Wow, Islam is hostile to the U.S.? Talk about a lack of perspective. I know why you're saying Islam(it's a religion, not a thing, it doesn't have emotions) is hostile towards the U.S., because some Muslims(psuedo-Muslims, perhaps) do. But, that reasoning is flawed. It's like saying the U.S. is anti-Islam because one person(you) doesn't like it.
Also, about China and "the finest human values in the world", what are you talking about? You think those 10 million civilians would just stand there? It's almost racist to think that Westerners are the only people that have good human values, and are the only ones willing to fight for them, as if the Chinese *people* somehow have different ones that are less good(which is all subjective anyway) *.
*Two things:
a)If Chinese people had different human rights, you couldn't really judge them, as you'd be judging them based on your Western ideals, which either cannot be applied or can be applied both ways, as you cannot imply a preferred "direction" for that judgement to go.
b)The Chinese people have the same human rights, and somehow do not seem to have the same problem with their government as you do. Considering that you don't live there(most likely), I'd take their word over yours. I'll take as their word that there hasn't been a coup(as the military is still composed of Chinese people), nor a revolt for some years.
We all know Antarctica has been developing WMDs for some time now. U.N. Sanctions have *not* been working, the inspectors have been kicked out, and Antarctica's leader will do anything to harm the U.S.
Well, while that's possible, it's unimportant. I'm glad our military is doing this after all. We wouldn't want to get caught without skilled commanders, or even modern strategy. Before World War 2, France had the largest army in Europe, yet it managed to lose because German generals(specifically Guderian) pioneered new strategies. Most people don't think about this, at least Americans, but there are other armies out there that are advanced too. Maybe not as powerful, but still there. We need to stay focused on keeping the lead, instead of relaxing on our supposed invincibility.
I wasn't talking *about* Bill O'Reilly either. Obviously, you see one side of the issue, the one where Fox is unbiased, but of course that's what you believe. It justifies your own views. If you said they were biased your views wouldn't be invalidated, just not reaffirmed by some unopinionated source. You just see Fox as unbiased, and based upon what they tell you, everyone else is. Others see only the other side, that Fox is biased, and CNN is not. That is also incorrect. Maybe when you grow up you will realize that none of them are telling you the whole truth and will determine that you have to discover things on your own and not rely on some idiot like Brit Hume to give you his agenda or Peter Jennings to give you his bias. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when most people can only see one side of this.
Just one bit about Fox News somehow seperating their reporting and their opinion, that's not really true. Obviously you don't pay too much attention or you trust what they say too much to accurately analyze what they say.
At least he doesn't claim to be unbiased, unlike Fox Idiots Channel. If Fox News *actually* admitted to being biased, I might be a little more open, but when they have idiots like O'Reilly on manipulating the masses, you've got a serious problem.
One thing with the name-'n'-shame system, most people wouldn't be too insulted about using IE. They'd just go, "eh", and get on with their pointless lives. Other than that, you're absolutely correct.
We have all of the software you need! Just tell us what you want the software to do, give us the name of open source software that already does the task, and in three weeks we will have a brand new software package *just* for you, for the low low price of $50! Unfortunately, our website is down because of high traffic and hackers. Still, you can view videos of the as-of-yet-non-existant software here.
OK, I'll grant you the gmail file system bit. But, how am I supposed to know that he's actually talking about that when he is *explicitly* saying Google File System, when that *is* an actual thing. The next time I read something, even if it's grammatically correct, and everything referenced in it is correct, do I have to figure out what *might* not be what the author actually intended and write my reply based on that? No. I even linked to the article *on* what I thought he was talking about, which I read myself(it's pretty interesting, besides). So, whatever. Granted, that was a long tirade on my having read about what he was talking about.:-)
Have you actually read about the Google File System? Because if you're talking about this paper
then you're really really wrong. It was designed *for* Google, *for* handling all of *Google's* data. Not as some scheme to steal Google's storage space. Next time at least read what you're talking about.
Hey, they're getting better. They now determine, *scientifically*, the force of a lion's bite by building a hydraulic robot and measuring that! That was so cool, I couldn't believe it. It was like a *real* lion right in their studio! And then they had it fight another animal. I can't wait for the giant squid vs. elephant episode!
I don't think privacy was on anyone's mind either immediatly after Google said they would store email indefinitely, either. It wasn't until a bunch of talking heads took it out of context that people started to worry. The same could happen here unfortunately. Notice I said "could".:-)
Sounds like another fiasco that Google is gonna have to withstand, just for being honest. Anyone remember when the privacy hounds were out about GMail perpetually storing your mail, and that a *gasp* computer would actually read it! Reminds me exactly of this. Of course, they'll come out and clarify it later, but by then the damage will be done. Oh well.
Well actually, if they do dual core chips, Moore's law will still be true. It's the doubling of *silicon* not the doubling of speed that is the core of Moore's law.
It's not a *real time patch*, it's a *real time* patch. It doesn't change the kernel while running, it changes the behavior of the kernel to be a real time one. I'm a little hazy on the difference, but I think it mainly has to do with scheduling, and that it will give high priority tasks all the time they need.
He might not be in a hurry, but I'd be surprised if he doesn't realize how this could help Linux. Maybe there are some stability problems with it, but then, I doubt that too. Does anyone have any experience with it? Maybe he's just waiting for the right time, not the earliest time.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you, couldn't have said it better myself.
Also, about China and "the finest human values in the world", what are you talking about? You think those 10 million civilians would just stand there? It's almost racist to think that Westerners are the only people that have good human values, and are the only ones willing to fight for them, as if the Chinese *people* somehow have different ones that are less good(which is all subjective anyway) *.
*Two things: a)If Chinese people had different human rights, you couldn't really judge them, as you'd be judging them based on your Western ideals, which either cannot be applied or can be applied both ways, as you cannot imply a preferred "direction" for that judgement to go. b)The Chinese people have the same human rights, and somehow do not seem to have the same problem with their government as you do. Considering that you don't live there(most likely), I'd take their word over yours. I'll take as their word that there hasn't been a coup(as the military is still composed of Chinese people), nor a revolt for some years.
We all know Antarctica has been developing WMDs for some time now. U.N. Sanctions have *not* been working, the inspectors have been kicked out, and Antarctica's leader will do anything to harm the U.S.
Well, while that's possible, it's unimportant. I'm glad our military is doing this after all. We wouldn't want to get caught without skilled commanders, or even modern strategy. Before World War 2, France had the largest army in Europe, yet it managed to lose because German generals(specifically Guderian) pioneered new strategies. Most people don't think about this, at least Americans, but there are other armies out there that are advanced too. Maybe not as powerful, but still there. We need to stay focused on keeping the lead, instead of relaxing on our supposed invincibility.
Yeah, NPR even has a Fox News correspondent working for them. I think. Watch outfoxed and look at the people's titles. :-)
Just one bit about Fox News somehow seperating their reporting and their opinion, that's not really true. Obviously you don't pay too much attention or you trust what they say too much to accurately analyze what they say.
At least he doesn't claim to be unbiased, unlike Fox Idiots Channel. If Fox News *actually* admitted to being biased, I might be a little more open, but when they have idiots like O'Reilly on manipulating the masses, you've got a serious problem.
One thing with the name-'n'-shame system, most people wouldn't be too insulted about using IE. They'd just go, "eh", and get on with their pointless lives. Other than that, you're absolutely correct.
Probably more of a bug with Ad-Aware than with the spyware. :-)
We have all of the software you need! Just tell us what you want the software to do, give us the name of open source software that already does the task, and in three weeks we will have a brand new software package *just* for you, for the low low price of $50! Unfortunately, our website is down because of high traffic and hackers. Still, you can view videos of the as-of-yet-non-existant software here.
Uh, that's the GPL dude.
Interesting. It probably won't work for very long though, as Google seems to be trying to stop third party clients...
OK, I'll grant you the gmail file system bit. But, how am I supposed to know that he's actually talking about that when he is *explicitly* saying Google File System, when that *is* an actual thing. The next time I read something, even if it's grammatically correct, and everything referenced in it is correct, do I have to figure out what *might* not be what the author actually intended and write my reply based on that? No. I even linked to the article *on* what I thought he was talking about, which I read myself(it's pretty interesting, besides). So, whatever. Granted, that was a long tirade on my having read about what he was talking about. :-)
Oops, sorry. :-)
Oh wait, this is Slashdot
I think you misunderstood the point. It's *meant* to do the wrong thing.
Now we know that whenever a giant squid and an elephant meet, bet on the squid! Talk about progress!
Hey, they're getting better. They now determine, *scientifically*, the force of a lion's bite by building a hydraulic robot and measuring that! That was so cool, I couldn't believe it. It was like a *real* lion right in their studio! And then they had it fight another animal. I can't wait for the giant squid vs. elephant episode!
I don't think privacy was on anyone's mind either immediatly after Google said they would store email indefinitely, either. It wasn't until a bunch of talking heads took it out of context that people started to worry. The same could happen here unfortunately. Notice I said "could". :-)
Sounds like another fiasco that Google is gonna have to withstand, just for being honest. Anyone remember when the privacy hounds were out about GMail perpetually storing your mail, and that a *gasp* computer would actually read it! Reminds me exactly of this. Of course, they'll come out and clarify it later, but by then the damage will be done. Oh well.
Well actually, if they do dual core chips, Moore's law will still be true. It's the doubling of *silicon* not the doubling of speed that is the core of Moore's law.
Maybe that's the reason for high crime! We don't have experienced detectives!
It's not a *real time patch*, it's a *real time* patch. It doesn't change the kernel while running, it changes the behavior of the kernel to be a real time one. I'm a little hazy on the difference, but I think it mainly has to do with scheduling, and that it will give high priority tasks all the time they need.
He might not be in a hurry, but I'd be surprised if he doesn't realize how this could help Linux. Maybe there are some stability problems with it, but then, I doubt that too. Does anyone have any experience with it? Maybe he's just waiting for the right time, not the earliest time.
Well, I'll admit that I don't have much of a clue about Bohm's superliminal linkage, so I'll grant you a victory. So, whatever. I give up. :-)