As I understand it, normally the parent would be the guardian, but since the parent dodged the lawsuit by shifting the blame to her child, there is a conflict of interest, and now the child must be represented by somebody else.
Countries compete. Hitler took it to new levels. Should we just shrug out shoulders and say he was just doing what is natural?
The fact is that Microsoft has taken competition to levels not seen since the robber barons of the late 1800s and early 1900s. No other company is so bent on destroying the competition through every possible means. Do you remember that fraudulent video at the anti-trust trial? That pretty much sums up Microsoft's attitude towards the world: win at any cost. They may even have intentionally thumbed their nose at the judge sufficient to get him to do something stupid, and he did; he gave an interview which provided the appeals court with a handy excuse for knocking down his punishment (although not his verdict or facts). Microsoft has that kind of reputation.
Your excuses don't wash. Microsoft is not an ordinary comapny with ordinary ethics. Sony doesn't try to destroy Yamaha and other home electronic manufacturers like Microsoft has destroyed its competition.
About the only ethics competition Microsoft has is the RIAA and MPAA. It's hard to tell who is more ethics-challnged.
He was commenting on TFA, which was about way back before glibc. Back then porting was a PITA, a daily struggle to keep track of what methods worked best on which operating systems, indeed which releases of which operating systems. The differences weren't as great as from one Microsoft OS to the next, but they were there, and there were more variants.
There was no glibc to be arsed to use. POSIX was a joke.
TFA dealt with that earlier era. You, sir, are off-topic and irrelevant.
I looked into getting UNIX for a commodity PC. Every single one had its own bizarre requirements which were different from all the others. No way could you buy commercial 3rd party software for a generic x86 UNIX. If you ran free source software you were mostly ok, but businesses weren't interested in that route.
No middle manager gave a rat's ass about the difficulty of porting to different vesions of UNIX. Certainly the effort to port a UNIX app to Windows and retrain all those programmers was far greater than merely adding a few IFDEFs to existing code. UNIX lost just as squiggleslash says. When time came to add a simple print server or file, managers said, Whoa, I can add a cheap Windows commodity system, or I can buy an expensive UNIX box that has to go in the dataceneter with special power and cooling requirements. As for who would admin the damn thing, since none of the UNIX guys would touch it, the answer was as simple as Microfoft's ad campaign, why the manager would, it's a GUI, what could be simpler?
UNIX ignored cheap systems, everyone knew the money was in the big boxes, and as for the desktop, that was an insignificant market to be sniffed at. No serious vendor paid attention to desktops, only (sniff) Microsoft and their toy operating system.
Little things like different error returns from system calls. EAGAIN varied on socket calls. Been a while since I struggled with this, but I remember having to code up shared memory and threaded apps differently for AIX, Solaris, etc, simply because some methods worked better on different systems. Some wanted mutexes in shared memory, or soemthing else some other way, and it was a real pain in the ass to deal with. HP-UX changed some socket return code semantics in some OS release, in some very subtle way.
Based on the reality of the cancelled Apollo missions, the destruction of our first space station (Spacelab) because it conflicted with a more expensive future, the downgrading waste of money that is the current space station, and the horrendous back scratching and pork that resulted in the space shuttle fiasco, I'd say history is on my side.
"Bush has focused..." yes that's very impressive. How much longer will Bush be in office? How much of a deficit has he run up that future presidents and congresses must pay for? And one guess what will be one of the very first projects to be cut and chopped until it is so hamstrung that it seems a kindness to delete it completely, with justification coming from how poorly it has performed on its reduced budget.
As for the pipe dream of colonizing the moon, I laugh. The only colonizations that have succeeded were those for personal gain. The idea that an unsteady budget from congress can survive the decades it will take to make a real colony just boggles my mind. You must be one of those new pups that still thinks politicians have a conscience and can think farther ahead than the next election.
- we are making the party our own - we are making sure the money is spent on our terms
What part of reality are you not getting? What in the blue blazes makes you think YOU can control ANY politician, let alone a whole legislature of them writing up pork bills?
Screw the fine article, face reality. Did you read the fine articles about how grand the new shuttle was going to be? Did you read the fine articles about how grand the space station was going to be?
What in heaven's name makes you think this politically inspired mission is going to be any different? It has no real goal, other than planting that flag. They may talk about a colony, but that's just so much hot air that we've seen before. Or maybe you haven't, if you actually believe their tripe. Good gosh, politicians can't follow thru on six month commitments, what makes you think they will follow thru on a ten or twenty year one?
I repeat. Until they do something because it makes sense, instead of finding excuses for planting flags, it will not succeed.
sit back and watch the party...or better yet join them and have fun...
or better yet, make yoru own party.
Just because the politicians and bureaucrats want to throw a party at my expense doesn't mean I have to go along. It's my money. I'd rather it was spent elsewhere on my terms, not theirs.
The question isn't why not go sooner, and the answer isn't solar power. The question they bureaucrats asked was How do we continue our empire, and the answer was Plant another few flags.
Why are you and so many others blind to the fact that this mission has nothing to do with your hoeps? What makes you think you can jump up and down and shout yippee and change this mission into something useful?
Show me even a hint that these missions will continue once they have planted a few flags.
And your reasons are not the reasons for this NASA and this administration and this mission. This mission has less incentive than beating the Soviets and will not last any longer. It will have no useful spinoffs, it will have no lasting impact, it has no long term goals or uses.
No shit I can think of a zillion reasons for going to the moon. But not the politicians and bureaucrats who will run this flag planting exercise in futility. You may think it's about time they got the bandwagon running, but it sure ain't going in your direction. Why do you support it?
As a *colony*... as a source of raw materials... as anything but a political flag planting which has no further goal.
Everyone keeps on coming up with all sorts of reasons for this moon mission, forgetting that their reasons do not match a single one of the reasons stated for this mission. This mission will plant a few flags and come back and have nothing to show for itself. Do you really think that planting a few flags will have any more effect this time than forty years ago?
I repeat... if it has no practical purpose, it is a waste of research and engineering.
What makes you think this will actually result in a permanent presence on the moon?
I repeat, as long as the goal is a politically ordered return to the moon for no practical useful reason, we will not stay there, and we will have wasted money that could have been spent on more useful research, like hypersonic transports, orbital hotels, decent batteries, safe reliable cheap nuclear power, and a zillion other choices. Going back to the moon for the mere purpose of planting a flag, or worse yet, a political colony along the same lines as the current space station, will simply divert talent from useful research and engineering.
I am not advocating feeding the homeless with the $100B, or any other loonie leftie short sightedness. I am advocating research for useful purposes, not political nonsense that won't ever result in anything that anybody can use.
Sure, now show me how a return to the moon a few times will accomplish any of the above.
NASA isn't going to the moon in order to lower the cost of space transport, bring back cheap ore, put mirrors in orbit, put nasty industries in orbit, etc etc etc. They are doing it on a political whim, where the goal is.... to get to the moon.
Once we get to the moon, the goal has been reached, and everyone loses interest.
That's why I said go for a practical reason. We should, and we aren't, and we won't stay. It's a waste of time and money.
They have no reason for going to the moon. At least Apollo had a reason, the space race against the evil commies, but this time, not even that much. No doubt we'll go there a few times and stop again.
Moon colonies would be great, from a science fiction point of view, but without an actual practical reason that involves real colonists with real practical uses, this new moon plan will be just another short sighted waste of time and money. I'd rather that money was spent on technology that had actual uses for most people. Don't preach to me about spin-offs. There would be just as many spin-offs from orbital hotels or quiet and environmentally friendly hypersonic transports or practical electric cars with batteries to go 500 miles.
Grease keeps systems working smoothly. Lawyers, money speculators, used car salesman, and a zillion other occupations are society's grease. In a frozen static society, you could get rid of them once you had polished the system to the nth degree. But in a dynamic society, these greasers keep the various diverse parts all working together relatively smoothly.
But too much grease in a gearbox bogs it down. That's what has happened with intellectual property in general. Those idiots in Washington listened to their corporate sponsors and believed what they said about the more the merrier.
At some point, hopefully sooner rather than later, business and politicians will notice what the true innovators and researchers have long since learned the hard way, and cut back on the flow of grease. In the meantime, the rest of us are stuck with completely counterpdocutive IP legal wrangling getting in our way. It may take a long time to notice the drop in innovation and productivity, but I sure hope not.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time I get in any sort of elevator or building, I fear for my life.
You probably enter (any sort of) buildings several times a day; surely by now you would have realized your fears are groundless.
As I understand it, normally the parent would be the guardian, but since the parent dodged the lawsuit by shifting the blame to her child, there is a conflict of interest, and now the child must be represented by somebody else.
TFA was from way back when. Your comments on 2005 are irrelevant.
Check out ncurses. It's amazing the improvements that have been made.
Countries compete. Hitler took it to new levels. Should we just shrug out shoulders and say he was just doing what is natural?
The fact is that Microsoft has taken competition to levels not seen since the robber barons of the late 1800s and early 1900s. No other company is so bent on destroying the competition through every possible means. Do you remember that fraudulent video at the anti-trust trial? That pretty much sums up Microsoft's attitude towards the world: win at any cost. They may even have intentionally thumbed their nose at the judge sufficient to get him to do something stupid, and he did; he gave an interview which provided the appeals court with a handy excuse for knocking down his punishment (although not his verdict or facts). Microsoft has that kind of reputation.
Your excuses don't wash. Microsoft is not an ordinary comapny with ordinary ethics. Sony doesn't try to destroy Yamaha and other home electronic manufacturers like Microsoft has destroyed its competition.
About the only ethics competition Microsoft has is the RIAA and MPAA. It's hard to tell who is more ethics-challnged.
He was commenting on TFA, which was about way back before glibc. Back then porting was a PITA, a daily struggle to keep track of what methods worked best on which operating systems, indeed which releases of which operating systems. The differences weren't as great as from one Microsoft OS to the next, but they were there, and there were more variants.
There was no glibc to be arsed to use. POSIX was a joke.
TFA dealt with that earlier era. You, sir, are off-topic and irrelevant.
I looked into getting UNIX for a commodity PC. Every single one had its own bizarre requirements which were different from all the others. No way could you buy commercial 3rd party software for a generic x86 UNIX. If you ran free source software you were mostly ok, but businesses weren't interested in that route.
No middle manager gave a rat's ass about the difficulty of porting to different vesions of UNIX. Certainly the effort to port a UNIX app to Windows and retrain all those programmers was far greater than merely adding a few IFDEFs to existing code. UNIX lost just as squiggleslash says. When time came to add a simple print server or file, managers said, Whoa, I can add a cheap Windows commodity system, or I can buy an expensive UNIX box that has to go in the dataceneter with special power and cooling requirements. As for who would admin the damn thing, since none of the UNIX guys would touch it, the answer was as simple as Microfoft's ad campaign, why the manager would, it's a GUI, what could be simpler?
UNIX ignored cheap systems, everyone knew the money was in the big boxes, and as for the desktop, that was an insignificant market to be sniffed at. No serious vendor paid attention to desktops, only (sniff) Microsoft and their toy operating system.
Little things like different error returns from system calls. EAGAIN varied on socket calls. Been a while since I struggled with this, but I remember having to code up shared memory and threaded apps differently for AIX, Solaris, etc, simply because some methods worked better on different systems. Some wanted mutexes in shared memory, or soemthing else some other way, and it was a real pain in the ass to deal with. HP-UX changed some socket return code semantics in some OS release, in some very subtle way.
From the Monarch page
...
Shipping Weight: 13.00 pounds
Ultra light: 6.8 kg (14 lbs)
I'd like to get hold of that shipping container! Make it a lot of them. I wonder what the shipping weight of the shipping container is
Why do you think we care about Microsoft's?
Because you read the article, and the story, and who knows how many comments, but above all, you responded!
Try the wikipedia on 360 (number).
360 goes way back thousands of years before the Greeks.
Based on the reality of the cancelled Apollo missions, the destruction of our first space station (Spacelab) because it conflicted with a more expensive future, the downgrading waste of money that is the current space station, and the horrendous back scratching and pork that resulted in the space shuttle fiasco, I'd say history is on my side.
..." yes that's very impressive. How much longer will Bush be in office? How much of a deficit has he run up that future presidents and congresses must pay for? And one guess what will be one of the very first projects to be cut and chopped until it is so hamstrung that it seems a kindness to delete it completely, with justification coming from how poorly it has performed on its reduced budget.
"Bush has focused
As for the pipe dream of colonizing the moon, I laugh. The only colonizations that have succeeded were those for personal gain. The idea that an unsteady budget from congress can survive the decades it will take to make a real colony just boggles my mind. You must be one of those new pups that still thinks politicians have a conscience and can think farther ahead than the next election.
what part of this are you not getting?
These parts:
- we are making the party our own
- we are making sure the money is spent on our terms
What part of reality are you not getting? What in the blue blazes makes you think YOU can control ANY politician, let alone a whole legislature of them writing up pork bills?
Screw the fine article, face reality. Did you read the fine articles about how grand the new shuttle was going to be? Did you read the fine articles about how grand the space station was going to be?
What in heaven's name makes you think this politically inspired mission is going to be any different? It has no real goal, other than planting that flag. They may talk about a colony, but that's just so much hot air that we've seen before. Or maybe you haven't, if you actually believe their tripe. Good gosh, politicians can't follow thru on six month commitments, what makes you think they will follow thru on a ten or twenty year one?
I repeat. Until they do something because it makes sense, instead of finding excuses for planting flags, it will not succeed.
sit back and watch the party...or better yet join them and have fun...
or better yet, make yoru own party.
Just because the politicians and bureaucrats want to throw a party at my expense doesn't mean I have to go along. It's my money. I'd rather it was spent elsewhere on my terms, not theirs.
The question isn't why not go sooner, and the answer isn't solar power. The question they bureaucrats asked was How do we continue our empire, and the answer was Plant another few flags.
Why are you and so many others blind to the fact that this mission has nothing to do with your hoeps? What makes you think you can jump up and down and shout yippee and change this mission into something useful?
Show me even a hint that these missions will continue once they have planted a few flags.
And your reasons are not the reasons for this NASA and this administration and this mission. This mission has less incentive than beating the Soviets and will not last any longer. It will have no useful spinoffs, it will have no lasting impact, it has no long term goals or uses.
No shit I can think of a zillion reasons for going to the moon. But not the politicians and bureaucrats who will run this flag planting exercise in futility. You may think it's about time they got the bandwagon running, but it sure ain't going in your direction. Why do you support it?
As a *colony* ... as a source of raw materials ... as anything but a political flag planting which has no further goal.
... if it has no practical purpose, it is a waste of research and engineering.
Everyone keeps on coming up with all sorts of reasons for this moon mission, forgetting that their reasons do not match a single one of the reasons stated for this mission. This mission will plant a few flags and come back and have nothing to show for itself. Do you really think that planting a few flags will have any more effect this time than forty years ago?
I repeat
What makes you think this will actually result in a permanent presence on the moon?
I repeat, as long as the goal is a politically ordered return to the moon for no practical useful reason, we will not stay there, and we will have wasted money that could have been spent on more useful research, like hypersonic transports, orbital hotels, decent batteries, safe reliable cheap nuclear power, and a zillion other choices. Going back to the moon for the mere purpose of planting a flag, or worse yet, a political colony along the same lines as the current space station, will simply divert talent from useful research and engineering.
I am not advocating feeding the homeless with the $100B, or any other loonie leftie short sightedness. I am advocating research for useful purposes, not political nonsense that won't ever result in anything that anybody can use.
Sure, now show me how a return to the moon a few times will accomplish any of the above.
.... to get to the moon.
NASA isn't going to the moon in order to lower the cost of space transport, bring back cheap ore, put mirrors in orbit, put nasty industries in orbit, etc etc etc. They are doing it on a political whim, where the goal is
Once we get to the moon, the goal has been reached, and everyone loses interest.
That's why I said go for a practical reason. We should, and we aren't, and we won't stay. It's a waste of time and money.
They have no reason for going to the moon. At least Apollo had a reason, the space race against the evil commies, but this time, not even that much. No doubt we'll go there a few times and stop again.
Moon colonies would be great, from a science fiction point of view, but without an actual practical reason that involves real colonists with real practical uses, this new moon plan will be just another short sighted waste of time and money. I'd rather that money was spent on technology that had actual uses for most people. Don't preach to me about spin-offs. There would be just as many spin-offs from orbital hotels or quiet and environmentally friendly hypersonic transports or practical electric cars with batteries to go 500 miles.
I hate memorizing keyboard shortcuts -- this is a GUI! ... there should be toolbar buttons for all the features.
You'd rather memorize a zillion dinky eye squinting icons?
I was smiling as I wrote it. It's especially nice when it just happens, without any special effort :-)
Grease keeps systems working smoothly. Lawyers, money speculators, used car salesman, and a zillion other occupations are society's grease. In a frozen static society, you could get rid of them once you had polished the system to the nth degree. But in a dynamic society, these greasers keep the various diverse parts all working together relatively smoothly.
But too much grease in a gearbox bogs it down. That's what has happened with intellectual property in general. Those idiots in Washington listened to their corporate sponsors and believed what they said about the more the merrier.
At some point, hopefully sooner rather than later, business and politicians will notice what the true innovators and researchers have long since learned the hard way, and cut back on the flow of grease. In the meantime, the rest of us are stuck with completely counterpdocutive IP legal wrangling getting in our way. It may take a long time to notice the drop in innovation and productivity, but I sure hope not.