compromised that. They have other revenue streams, so they can survive a hit.
Their leverage is that they can exit the market and kill industries in the process. This however is equivalent to a nuclear bomb in my mind and shouldn't be used to fight some temporary resource contention issues which is apparently affecting the wider industry too. They're probably looking at alternatives right now, but I suspect the options aren't very desirable.
Sure it does, because this is how you assess risk and determine where to focus your business.
Or exploit it for other purposes, such as selling off research, as they have done numerous times.
Tech markets tend to have a lot of various issues continuously which is reflected price changes. I remember other significant problems like when Taiwan got hit by a natural disaster and many harddrive companies were unable to produce harddrives in quantities desired due to component demands. This isn't really a different situation or something new.
You seem confused. AMD's primary income is from selling research, not producing processors.
They've always had the option to leave the microprocessor market entirely.
Except this still isn't their primary income, it is secondary.
I repeat my question, because it really sounds like you're saying this. You're saying it;'s better to be dead than a loser?
So, you're saying it's better to be a dead company than a loser?
AMD didn't even make enough money to keep one of their fabs, never mind keep it up to date...
Where is the Chinese knock-off AMD and nVidia chips then that are just as good, but cheaper?
Ah, so you're a 2015 hippy.
Scientists were well aware that if the active cooling systems were shut down, suffered a powerless, sensors damaged, a meltdown could occur easily. There are no melt-down counter measures that can be shut down in generation four reactors.
Because apparently oceans cause melt downs, you really have convoluted logic.
Regardless, you have failed to answer the question and repeatedly ignored answers to your points, completing not acknowledging anything. You're a waste of time to talk to.
I am not interested in your red herring and strawman arguments. You can move the goal posts all you want, but I have sufficiently countered each post; which shows your clear lack of understanding on the subject matter.
I say: You'd have to be an idiot to keep your money as Bitcoins or in Bitcoin exchanges.
Tell me exactly how a generation four reactor is going to have a melt down.
1) Charnobyl is not a generation four reactor.
2) it was a weapons grade uranium enrichment centre and continued operations for enrichment and power generation until December 1995 with no further incidents.
3) Pripyat is still alive and well today (many people snuck back into the town despite warnings), it has a booming tourist industry (mostly showing off a few blocks of flats and a closed down theme park from soviet rule).
No, I think the 1970s and 1980s hippies that forced the U.S. government to stop funding and research into additional safety systems through passive cooling methods resulted in stagnation of the technology which had international consequences because international nuclear research were head quartered in the U.S.
All nuclear meltdowns were a result of the reactors overheating. Even the latest Fukushima was the result of an active cooling system not having a backup power supply (despite international regulations and knowing the area was prone to natural disasters).
If you're concerned about landmass, natural disasters, security, nuclear waste, nuclear weapons. This is what you do:
Build a generation four nuclear reactor (with all it's passive safety systems) on an offshore platform. Offshore platforms are not prone to natural disasters. There is no landmass consumption. They are easy to secure from the stand point that you can develop the platform as secure as you need it to be. The power generation capabilities of a nuclear power plant go far beyond that of any other power source we have access to, so there isn't a big issue transporting power using sea cables. You have an additional safety system where the water surrounding the reactor can be used as yet another passive cooling system. Using the generation four reactors, we can use the nuclear waste that has accumulated over the years for the reactor. We can even reuse that nuclear waste repeatedly until it is no longer nuclear waste. If we want to get rid of nuclear weapons, we can reuse the nuclear content from the weapons to power our cities (I heard a figure that reusing the nuclear waste the UK has, we could power the UK with predicted power growths for the next 10,000 years easily with just nuclear waste).
On top of that, there is a lot of money to be saved at this point and we are able to bring back industries to our countries that rely purely on power consumption and endorse a cleaner environment by looking at electricity centric production systems with cheap, clean energy.
The power generated by solar and wind isn't sufficient to travel long distances. This is an unrealistic dream. Let's use a reliable renewable source of energy that isn't as destructive, doesn't require massive amounts of land mass, costly maintenance etc. Like generation 4 nuclear reactors.
There should always be an aura of alertness, readiness where this is concerned, period. If you don't, the enemy will penetrate your defences and do massive damage.
As someone who served in the military and could potentially be considered a 'hacker'. I disagree with your assessment that it wouldn't help much. Sometimes a few people is what makes the absolute difference, even when the situation shouldn't be considered one that has gone to hell.
There are a few reasons why that is the case in the British army, I can't speak for the U.S. army. Here are some primary reasons behind the fitness regime for some non-combat roles which I think also apply to hackers:
Endurance: You need to build up the ability to stay awake as long as necessary to get a job done and done well. Someone who is of average physical fitness will fail.
Readiness: Someone who exercises regularly in a military form will be capable of dropping everything and immediately being ready to perform a task. This improves your reaction speed.
Assertiveness: This may sound ridiculous, but military fitness also builds your mind when it comes to getting tasks done. You won't wait around for someone else to do it, you'll try to deal with it yourself and get things done.
Immune response: I'm not going to describe this, it should be obvious.
Discipline: I don't mean the sort where you follow orders per say. But if you're capable of pushing yourself through the pain of pushing yourself beyond what your body is telling you while getting fit, you find that you're far more capable when it comes to tasks that don't give as much pain because you've developed that discipline to push further.
As I understand it, contractors can quit at any time, even at the cost of failing to deliver a project, it's hard to legally battle anything about the work produced if it's reached the expected work to the point of time the person quit and wouldn't be a federal issue. Legally, a military person cannot decide to just quit one day he doesn't want to do it any more.
They do in the British army and there isn't even a shortage of them.
The problem is the pay. Make it worth their while.
Note: I am not the OP.
What is nerd culture?
I admit I am technical, I like technical subjects, science fiction, programming, participate in hacker spaces.
I have little idea what you mean by this? I picked up my copy of 2600 and I struggle to find anything sexist in this, please clarify?
I haven't really seen any sexism taking place in the activities I enjoy. They do seem male dominated, but I am not seeing any sexism which causes that? Back to my copy of 2600, what would you suggest I do to improve 2600 as a subscriber?
I doubt it will come to that. Unusual fetishes do not translate to maiming or killing people.
It's caused by central architecture design that has a single point of failure. It doesn't matter if it was DRM or not. You could do similar things in the opensource world. Take out the DNS servers for ubuntu.com and now you can't access the default repositories that are all subdomains on ubuntu.com, you can't install software and by extension, use that software the normal way now through just opening your package manager.
Certificate signing through certificate authorities do not require the authority to even be online to operate. In fact, this is how signed code works with offline xbox systems. It's also how software is validated through Linux repositories identify they come from the genuine source.
Of course not, I just don't think that you would spend your free time on Slashdot if you had that good of a game. You would play your game instead. I am not saying you don't go out to a Christmas party, go eat foods etc.
No, you're just trying to read too much into the motives of my post rather than applying common sense to my comment.