If you're government is so weak that it can't communicate with outside parties then you are doing something seriously wrong. Also, China is messing with the U.S. in a number of ways, the only difference is that we see China as a competitor instead of an enemy even though they are quite similar. Of course we consider competition to be a good thing, think of the cold war and how much technology that pushed into the lives of everyone because we were competing with the Soviet Union. It worked out well for us albeit not so well for what is now Russia but there's a lot of history there we won't get into here.
Sharing ideas is always a good thing, any government basing its rule on lack of information such as North Korea and Iran are destined to fail because word always gets out eventually and then people start to get pissed which is what you're seeing in Iran right now. Hopefully they can get a government that represents them instead of a government that makes ridiculous statements about 3rd parties meddling with their affairs.
Funding democratic efforts is not interfering with foreign governments as you're not forcing anyone to do anything.
How in the hell did this get modded insightful? That's retarded, you can never know the outcome of anything you do with 100% certainty. Parent would have everyone do nothing because we can't guarantee success.
The simple fact is that no one understands personal, electronic, or institutional security. If they claim they do then they are full of shit. No one can know every variable facing them. If you see someone getting attacked you're not just going to sit there afraid to act because you might get hurt. If you think it's worth the risk then you leap and deal with the consequences when they arrive which is precisely what Protesterhelper did. The thought process is that a just act will always leave you on the right side of the situation. Sometimes it means you get stabbed and even killed, much like the fate of a certain flight in Pennsylvania on 9/11. Sometimes you have to act before you understand all the variables because waiting will cost you everything or in this case, will cost the Iranian people everything.
I don't understand the need to attack and berate the actions of someone that is only trying to help a populous communicate. He wasn't complaining he was attacked nor did he act surprised so the parent's comment appears to have been completely pulled out of some dead donkey's ass.
But of course, this could have all been a lovely troll in which case I'm the ass and I can accept that and even call you a magnificent bastard.
The core issue was government entities going outside of their mandates and how it never leads anywhere good.
The whole question of jurisdiction just shows that clear lines need to be drawn. Any domestic activity at all on the part of the NSA is outside of their mandate and the FBI is ill-equipped to handle the situation. Do you fix the FBI? Or do you change the mandate of the NSA? Fixing the FBI will cost a lot more but safeguards the principles on which their agency was founded.
I don't imagine the CIA or the NSA will be fixed anytime soon though. Both need to be clearly defined to the American public. The "No Such Agency" concept should not, and needs not apply to the American people. Operational secrecy is fine but the people need to be aware of who does what to protect them even if there aren't that many specifics.
I don't know why our representatives don't see fit to do their jobs and provide oversight to these agencies, something is fundamentally broken when the NSA is allowed to break the law en masse.
Any and all domestic spying for one. Their mandate as part of the DOD means something very real. If they operate domestically they are breaking the law. Of course the people responsible for oversight, our representatives, have not been doing their jobs. Oversight has been a huge problem for at least the last 8 years, Clinton actually received a fair amount due to his rabid opponents but this is actually a good thing even if it was idiots that were trying to crucify him over stupid issues. Of course it's been a problem going much further back than that even. One need only look at the mess we've created in the middle-east arming people then complaining when they turn our arms against us after we backed out of a deal we had no interest in keeping anymore.
History in school always pissed me off for the same reasons. The funny or sad reality depending on your perspective is that the blood and gore involved in history would actually make it more interesting for students and then people might actually learn from the mistakes of the past.
This idea that kids can't handle anything, I have no idea where it came from? It's amazing, every year kids endure more and more restrictions are what they can do and surprise surprise, they are less mature for it!
Fortunately for me, I had a father who actually cared about history and its significance enough to not dumb it down for me although I'm sure he didn't when I was a youngin. By the age of 12 or 13 all bets were off though.
Most schools do this. I've not heard of anyone docking a math grade for being disruptive in class. Maybe I'm a little too distant from it all by my niece in school right now gets grades on all the things you mention.
Ouch! Some kids do have to learn the hard way. If he's as smart as you say then he'll find some other way to apply his skills but it will just take a lot longer especially if the relationship gets serious.
I do find it rather curious that its common for an American to go off and live on his/her own at 18 while being uncommon in a great number of other places. I have often felt like there is too much emphasis on using age to divide a population. I know 50 year olds that are as mature at 18 year olds and I know 18 year olds that are as mature as any respectable adult. Some people need extra time living life to fully realize what's in front of them. Five years out of school I remember looking back and being surprised where I ended up which made me start thinking about the next five years and even ten years out.
Long story short; you never know what path someone is going to end up taking. Some people don't want the easy path as they are afraid it will become boring. Some people just don't think that far ahead.
Honestly discussions like this are the reason I always liked Slashdot. Just because stances are opposing doesn't mean they don't share the same goals.
You are right in that paying will instill the wrong ideals but I think that problem is easier to deal with than the current problems we have since it will encourage those that currently have no drive to learn to change their ways.
I think you can accomplish both, provide a positive monetary reward and at the same time instill a strong work ethic by helping children to realize that $500 is nothing compared to what they could make if they applied themselves.
As for teaching patriotism it does have the problems you say which is why I don't advocate teaching patriotism. I think that a country is made up of its people and if it's people suck then so does the country. That is why I like my country, because I know a lot of great and positive people that balance out a lot of the negative. Patriotism in a democratic society does little but instill a value in the core beliefs that the country was found upon. Those ideals should not be dictated however as reasonable people should come to conclude the ideals for which the country stands are right and just through their own critical thought and not just because they were told to think it.
My argument is simply that the problems resulting from this will be easier to iron out than the current problems I see with our education system as a whole. It's just my opinion though and you present rather compelling arguments for why I may be wrong.
Personally I found a niche that was paying me in high school and I took it to much further levels than most people my age as I had a motivator beyond my own interests which helped me stay focused. It is certain that this type of motivation will not work for everyone though.
I disagree with that as I did learn a lot in school that would later become very applicable in my life. I learned a lot about the different disciplines and I learned a lot about dealing with people that hate you for no reason.
I think a lot of modern office politicking can and is taught in school even though it isn't formally taught. All the regular disciplines, math, science, English, and social studies provided me with a very well rounded education allowing me to sail right into college and become immediately successful academically.
Just because some lessons are harder to articulate than others doesn't mean students aren't learning a lot in school. Academic education as you call it is also a goal, it's just not the only goal which seems to be the argument you have. That is why the freedom to school your own child is there, you are allowed to disagree and that's why the option still exists.
You do bring up very valid points here. That is quite a strong argument there and I don't disagree with you on any particular point.
The question: Is your predicted outcome better, worse, or the same as the system we currently have in place? I honestly don't know the answer to that question as I do see an upside but you are right in that they are sheltered from the other harsh realities of the business world so we perhaps shouldn't endeavor make learning environments similar to business environments.
As for child labor, while I think such a scenario could arise I don't see it as a negative thing as it encourages the children to do their work and get good grades which is something apathetic parents wouldn't have bothered with encouraging before and poor but well intentioned parents would see great satisfaction at their child doing well enough in school to help out with the family.
In all scenarios there are those that would abuse the situation but I do feel like that would be fewer than the number of children victimized by parents that don't value education currently.
While I may have a low opinion of home-schooling I don't think it is wrong, with the right parents it can give a kid a great education but there's no falling back on the "kids need to be socialized" argument. It is a valid concern with home schooling and often does result in adults that are not well adjusted. That doesn't mean its impossible for a home schooled child to be well adjusted as there are plenty of success stories out there as evidence. Sports and other out of school social engagements have often been used with great success to supplement the lack of peer interaction. Of course there are plenty of failures so you can't fault people for being skeptical.
Both methods have their problems, if a parent understands their responsibility then more power to them as there is a chance they could do a better job. A friend of mine back home was home-schooled by his wacko religious fanatical mother and it didn't turn out so well even though he was a smart kid. After a few years of rebelling and getting away from his mother he has evened out quite a bit even though he is still a bit awkward.
Of course I went through public school and still ended up awkward until a few years of college and work life straightened me out which is why I don't have a problem with home schooling in general as neither method guarantees any result.
While I agree with you, another poster brought up the issue that this could create a class of people that have serious entitlement issues.
I had great parents to help me get perspective but a great many students out there don't have parents that are as involved as they should be.
I wonder if you would just let the real-world teach them about entitlement when they get out of school as they is going to be a harsh reality almost no matter what. Of course I could see that leading down a very dangerous road where people that couldn't become successful turned to crime but that's not really any different than the situation we have now.
Out of curiosity how is the real-world motivation system different? If I work hard and continue to achieve great work then I do see more income and that's here in the real world where I get a raises and/or bonuses based on my performance.
There's also nothing saying that a school couldn't raise the standards necessary to get money which would affectively raise the bar even further encouraging students to perform. I remember my frustration back in high school and lower grades with knowing that I would never use the knowledge that I was learning at the time in real life and so I didn't care about my grades even though I did fairly well anyways.
In college I was of course paying to be there so I took it a lot more seriously which is rare as a great many college students have their parents paying for everything. I had just enough from student loans to keep me in ramen noodles and it worked out alright.
I also look at my niece when she moved here to AZ where they aren't exactly known for great schools, her parents actually managed to find a school that was more work and held student to a higher standards than even VT where they were living. As a result she struggled for a while but with lots of support for her parents and her uncle she's back on top and performing well even though she does have a few areas where she needs to continue to work hard to catch up on. It's becoming fun for her to learn because everyone around her encourages it and provides her with some guidance when she needs it and that is sadly what a great many families are missing. Absent that I don't see a problem with trying to bribe the desire to learn out of kids since as I said, the real world functions in the same way.
That depends if you think that knowledge gained is the only purpose of school and I think you would be hard pressed to make such an argument.
If you're trying to produce people who can work together and be productive members of society then it makes sense to dock people that not followed rules which directly relate to that. In-class suspensions for disruptive behavior makes a lot of sense to me in this regard although I don't consider hugging in the hallway to be disruptive.
Much of the business world involves finding constructive tasks to perform when you are bored out of your skull so it makes sense that school would discourage disruptive behavior even if the student proves that he understand the materials being taught.
Do I think schools should be this way? I don't know, society has a way of filtering out people that are destructive or at least finding creative ways to embrace the destructive nature of particular individuals. I don't think students should be robots but I also think disrupting a class is unacceptable so I guess I like it but would favor relaxing many rules that were only enacted because a few people were uncomfortable with the setting such as the banning of hugging.
I would use Linux4One except that the kernel is missing a lot of useful stuff such as usb-to-serial drivers. By the time I installed enough software that I could compile modules I might as well have just installed Ubuntu and fixed the minor issues with it. My other complaint was that the kernel source was very hard to get so making drivers was exceedingly difficult. So much so that I went back to Ubuntu on my Aspire One.
Disable window effects and then it will work. I've never had this problem on Ubuntu with Gnome but I always disable the effects as I don't think they add anything of value especially on my netbook. I use the alt+mouse all the time with it for the very reasons already mentioned here.
What? Are you 12? Seriously, with a response like that how do you not expect people to just ignore you since you don't even offer anything to the conversation. Just shouting "WRONG" doesn't change anything and only serves to strengthen the other side. Rather than childish name-calling perhaps you could add something of value rather than wasting everyone's time? Maybe not...
There are those of us that intercept and redirect cell transmissions because of the absurdly high costs of everything. Why use cell minutes when you can create your own mini-tower and use your internal PBX? Many companies are investing many thousands of dollars in equipment because it pays off fast. If individual companies can do it cheaper then a single cellular provider simply has no excuse for such high rates, especially given the obvious collusion in the industry.
I think the fact that Windows netbooks outsell Linux netbooks dramatically says a lot about how Americans feel about their computer. They want a familiar environment. I bought an Acer with Linux as was surprised at how feature full it was. I could do the majority of tasks that I would want to do on a netbook. Other people with less technical skills found it cumbersome though as things didn't work as they expected.
The netbook trend started a long time ago and only recently did it become useful enough for the majority of us to actually want. Coincidentally that was also the time when they became powerful enough to run Windows even though they have been capable of running Linux for years.
Scaling vertically hasn't been a good idea for a long time unless you're app has trouble scaling horizontally. I'm in the process of creating a proposal with a back-end database cluster considering of 4-6 nodes. Now I could achieve the same horsepower by buying an 8s or a 4s server and not have to buy as many machines but 4s servers seem to be 3 times more expensive than 2s socket servers so I can just buy more dual processor servers and scale out to achieve the target number of connections served.
Of course more servers are harder to manage and there is more hardware that can go bad although you are more tolerant of failures so its quite the trade-off.
I believe Anandtech is showing it's bias here. I had heard great things about the Xeon 55xx series CPUs so I went and bought a couple of servers. Specifically one web server and one database server. I also had Opteron-based servers performing the same tasks. My webservers are load balanced using a hardware load balancer. During January I was under an extremely heavy load scenario. I ended up having to weight more traffic to the Opteron servers because the Xeons were choking under 100% cpu load. I barely squeaked by as all my servers were quite overloaded but once you get to a certain threshold Xeon performance seems to drop sharply.
Rendering Intel has always been king but everywhere else Opterons have performed better for me again and again. I'm 100% 64bit though and I haven't tested virtualization performance yet.
You again make a lot of assumptions and still don't refute the OS X server lacks these features as you have to go third party. Both Microsoft and Novell have offered complete solutions for years and only recently has OS X become anything short of a farce as I said to begin with.
Of course you also don't seem to understand the complete absurdity involved in storing client views on the server which conflict with one another as one Mac user will have one preference while another will have a different preference.
Of course why should I have to modify the default config for samba to speed up transfer performance and disable the creation of files that no other platform seems to think are necessary. What other settings do I need to change for the client to stop being retarded? How about random disconnects? I'm sure there's a setting in there somewhere. This behavior is counterproductive and Apple could do better if it wanted.
I'll also add that the hidden files are not just DS_store files as there is one for each file and they are not 10k, they are thumbnails and contain metadata for the file with which they are associated. As I said, they all added up to an extra 500gigs of content that I had to be able to store before I scripted their removal. There's no getting around it, that's completely unacceptable.
I also did not say that enterprise tools didn't exist for OS X, only that they are still very limited when you compare their features with similar products from Sun, Oracle, Novell, Microsoft, IBM, and HP, and those are just the big players with KASE also offering solutions among a great many smaller players.
OS X has made a lot of progress as I said in the beginning but they have a long way to go before I would even remotely consider it cheaper to support.
As for the tools you mention, NetRestore is EOL, Deploy Studio is a joke for any company of size, Radmind is extremely limited to mainly file-system monitoring, and Centrify runs on Windows, not OS X, it just supports OS X as a client much like SCCM from Microsoft does.
Most of the tools you have listed are not enterprise tools, a lot of applications can be deployed in small numbers, when you start getting to larger numbers of workstations there become a lot of problems with maintaining compliance and enforcing policies.
While I'll freely admit there are a lot of tools out there that I'm not aware of, but I don't see anyone seriously considering running OS X as the core of their business if they are of any size. Maybe it's the culture here in Phoenix I'm not sure but you don't even hear about it here. OS X and X-store are rarely ever seen around here because they require a whole new suite of products to manage and few people are willing to invest in something completely different than their existing infrastructure when they can just scale with current hardware and software providers.
I was suggesting there are a multitude of issues and was not suggesting that updates reset server configurations although I have had OS X server accept a write to a share even though it was out of disk space resulting in someone losing all of their work for the previous two weeks.
I will grant that it was one of the first versions of OS X that was released but it still sorely lacks a lot of enterprise class features to this day especially in the field of centralized deployment, change, and event management. SYSLOG support has helped dramatically but there are a lot of black boxes inside OS X that hinder troubleshooting. It's not that different from Windows in philosophy.
I've had OS X updates overwrite Samba configs for clients connecting to Linux or Windows file shares. The added hidden files resulted in over 500gigs of storage on my server which I now run scripts to remove periodically. Given that I'm dealing with 90 terabytes that's not the end of the world but it was quite annoying when I didn't have a proper SAN to back me up and was running out space on my old file-server for no reason.
No, I'm not bitching about different configurations for different OSes, I'm talking about the creation of hundreds of thousands of files that serve no purpose especially when you're looking in directories with thousands of files in them.
Of course you haven't refuted anything I said and assumed I don't have important config files backed up which is complete absurdity so I'll leave it at that and add that deploying hundreds of config files after software updates is impractical. Thank god I don't have that many Macs in my company so I can handle changing the acknowledgement settings for Samba when the OS X users complain about performance when everyone else has no issue.
Sorry, Apple doesn't play well with others, they never have, they are making progress towards changing that but they have the same goals as Microsoft towards achieving lock-in so any migration will be towards a Linux distro where I can just drop in a replacement and it will work as expected.
What is this based on? It sounds to me like it's not based on reality as OS X server was a farce until about a year ago and it's still lacking significant enterprise features that have been present in Windows for 10 years and present in Netware for 15 years.
Sorry, that's complete BS, I'll consider OS X friendly when it doesn't litter file shares with hidden files and starts closing file locks that it open which isn't a problem on the Linux platform. Combined with speed issues of file-sharing and I'd say that MS infrastructure is far more friendly. Gotta love reconfiguring samba on OS X to make it perform like I expect a Linux box and then having the config wiped due to a software update.
That said, any company that rises to the level of Microsoft in marketshare will have plenty of consulting/support business crop up around it. There is no such thing as an idiot proof interface and OS X is by far no exception.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're government is so weak that it can't communicate with outside parties then you are doing something seriously wrong. Also, China is messing with the U.S. in a number of ways, the only difference is that we see China as a competitor instead of an enemy even though they are quite similar. Of course we consider competition to be a good thing, think of the cold war and how much technology that pushed into the lives of everyone because we were competing with the Soviet Union. It worked out well for us albeit not so well for what is now Russia but there's a lot of history there we won't get into here.
Sharing ideas is always a good thing, any government basing its rule on lack of information such as North Korea and Iran are destined to fail because word always gets out eventually and then people start to get pissed which is what you're seeing in Iran right now. Hopefully they can get a government that represents them instead of a government that makes ridiculous statements about 3rd parties meddling with their affairs.
Funding democratic efforts is not interfering with foreign governments as you're not forcing anyone to do anything.
How in the hell did this get modded insightful? That's retarded, you can never know the outcome of anything you do with 100% certainty. Parent would have everyone do nothing because we can't guarantee success.
The simple fact is that no one understands personal, electronic, or institutional security. If they claim they do then they are full of shit. No one can know every variable facing them. If you see someone getting attacked you're not just going to sit there afraid to act because you might get hurt. If you think it's worth the risk then you leap and deal with the consequences when they arrive which is precisely what Protesterhelper did. The thought process is that a just act will always leave you on the right side of the situation. Sometimes it means you get stabbed and even killed, much like the fate of a certain flight in Pennsylvania on 9/11. Sometimes you have to act before you understand all the variables because waiting will cost you everything or in this case, will cost the Iranian people everything.
I don't understand the need to attack and berate the actions of someone that is only trying to help a populous communicate. He wasn't complaining he was attacked nor did he act surprised so the parent's comment appears to have been completely pulled out of some dead donkey's ass.
But of course, this could have all been a lovely troll in which case I'm the ass and I can accept that and even call you a magnificent bastard.
The core issue was government entities going outside of their mandates and how it never leads anywhere good.
The whole question of jurisdiction just shows that clear lines need to be drawn. Any domestic activity at all on the part of the NSA is outside of their mandate and the FBI is ill-equipped to handle the situation. Do you fix the FBI? Or do you change the mandate of the NSA? Fixing the FBI will cost a lot more but safeguards the principles on which their agency was founded.
I don't imagine the CIA or the NSA will be fixed anytime soon though. Both need to be clearly defined to the American public. The "No Such Agency" concept should not, and needs not apply to the American people. Operational secrecy is fine but the people need to be aware of who does what to protect them even if there aren't that many specifics.
I don't know why our representatives don't see fit to do their jobs and provide oversight to these agencies, something is fundamentally broken when the NSA is allowed to break the law en masse.
Any and all domestic spying for one. Their mandate as part of the DOD means something very real. If they operate domestically they are breaking the law. Of course the people responsible for oversight, our representatives, have not been doing their jobs. Oversight has been a huge problem for at least the last 8 years, Clinton actually received a fair amount due to his rabid opponents but this is actually a good thing even if it was idiots that were trying to crucify him over stupid issues. Of course it's been a problem going much further back than that even. One need only look at the mess we've created in the middle-east arming people then complaining when they turn our arms against us after we backed out of a deal we had no interest in keeping anymore.
History in school always pissed me off for the same reasons. The funny or sad reality depending on your perspective is that the blood and gore involved in history would actually make it more interesting for students and then people might actually learn from the mistakes of the past.
This idea that kids can't handle anything, I have no idea where it came from? It's amazing, every year kids endure more and more restrictions are what they can do and surprise surprise, they are less mature for it!
Fortunately for me, I had a father who actually cared about history and its significance enough to not dumb it down for me although I'm sure he didn't when I was a youngin. By the age of 12 or 13 all bets were off though.
I think SCO might disagree with you, oh wait....
Most schools do this. I've not heard of anyone docking a math grade for being disruptive in class. Maybe I'm a little too distant from it all by my niece in school right now gets grades on all the things you mention.
Ouch! Some kids do have to learn the hard way. If he's as smart as you say then he'll find some other way to apply his skills but it will just take a lot longer especially if the relationship gets serious.
I do find it rather curious that its common for an American to go off and live on his/her own at 18 while being uncommon in a great number of other places. I have often felt like there is too much emphasis on using age to divide a population. I know 50 year olds that are as mature at 18 year olds and I know 18 year olds that are as mature as any respectable adult. Some people need extra time living life to fully realize what's in front of them. Five years out of school I remember looking back and being surprised where I ended up which made me start thinking about the next five years and even ten years out.
Long story short; you never know what path someone is going to end up taking. Some people don't want the easy path as they are afraid it will become boring. Some people just don't think that far ahead.
Honestly discussions like this are the reason I always liked Slashdot. Just because stances are opposing doesn't mean they don't share the same goals.
You are right in that paying will instill the wrong ideals but I think that problem is easier to deal with than the current problems we have since it will encourage those that currently have no drive to learn to change their ways.
I think you can accomplish both, provide a positive monetary reward and at the same time instill a strong work ethic by helping children to realize that $500 is nothing compared to what they could make if they applied themselves.
As for teaching patriotism it does have the problems you say which is why I don't advocate teaching patriotism. I think that a country is made up of its people and if it's people suck then so does the country. That is why I like my country, because I know a lot of great and positive people that balance out a lot of the negative. Patriotism in a democratic society does little but instill a value in the core beliefs that the country was found upon. Those ideals should not be dictated however as reasonable people should come to conclude the ideals for which the country stands are right and just through their own critical thought and not just because they were told to think it.
My argument is simply that the problems resulting from this will be easier to iron out than the current problems I see with our education system as a whole. It's just my opinion though and you present rather compelling arguments for why I may be wrong.
Personally I found a niche that was paying me in high school and I took it to much further levels than most people my age as I had a motivator beyond my own interests which helped me stay focused. It is certain that this type of motivation will not work for everyone though.
I disagree with that as I did learn a lot in school that would later become very applicable in my life. I learned a lot about the different disciplines and I learned a lot about dealing with people that hate you for no reason.
I think a lot of modern office politicking can and is taught in school even though it isn't formally taught. All the regular disciplines, math, science, English, and social studies provided me with a very well rounded education allowing me to sail right into college and become immediately successful academically.
Just because some lessons are harder to articulate than others doesn't mean students aren't learning a lot in school. Academic education as you call it is also a goal, it's just not the only goal which seems to be the argument you have. That is why the freedom to school your own child is there, you are allowed to disagree and that's why the option still exists.
You do bring up very valid points here. That is quite a strong argument there and I don't disagree with you on any particular point.
The question: Is your predicted outcome better, worse, or the same as the system we currently have in place? I honestly don't know the answer to that question as I do see an upside but you are right in that they are sheltered from the other harsh realities of the business world so we perhaps shouldn't endeavor make learning environments similar to business environments.
As for child labor, while I think such a scenario could arise I don't see it as a negative thing as it encourages the children to do their work and get good grades which is something apathetic parents wouldn't have bothered with encouraging before and poor but well intentioned parents would see great satisfaction at their child doing well enough in school to help out with the family.
In all scenarios there are those that would abuse the situation but I do feel like that would be fewer than the number of children victimized by parents that don't value education currently.
While I may have a low opinion of home-schooling I don't think it is wrong, with the right parents it can give a kid a great education but there's no falling back on the "kids need to be socialized" argument. It is a valid concern with home schooling and often does result in adults that are not well adjusted. That doesn't mean its impossible for a home schooled child to be well adjusted as there are plenty of success stories out there as evidence. Sports and other out of school social engagements have often been used with great success to supplement the lack of peer interaction. Of course there are plenty of failures so you can't fault people for being skeptical.
Both methods have their problems, if a parent understands their responsibility then more power to them as there is a chance they could do a better job. A friend of mine back home was home-schooled by his wacko religious fanatical mother and it didn't turn out so well even though he was a smart kid. After a few years of rebelling and getting away from his mother he has evened out quite a bit even though he is still a bit awkward.
Of course I went through public school and still ended up awkward until a few years of college and work life straightened me out which is why I don't have a problem with home schooling in general as neither method guarantees any result.
While I agree with you, another poster brought up the issue that this could create a class of people that have serious entitlement issues.
I had great parents to help me get perspective but a great many students out there don't have parents that are as involved as they should be.
I wonder if you would just let the real-world teach them about entitlement when they get out of school as they is going to be a harsh reality almost no matter what. Of course I could see that leading down a very dangerous road where people that couldn't become successful turned to crime but that's not really any different than the situation we have now.
Out of curiosity how is the real-world motivation system different? If I work hard and continue to achieve great work then I do see more income and that's here in the real world where I get a raises and/or bonuses based on my performance.
There's also nothing saying that a school couldn't raise the standards necessary to get money which would affectively raise the bar even further encouraging students to perform. I remember my frustration back in high school and lower grades with knowing that I would never use the knowledge that I was learning at the time in real life and so I didn't care about my grades even though I did fairly well anyways.
In college I was of course paying to be there so I took it a lot more seriously which is rare as a great many college students have their parents paying for everything. I had just enough from student loans to keep me in ramen noodles and it worked out alright.
I also look at my niece when she moved here to AZ where they aren't exactly known for great schools, her parents actually managed to find a school that was more work and held student to a higher standards than even VT where they were living. As a result she struggled for a while but with lots of support for her parents and her uncle she's back on top and performing well even though she does have a few areas where she needs to continue to work hard to catch up on. It's becoming fun for her to learn because everyone around her encourages it and provides her with some guidance when she needs it and that is sadly what a great many families are missing. Absent that I don't see a problem with trying to bribe the desire to learn out of kids since as I said, the real world functions in the same way.
That depends if you think that knowledge gained is the only purpose of school and I think you would be hard pressed to make such an argument.
If you're trying to produce people who can work together and be productive members of society then it makes sense to dock people that not followed rules which directly relate to that. In-class suspensions for disruptive behavior makes a lot of sense to me in this regard although I don't consider hugging in the hallway to be disruptive.
Much of the business world involves finding constructive tasks to perform when you are bored out of your skull so it makes sense that school would discourage disruptive behavior even if the student proves that he understand the materials being taught.
Do I think schools should be this way? I don't know, society has a way of filtering out people that are destructive or at least finding creative ways to embrace the destructive nature of particular individuals. I don't think students should be robots but I also think disrupting a class is unacceptable so I guess I like it but would favor relaxing many rules that were only enacted because a few people were uncomfortable with the setting such as the banning of hugging.
I would use Linux4One except that the kernel is missing a lot of useful stuff such as usb-to-serial drivers. By the time I installed enough software that I could compile modules I might as well have just installed Ubuntu and fixed the minor issues with it. My other complaint was that the kernel source was very hard to get so making drivers was exceedingly difficult. So much so that I went back to Ubuntu on my Aspire One.
Disable window effects and then it will work. I've never had this problem on Ubuntu with Gnome but I always disable the effects as I don't think they add anything of value especially on my netbook. I use the alt+mouse all the time with it for the very reasons already mentioned here.
What? Are you 12? Seriously, with a response like that how do you not expect people to just ignore you since you don't even offer anything to the conversation. Just shouting "WRONG" doesn't change anything and only serves to strengthen the other side. Rather than childish name-calling perhaps you could add something of value rather than wasting everyone's time? Maybe not...
There are those of us that intercept and redirect cell transmissions because of the absurdly high costs of everything. Why use cell minutes when you can create your own mini-tower and use your internal PBX? Many companies are investing many thousands of dollars in equipment because it pays off fast. If individual companies can do it cheaper then a single cellular provider simply has no excuse for such high rates, especially given the obvious collusion in the industry.
I think the fact that Windows netbooks outsell Linux netbooks dramatically says a lot about how Americans feel about their computer. They want a familiar environment. I bought an Acer with Linux as was surprised at how feature full it was. I could do the majority of tasks that I would want to do on a netbook. Other people with less technical skills found it cumbersome though as things didn't work as they expected.
The netbook trend started a long time ago and only recently did it become useful enough for the majority of us to actually want. Coincidentally that was also the time when they became powerful enough to run Windows even though they have been capable of running Linux for years.
Who said anything about old Opterons? The chips are not superior in every way so thanks for playing.
Scaling vertically hasn't been a good idea for a long time unless you're app has trouble scaling horizontally. I'm in the process of creating a proposal with a back-end database cluster considering of 4-6 nodes. Now I could achieve the same horsepower by buying an 8s or a 4s server and not have to buy as many machines but 4s servers seem to be 3 times more expensive than 2s socket servers so I can just buy more dual processor servers and scale out to achieve the target number of connections served.
Of course more servers are harder to manage and there is more hardware that can go bad although you are more tolerant of failures so its quite the trade-off.
I believe Anandtech is showing it's bias here. I had heard great things about the Xeon 55xx series CPUs so I went and bought a couple of servers. Specifically one web server and one database server. I also had Opteron-based servers performing the same tasks. My webservers are load balanced using a hardware load balancer. During January I was under an extremely heavy load scenario. I ended up having to weight more traffic to the Opteron servers because the Xeons were choking under 100% cpu load. I barely squeaked by as all my servers were quite overloaded but once you get to a certain threshold Xeon performance seems to drop sharply.
Rendering Intel has always been king but everywhere else Opterons have performed better for me again and again. I'm 100% 64bit though and I haven't tested virtualization performance yet.
You again make a lot of assumptions and still don't refute the OS X server lacks these features as you have to go third party. Both Microsoft and Novell have offered complete solutions for years and only recently has OS X become anything short of a farce as I said to begin with.
Of course you also don't seem to understand the complete absurdity involved in storing client views on the server which conflict with one another as one Mac user will have one preference while another will have a different preference.
Of course why should I have to modify the default config for samba to speed up transfer performance and disable the creation of files that no other platform seems to think are necessary. What other settings do I need to change for the client to stop being retarded? How about random disconnects? I'm sure there's a setting in there somewhere. This behavior is counterproductive and Apple could do better if it wanted.
I'll also add that the hidden files are not just DS_store files as there is one for each file and they are not 10k, they are thumbnails and contain metadata for the file with which they are associated. As I said, they all added up to an extra 500gigs of content that I had to be able to store before I scripted their removal. There's no getting around it, that's completely unacceptable.
I also did not say that enterprise tools didn't exist for OS X, only that they are still very limited when you compare their features with similar products from Sun, Oracle, Novell, Microsoft, IBM, and HP, and those are just the big players with KASE also offering solutions among a great many smaller players.
OS X has made a lot of progress as I said in the beginning but they have a long way to go before I would even remotely consider it cheaper to support.
As for the tools you mention, NetRestore is EOL, Deploy Studio is a joke for any company of size, Radmind is extremely limited to mainly file-system monitoring, and Centrify runs on Windows, not OS X, it just supports OS X as a client much like SCCM from Microsoft does.
Most of the tools you have listed are not enterprise tools, a lot of applications can be deployed in small numbers, when you start getting to larger numbers of workstations there become a lot of problems with maintaining compliance and enforcing policies.
While I'll freely admit there are a lot of tools out there that I'm not aware of, but I don't see anyone seriously considering running OS X as the core of their business if they are of any size. Maybe it's the culture here in Phoenix I'm not sure but you don't even hear about it here. OS X and X-store are rarely ever seen around here because they require a whole new suite of products to manage and few people are willing to invest in something completely different than their existing infrastructure when they can just scale with current hardware and software providers.
I was suggesting there are a multitude of issues and was not suggesting that updates reset server configurations although I have had OS X server accept a write to a share even though it was out of disk space resulting in someone losing all of their work for the previous two weeks.
I will grant that it was one of the first versions of OS X that was released but it still sorely lacks a lot of enterprise class features to this day especially in the field of centralized deployment, change, and event management. SYSLOG support has helped dramatically but there are a lot of black boxes inside OS X that hinder troubleshooting. It's not that different from Windows in philosophy.
I've had OS X updates overwrite Samba configs for clients connecting to Linux or Windows file shares. The added hidden files resulted in over 500gigs of storage on my server which I now run scripts to remove periodically. Given that I'm dealing with 90 terabytes that's not the end of the world but it was quite annoying when I didn't have a proper SAN to back me up and was running out space on my old file-server for no reason.
No, I'm not bitching about different configurations for different OSes, I'm talking about the creation of hundreds of thousands of files that serve no purpose especially when you're looking in directories with thousands of files in them.
Of course you haven't refuted anything I said and assumed I don't have important config files backed up which is complete absurdity so I'll leave it at that and add that deploying hundreds of config files after software updates is impractical. Thank god I don't have that many Macs in my company so I can handle changing the acknowledgement settings for Samba when the OS X users complain about performance when everyone else has no issue.
Sorry, Apple doesn't play well with others, they never have, they are making progress towards changing that but they have the same goals as Microsoft towards achieving lock-in so any migration will be towards a Linux distro where I can just drop in a replacement and it will work as expected.
What is this based on? It sounds to me like it's not based on reality as OS X server was a farce until about a year ago and it's still lacking significant enterprise features that have been present in Windows for 10 years and present in Netware for 15 years.
Sorry, that's complete BS, I'll consider OS X friendly when it doesn't litter file shares with hidden files and starts closing file locks that it open which isn't a problem on the Linux platform. Combined with speed issues of file-sharing and I'd say that MS infrastructure is far more friendly. Gotta love reconfiguring samba on OS X to make it perform like I expect a Linux box and then having the config wiped due to a software update.
That said, any company that rises to the level of Microsoft in marketshare will have plenty of consulting/support business crop up around it. There is no such thing as an idiot proof interface and OS X is by far no exception.