To be frank, what suggestion? A separate autonomous entity not confined to normal Dell practices? What exactly does that mean? Or more importantly, what makes anyone think Dell hasn't already worked through hundreds of permutations to follow through on their word. No offense, but I see more clouds than trees and grass here.
Instead of telling Dell just to read a book, maybe some actual constructive analogous examples from the book would have been better.
Flip it to auto in heavy fire at night, and you WILL see short flames. You only need to run through about 10 to 15 clips in a couple minutes to see it. After continual use for extended periods, the gases have almost a cumulative effect trying to eject out the flash cage. We're not talking about semi mode and short bursts here. I can't speak for the A4 - that's almost 20 years since my enlistment, but I find it hard to believe it would be any different under those same circumstances. I guess it really depends on whether the GP is talking about Police Academy flicks or Platoon. Either way, I have yet to see one movie that comes remotely close to demonstrating the concussive boom from just an M67 pineapple - it'll rattle your drums and teeth. Hollywood consults military personnel in post production for these effects; for some movies they do a decent job (as best you can portray on a flat screen anyways). Believe it or not, Forrest Gump was the most realistic Hollywood production I've seen yet (from the tracer rounds to the muzzle flashes in the woods).
Real weapons tend not to do that, but they probably just look pathetic on film.
I take it you've never fired an M16-A2 at night? It does indeed look like flames shooting out the muzzle, and they do indeed give away your position. The flash suppressor at the end helps (and directs the flash down and to the sides), but if you set your M16 close enough to the ground (in a prone position), you literally make divots in soft dirt or sand from the compressed exhaust pressure shooting out the muzzle cage. And that's just the M16. I was the 50 cal AG for my unit and you could probably roast a weenie on a stick near the muzzle. Hot damn I miss my "girl"...
if they are labeling "intentions" as complex behaviors, my eyebrows will be raised.
Not really intentions, but predictions. Apparently, from the binary decision test of adding or subtracting, they could predict within 70% certainty which path they would take. However, the article mentioned far reaching Orwellian type implications of this technology - like lie detection systems, which are about 70% reliable currently, so I see no improvement on that end. Of course, there's still much research and application to be done (and I would personally like to donate my brain to assist them if I could just borrow it back during the weekdays).
Al, as in Gore. But either A.I. or Al works though. What does A in A.I. stand for again? I keed! I keed! Uh oh. I sense a disturbance in the karma force.
One could probably compare OpenNMS to a tradtional startup company with no venture capital, and they beat out HP and IBM. That speaks volumes alone. I imagine the openNMS guys will eventually get swallowed up with a buyout from one of those two - which is an encouraging thought (although probably not their original intent). I admire GPL and FSF principles, but if it were me, I'd take that offer quicker than a cupcake left unguarded on the table.
Actor who would play Cerf in a movie: "Well, how about that guy in 'Matrix' who played 'the Architect?'"
DARPA Revolutions
The Architect - Hello, Al. Al - Who are you? Architect - I created the Internet. Al - Bullshit. The Architect - Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness. Al - If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again. The Architect - We won't.
Only now, you can't just "be" root to accomplish a series of tasks, you have to prefix everything with "sudo", even if you are the system administrator.
Not so. You can always set up a root password and login as root. For kde, you will also need to edit/etc/kde3/kdm/kdmrc and change AllowRootLogin=false to true. You will also need to do that login step for Gnome. Logout, login, and Bam! You are now root with all those caveats.
* A very important reason is sometimes overlooked when discussing sudo (within the context you framed it): Have you ever tried to access a GUI in a user login session as root? You can't - unless you start an xterm with "su" and inherit all the user environment vars like XAUTHORITY and DISPLAY by setting them. Compare that with just "sudo xterm" and then running whatever by locating bin apps with which (if not known).
And for _non_ GUI root access from within a user session, it's no more difficult than just setting up a root passwd and starting an xterm with "su".
Sudo is a layer of flexibility built on top of security - the best of both worlds. It just takes time to fully appreciate it by understanding it and using it. This sudo model integrated into ubuntu is a testament to the insight of the devs and this distro.
There are a lot of reasons that web-apps suck, I was just barely scratching the surface.
This is not the focus of the article. The article's focus is "when to use" (the very top title) and...
Applications that are built around forms or data manipulation are often excellent candidates for implementation as a trivial Web service.
Using javascript for form processing and database access applications is over engineering. Everything the article cites is all you need. Of course, the article itself is over simplistic and pretty much restating the obvious (for these _specific_ client requirements).
Why not just use the command line? I didn't see anything in this article that would exclude its usage...
There's nothing necessarily wrong with that approach. However, as a practical example, I worked for Insurance companies and we developed software initially using nothing but DOS. However, even for simple form processing, it was quite a task (especially when each vendor had their own specific designs for their property and casualty policies). Just to rearange those items even from a given template (or using a suite of library tools like curses) it was an ordeal at times fitting (for example) UMBI (Uninsured Motorist Bodily Injury) with UMPD (...Property Damage) across a FIXED 80 column screen. And some companies would insist it be that way. It was like squeezing a small child out of a birth canal at times. Even when migrating to a full blown OO GUI, the design requirements and scope was not all that much different (or resource conserving).
IBM said it best wrt scaling,
When you add in the possibility of needing to rework the application for a larger (plural!) audience, it pays off even more.
You are exactly right. When other business competitors (to us) were developing elaborate GUI based alternatives to our browser portal, our clients (and theirs) migrated to our platform instead. Which Industry? The Insurance companies - Progressive, Infinity, State Farm, etc. It was a perfect match for all their agents distributed across the nation (and who weren't even located on those companies premises). For heavy form processing, the browser already provided the interface - the backend delivery system we developed was a snap. And this was over a decade ago, long before distribution across the internet - just using their intranets. The biggest bonus from this GUI switch to browser? Maintenance - by far. Feature changes (like menu arrangements or additions) a close second.
Argoff, see my post just above in your defense. Seriously guys, we all have our opinions and facts here, as do many scientists. Why such hostility towards eachother on this topic? Can't we all just agree to disagree, and learn from it? Let's stop with the mutual self destruction here. Let CO2, the sun, or even the almighty Xenu destroy us instead.
We suggest equal emphasis on an alternative, more optimistic, scenario that emphasizes reduction of non-CO2 GHGs and black carbon during the next 50 years. This scenario derives from our interpretation that observed global warming has been caused mainly by non-CO2 GHGs.
Note the prefix non.
A corollary following from Figure 1 is that climate forcing by non-CO2 GHGs (1.4 W/m2) is nearly equal to the net value of all known forcings for the period 1850-2000 (1.6 W/m2). Thus, assuming only that our estimates are approximately correct, we assert that the processes producing the non-CO2 GHGs have been the primary drive for climate change in the past century.
and...
The primary natural source of CH4 is microbial decay of organic matter under anoxic conditions in wetlands.
and...
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases are probably the main cause of observed global warming, with CH4 causing the largest net climate forcing. There are economic incentives to reduce or capture CH4 emissions, but global implementation of appropriate practices requires international cooperation. Definition of appropriate policies requires better understanding of the CH4 cycle, especially CH4 sources.
Which would seem to bear out the GP's assertion about methane as the principal agent.
Yet the climate simulations lead to the conclusion that the Kyoto reductions will have little effect in the 21st century (Wigley 1998), and "thirty Kyotos" may be needed to reduce warming to an acceptable level (Malakoff 1998).
Basically, unless I missed the point of this research and their _realistic_ approach to solve it, the reduction of non-CO2 GHG (Green House Gases) should be the primary focus in our attempts to reduce global warming - which means a reduction of climate forcing agents like methane (CH4), CFCs, ozone, and others.
CFCs - found in fridges, air conditioners, aerosols etc. are extremely effective greenhouse gases. Although there are lower concentrations of CFCs in the atmosphere than CO2 they trap more heat. A CFC molecule is 10,000 times more effective in trapping heat than a CO2 molecule, methane is about 30 times more effective. Methane molecules survive for 10 years in the atmosphere and CFCs for 110 years. It is this that causes people to want to ban them completely.
The original CFCs were powerful greenhouse gases (about 0.34 W/m2 forcing since 1850), and even allowing for a cooling due to the subsequent depletion in stratospheric ozone (-0.15 W/m2), they had a net warming effect.
> And because most users are familiar with their older products, they stick with what they know.
That's a fair observation. But the real chin scratcher is why they continue purchasing AV software. I've been running butt naked wild on the net since at least win95 - never installing an AV rubber. Never got a trojan or virus either. Why? I don't open email attachments. I don't install software from untrusted sources. Etc. But those last two statements are common sense, right? People know that. And I know they know that. Why? They tell me everytime I go to their house trying to salvage their infected machine.
So, my observation over the years is simply this: common sense is common perception's little biatch. Everything the AV marketing gurus and layman news reporting floods us with over the years sticks - sticks like sweet maple syrup slathered all over the waffles of our reasoning and purchasing decisions. [Homer zombie moment here] Mmmmm, maple flavored brain waaaffles... hu hu hu hu
I mean, check out our garages. They're stuffed to the rafters with pure unadulterated crap. It's a regular Useless "R" Us store in there. I mean, who convinced us button down collars were a necessity? The wind really that strong to poke my eye out with a flap? We are basically what we buy, or in linux's case, don't. You can't convince people unless you desaturate them from that environment first. When I returned from the Spartan lifestyle as a soldier in the Army, the world around me was fresh and somewhat out of place. I couldn't even watch TV regularly for about three months - it felt like thumping inside my head. We really do have a matrix veil shrouding our senses. I call it marketing. And I ask you - where's the linux marketing? IBM? RedHat? Dell?
I'm not the AC, but it seems like [s]he also sees the value of a megaphone wielding thug with a plump rear pocket full of greenbacks too.
I can appreciate all your purchasing sentiments you outlined above. I think "people are pissing and moaning" over this Dell issue because 1) they have unfounded hatred towards Microsoft (aka linux fanbois), or 2) they would like their appreciation and support of OSS (over the years) to gain some market share for the tangible trickle down like benefits from more exposure, or 3) any other [ir]rationale reasons. I subscribe to 2, but all I'm saying is everyone from 1 to 3 is a revenue stream. The generalizations that every linux user conforms to 1 just isn't fair - and adult linux users like me have been fighting these broad characterizations for decades. I'm a practical man, not a preacher.
No, sir. He missed the nail entirely. In fact, it seems like he was aiming for his own forehead. Why? "Linux users are a bunch of hypersensitive crackpots who think the world owes them everything". If people don't see the parallel irony in that statement with the Dell post than they probably have a few craftsman rings and pieces of fiberglass on their own forehead.
I've been on linux mailing lists since the early 90s. Nothing has changed, yet linux still makes inroads. Since 93, for every response telling me to "RTFM", I've encountered constructive and helpful posts in orders of magnitude far greater than the RTFM'ers. The very same generalizations some would apply here to the linux base is no more different than countless Win related forums I frequent. Furthermore, companies are paid to appreciate _every_ customer from Joe Sixpack to Joe Suxtact. It's the cost of doing business, or doing none at all. There are no fringes here - only an equal mix of adults and children alike. Which by the way, are great customers!
> I'm curious what would happen if the funding was spontaneously cut.
Interesting. The horse came before the cart here though. If that cart were no longer attached, I'm quite sure a lot of other OSS programming studs would assume the reigns.
Aw, comeon bro. This is by far one of the most interesting articles I've seen here in some time. The statistics bear out so many important implications for linux and OSS in general. Did you mean Elmer FUDD by chance? If so, maybe the conlusion we can draw from this release now that it's finalized is "West and wewaxation at wast! ah hu hu hu hu"
Slashdot Mirror
To be frank, what suggestion? A separate autonomous entity not confined to normal Dell practices? What exactly does that mean? Or more importantly, what makes anyone think Dell hasn't already worked through hundreds of permutations to follow through on their word. No offense, but I see more clouds than trees and grass here.
Instead of telling Dell just to read a book, maybe some actual constructive analogous examples from the book would have been better.
Flip it to auto in heavy fire at night, and you WILL see short flames. You only need to run through about 10 to 15 clips in a couple minutes to see it. After continual use for extended periods, the gases have almost a cumulative effect trying to eject out the flash cage. We're not talking about semi mode and short bursts here. I can't speak for the A4 - that's almost 20 years since my enlistment, but I find it hard to believe it would be any different under those same circumstances. I guess it really depends on whether the GP is talking about Police Academy flicks or Platoon. Either way, I have yet to see one movie that comes remotely close to demonstrating the concussive boom from just an M67 pineapple - it'll rattle your drums and teeth. Hollywood consults military personnel in post production for these effects; for some movies they do a decent job (as best you can portray on a flat screen anyways). Believe it or not, Forrest Gump was the most realistic Hollywood production I've seen yet (from the tracer rounds to the muzzle flashes in the woods).
Well, you know what they say...
Once you go #GGGG, you never go ^H^H^H^H.
Oops. I meant to click on the GP reply button. I guess the humorous parent diverted my intention.
Al, as in Gore. But either A.I. or Al works though. What does A in A.I. stand for again? I keed! I keed! Uh oh. I sense a disturbance in the karma force.
One could probably compare OpenNMS to a tradtional startup company with no venture capital, and they beat out HP and IBM. That speaks volumes alone. I imagine the openNMS guys will eventually get swallowed up with a buyout from one of those two - which is an encouraging thought (although probably not their original intent). I admire GPL and FSF principles, but if it were me, I'd take that offer quicker than a cupcake left unguarded on the table.
DARPA Revolutions
The Architect - Hello, Al.
Al - Who are you?
Architect - I created the Internet.
Al - Bullshit.
The Architect - Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.
Al - If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
The Architect - We won't.
* A very important reason is sometimes overlooked when discussing sudo (within the context you framed it): Have you ever tried to access a GUI in a user login session as root? You can't - unless you start an xterm with "su" and inherit all the user environment vars like XAUTHORITY and DISPLAY by setting them. Compare that with just "sudo xterm" and then running whatever by locating bin apps with which (if not known).
And for _non_ GUI root access from within a user session, it's no more difficult than just setting up a root passwd and starting an xterm with "su".
Sudo is a layer of flexibility built on top of security - the best of both worlds. It just takes time to fully appreciate it by understanding it and using it. This sudo model integrated into ubuntu is a testament to the insight of the devs and this distro.
IBM said it best wrt scaling,at least for our specific requirements it did.
You are exactly right. When other business competitors (to us) were developing elaborate GUI based alternatives to our browser portal, our clients (and theirs) migrated to our platform instead. Which Industry? The Insurance companies - Progressive, Infinity, State Farm, etc. It was a perfect match for all their agents distributed across the nation (and who weren't even located on those companies premises). For heavy form processing, the browser already provided the interface - the backend delivery system we developed was a snap. And this was over a decade ago, long before distribution across the internet - just using their intranets. The biggest bonus from this GUI switch to browser? Maintenance - by far. Feature changes (like menu arrangements or additions) a close second.
Argoff, see my post just above in your defense. Seriously guys, we all have our opinions and facts here, as do many scientists. Why such hostility towards eachother on this topic? Can't we all just agree to disagree, and learn from it? Let's stop with the mutual self destruction here. Let CO2, the sun, or even the almighty Xenu destroy us instead.
One Title - Natural Born Shrillers
Knock Knock.
Who's there?
Ballmer.
Ballmer who?
Ball more over giving me 200 for Vista and I'll chair your head.
> And because most users are familiar with their older products, they stick with what they know.
That's a fair observation. But the real chin scratcher is why they continue purchasing AV software. I've been running butt naked wild on the net since at least win95 - never installing an AV rubber. Never got a trojan or virus either. Why? I don't open email attachments. I don't install software from untrusted sources. Etc. But those last two statements are common sense, right? People know that. And I know they know that. Why? They tell me everytime I go to their house trying to salvage their infected machine.
So, my observation over the years is simply this: common sense is common perception's little biatch. Everything the AV marketing gurus and layman news reporting floods us with over the years sticks - sticks like sweet maple syrup slathered all over the waffles of our reasoning and purchasing decisions. [Homer zombie moment here] Mmmmm, maple flavored brain waaaffles... hu hu hu hu
I mean, check out our garages. They're stuffed to the rafters with pure unadulterated crap. It's a regular Useless "R" Us store in there. I mean, who convinced us button down collars were a necessity? The wind really that strong to poke my eye out with a flap? We are basically what we buy, or in linux's case, don't. You can't convince people unless you desaturate them from that environment first. When I returned from the Spartan lifestyle as a soldier in the Army, the world around me was fresh and somewhat out of place. I couldn't even watch TV regularly for about three months - it felt like thumping inside my head. We really do have a matrix veil shrouding our senses. I call it marketing. And I ask you - where's the linux marketing? IBM? RedHat? Dell?
I'm not the AC, but it seems like [s]he also sees the value of a megaphone wielding thug with a plump rear pocket full of greenbacks too.
I can appreciate all your purchasing sentiments you outlined above. I think "people are pissing and moaning" over this Dell issue because 1) they have unfounded hatred towards Microsoft (aka linux fanbois), or 2) they would like their appreciation and support of OSS (over the years) to gain some market share for the tangible trickle down like benefits from more exposure, or 3) any other [ir]rationale reasons. I subscribe to 2, but all I'm saying is everyone from 1 to 3 is a revenue stream. The generalizations that every linux user conforms to 1 just isn't fair - and adult linux users like me have been fighting these broad characterizations for decades. I'm a practical man, not a preacher.
Just for clarity, I was referring to the AC, not otter (as he pointed out the problems of generalizations and which I fully agree).
No, sir. He missed the nail entirely. In fact, it seems like he was aiming for his own forehead. Why? "Linux users are a bunch of hypersensitive crackpots who think the world owes them everything". If people don't see the parallel irony in that statement with the Dell post than they probably have a few craftsman rings and pieces of fiberglass on their own forehead.
I've been on linux mailing lists since the early 90s. Nothing has changed, yet linux still makes inroads. Since 93, for every response telling me to "RTFM", I've encountered constructive and helpful posts in orders of magnitude far greater than the RTFM'ers. The very same generalizations some would apply here to the linux base is no more different than countless Win related forums I frequent. Furthermore, companies are paid to appreciate _every_ customer from Joe Sixpack to Joe Suxtact. It's the cost of doing business, or doing none at all. There are no fringes here - only an equal mix of adults and children alike. Which by the way, are great customers!
Maintainer? I always thought Alan Cox was the main gatekeeper and that Linus handed him the neck keychain some time ago.
> I'm curious what would happen if the funding was spontaneously cut.
Interesting. The horse came before the cart here though. If that cart were no longer attached, I'm quite sure a lot of other OSS programming studs would assume the reigns.
Aw, comeon bro. This is by far one of the most interesting articles I've seen here in some time. The statistics bear out so many important implications for linux and OSS in general. Did you mean Elmer FUDD by chance? If so, maybe the conlusion we can draw from this release now that it's finalized is "West and wewaxation at wast! ah hu hu hu hu"