I did the same thing. I got a DSL connection, a Powermac, installed MacOSX server on it, added plone for my web sites and off I went.
It's nice but these days my email server is just getting hammered with relay requests and emails to bogus_user_name@mydomain.com. Postfix to it's credit is handling the load OK but I am getting really tired of tweaking spamassasin constantly to filter the spam and the three to five SMTP connections PER SECOND must be chewing up bandwidth some.
I am ready jump on this whole hog. I will leave everything on my server but If I can point my mx record to google and be done with that headache I am all over it.
Actually it's more expensive to oursource exchange because remote exchange only works with outlook. It has a proprietary protocol. This means that for each employee you also have to putchase either outlook or office.
If a company is looking to ditch MS office this a great way to go. You can use any email client you want.
Of course.MAC beat them to it by a few years but hey.
If you are running a business you are supposed to keep all your emails just for the purpose of handing them over to the feds or to other companies who may sue you.
Despite your percenption of freedom you too are supposed to hand over the contents of your hard drive if the govt serves you with a warrant. With the partiot act the feds can even come to your house when you are out and suck out the contents without ever telling you. All they have to do is to say that they suspect you of terrorist ectivities without specifying what, how or where.
Also consider this.
Lots of businesses oursource their email. They outsource spam tracking, they outsource their entire exchange hosting. This is where google is going with this. Think about it. They already have chat, they have email, they have file storage (two gigs per employee!), all they need is a shared calendar they are pretty much done. Since they have an API and since you can already mount your gmail account as a file system you already have shared folders.
This is googles attempt at a.MAC which is already a compelling replacement for exchange.
"The XBox 360 is doing well and MS is getting more and more penetration and doing things to separate their product from Sony. SQL server is used on a vast percentage of MS servers, which is a very large number."
Statistics show that both the xbox and SQL server are in third place in the marketplace. In therms of game consoles both sony and nintendo outsell xbox. In terms of database servers oracle is number 1, IBM is number 2 (they sometimes swap) and SQL server is solidly in third place. The whole market is collapsing though because in reality the uncounted software (mysql, postgres, firebird, ingres etc) are probalby number 1.
"The main reason I see success for them is because of their API's and ability to integrate them with their OS for truly rich Web experiences."
They already have this with IE. IE can run activeX controls, it has IE specific extensions for remote data, navigation, recordsets etc. They have been unable to leverage any of this because it's huge security hole. Remember the HTA files? THose were supposed to provide a rich experience by leveraging activex and making a web app look exactly like a windows app. Didn't work though.
Oddlyenough java web start was supposed to do the same thing too but that never caught on either.
I think history shows that people are not willing to run their applications from the web. Now that mobility devices are more important then ever I fully expect simple web sites and WAP to make a comeback.
THis post isn't going to alarm the grandparent. He is a right winger, he wants PETA to be rounded up and locked up. Saying that the govt is going to round up democrats isn't going to bother any member of the NRA. They will pitch in and help!
"The realistic viewpoint is that most of the people laid off (especially the good ones) will go on to even better jobs."
Do you have any real scientific data that backs this point up? One would think most people get the same level or worse jobs because they are older and less employable.
They have tried to gain a monopoly on database servers, mobile phones, fax machines/copiers (microsoft at work), set top boxes, PVRs, game machines, sql servers, web search, portals, travel sites, and failed miserably in most of them and gotten no bigger then a third tier in the rest of them.
MS is no longer the big bad wolf. Their failures outnumber their successes by a long shot. They eventually divested themselves of webtv, travelocity, sidewalk and others. Their other products like SQL server, xbox, money and what have you enjoy no better then third place.
Remember when windows NT was a better unix then unix? Remember how windows 2000 server was going to make mainframes obselete? It will be just like that.
Do a google for "agent ransack". There is a free version. It's pretty awesome and usually the second thing I install on a windows PC (first being firefox of course).
It does name searches, it does text searches, it does regular expressions etc.
As for windows search I agree it's a piece of shit. Why they couldn't just put something like locate into place I'll never know.
Of course unless you are forced to use windows I would reccomend a switch to mac. The amazing spotlight search is worth the extra money by itself.
"Not sure who you're referring to, but this is certainly not a mainstream view."
I agree with you that it's not a mainstream view, in fact I specifically said that in post. I have seen TV reports where people have said this though. I am sure of it.
". The Jewish religion which has almost nothing to say about nation states or their operation. Secular Zionism which is a mirror of European nationalisms of the 1900's has this as a tenet, but only in terms of being a manageable state."
The word "jewish" is very malleable isn't it? Sometimes people use it to indicate a race, sometimes people use it to indicate a religion, sometimes a culture and sometimes people use it to indicate citizenship in a country. This is why frequently people who critise israel are called anti-semite even though the precentage of the israeli population who are semites are tiny. Ironically virtually all the palestenians are semitic. That's allways kind of cracked me up.
Anyway zionisn states that israel is t be a jewish country. Does this mean jewish as in race? Does this mean jewish as in religion? I don't know, maybe you do. You seem to agree though that it will not ever be a melting pot of different cultures, races, religions or whatever. It must remain a "homogenius" meaning a jews only state. In this case then you seem to be agreeing with me 100% on this regard.
"Oh yes, and we don't get $12 billion a year, in 2005 it was about $2.6 billion of which $2.3 billion went straight back to US defense industry. (Unfortunately we get to do a fair amount of field trials)."
It's a little tricky to calculate but overall israel gets 30% of the US foreign aid despite being one the wealthiest countries in the world and despite being a nuclear state. That's just the aide numbers though. Once you add loan guarantees, forgiveness of the outstanding debt (and interest), money funneled in though various political organizations etc you get anywhere from six to 12 billion a year (which incidentally is more then the budget of NASA!).
So you guys get to use our weapons to occupy 3.5 million people, gee I don't think that so great but like I said I am an atheist and have a different value system then most people.
Getting back to the point though......
I think it's worse to ACTUALLY kill people then to chant about killing people. I also think it's worse to keep people in bondage, occupation, and apartheid then chanting too.
I will leave this with a quote.
"I am a black South African, and if I were to change the names, a description of what is happening in the Gaza Strip and West Bank could describe events in South Africa."
"You are attempting to say in your comparison, that Muslims just yell and scream about killing, while Israelis actually kill. This is incorrect."
MMM.. Not not really. What I was saying is the both the US and Israel kill muslims. Certainly the bulk of the 50,000 dead muslims has come at the hands of the US.
"This is incorrect. Many Israelis have been killed by Muslim attacks."
I don't dispute that. However the last I checked the ration of dead palesteninans killed by israel to dead israelis killed by palestenians was at about three to one. In other words israel kills three palestenians for every israeli killed. Not a bad ratio if you are israel but much lower then the US. We are running a ration of about a thousand to one.
"ONLY the Muslims have large demonstrations take place on a regular basis where people chant and scream to kill the other side. "
I don't dispute that. I am simply asking if demonstrating and chanting and screaming to kill the other side bad as actually killing the other side. The US has killed tens of thousands of muslims during the bush administration reign. The estimates on the first gulf war were the 100,000 to 200,000 iraqis were killed. I don't know what the combined body count of the iraq and afghan wars are but I would suspect we are nearing 100,000.
So which is worse, demonstrating and chanting to kill americans or actually killing arabs?
"You simply do not see large Israeli demonstrations with Jews screaming bloodthirsty chants to kill Muslims."
I have seen those on TV. I have also seen on TV where members of the knesset have called for the extermination of the palestenians. I have also seen on TV where prominent jewish clerics have called for the extermination of the palestenians. I realize that those are not mainstream voices (except maybe the guy in the knesset perhaps) but I have seen it. Are you saying there has never been large scale protests in ISrael by fundamentalist jews?
"In other words, the Muslims are largely the agressors, while the Israelis are largely on the defensive."
I am afraid I will have to disagree with you on that. One side is killing trying to gain their freedom, the other side is killing to continue their occupation.
"ortunately for the Israelis, they are significantly better fighters than any of thier enemies, and have historically trounced them in every straight up military fight. Which is why many of the Muslims have turned to Terrorism. They can't compete any other way."
I agree wholeheartedly with this one. It seems like it's the only weapon they have. I also believe that this is the reason why there will never be peace between israel and palestenians. Peace treaties can only be signed between forces of roughly equal strength. In all other circumstances one side has to surrender. The arabs have been unwilling to surrender for decades and they are unlikely to ever do so.
I think the best way to solve this problem would be for israel to annex all of the west bank and gaza and then make all the palestenians full citizens. That's what the US did with the indians, the australians with the aboriginals, new zealanders with the maori and every conqeuering country with the conquered (even the chinese with the tibetians!). I know the jewish religion prevents that though, israel is supposed to be a jewsish state not a state in which muslims would be a majority or a large percentage.
I never said the jews enjoyed killing arabs. I simply asked if actually killing people was worse then yelling "death to america, death to israel". My take in this is that it's much worse to actually kill people then to wish for their death. But then again I am atheist, I just don't see the fundamentalist point of view.
I can't speak to whether the israelis enjoy killing the arabs or not. I do think the US population seems to be very excited when there is a war though. I remember the two times we bombed fallujia for example. It was all over the news and I certainly don't recall anybody complaining about the innocents killed or the mass graves that were dug in those soccer fields afterwards.
As for giving a shit if anybody killed jews I think today people value jewish life very high. People in the US anyway (can't really speak for the rest of the world). Over here everytime a bomber kills a few isralies it's very big news. One could imagine what kind of an uproar it cause to kill 50,000 jews. Not that I think it could happen, after all we spend 12 billion a year keeping Israel very well armed. If it ever happened though you can be sure the US would turn whichever country that caused that many deaths in israel into a parking lot. Israel is almost like a another state for the US. You touch israel and it will automatically trigger a response from the US.
I just don't buy this freedom of speech thing. Just this week a muslim cleric was sentenced to jail for seven years in Britain for hate speech. All of his crimes consisted of saying things.
This week an Iranian newspaper was universally condemned for saying that they are going to publish cartoon about the holocaust. They haven't yet mind you, they might one day. Presuming that one day they actually publish these cartoons do you think one european newspaper will carry them?
I highly doubt they are willing to piss off the jews as much as they are willing to piss off the muslims.
"I realise that (a) it is a minority of Muslims and (b) they are actually behaving against the very teachings of the Prophet and Islam, but dammit, the rest of the Islamic people better get these violent ones in line or we are rightfully headed for a clash of ideals here."
For hundreds of years the catholics and the protestants were killing each other in Ireland. What did the rest of the christian people do about it? It will be just like that.
DId you contact McDOnalds yet? they need sharp minds like you. You uncovered evidence their lawyers missed. Plus I bet you could have spotted those nasty liberals a mile away and kept them away from the jury in the first place.
A very long time ago some really smart people wrote lisp, smalltalk, C, and fortran. Since then every other language has tried repeatedly to re-invent those languages each time never quite achieving superiority.
Imagine if all the effort spent to make ruby, python, perl, java or whatever was spent making smalltalk better and better.
In this industry we are doomed to continually rediscover 20 year old technology and call it new.
These kinds of things are usually dictated by a CIO who knows nothing. They are usually pushed by a vendor (either MS or Sun) and after a few dinners, a golf outing or two and maybe a nice watch the CIO makes the ruling that everybody is going to use the same language.
What's even worse is when the CIO dictates not only are they going to use the one language pushed by the vendor but that they will also use the vendor supplied toolchain, servers, and operating systems.
That's how "windows shops" are born. Anybody who thinks that all problems are solved by what one vendor sells is either a zealot or gullable.
"I've worked a lot with UI development in both Java (Swing) and C#. I can definately say that the.NET Framework makes things a lot easier. ".NET makes what "things" easier? Easier then what?.NET is just a marketing buzzword. How can a marketing buzzword make anything easier. I suspect what you meant to say was "VS.NET makes things easier". I think it's telling when even a fan of windows tools confuses the technology with the tools..NET is just a VM. Not that much different then the JVM or even the python VM (except that the python VM supports multiple inheritance and continuations).
Yes dropping controls on a form in.NET is "easier" then coding swing by hand in notepad (even then not always) but it's not "easier" then using a swing gui builder. It's not even "easier" then using something like glade or wxwidgets gui builder.
VS.NET definately does not make refactoring "easier", it does not make debugging "easier", it does not make deployment or documentation "easier". Until VS.NET 2005 windows programmers didn't even have refactoring support or a unit testing framework. They still don't have a decent object relational layer officially blessed by MS.
Guess what, refactoring, debugging, documenting, and deploying take up the bulk of your software development life cycle. Choosing a tool which makes the GUI development "easier" while making the rest harder is false economy.
"No, I'm just saying that if they decide not to do something entirely outrageous and unreasonable, the bad things that happen to those who do these things probably would not happen. This same rule can apply to those who resist arrest and end up shot while fleeing or crash their getaway car into a tree."
By "bad things" you mean torture right?
"Situations such as rape trials."
In every trial there is a balancing of the public interest with the private interests of the defendent, accused and the state. It's still a public trial though.
"Mr. Godwin! So nice of you to join us!"
Are you saying there are no paralells between trying nazi criminals with trying al-quade criminals.
Sometimes discussion of nazis is on topic. Notice that I didn't call you a nazi despite the fact that you are pro torture.
"ASP.NET provides a really productive environment for web app development. At least for projects of a certain size, ASP.NET is much cheaper/faster to develop for than J2EE"
So I am waiting for you to prove it.
I guess I will be waiting forever huh? If you could have proved that bit of shill work you would have by now.
Well fan boi? Are you going to present any evidence to back up your claim or not?
"It is a reasonable inference considering the issues of the case and the jury's resulting decision."
It figures you would think that way. Did Rush Limbaugh tell you that or is that something you heard on fox news?
"You have presented absolutely no argument as to why my assertions are in error or should be discounted."
I implore you to contact McDonalds. They need your talents. You have exposed evidence that their attroneys never presented in court. Your amazing powers of research and logic would have come in handy at the trial. I bet not one of these facts were presented at the trial.
"Bad is it is, and rare as it is, such torture is easy enough to avoid, if it ever occured to the "victims" to wake up one morning and decide, "Gee, what if I did something nice this morning instead, instead of engaged in mayhem and mass murder?"."
Interesting. You are saying that if they co-operate you will not torture them. What if they don't play nice? Then you are for torturing them right?
Once again I am against torturing and killing everybody. Even mass murderers should not be tortured to death.
"Public trials? There's no particular need for this"
We disagree on this. I think everybody who is accused of a crime should be tried fairly and publicly. No matter what their crime is. I figure if nazis were tried then so should the brown people (even if they are muslims!).
"If someone is caught in the act of doing something, they are guilty of that act. You are confusing court-determined guilt with actual guilt. Very often, they are two separate things."
Caught in the act of doing what exactly? Driving a cab? Sitting at their house.
What I especially love is your argument that it's OK to torture and kill people if you don't like them.
I don't feel that what. I don't think it's OK to torture and kill anybody. No matter who they are or what they did.
I also believe in a public and fair trial for everybody who is accused of a crime.
I simply don't believe that it's right to grab people off the street (even a battlefield), torture them, and then kill them. Even if they are muslims, arabs, or brown people.
"The other guy kills hundreds of guilty people as a last resort after they have been caught committing atrocities and other unspeakable acts (including participating in what is described in the first sentence)."
Prove it. I must have missed those trials where every person who was tortured to death by bush was found guilty.
Slashdot Mirror
I did the same thing. I got a DSL connection, a Powermac, installed MacOSX server on it, added plone for my web sites and off I went.
It's nice but these days my email server is just getting hammered with relay requests and emails to bogus_user_name@mydomain.com. Postfix to it's credit is handling the load OK but I am getting really tired of tweaking spamassasin constantly to filter the spam and the three to five SMTP connections PER SECOND must be chewing up bandwidth some.
I am ready jump on this whole hog. I will leave everything on my server but If I can point my mx record to google and be done with that headache I am all over it.
Actually it's more expensive to oursource exchange because remote exchange only works with outlook. It has a proprietary protocol. This means that for each employee you also have to putchase either outlook or office.
.MAC beat them to it by a few years but hey.
If a company is looking to ditch MS office this a great way to go. You can use any email client you want.
Of course
If you are running a business you are supposed to keep all your emails just for the purpose of handing them over to the feds or to other companies who may sue you.
.MAC which is already a compelling replacement for exchange.
Despite your percenption of freedom you too are supposed to hand over the contents of your hard drive if the govt serves you with a warrant. With the partiot act the feds can even come to your house when you are out and suck out the contents without ever telling you. All they have to do is to say that they suspect you of terrorist ectivities without specifying what, how or where.
Also consider this.
Lots of businesses oursource their email. They outsource spam tracking, they outsource their entire exchange hosting. This is where google is going with this. Think about it. They already have chat, they have email, they have file storage (two gigs per employee!), all they need is a shared calendar they are pretty much done. Since they have an API and since you can already mount your gmail account as a file system you already have shared folders.
This is googles attempt at a
"except for when Slashdot gets in the way."
Don't underestimate how much slashdot or reddit eat up your time. I am almost ready to put 127.0.0.1 for slashdot in my hosts file.
I said ALMOST. Just one more hit, I know I can quit, I can quit anytime I want.
"The XBox 360 is doing well and MS is getting more and more penetration and doing things to separate their product from Sony. SQL server is used on a vast percentage of MS servers, which is a very large number."
Statistics show that both the xbox and SQL server are in third place in the marketplace. In therms of game consoles both sony and nintendo outsell xbox. In terms of database servers oracle is number 1, IBM is number 2 (they sometimes swap) and SQL server is solidly in third place. The whole market is collapsing though because in reality the uncounted software (mysql, postgres, firebird, ingres etc) are probalby number 1.
"The main reason I see success for them is because of their API's and ability to integrate them with their OS for truly rich Web experiences."
They already have this with IE. IE can run activeX controls, it has IE specific extensions for remote data, navigation, recordsets etc. They have been unable to leverage any of this because it's huge security hole. Remember the HTA files? THose were supposed to provide a rich experience by leveraging activex and making a web app look exactly like a windows app. Didn't work though.
Oddlyenough java web start was supposed to do the same thing too but that never caught on either.
I think history shows that people are not willing to run their applications from the web. Now that mobility devices are more important then ever I fully expect simple web sites and WAP to make a comeback.
THis post isn't going to alarm the grandparent. He is a right winger, he wants PETA to be rounded up and locked up. Saying that the govt is going to round up democrats isn't going to bother any member of the NRA. They will pitch in and help!
"The realistic viewpoint is that most of the people laid off (especially the good ones) will go on to even better jobs."
Do you have any real scientific data that backs this point up? One would think most people get the same level or worse jobs because they are older and less employable.
They have tried to gain a monopoly on database servers, mobile phones, fax machines/copiers (microsoft at work), set top boxes, PVRs, game machines, sql servers, web search, portals, travel sites, and failed miserably in most of them and gotten no bigger then a third tier in the rest of them.
MS is no longer the big bad wolf. Their failures outnumber their successes by a long shot. They eventually divested themselves of webtv, travelocity, sidewalk and others. Their other products like SQL server, xbox, money and what have you enjoy no better then third place.
Remember when windows NT was a better unix then unix? Remember how windows 2000 server was going to make mainframes obselete? It will be just like that.
Do a google for "agent ransack". There is a free version. It's pretty awesome and usually the second thing I install on a windows PC (first being firefox of course).
It does name searches, it does text searches, it does regular expressions etc.
As for windows search I agree it's a piece of shit. Why they couldn't just put something like locate into place I'll never know.
Of course unless you are forced to use windows I would reccomend a switch to mac. The amazing spotlight search is worth the extra money by itself.
"Not sure who you're referring to, but this is certainly not a mainstream view."
I agree with you that it's not a mainstream view, in fact I specifically said that in post. I have seen TV reports where people have said this though. I am sure of it.
". The Jewish religion which has almost nothing to say about nation states or their operation. Secular Zionism which is a mirror of European nationalisms of the 1900's has this as a tenet, but only in terms of being a manageable state."
The word "jewish" is very malleable isn't it? Sometimes people use it to indicate a race, sometimes people use it to indicate a religion, sometimes a culture and sometimes people use it to indicate citizenship in a country. This is why frequently people who critise israel are called anti-semite even though the precentage of the israeli population who are semites are tiny. Ironically virtually all the palestenians are semitic. That's allways kind of cracked me up.
Anyway zionisn states that israel is t be a jewish country. Does this mean jewish as in race? Does this mean jewish as in religion? I don't know, maybe you do. You seem to agree though that it will not ever be a melting pot of different cultures, races, religions or whatever. It must remain a "homogenius" meaning a jews only state. In this case then you seem to be agreeing with me 100% on this regard.
"Oh yes, and we don't get $12 billion a year, in 2005 it was about $2.6 billion of which $2.3 billion went straight back to US defense industry. (Unfortunately we get to do a fair amount of field trials)."
It's a little tricky to calculate but overall israel gets 30% of the US foreign aid despite being one the wealthiest countries in the world and despite being a nuclear state. That's just the aide numbers though. Once you add loan guarantees, forgiveness of the outstanding debt (and interest), money funneled in though various political organizations etc you get anywhere from six to 12 billion a year (which incidentally is more then the budget of NASA!).
So you guys get to use our weapons to occupy 3.5 million people, gee I don't think that so great but like I said I am an atheist and have a different value system then most people.
Getting back to the point though......
I think it's worse to ACTUALLY kill people then to chant about killing people. I also think it's worse to keep people in bondage, occupation, and apartheid then chanting too.
I will leave this with a quote.
"I am a black South African, and if I were to change the names, a description of what is happening in the Gaza Strip and West Bank could describe events in South Africa."
Archbishop Desmond Tutu
"You are attempting to say in your comparison, that Muslims just yell and scream about killing, while Israelis actually kill. This is incorrect."
MMM.. Not not really. What I was saying is the both the US and Israel kill muslims. Certainly the bulk of the 50,000 dead muslims has come at the hands of the US.
"This is incorrect. Many Israelis have been killed by Muslim attacks."
I don't dispute that. However the last I checked the ration of dead palesteninans killed by israel to dead israelis killed by palestenians was at about three to one. In other words israel kills three palestenians for every israeli killed. Not a bad ratio if you are israel but much lower then the US. We are running a ration of about a thousand to one.
"ONLY the Muslims have large demonstrations take place on a regular basis where people chant and scream to kill the other side. "
I don't dispute that. I am simply asking if demonstrating and chanting and screaming to kill the other side bad as actually killing the other side. The US has killed tens of thousands of muslims during the bush administration reign. The estimates on the first gulf war were the 100,000 to 200,000 iraqis were killed. I don't know what the combined body count of the iraq and afghan wars are but I would suspect we are nearing 100,000.
So which is worse, demonstrating and chanting to kill americans or actually killing arabs?
"You simply do not see large Israeli demonstrations with Jews screaming bloodthirsty chants to kill Muslims."
I have seen those on TV. I have also seen on TV where members of the knesset have called for the extermination of the palestenians. I have also seen on TV where prominent jewish clerics have called for the extermination of the palestenians. I realize that those are not mainstream voices (except maybe the guy in the knesset perhaps) but I have seen it. Are you saying there has never been large scale protests in ISrael by fundamentalist jews?
"In other words, the Muslims are largely the agressors, while the Israelis are largely on the defensive."
I am afraid I will have to disagree with you on that. One side is killing trying to gain their freedom, the other side is killing to continue their occupation.
"ortunately for the Israelis, they are significantly better fighters than any of thier enemies, and have historically trounced them in every straight up military fight. Which is why many of the Muslims have turned to Terrorism. They can't compete any other way."
I agree wholeheartedly with this one. It seems like it's the only weapon they have. I also believe that this is the reason why there will never be peace between israel and palestenians. Peace treaties can only be signed between forces of roughly equal strength. In all other circumstances one side has to surrender. The arabs have been unwilling to surrender for decades and they are unlikely to ever do so.
I think the best way to solve this problem would be for israel to annex all of the west bank and gaza and then make all the palestenians full citizens. That's what the US did with the indians, the australians with the aboriginals, new zealanders with the maori and every conqeuering country with the conquered (even the chinese with the tibetians!). I know the jewish religion prevents that though, israel is supposed to be a jewsish state not a state in which muslims would be a majority or a large percentage.
I never said the jews enjoyed killing arabs. I simply asked if actually killing people was worse then yelling "death to america, death to israel". My take in this is that it's much worse to actually kill people then to wish for their death. But then again I am atheist, I just don't see the fundamentalist point of view.
I can't speak to whether the israelis enjoy killing the arabs or not. I do think the US population seems to be very excited when there is a war though. I remember the two times we bombed fallujia for example. It was all over the news and I certainly don't recall anybody complaining about the innocents killed or the mass graves that were dug in those soccer fields afterwards.
As for giving a shit if anybody killed jews I think today people value jewish life very high. People in the US anyway (can't really speak for the rest of the world). Over here everytime a bomber kills a few isralies it's very big news. One could imagine what kind of an uproar it cause to kill 50,000 jews. Not that I think it could happen, after all we spend 12 billion a year keeping Israel very well armed. If it ever happened though you can be sure the US would turn whichever country that caused that many deaths in israel into a parking lot. Israel is almost like a another state for the US. You touch israel and it will automatically trigger a response from the US.
I just don't buy this freedom of speech thing. Just this week a muslim cleric was sentenced to jail for seven years in Britain for hate speech. All of his crimes consisted of saying things.
This week an Iranian newspaper was universally condemned for saying that they are going to publish cartoon about the holocaust. They haven't yet mind you, they might one day. Presuming that one day they actually publish these cartoons do you think one european newspaper will carry them?
I highly doubt they are willing to piss off the jews as much as they are willing to piss off the muslims.
"I realise that (a) it is a minority of Muslims and (b) they are actually behaving against the very teachings of the Prophet and Islam, but dammit, the rest of the Islamic people better get these violent ones in line or we are rightfully headed for a clash of ideals here."
For hundreds of years the catholics and the protestants were killing each other in Ireland. What did the rest of the christian people do about it? It will be just like that.
So far only 10 people or so have died in the protests, most of them have been the protesters themselves shot by the police.
Check out this guy(?) take on it. Interesting points.
What is worse, 50,000 muslims chanting death to america, death to israel or 50,000 muslims actually killed by america and israel.
There goes my karma but it has to be asked don't you think? Isn't actually killing people worse then calling for their death?
DId you contact McDOnalds yet? they need sharp minds like you. You uncovered evidence their lawyers missed. Plus I bet you could have spotted those nasty liberals a mile away and kept them away from the jury in the first place.
A very long time ago some really smart people wrote lisp, smalltalk, C, and fortran. Since then every other language has tried repeatedly to re-invent those languages each time never quite achieving superiority.
Imagine if all the effort spent to make ruby, python, perl, java or whatever was spent making smalltalk better and better.
In this industry we are doomed to continually rediscover 20 year old technology and call it new.
These kinds of things are usually dictated by a CIO who knows nothing. They are usually pushed by a vendor (either MS or Sun) and after a few dinners, a golf outing or two and maybe a nice watch the CIO makes the ruling that everybody is going to use the same language.
What's even worse is when the CIO dictates not only are they going to use the one language pushed by the vendor but that they will also use the vendor supplied toolchain, servers, and operating systems.
That's how "windows shops" are born. Anybody who thinks that all problems are solved by what one vendor sells is either a zealot or gullable.
"I've worked a lot with UI development in both Java (Swing) and C#. I can definately say that the .NET Framework makes things a lot easier. " .NET makes what "things" easier? Easier then what? .NET is just a marketing buzzword. How can a marketing buzzword make anything easier. I suspect what you meant to say was "VS.NET makes things easier". I think it's telling when even a fan of windows tools confuses the technology with the tools. .NET is just a VM. Not that much different then the JVM or even the python VM (except that the python VM supports multiple inheritance and continuations).
.NET is "easier" then coding swing by hand in notepad (even then not always) but it's not "easier" then using a swing gui builder. It's not even "easier" then using something like glade or wxwidgets gui builder.
Yes dropping controls on a form in
VS.NET definately does not make refactoring "easier", it does not make debugging "easier", it does not make deployment or documentation "easier". Until VS.NET 2005 windows programmers didn't even have refactoring support or a unit testing framework. They still don't have a decent object relational layer officially blessed by MS.
Guess what, refactoring, debugging, documenting, and deploying take up the bulk of your software development life cycle. Choosing a tool which makes the GUI development "easier" while making the rest harder is false economy.
"No, I'm just saying that if they decide not to do something entirely outrageous and unreasonable, the bad things that happen to those who do these things probably would not happen. This same rule can apply to those who resist arrest and end up shot while fleeing or crash their getaway car into a tree."
By "bad things" you mean torture right?
"Situations such as rape trials."
In every trial there is a balancing of the public interest with the private interests of the defendent, accused and the state. It's still a public trial though.
"Mr. Godwin! So nice of you to join us!"
Are you saying there are no paralells between trying nazi criminals with trying al-quade criminals.
Sometimes discussion of nazis is on topic. Notice that I didn't call you a nazi despite the fact that you are pro torture.
You said...
"ASP.NET provides a really productive environment for web app development. At least for projects of a certain size, ASP.NET is much cheaper/faster to develop for than J2EE"
So I am waiting for you to prove it.
I guess I will be waiting forever huh? If you could have proved that bit of shill work you would have by now.
Well fan boi? Are you going to present any evidence to back up your claim or not?
"It is a reasonable inference considering the issues of the case and the jury's resulting decision."
It figures you would think that way. Did Rush Limbaugh tell you that or is that something you heard on fox news?
"You have presented absolutely no argument as to why my assertions are in error or should be discounted."
I implore you to contact McDonalds. They need your talents. You have exposed evidence that their attroneys never presented in court. Your amazing powers of research and logic would have come in handy at the trial. I bet not one of these facts were presented at the trial.
"Bad is it is, and rare as it is, such torture is easy enough to avoid, if it ever occured to the "victims" to wake up one morning and decide, "Gee, what if I did something nice this morning instead, instead of engaged in mayhem and mass murder?"."
Interesting. You are saying that if they co-operate you will not torture them. What if they don't play nice? Then you are for torturing them right?
Once again I am against torturing and killing everybody. Even mass murderers should not be tortured to death.
"Public trials? There's no particular need for this"
We disagree on this. I think everybody who is accused of a crime should be tried fairly and publicly. No matter what their crime is. I figure if nazis were tried then so should the brown people (even if they are muslims!).
"If someone is caught in the act of doing something, they are guilty of that act. You are confusing court-determined guilt with actual guilt. Very often, they are two separate things."
Caught in the act of doing what exactly? Driving a cab? Sitting at their house.
What I especially love is your argument that it's OK to torture and kill people if you don't like them.
I don't feel that what. I don't think it's OK to torture and kill anybody. No matter who they are or what they did.
I also believe in a public and fair trial for everybody who is accused of a crime.
I simply don't believe that it's right to grab people off the street (even a battlefield), torture them, and then kill them. Even if they are muslims, arabs, or brown people.
But hey that's just me.
"The other guy kills hundreds of guilty people as a last resort after they have been caught committing atrocities and other unspeakable acts (including participating in what is described in the first sentence)."
Prove it. I must have missed those trials where every person who was tortured to death by bush was found guilty.