I may be answering a troll. I hope this story isn't true. In the off-chance that it is, I have a couple interesting thoughts for you to mull over.
Your story comes across like this: A bunch of imberb politicos (possibly lead by you, mr AC), who are fixated on being buddy-buddies and looking good in the eyes of the world managed to drive off at least two key participants in a FOSS project - of whom at least one is sufficiently mature and professional to know how to disengage peacefully and let your clique rot and wither on the vine. Good going. You have managed to separate the chaff from the wheat. Now comes the unpleasant realisation that you ARE the chaff. Rest assured that the release manager will not be the only one to up and leave.
Mission statements, marketing, CoC.... Do you have any time left to do design, coding, testing, packaging, bugfixes?
"Yes, I'm going to give access to my computer to some random technical support guy." This is an attempt at irony, no? It is a supported function in Windows XP.
"Windows surely is dying. Man, look at those spasms." Did I say that Windows is dying? No. You're using a straw-man argument. On the contrary, I'm taking the view that Linux need only be more viable in the long term - not only two years from now, but ten or fifteen to "win".
Less likely is all you get with the actual tests too (there is a margin of error). If you lie, you shift things from "less likely" to "more likely" and de-value the questionnaire for everyone, eventually driving up the cost to be paid for the same amount of safety. That's not a nice thing to do.
Well if it's a three-digit lock, it IS insecure, buddy. If it's a 4 or 5 digit lock with no try/time limiter and you can hear the pins drop with just a standard-issue bubble mike taped to the door, it IS insecure - because it does not take "practically forever" or "gov't-level resources" to crack, but only a couple minutes.
No cypher is proven unbreakable (with the exception of one-time pads) - all have varying strengths, defined as "it takes $ludicrous_amount_of_time_and_processing_power to retrieve plaintext".
Get off your hobby horse - implementation matters in the real world.
No, you shouldn't just lie. Contrary to popular belief, not all blood gets tested for all the blood-transmissible diseases. There would be enormous expense involved. The questionnaire is a way of improving the odds that you get "healthy" blood in the first place. As for lying on that particular test, well, here's a huge cluestick with your name on it: sick as it may seem, some diseases (such as hep B and C) are far more widespread in homosexuals than in heterosexuals and the questionnaire is an accurate reflection of this sad fact.
The "user" has no business knowing such things. The "user" needs to use stuff, not to know stuff about stuff. How many people do you know who can make a knife? How many people do you know who can use a knife? The ratio should be about the same for software. It isn't, because of sturgeon's law and the inherent complexity of software.
More to the point, the user in your scenario should give you admin access to the system (bot not to his/her private data) and let you figure it all out. In 98% of the cases, what window manager / desktop environment the user is running will have zero effect on the outcome of your bug-fixing exercise.
As for the "monoculture helps growth", well, you're right. Works for cancer, works for Microsoft Windows. Both end up consuming everything in their path, leaving only death and devastation behind. Diversity and a little in-fighting and outside adversity to weed out the weak are the recipes of survival. Survival is more important than "winning" a battle or another. If you survive long enough, you won't have any competition because it will all have died.
There's nothing inherently wrong with blanket statements. They just rarely seem to hold true in the real world.
The fine article states that close to half of all americans are Christian fundamentalists, so there's at least one "blanket statement" that seems to be true... I am using the wikipedia definition of fundamentalist here.
"If I buy a piece of furniture and I want another one like it for another room, should it be illegal for me to pull out my tape measure, buy some wood, and build myself another one just like it?" No. You wouldn't be infringing any copyrights either. The fact that it's a DIY will make it sufficiently different from the original in any case.
"If I buy a small print from a local artist to hang in my bedroom, should it be illegal for me to scan it, manipulate the colors, and print another copy that matches the decor in the guest room?" Yes, definitely, if you do it without permission. While making a print of a print should be ok as long as you don't distribute it, modifying stuff in random ways can really hurt the artist's reputation so big no-no there.
If I have a VHS tape that I'd like to preserve, should it be illegal for me to capture it, do a little noise reduction and clean-up on the video, and burn it to DVD? No.
"And if I have a shelf of DVDs, should it be illegal to rip them and stick them on a server in my own home. Should it be illegal to provide the tools that allow me to do that?" No and no. Fair use and all that. As long as the copied bits don't leave the confines of your home (or car, or whatever private property you may own) AND as long as you don't start charging admission to your friends when they come watch a movie.
True that, but going without for a while is more than your average electorate can stand. Especially if it means being literally hungry from time to time, little to no police in the streets, bad(-ish) roads and rail, cheap-ass schools, zero make-work public projects and so on for about ten to fifteen years, with no guarantees that the "let's get richer" program will succeed or indeed that it will ever be completed.
The wealthier countries can afford to miss out on a few bribes and sponsorships and to concentrate on the bigger picture. When you're poor, you live hand to mouth, at the mercy of whatever patrons choose to throw a bone your way.
Yes, because eating humble pie is a sure-fire way to get noticed and convince people your dreams are worthy. Pah. More on topic, I have this much to say to both of you: America lost the space race. Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Then Russia gave up on it. Cry me river number two. The future of space exploration lies with corporations anyway. NASA, the ISS and the other (national) space programs are just fluff and budget sinkholes.
"Let me tell you something about management- they have a keen eye for cost saving. If they don't, another company or individual will take that approach and dominate." Bollocks, mate. Most markets are oligopolies, with a smattering if irrelevant.01 percenters at the bottom. Cost savings don't really matter. It's the aspect of next quarter's bottom line that matters, because that's what is reflected on the stock market and in exec bonuses: if there's 5 dollars lower expenses from not replacing a lightbulb YAY!, if it's 5000 dollars more because you switched over your servers to Linux BOO!, no matter that next trimester you won't be paying through your nose for new CALs anymore. Short-sightedness, to the point of financial irresponsibility.
Mass hysteria would not produce megadeaths. Those incoming warheads would. However, it is interesting to note that the Sprint was only deployed in N Dakota. WTH is there to protect in N Dakota?
Slashdot Mirror
I may be answering a troll. I hope this story isn't true. In the off-chance that it is, I have a couple interesting thoughts for you to mull over.
Your story comes across like this:
A bunch of imberb politicos (possibly lead by you, mr AC), who are fixated on being buddy-buddies and looking good in the eyes of the world managed to drive off at least two key participants in a FOSS project - of whom at least one is sufficiently mature and professional to know how to disengage peacefully and let your clique rot and wither on the vine. Good going. You have managed to separate the chaff from the wheat. Now comes the unpleasant realisation that you ARE the chaff. Rest assured that the release manager will not be the only one to up and leave.
Mission statements, marketing, CoC.... Do you have any time left to do design, coding, testing, packaging, bugfixes?
"Yes, I'm going to give access to my computer to some random technical support guy."
This is an attempt at irony, no? It is a supported function in Windows XP.
"Windows surely is dying. Man, look at those spasms."
Did I say that Windows is dying? No. You're using a straw-man argument. On the contrary, I'm taking the view that Linux need only be more viable in the long term - not only two years from now, but ten or fifteen to "win".
Lol. Normal business people who travel are of the "clueless salesman" rather than the "geek ambassador at large" type.
Supply and demand will kick in before long.
It's not true everywhere, and I only gave hep B and C as examples... I don't see HPV on the list.
Less likely is all you get with the actual tests too (there is a margin of error). If you lie, you shift things from "less likely" to "more likely" and de-value the questionnaire for everyone, eventually driving up the cost to be paid for the same amount of safety. That's not a nice thing to do.
Well if it's a three-digit lock, it IS insecure, buddy. If it's a 4 or 5 digit lock with no try/time limiter and you can hear the pins drop with just a standard-issue bubble mike taped to the door, it IS insecure - because it does not take "practically forever" or "gov't-level resources" to crack, but only a couple minutes.
No cypher is proven unbreakable (with the exception of one-time pads) - all have varying strengths, defined as "it takes $ludicrous_amount_of_time_and_processing_power to retrieve plaintext".
Get off your hobby horse - implementation matters in the real world.
Plain ol' Explorer 7 can be had in XP. Your point?
No, you shouldn't just lie. Contrary to popular belief, not all blood gets tested for all the blood-transmissible diseases. There would be enormous expense involved. The questionnaire is a way of improving the odds that you get "healthy" blood in the first place.
As for lying on that particular test, well, here's a huge cluestick with your name on it: sick as it may seem, some diseases (such as hep B and C) are far more widespread in homosexuals than in heterosexuals and the questionnaire is an accurate reflection of this sad fact.
The "user" has no business knowing such things. The "user" needs to use stuff, not to know stuff about stuff. How many people do you know who can make a knife? How many people do you know who can use a knife? The ratio should be about the same for software. It isn't, because of sturgeon's law and the inherent complexity of software.
More to the point, the user in your scenario should give you admin access to the system (bot not to his/her private data) and let you figure it all out. In 98% of the cases, what window manager / desktop environment the user is running will have zero effect on the outcome of your bug-fixing exercise.
As for the "monoculture helps growth", well, you're right. Works for cancer, works for Microsoft Windows. Both end up consuming everything in their path, leaving only death and devastation behind. Diversity and a little in-fighting and outside adversity to weed out the weak are the recipes of survival. Survival is more important than "winning" a battle or another. If you survive long enough, you won't have any competition because it will all have died.
"Therefore, a US-only solution isn't just suboptimal, it's useless."
Self-contradictory. Hilarious. A solution would at least help americans.
There's nothing inherently wrong with blanket statements. They just rarely seem to hold true in the real world.
The fine article states that close to half of all americans are Christian fundamentalists, so there's at least one "blanket statement" that seems to be true... I am using the wikipedia definition of fundamentalist here.
Fsck the 8-bit tie. Where are my SurgeStix?
"If I buy a piece of furniture and I want another one like it for another room, should it be illegal for me to pull out my tape measure, buy some wood, and build myself another one just like it?"
No. You wouldn't be infringing any copyrights either. The fact that it's a DIY will make it sufficiently different from the original in any case.
"If I buy a small print from a local artist to hang in my bedroom, should it be illegal for me to scan it, manipulate the colors, and print another copy that matches the decor in the guest room?"
Yes, definitely, if you do it without permission. While making a print of a print should be ok as long as you don't distribute it, modifying stuff in random ways can really hurt the artist's reputation so big no-no there.
If I have a VHS tape that I'd like to preserve, should it be illegal for me to capture it, do a little noise reduction and clean-up on the video, and burn it to DVD?
No.
"And if I have a shelf of DVDs, should it be illegal to rip them and stick them on a server in my own home. Should it be illegal to provide the tools that allow me to do that?"
No and no. Fair use and all that. As long as the copied bits don't leave the confines of your home (or car, or whatever private property you may own) AND as long as you don't start charging admission to your friends when they come watch a movie.
Now, if only we could convince that fool Zakharov to rush the Ascent project.
Thanks for the laugh.
True that, but going without for a while is more than your average electorate can stand. Especially if it means being literally hungry from time to time, little to no police in the streets, bad(-ish) roads and rail, cheap-ass schools, zero make-work public projects and so on for about ten to fifteen years, with no guarantees that the "let's get richer" program will succeed or indeed that it will ever be completed.
The wealthier countries can afford to miss out on a few bribes and sponsorships and to concentrate on the bigger picture. When you're poor, you live hand to mouth, at the mercy of whatever patrons choose to throw a bone your way.
This is polymorphic hardware, not software.
No, just the Talents and above :). But you're wrong.
What the heck is wrong with you? Electricity can be produced in a nuclear power plant, y'know?
There is no such thing as your right to anonymity, on or off the web.
Yes, because eating humble pie is a sure-fire way to get noticed and convince people your dreams are worthy. Pah. More on topic, I have this much to say to both of you: America lost the space race. Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Then Russia gave up on it. Cry me river number two. The future of space exploration lies with corporations anyway. NASA, the ISS and the other (national) space programs are just fluff and budget sinkholes.
"Let me tell you something about management- they have a keen eye for cost saving. If they don't, another company or individual will take that approach and dominate." .01 percenters at the bottom. Cost savings don't really matter.
Bollocks, mate. Most markets are oligopolies, with a smattering if irrelevant
It's the aspect of next quarter's bottom line that matters, because that's what is reflected on the stock market and in exec bonuses: if there's 5 dollars lower expenses from not replacing a lightbulb YAY!, if it's 5000 dollars more because you switched over your servers to Linux BOO!, no matter that next trimester you won't be paying through your nose for new CALs anymore. Short-sightedness, to the point of financial irresponsibility.
Mass hysteria would not produce megadeaths. Those incoming warheads would. However, it is interesting to note that the Sprint was only deployed in N Dakota. WTH is there to protect in N Dakota?