Is the editorializing in the lead sentence of the article really necessary? If you have an opinion to share; state the fact and save the editorial for a concluding sentence.
As it is written, my reflex is to discount the entire post as biased crap.
"On a range of different systems, the power consumption of the Linux OS was comparable to that of Windows except for a few select workloads and systems."
That sentence says power consumption was relatively the same, except when Windows consumed less.
A little bias by the headline writer?
Granted it would be a mistake to elevate this above the task of actually getting the job done, but I see no shame in promoting OSS as a matter of policy provided there are no overriding practical considerations.
My point exactly. Anyone making recommendations with any sort of bias blinders on, whether is be (corruption) getting paid off by a corporate entity or personal agenda (being an OSS zealot), is inherently not to be trusted. Getting the job done is the key. In the best way, for the least money, and serving the public good.
The OP suggested that he wanted to convince the powers that be that OSS was the way. The absense of any other reasoning suggests that he may have a personal agenda that is clouding his judgement.
It is not and should not be OSS vs. Commercial software. It should be solution A vs solution B. With all the aspects of those solutions taken into consideration. If solution B is OSS, perhaps it gets a +1. But OSS is merely one of the factors, not all of them.
and recommend the best solution to the tasks at hand. You sound like you have a OSS agenda to push without regard at to what the issue that needs to be addressed is. I can tell you, as someone that has managed teams of engineers, that I will be convinced by a logical discussion of why software package A is preferred over software package B. If I hired a guy who had an agenda of pushing a particular software vendor over another due to personal agendas, I can tell you he wouldn't be around for long. Pushing OSS, just because it is OSS, is equally as pernicious as pushing BigSoftwareCoX's products. Right tool, right job. Of course $ is always a consideration, so OSS may have a good "Right Tool" argument, but you need to make the WHOLE argument.
why Linux advocates wouldn't wnat more people to use Linux? The driver MS has provided allows one to run Linux under MS's Virtualization software.
1) People use MS's Virtualization softaware. Perhaps not even by choice. (Business requirements)
2) They may want to install Linux in a VM.
3) Before they couldn't, now they can.
Seems to me that MS, at least in this scenario, is making it EASIER for you to use your OS of choice.
Amen. This is my pet peeve about Lenovo's. It is the only keyboard where the Ctrl key is not the lower leftmost. I find myself hitting fn-alt-delete far too often (to no effect) and thinking that the laptop has ceased functioning.
There is a fundemental difference.
It has to do with money, and who has it.
Big money RIAA sueing broke college kids == bad
broke FOSS developer sueing corporation that is using what he is giving away for free in a commercial product == good.
Now, if some independant songwriter, that generally gave his stuff away for free sued someone who took his song and made a commercial hit out of it, I bet the/. crowd would be on his bandwagon.
Fancy dancy cable folding is all well and good.
60 seconds later, I want to fiddle with something and am reaching for the sidecutters to clip the cable ties.
Eventually, the side of the box is left off and a hard drive has been hanging by a cable for several months.
So, in conclusion, elegant cable folding is the equivalent of folding your underwear.
Legal counsel decides it's a bad idea because it could expose them to liability
Not true, they are already giving this firmware out with the cards, it is just on a cd and can only be installed from Windows. OBSD is merely asking for the ability to package the firmware with their distro.
It really does expose them to liability. For example, you could exceed FCC restrictions on the ISM bands by programming your card to emit more power than it should on frequencies it's not allowed in the US to be in.
Not true, FCC regs do not apply to the manufacturer, they apply to the user.
There are bits of licensed code in the driver that aren't theirs to give out.
OBSD is not asking for the source to be opened. Read the article again. The binary firmware blob, which is already on the CD (but with a onerous re-distribution license) is what is being discussed here. No one cares what the code in the firmware looks like, we just want to be free to give the blob away.
They are using a reference design and the driver contains features unique to their product. If they let the driver out, people will be able to buy the cheaper implementation of the same reference design and get those features.
Again, read the article, the drivers already exist in OSS. The drivers are no good if you can't load the firmware binary.
No one is asking anyone here to open source any code. We just want these vendors to remove restrictions on redistribution of the BINARY firmware (that they themselves already give away).
This is a political campaign site with political campaign propaganda. And since there are still an extremely wide variety of ways to get at its content and information from outside the US, it's obviously not some kind of "international censorship".
While I agree that there is nothing "wrong" with this (other than the collateral overseas abenstee voter damage), it does point out something about this presidents beliefs:
What the rest of the world thinks does not matter.
In this case I don't think it's wrong, since the richer companies could use their money to effectively monopolise radio for their artists.
(emphasis added)
Could? With radio stations increasingly owned by other "richer companies" (Clear Channel and Cap Cities ABC own 90% of the Music Radio where I live) I am honestly shocked if I ever hear a song off a non-mega-media-conglomerate label.
Some little voice is telling me that huge corporate radio + huge corporate record labels = Mr. Spitzer is on to something.
You can't vote if you're under 18
you can't vote if you're in prison
in some states you can't vote if you were convicted of a felony ages ago
US residents without US citizenship can't vote (yet are taxed and subject to legislation)
Those are all issues of fact. There is no room for debate about whether someone is in prison, or 18 or a felon or a citizen.
Intelligence is arbitrary. There is no such thing as an objective IQ test. All tests express some bias of the creator of the test as to what he/she deems to indictate "intelligence".
This is a fundemental difference between the limits that exist today on voting and the OP's assertation that stupid people shouldn't be allowed to vote.
That said, the law says that convicted felons can't vote. In many cases they can have their voting rights re-instated. Often times this is done in what seems to be an arbitrary and biased manner.
The only way for democracy to be viable is for the vote to be limited.
What?
If you limit the vote I believe you no longer have a democracy. Your statement is an oxymoron.
That idea worked really well in the past with non-whites and women.
Slashdot Mirror
"Windows is dying"? Windows 8 is already at a higher market % than OSX 10.8. Is OSX dying?
The perils of hiring (and needing to fire) a guy named Joe Allusers.
Is the editorializing in the lead sentence of the article really necessary? If you have an opinion to share; state the fact and save the editorial for a concluding sentence.
As it is written, my reflex is to discount the entire post as biased crap.
"On a range of different systems, the power consumption of the Linux OS was comparable to that of Windows except for a few select workloads and systems." That sentence says power consumption was relatively the same, except when Windows consumed less. A little bias by the headline writer?
Granted it would be a mistake to elevate this above the task of actually getting the job done, but I see no shame in promoting OSS as a matter of policy provided there are no overriding practical considerations.
My point exactly. Anyone making recommendations with any sort of bias blinders on, whether is be (corruption) getting paid off by a corporate entity or personal agenda (being an OSS zealot), is inherently not to be trusted. Getting the job done is the key. In the best way, for the least money, and serving the public good. The OP suggested that he wanted to convince the powers that be that OSS was the way. The absense of any other reasoning suggests that he may have a personal agenda that is clouding his judgement. It is not and should not be OSS vs. Commercial software. It should be solution A vs solution B. With all the aspects of those solutions taken into consideration. If solution B is OSS, perhaps it gets a +1. But OSS is merely one of the factors, not all of them.
Hay guys. I made cold fusion work in my bathtub. Want to invest?
and recommend the best solution to the tasks at hand. You sound like you have a OSS agenda to push without regard at to what the issue that needs to be addressed is. I can tell you, as someone that has managed teams of engineers, that I will be convinced by a logical discussion of why software package A is preferred over software package B. If I hired a guy who had an agenda of pushing a particular software vendor over another due to personal agendas, I can tell you he wouldn't be around for long. Pushing OSS, just because it is OSS, is equally as pernicious as pushing BigSoftwareCoX's products. Right tool, right job. Of course $ is always a consideration, so OSS may have a good "Right Tool" argument, but you need to make the WHOLE argument.
http://gettag.mobi/ and it doesn't require LED's
Add in a placebo of a "WiFi blocker" in pill form and see if it helps him.
why Linux advocates wouldn't wnat more people to use Linux? The driver MS has provided allows one to run Linux under MS's Virtualization software. 1) People use MS's Virtualization softaware. Perhaps not even by choice. (Business requirements) 2) They may want to install Linux in a VM. 3) Before they couldn't, now they can. Seems to me that MS, at least in this scenario, is making it EASIER for you to use your OS of choice.
Amen. This is my pet peeve about Lenovo's. It is the only keyboard where the Ctrl key is not the lower leftmost. I find myself hitting fn-alt-delete far too often (to no effect) and thinking that the laptop has ceased functioning.
Um...I pay Sprint $15 for tethering.
No, if you are giving something away for free, someone else shouldn't be able to make money selling it without your permission.
Big money RIAA sueing broke college kids == bad broke FOSS developer sueing corporation that is using what he is giving away for free in a commercial product == good.
Now, if some independant songwriter, that generally gave his stuff away for free sued someone who took his song and made a commercial hit out of it, I bet the /. crowd would be on his bandwagon.
Look at Dune. One of the best SciFi series ever (The books, not necessarily the movie or miniseries) has at it's crux issues of religion.
A painfully slow loading java app. Loved it.
Hey, at least we don't have a loon on our Money, at least not Yet.
The current Minnesota drivers license has a magnetic strip. Apparently that wasn't good enough.
Fancy dancy cable folding is all well and good.
60 seconds later, I want to fiddle with something and am reaching for the sidecutters to clip the cable ties.
Eventually, the side of the box is left off and a hard drive has been hanging by a cable for several months.
So, in conclusion, elegant cable folding is the equivalent of folding your underwear.
Legal counsel decides it's a bad idea because it could expose them to liability
Not true, they are already giving this firmware out with the cards, it is just on a cd and can only be installed from Windows. OBSD is merely asking for the ability to package the firmware with their distro.
It really does expose them to liability. For example, you could exceed FCC restrictions on the ISM bands by programming your card to emit more power than it should on frequencies it's not allowed in the US to be in.
Not true, FCC regs do not apply to the manufacturer, they apply to the user.
There are bits of licensed code in the driver that aren't theirs to give out.
OBSD is not asking for the source to be opened. Read the article again. The binary firmware blob, which is already on the CD (but with a onerous re-distribution license) is what is being discussed here. No one cares what the code in the firmware looks like, we just want to be free to give the blob away.
They are using a reference design and the driver contains features unique to their product. If they let the driver out, people will be able to buy the cheaper implementation of the same reference design and get those features.
Again, read the article, the drivers already exist in OSS. The drivers are no good if you can't load the firmware binary.
No one is asking anyone here to open source any code. We just want these vendors to remove restrictions on redistribution of the BINARY firmware (that they themselves already give away).
It may save time and screen real estate to put icons for servers that survived a /.ing
This is a political campaign site with political campaign propaganda. And since there are still an extremely wide variety of ways to get at its content and information from outside the US, it's obviously not some kind of "international censorship".
While I agree that there is nothing "wrong" with this (other than the collateral overseas abenstee voter damage), it does point out something about this presidents beliefs:
What the rest of the world thinks does not matter.
In this case I don't think it's wrong, since the richer companies could use their money to effectively monopolise radio for their artists.
(emphasis added)
Could?
With radio stations increasingly owned by other "richer companies" (Clear Channel and Cap Cities ABC own 90% of the Music Radio where I live) I am honestly shocked if I ever hear a song off a non-mega-media-conglomerate label.
Some little voice is telling me that huge corporate radio + huge corporate record labels = Mr. Spitzer is on to something.
You can't vote if you're under 18 you can't vote if you're in prison in some states you can't vote if you were convicted of a felony ages ago US residents without US citizenship can't vote (yet are taxed and subject to legislation)
Those are all issues of fact. There is no room for debate about whether someone is in prison, or 18 or a felon or a citizen.
Intelligence is arbitrary. There is no such thing as an objective IQ test. All tests express some bias of the creator of the test as to what he/she deems to indictate "intelligence".
This is a fundemental difference between the limits that exist today on voting and the OP's assertation that stupid people shouldn't be allowed to vote.
That said, the law says that convicted felons can't vote. In many cases they can have their voting rights re-instated. Often times this is done in what seems to be an arbitrary and biased manner.
The only way for democracy to be viable is for the vote to be limited.
What?
If you limit the vote I believe you no longer have a democracy. Your statement is an oxymoron.
That idea worked really well in the past with non-whites and women.