ZDNet's comment would actually change the perception and make some investors out there doubt the decision of investing in open source. Kind of like a measurement of a quantum system would change the system, so perhaps an article in a popular tech news commenting on the investment situation in the tech industry would end up somehow changing the overall open source investment trends eventually...
Ok, I was talking about dogmatic unity not political subbordination. The Byzantium and Constantinople are not there anymore, Rome is Catholic, so that isn't relevant. Most Orthodox countries have been subject to policial rulers and pressures - look at the Soviet Russia in just the last 100 years - that has nothing to do with the dogma and beliefs of the church, which remained unchanged since the apostolic era.
The Coptic split occured because there was supposedly a difference in the belief about the nature of Christ -- while in fact now it seems it was just a translation issue between Greek and Arabic. So in case of unification, the Coptic church would not have to be "subject" to any political rule, they would have their own pope and so on probably, it is just that all the Orthodox would be in communion with each other - a pretty good thing if you ask me.
It is not the lack of formal education that is bothering me, it is the "Give me $100 million, I can get energy from water, it's just around the corner, trust me..." combined with the lack of education that screams "CROCK"!
I know and admire Ramanujan, a math professor spent a whole class period talking about him...
The Coptics are Orthodox too and would interpret the Bible in the same way as the other Orthodox. The was just a small dissagreement between the nature of Christ, that is thought to have arrisen from a translation error to/from Greek and Arabic. But dogmatic union of the early church was extremely important and thus there was split. I hope today they would come back together, there isn't any dogmatic difference between the churches and there is just as much customs and local tradition difference as there is between different national churches even among the Eastern Orthodox.
Well that's better. That is what I was talking about, those look like real research papers. They would have to be evaluated by peers. In other words if something strange happens it doens't mean QM is wrong, it probably means that the setup, measurement or analyzis was wrong. After careful testing, a paper is published describing what has happened and then hopefully others will want to replicate the experiment. If the results are replicated consistently then a theory could be proposed. After the thoery is proposed it would have to be tested - the calculation, conformance with previous similar older and current experimental results. Only after that there could just a small hint that QM "might be" wrong...
Now that is different from "Give me money - $100 million, I can get free energy out of water! It's just around the corner, no really, trust me. See I even made a website about it...".
Quite simply, talk to either the Orthodox Jews or the Orthodox Christians (Also called Easern Orthodox Christians), perhaps Catholics too. Why? They have a rich oral tradition that has been unchanged since the days the books have been written. Whoever wrote the book told his followers what it meant, then they told their followers and so on. As you can imagine there were no cameras or sound recording equipment in that day to just sit and record everything, so the oral tradition along with a written text is what we have.
The "Fundamentalists" follow the Bible, even though it was technically written and composed by the early Christians at a council in the 4th century, so instead of going crazy with the interpretation they should just talk to the people who composed the Bible and selected which books would be "in" and which ones would be left out - the Orthodox Christians, they would probably also know what the correct interpretation is.
If I did spend the time sifting through his crap (I would rather go through Feynman's lectures instead) I doubt there would even be too many people who would understand the refutation, as that would require understanding QM math. His quakery works on the same principle, he claims to have built "teh flux capacitor" and then blurts out some pseudo-scientific mummbo jumbo which looks like "teh kool science" for the average joe who reads scientific american once in a while. The idea is that among those average joe's, some idiot with lots of money would invest in his project.
For refutation I will say this so far: I looked at his "The Fallacy of Feynman's Argument..." paper which is mostly essay format with just a few basic QM equations here and there followed by "short novels" why he thinks they are wrong. If he has indeed found a fallacy in the QM equations, it would take pretty darn long paper, with a lot more equations and proofs to even look plausable. It is as if someone would say they found anti-gravity then write a short sci-fi story to prove it.
You say show that there is absolutely no empirical evidence for anything they have done. If they had something strange happen during an experiment they should have left it at that and write a paper called something like "Something strange happened during blah blah blah...", then describe in detail the setup of the experiment and the results, then wait for peer review and not jump up and yell "oh my gawd, free energy from H2O, give us $100 million!". I guess the point is that "free energy" quaks today are the yesterday's "Perpetuum Mobile" crowd.
Anyway, nobody is stopping you or anyone to believe him, you can even invest in his project if you want. Many physics and math papers and QM textbooks are out there - a good deal for free - so decide for yourself if this guy is a quak or not.
Yesterday some inventor had plans for H-B fusion in a "coffee can" now energy from water. What is next? Time travel, UFO's and Zombies?
This guy if full of shit. Just because he graduated from MIT, deosn't mean he is that good. Remember the Unabomber graduated from Harvard, for all that's worth.
To all those "But, wait what if it is true! He is the other other Einstein" comments I would just have to say that this guy doesn't know quantum mechanics. He is a medic and an electrical engineer, what the fuck is he doing publishing papers on "The Fallacy of Feynman's Argument on the Stability of the Hydrogen Atom According to Quantum Mechanics". He has two or three equations and the rest is bullshit in "essay format". Check out his website. He might as well be selling tin foil hats to prevent damage from space death rays.
It is just that with KDE SVG came turned on by default and with GNOME I never even felt the need to find it to turn it on to like GNOME, a complement for GNOME I guess. The theme here seems to be that in GNOME stuff "just works" and the user doesn't have to be aware of it.
In KDE the options, components and preferences are everywhere, which sometimes can confuse users...
How about...
Safe crack - smoke and get high all you want without the risk of brain injury, producing crack babies or turning regular, run-of-the-mill whores into crack whores!
Get it now, while supplies last!
Only $29.99, first rock is always free or get one for you and the second one for your loved ones for 50% off!
Call within the next five minutes and we'll throw in a designer crack pipe absolutely free!
Ok, that makes sense, thanks for taking the time and clearing it up. I feel like I should have known that from the General Physics course at the university from only 5 years ago.
Remember the furore about banning the sale of PS2s to Iraq
That's the first time I've heard of it. It makes it sound as if Iraq had everything ready for the WMDs except the PS2 chips. I can imagine the following dialog:
[Sadam]: General, are the WMD ready?
[General]: Yes, the nuclear, biological and chemical warheads are ready, fueled up and pointed at the infidels.
[Sadam]: What are we waiting on then, let's launch them!
[General]: We can't.
[Sadam]: Why not?
[General]: We don't have any PS2 chips.
[Sadam]: Damn you Amiricans and UN, damn you to hell!
You are right about the main difference about KDE and GNOME. That is why I started using GNOME, even though for years I swore by KDE. I was just more productive in GNOME, in UI design sometimes "less is more".
As you have also pointed out, besides the language difference between the two there is another more subtle difference between KDE and GNOME. To me, it seems that KDE wanted to create an environment that looks familiar to MS Windows so the new users don't feel lost. The problem with that is that years of research in HCI (Human Computer Interraction) have shown that MS Windows doesn't have the best UI. GNOME wanted to apply some of the new/better/different UI design approaches and thus created something that is farther way from MS Windows but also, in the long term, more usable.
Out of all the desktops out there I personally think Mac's OS X is the best one. They have put a lot of money in usability and design of the interface, that is why a lot of people use it and like it even thought performance-wise the machines are behind the Intel compatible ones. And GNOME seems closer and more similar to Mac OS X than Windows.
NOTE: I use Windows at home it because it runs some of the stuff I need and I don't have a choice. I don't own a Mac cause it is too expensive for me, but on Linux I have a choice and I use Ubuntu's GNOME Desktop.
I, on the other hand, have always used KDE on Mandrake (now Mandriva), on SuSE, on RedHat. Then I gave Ubuntu a try, which uses GNOME as the default desktop. I thought "stupid GNOME" and went right way and installed the KDE Desktop with all the libraries and utilities. I used that on Ubuntu, but then eventually I found myself logging into the GNOME Desktop more and more and now I am only using GNOME.
Honestly I don't even know the reason, maybe it is the Dark Side of the Force, or maybe the panels just have less clutter, maybe stuff just works better. I don't miss the transparency, the shadows, the SVG icons of KDE, at first I thought they were great, but after a while it didn't matter. Maybe it is also less stuff to configure and less options to worry about. Sometimes I think in UI design "less is more", but of course it is still very much a subjective thing, so I am glad there is the choice and the options for everyone KDE, GNOME, Blackbox, Xfce and others.
I suspect he is a crock. I don't know enough physics to prove or disprove him wrong. For a present day physicist he doesn't have that much stuff published in scientific journals. I checked his publications on arXiv.org and he only has his paper talking about his new reactor and the other one how the universe is not expanding and some other one. Also claiming to build a "new" "clean" and "cheap" energy source that other scientists just couldn't figure out just sounds a little suspicious, if you know what I mean...
Seriously though, how this small "coffee can" size device could hold a temperature above 1 billion degrees inside without melting. The copper will melt just above 1000 degrees. With a 1 billion degree plasmoid just couple of inches from the inner wall, how will the whole thing not turn into gas? I understand that there will be a vacuum created inside and there will also be hydrogen and boron gas flowing during the operation. The pulse will be at about 1 Mhz.
The last time I checked there was vacuum between us and the sun and we still get a good deal of its energy, what about a couple of inches of distance. Can any physics major explain? Thanks.
It is the performance/price ratio that they talk about. The price is known so they just have a performance benchmark. The CPU that can crank the most FPUs (or something like that) per unit of time per $ is the winner. You can also factor in power if you want. The most expensive != the fastest sometimes.
Brewed frothy coffee, what a concept, no coffee shop in the world could have possibly invented that on their own. This is like Microsoft patenting the "double click". Then why don't the Italians then patent pizza and the Mexicans patent tacos and diarrhea!
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to Slashdot, here anything can happen ;-)
This sucks!
ZDNet's comment would actually change the perception and make some investors out there doubt the decision of investing in open source. Kind of like a measurement of a quantum system would change the system, so perhaps an article in a popular tech news commenting on the investment situation in the tech industry would end up somehow changing the overall open source investment trends eventually...
The Coptic split occured because there was supposedly a difference in the belief about the nature of Christ -- while in fact now it seems it was just a translation issue between Greek and Arabic. So in case of unification, the Coptic church would not have to be "subject" to any political rule, they would have their own pope and so on probably, it is just that all the Orthodox would be in communion with each other - a pretty good thing if you ask me.
I know and admire Ramanujan, a math professor spent a whole class period talking about him...
The Coptics are Orthodox too and would interpret the Bible in the same way as the other Orthodox. The was just a small dissagreement between the nature of Christ, that is thought to have arrisen from a translation error to/from Greek and Arabic. But dogmatic union of the early church was extremely important and thus there was split. I hope today they would come back together, there isn't any dogmatic difference between the churches and there is just as much customs and local tradition difference as there is between different national churches even among the Eastern Orthodox.
Now that is different from "Give me money - $100 million, I can get free energy out of water! It's just around the corner, no really, trust me. See I even made a website about it...".
The "Fundamentalists" follow the Bible, even though it was technically written and composed by the early Christians at a council in the 4th century, so instead of going crazy with the interpretation they should just talk to the people who composed the Bible and selected which books would be "in" and which ones would be left out - the Orthodox Christians, they would probably also know what the correct interpretation is.
May I respectfully suggest Half Life 2 then, sir ;-)
This guy's quakery works too, I am sure someone out there will give him money...
For refutation I will say this so far: I looked at his "The Fallacy of Feynman's Argument..." paper which is mostly essay format with just a few basic QM equations here and there followed by "short novels" why he thinks they are wrong. If he has indeed found a fallacy in the QM equations, it would take pretty darn long paper, with a lot more equations and proofs to even look plausable. It is as if someone would say they found anti-gravity then write a short sci-fi story to prove it.
You say show that there is absolutely no empirical evidence for anything they have done. If they had something strange happen during an experiment they should have left it at that and write a paper called something like "Something strange happened during blah blah blah...", then describe in detail the setup of the experiment and the results, then wait for peer review and not jump up and yell "oh my gawd, free energy from H2O, give us $100 million!". I guess the point is that "free energy" quaks today are the yesterday's "Perpetuum Mobile" crowd.
Anyway, nobody is stopping you or anyone to believe him, you can even invest in his project if you want. Many physics and math papers and QM textbooks are out there - a good deal for free - so decide for yourself if this guy is a quak or not.
This guy if full of shit. Just because he graduated from MIT, deosn't mean he is that good. Remember the Unabomber graduated from Harvard, for all that's worth.
To all those "But, wait what if it is true! He is the other other Einstein" comments I would just have to say that this guy doesn't know quantum mechanics. He is a medic and an electrical engineer, what the fuck is he doing publishing papers on "The Fallacy of Feynman's Argument on the Stability of the Hydrogen Atom According to Quantum Mechanics". He has two or three equations and the rest is bullshit in "essay format". Check out his website. He might as well be selling tin foil hats to prevent damage from space death rays.
It is just that with KDE SVG came turned on by default and with GNOME I never even felt the need to find it to turn it on to like GNOME, a complement for GNOME I guess. The theme here seems to be that in GNOME stuff "just works" and the user doesn't have to be aware of it.
In KDE the options, components and preferences are everywhere, which sometimes can confuse users...
How about ...
Safe crack - smoke and get high all you want without the risk of brain injury, producing crack babies or turning regular, run-of-the-mill whores into crack whores!
Get it now, while supplies last!
Only $29.99, first rock is always free or get one for you and the second one for your loved ones for 50% off!
Call within the next five minutes and we'll throw in a designer crack pipe absolutely free!
Ok, that makes sense, thanks for taking the time and clearing it up. I feel like I should have known that from the General Physics course at the university from only 5 years ago.
That's the first time I've heard of it. It makes it sound as if Iraq had everything ready for the WMDs except the PS2 chips. I can imagine the following dialog:
[Sadam]: General, are the WMD ready?
[General]: Yes, the nuclear, biological and chemical warheads are ready, fueled up and pointed at the infidels.
[Sadam]: What are we waiting on then, let's launch them!
[General]: We can't.
[Sadam]: Why not?
[General]: We don't have any PS2 chips.
[Sadam]: Damn you Amiricans and UN, damn you to hell!
As you have also pointed out, besides the language difference between the two there is another more subtle difference between KDE and GNOME. To me, it seems that KDE wanted to create an environment that looks familiar to MS Windows so the new users don't feel lost. The problem with that is that years of research in HCI (Human Computer Interraction) have shown that MS Windows doesn't have the best UI. GNOME wanted to apply some of the new/better/different UI design approaches and thus created something that is farther way from MS Windows but also, in the long term, more usable.
Out of all the desktops out there I personally think Mac's OS X is the best one. They have put a lot of money in usability and design of the interface, that is why a lot of people use it and like it even thought performance-wise the machines are behind the Intel compatible ones. And GNOME seems closer and more similar to Mac OS X than Windows.
NOTE: I use Windows at home it because it runs some of the stuff I need and I don't have a choice. I don't own a Mac cause it is too expensive for me, but on Linux I have a choice and I use Ubuntu's GNOME Desktop.
Honestly I don't even know the reason, maybe it is the Dark Side of the Force, or maybe the panels just have less clutter, maybe stuff just works better. I don't miss the transparency, the shadows, the SVG icons of KDE, at first I thought they were great, but after a while it didn't matter. Maybe it is also less stuff to configure and less options to worry about. Sometimes I think in UI design "less is more", but of course it is still very much a subjective thing, so I am glad there is the choice and the options for everyone KDE, GNOME, Blackbox, Xfce and others.
I suspect he is a crock. I don't know enough physics to prove or disprove him wrong. For a present day physicist he doesn't have that much stuff published in scientific journals. I checked his publications on arXiv.org and he only has his paper talking about his new reactor and the other one how the universe is not expanding and some other one. Also claiming to build a "new" "clean" and "cheap" energy source that other scientists just couldn't figure out just sounds a little suspicious, if you know what I mean...
The last time I checked there was vacuum between us and the sun and we still get a good deal of its energy, what about a couple of inches of distance. Can any physics major explain? Thanks.
It is the performance/price ratio that they talk about. The price is known so they just have a performance benchmark. The CPU that can crank the most FPUs (or something like that) per unit of time per $ is the winner. You can also factor in power if you want. The most expensive != the fastest sometimes.
Brewed frothy coffee, what a concept, no coffee shop in the world could have possibly invented that on their own. This is like Microsoft patenting the "double click". Then why don't the Italians then patent pizza and the Mexicans patent tacos and diarrhea!
Well then you mix it up with your kool aid and sip it through a straw!
But can you use apt-get on Solaris?
I'm gonna go out on limb here and ask what if someone wants a Solaris kernel but all the Debian extra packages and utilities?