The point is though that hype doesn't have to be lies, and it's of course more effective if it's the truth that is hyped. It would be better for everyone if SUVs were not the standard fare of rich yuppies, and we reduced greenhouse gas emissions, so who exactly is hurt by spinning the need for change in a way that Joe can understand?
So dissembling to attain a "good" end is wrong when George Bush does it, but is right when you do it?
I dislike George Bush, SUVs, and dirty air too. On the other hand I'm a big fan of honest dealing and freedom. I guess I have a kooky outlook on where the balance should be.
If Joe can be convinced that NO won't float away again if he doesn't buy an SUV, and replaces his light bulbs with CFLs, then what harm is being done by hyping it a little bit?
So if you can manipulate someone into doing what you "know" is right the ends justify the means?
Where do you get the right to decide what behavior is right and wrong and then affect change through lies? How could you become so arrogant?
Dotnaught seems to disapprove of this language, but I disagree. This creates a check to dominant parties using their power to put opponents at a further disadvantage by declaring outlets sympathetic to those opposition parties "biased", and, therefore, limited by these regulations.
Everybody's biased. The two entrenched parties keep trying to stake out their positions as "centrist". This language seems to mitigate that tactic in this case.
If they exist they must be presented for destruction. If they do not exist, credible evidence to that effect should presented.
- Hans Blix
This was in reference to WMDs that Iraq was known to have had at some time. The demand for proof was pursuant to the UN Gulf War Armistice. The UN's plan to obtain compliance with the treaty seems to have been to continue to try to starve out the Iraqi people. (Connecting that fact to the UN Food for Oil scandal is left as an exercise for the reader.) I think that's unfortunate. If they'd made more than a half-hearted effort to gain compliance our president wouldn't have had the opening to take us to war.
The Iraq war is clearly a boondoggle and the American people were sold a bill of goods, but your position is overly-simplistic to the point of absurdity.
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
One of the tenets of libertarianism is abolition of consensual crime. If there were no prohibition on cocaine there would be no black market for crack. If there were no black market for crack would there be crack houses?
The penitentiary system in America is of Protestant origin.
Catholic history being as long and varied as it is provides a counter-example to nearly any statement you can make about it. That said, public punishment is not a Catholic value. Consider that the highest punishment in the Church is excommunication: simple exclusion from Christian society.
In the interest of full disclosure: I am an atheist, but I was raised Catholic. I believe that "consensual crime" is absurd.
And adobe can't possibly make a different package for each distro, even the popular ones.
Why not?
Do you mean binary package (.deb,.rpm, etc.) or shiny shrink-wrapped box? It seems like they could put half a dozen different binary packages on one DVD and ship that as the "Linux" version.
You won't be able to count the number of variants of the next release of Windows on one hand. Does that mean Windows is dead?
The whole "fragmentation" situation is a balancing act. Clearly, one OS does not fit all. On the other hand excessive proliferation of variants causes trouble for vendors and users.
I think the rub with systems based on Linux and GNU is that the optimal number of variants for users is higher than the optimal number for vendors. Users are gaining the upper hand.
I also think a lot of conventional wisdom on the topic is based on a culture of single tier, binary only distribution. "Fragmentation" is much less of a problem, indeed is a boon to end users, in a culture where software is released in source form by its authors and is largely distributed as a complete system by a third party. I think a lot of the grousing we see about fragmentation comes from people who can't see past the old model of shipping binary software on a CD with the expectation that it will run on everyone's PC.
Slashdot Mirror
Fifteen years.
Just like always.
-Peter
I gave 'em my email address. The next page said I was "good to go" and to press next, which does NOTHING.
I'm using IE.
Every time I give those hose-bags a chance they just reinforce my opinion of them.
-Peter
Look, it was one time. I was in College. I met a dashing young particle Physicist. One thing led to another . . .
-Peter
Dear Richard Carrigan,
You keep doing particle Physics, and we'll keep doing Computer Science.
Love,
The Computer Scientists
You can't seriously believe that the Earth won't be able to support life within your children's lifetime.
I can only conclude that you are dissembling about your justification for dissembling. Ingenious!
-Peter
So dissembling to attain a "good" end is wrong when George Bush does it, but is right when you do it?
I dislike George Bush, SUVs, and dirty air too. On the other hand I'm a big fan of honest dealing and freedom. I guess I have a kooky outlook on where the balance should be.
-Peter
Weird. I voted against him. Twice.
Did it make you feel better, somehow, to assume I am a hypocrite?
-Peter
So if you can manipulate someone into doing what you "know" is right the ends justify the means?
Where do you get the right to decide what behavior is right and wrong and then affect change through lies? How could you become so arrogant?
-Peter
Dotnaught seems to disapprove of this language, but I disagree. This creates a check to dominant parties using their power to put opponents at a further disadvantage by declaring outlets sympathetic to those opposition parties "biased", and, therefore, limited by these regulations.
Everybody's biased. The two entrenched parties keep trying to stake out their positions as "centrist". This language seems to mitigate that tactic in this case.
-Peter
Zaphod, is that you?
-Peter
Plus a whopping 80% penalty.
-Peter
- Hans Blix
This was in reference to WMDs that Iraq was known to have had at some time. The demand for proof was pursuant to the UN Gulf War Armistice. The UN's plan to obtain compliance with the treaty seems to have been to continue to try to starve out the Iraqi people. (Connecting that fact to the UN Food for Oil scandal is left as an exercise for the reader.) I think that's unfortunate. If they'd made more than a half-hearted effort to gain compliance our president wouldn't have had the opening to take us to war.
The Iraq war is clearly a boondoggle and the American people were sold a bill of goods, but your position is overly-simplistic to the point of absurdity.
-Peter
I think that the biggest single reason is that cable ladders encourage neat and sane cabling. Raised flooring . . . doesn't.
-Peter
Sun even shines on a dog's ass some days.
-Peter
As you should have surmised, I am a geofringest: I believe that the Earth is at the edge of the universe.
I'm not sure what you mean by the "other party". Been years since I read the books. In any case, Max Quordlepleen mentions the Big Bang Burger Bar.
Of course the gnab gib is also cannon, but you're wrecking my parallelism by bringing it up.
-Peter
Marty, you're not thinking fourth dimensionally.
-Doc
As long as there are users who fetishize some particular platform-locked app there will be users who staunchly refuse to switch platforms.
;-)
This is to be expected, and has nothing to do with any platform's "readiness".
For my part, I finally got off of DOS when printer vendors stopped shipping drivers for WordPerfect 5
-Peter
Telescopes look back in time, not forward.
We might have a shot at a glimpse of the Big Bang Burger Bar, though.
-Peter
Internet is Killing the Newspaper
Buggy whip manufacturers unavailable for comment.
-Peter
Falsifiability. Look it up before you spout any more pseudo-scientific bullshit.
Also, where can I get a copy of a Bible that has Jesus creating the world? In mine he doesn't show up until, like, half way through.
-Peter
One of the tenets of libertarianism is abolition of consensual crime. If there were no prohibition on cocaine there would be no black market for crack. If there were no black market for crack would there be crack houses?
-Peter
The penitentiary system in America is of Protestant origin.
Catholic history being as long and varied as it is provides a counter-example to nearly any statement you can make about it. That said, public punishment is not a Catholic value. Consider that the highest punishment in the Church is excommunication: simple exclusion from Christian society.
In the interest of full disclosure: I am an atheist, but I was raised Catholic. I believe that "consensual crime" is absurd.
-Peter
It isn't you. Their "HTML" isn't HTML at all. It's dog shit.
As you say, how can I take "IT experts" who can't even produce actual HTML seriously?
-Peter
Why not?
Do you mean binary package (.deb,
-Peter
You won't be able to count the number of variants of the next release of Windows on one hand. Does that mean Windows is dead?
The whole "fragmentation" situation is a balancing act. Clearly, one OS does not fit all. On the other hand excessive proliferation of variants causes trouble for vendors and users.
I think the rub with systems based on Linux and GNU is that the optimal number of variants for users is higher than the optimal number for vendors. Users are gaining the upper hand.
I also think a lot of conventional wisdom on the topic is based on a culture of single tier, binary only distribution. "Fragmentation" is much less of a problem, indeed is a boon to end users, in a culture where software is released in source form by its authors and is largely distributed as a complete system by a third party. I think a lot of the grousing we see about fragmentation comes from people who can't see past the old model of shipping binary software on a CD with the expectation that it will run on everyone's PC.
-Peter