That does push things back a bit but do you really think humans developed modern intelligence only 10-30K years ago? There were two population bottlenecks at 140k years ago and 60K years ago that could have been where we began to select for intelligence. I often wonder if paleolithic and neolithic people were so much less sophisticated in their thinking as modern people or were they simply using technologies and materials that were appropriate to their circumstances. A lot of what is passed off as evidence of civilization, for example, social stratification, looks like a really bad deal for the average person.
True. Ancient people were just as intelligent as we are. The only reason this is not more evident is because time has erased the remains of their material culture. It would be more surprising if no one thought of make a raft or boat for tens of thousands of years.
How can he make the analogy to postal mail or telephone calls and not see that the same principles apply to email? We should have a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to privacy. The anti federalists were right. Without an explicit protection the government will take away every protection it can.
The Wikipedia article is pretty funny. It says New Hampshire is the _ONLY_ state other than Kentucky and Maryland that has a provision for the right of revolution in its state constitution. I do not think only means what they think it means.
Excellent point. Just try living in an urban area without owning a car. I have and it's hard to do at least in the US. My wife looked at every option available to her before buying her last car and finally bought a small honda as least expensive/environmentally damaging option. It's simply too dangerous to ride a bicycle on many roads.
This might be of interest: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs133-99/gl_vol.html.
If the 29,000,000 cubic kilometers of ground ice in Antarctica melted sea levels would rise by a maximum of 80 meters. That is a worst case scenario of course.
It's really hard to estimate what it would cost without talking to a sales rep. If you check you out Microsoft's support offerings there are no prices, just descriptions. On the red Hat site there is a link for volume licensing. I'd imagine that if you have 900 servers they would cut you a break. Perhaps I was a bit harsh in my post but what bothers me is that for as long as I have been reading slashdot people have said linux distros would not make money from the OS but from things like customization, support, documentation, and so forth. Now when a Linux company is relatively successful at just that there are people who seem to feel angry that they expect payment for those services. I can understand someone deciding that in their environment they don't need vender support and choosing a different distro or recompiling btis and pieces of the base Red Hat to meet their needs. It's the sense of entitlement that bugs me. Red Hat's pricing seems to be in line for support from other OS venders even considering thier development costs are lower. There are a lot of organizations that will need this. Consider too that they are offering a distribution that is certified on various venders hardware, has this government COE cert, and is tested and certifed with some rather expensive enterprise applications. None of that is important to me but then I don't have 900 servers either.
Hell yeah brother! Preach on! I really don't get what all the bitching is about. $800 for 5 years of support? I support 13 app servers that we pay $16K/yr for support on. That doesn't include the OS or hardware. So if Red Hat is basically letting you have the code for free but only answering the phone or providing patches if you cough up a little coin how can you complain? One dude said he only called IBM twice a month. If you called Red Hat twice a month and say each call lasted about an hour you would take up three working days of that guys time a year. If the tech support guy makes $40K/yr and you add in 30% for benefits and then some for cube rental they aren't making a fortune on this deal. Plus, you would have consider how much a developer might cost to write a few patches. I think the problem here is that people are looking at it from the perspective of the home/small business user and expecting the same sort of support one would get from an enterprise software vender. From my experience that kind of support can cost tens of thousands per quarter. Someone running SAP, peoplesoft, or Oracle shouldn't blink an eye at $800/box. If you think this is too much how do you expect Red Hat to make a profit? As a shareholder I'd really like to know.
Saying "XP isn't crashing explorer.exe is" is kind of like saying linux isn't crashing bash is. It may be technically true but it doesn't do you a damn bit of good since explorer is the default shell. I don't know if this still works but in win 9x you could change the shell to progman, the old win 3.1 shell. I used to have some fun at my coworkers expense this way.
A modern fab is a billion dollar investment. Given that AMD can't charge a premium for thier chips and that thier credit is not as good anymore I don't see how they can expect to conitnue the race to make smaller faster chips against Intel. Intel has very deep pockets and more production capacity so in a way the Mhz race is how Intel is pushing AMD out of serious competition. Deemphasizing the cpu part of their business is a smart move for AMD but not good news for consumers.
"in those days people still thought IBM was running the show."
That whole PC compatable mentality killed off a lot of inovation IMHO. Commadore and Atari had had machines in the early to mid 80s that had came with 2 MB RAM and 3.5 floppies for less than what an XT with 640k cost with 5.25 floppy and that was a big difference in those days. It's kind of the same mentality that keeps MS in the drivers seat. What was needed then and now is open standards for exchanging data so everyone can use the tools that suit their needs best. Still, it's no ones fault not even the Romans or MS that early PCs couldn't support whizbang OSs.
Actually, at the time DOS was a pretty good OS for a a system running at 4 or 8 Mhz with anywhere from 256- 640k of RAM and it probably owes more to CPM than unix. Personal computers at the time were not networked to any significant extent and a multiuser, multitasking, secure, OS with IP support wasn't feasable on the hardware an average person could buy. The damnable thing about DOS though was that by the time MS came up with Win95 and NT 15 years had passed. In the meantime many better and cheaper OS's and hardware platforms were killed off by the sheer numbers of PC compatables cranked out running DOS and that abomination of a shell that ran on top of it. NetBUI is as much an API as it is a protocol and the previous poster is correct that it is based on NetBios which was an IBM creation. Don't be too quick to knock it though. If you ever need to transfer lot of files across a slow connection on a LAN try using NETBUI instead of TCP/IP as your protocol. IP adds a lot of overhead and and is MUCH slower.
I have a Radeon 7500 AIW and have random hard lock ups in X. When it locks up nothing works. I can't open another terminal or kill X. I have spent hours playing with my configuration, searching newsgroups, and reading documentation. Mostly though I either just work from a prompt in Linux or pop in my win2k drive. This shit is what makes it doubtful linux will be successful on the desktop. I mean ATI is what, number 1 or 2 in graphics chipsets and they can't be bothered to support a card they came out with six months ago? The card is great under windows but if I had known what a pain it would be under X windows I would have looked elsewhere.
I had LASIK 1 year ago after 30 years of nearsightedness and astigmatism. Now it seems natural to me to see well without glasses. I have 20/20 in one eye and 20/25 in the other. I think within 10 years noone over 25 will wear glasses in the developed world. LASIK too easy and safe. It's getting cheaper too but be sure to go with a doctor with a good track record.
It's your hardware but the idea of changing video cards while the PC is in sleep mode makes me cringe. The power isn't really OFF off. You can damage your PC like this and possibly electrocute yourself. I have two removeable hard drives one with Win2K and on with Linux. After installing the last service pack I haven't had anymore problems with it. The Linux install works great except that when running X it sometimes locks the PC up hard. I think this is a driver issue with my Radeon video card and I put the blame on ATI for not developing drivers for X. I should have checked before buying an ATI card. Works great under windows though.
The windows command shell is a lot more powerful than command.com. You might give it a try sometime if you use that W2K box for anything other than games.
Re:Government should stay out except for....
on
Defining Globalism
·
· Score: 1
Whether MS licensed it's winsock (I don't think they did) or not this has to be the best example of bundling benefiting the consumer I can think of and one of the best things MS ever did. Back in the day using IP on windows was a nightmare. Every ISP/online service/app had it's own IP stack and they all went by the name of winsock.dll. If you used Compuserve and decided to try Delphi the installation program would likely overwrite your previous winsock. The new one either would not work or worse worked 90% of the time and then caused everything to lock up. I used batch files to copy/rename wisock.dll for every ISP I used. Of course windows 3.x was a nightmare in itself. I used OS/2,then tried Slackware linux but I always needed a dos partition for acceptable game performance. Anyway, when windows 95 came out the integrated winsock was my favorite feature. Had MS not included it, I doubt they would have kept their market share.
One reason I don't feel bad about downloading songs from napster is that I have often already bought the albumn in some format in the past. Should I now have to pay for it again because my fuzzy warble is scratched or my tape got eaten? I don't understand the RIAAs arguments. They seem to want to regard music as a physical article when that definition maximizes their members revenue and as content to be licensed like software when that makes more money.
I agree creationsim should be taught in public schools...and subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny creationists apply to evolutionary theory. If radiocarbon dating and the relative ages of layers of sedimentary rock are open to challenge then why not have our public school teachers question the truth of the biblical account in Genesis. If a student claims it is the inerrant word of God then have them show some objective evidence of that claim. Apply Ockham's razor to the question of whether the bible is a compilation of oral history and folk tales of a group of nomadic desert people or the literal word of God. I think teaching creationsim in schools could serve a very useful purpose in getting young people to question their core beliefs.
At least in the early days the purpose of the internet and the web was the disemination of information. Any decision that forces us to choose between the free flow of information and the abililty of someone to make a profit should be decided in favor of the former. Deep linking is an issue mainly because of the commercialization of the web. Maybe there should be a separate network designed for commercial interests but I would hate to see the surrent internet go any further in that direction.
Slashdot Mirror
That does push things back a bit but do you really think humans developed modern intelligence only 10-30K years ago? There were two population bottlenecks at 140k years ago and 60K years ago that could have been where we began to select for intelligence. I often wonder if paleolithic and neolithic people were so much less sophisticated in their thinking as modern people or were they simply using technologies and materials that were appropriate to their circumstances. A lot of what is passed off as evidence of civilization, for example, social stratification, looks like a really bad deal for the average person.
True. Ancient people were just as intelligent as we are. The only reason this is not more evident is because time has erased the remains of their material culture. It would be more surprising if no one thought of make a raft or boat for tens of thousands of years.
How can he make the analogy to postal mail or telephone calls and not see that the same principles apply to email? We should have a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to privacy. The anti federalists were right. Without an explicit protection the government will take away every protection it can.
The Wikipedia article is pretty funny. It says New Hampshire is the _ONLY_ state other than Kentucky and Maryland that has a provision for the right of revolution in its state constitution. I do not think only means what they think it means.
Excellent point. Just try living in an urban area without owning a car. I have and it's hard to do at least in the US. My wife looked at every option available to her before buying her last car and finally bought a small honda as least expensive/environmentally damaging option. It's simply too dangerous to ride a bicycle on many roads.
This might be of interest: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs133-99/gl_vol.html.
If the 29,000,000 cubic kilometers of ground ice in Antarctica melted sea levels would rise by a maximum of 80 meters. That is a worst case scenario of course.
It's really hard to estimate what it would cost without talking to a sales rep. If you check you out Microsoft's support offerings there are no prices, just descriptions. On the red Hat site there is a link for volume licensing. I'd imagine that if you have 900 servers they would cut you a break. Perhaps I was a bit harsh in my post but what bothers me is that for as long as I have been reading slashdot people have said linux distros would not make money from the OS but from things like customization, support, documentation, and so forth. Now when a Linux company is relatively successful at just that there are people who seem to feel angry that they expect payment for those services. I can understand someone deciding that in their environment they don't need vender support and choosing a different distro or recompiling btis and pieces of the base Red Hat to meet their needs. It's the sense of entitlement that bugs me. Red Hat's pricing seems to be in line for support from other OS venders even considering thier development costs are lower. There are a lot of organizations that will need this. Consider too that they are offering a distribution that is certified on various venders hardware, has this government COE cert, and is tested and certifed with some rather expensive enterprise applications. None of that is important to me but then I don't have 900 servers either.
Hell yeah brother! Preach on! I really don't get what all the bitching is about. $800 for 5 years of support? I support 13 app servers that we pay $16K/yr for support on. That doesn't include the OS or hardware. So if Red Hat is basically letting you have the code for free but only answering the phone or providing patches if you cough up a little coin how can you complain? One dude said he only called IBM twice a month. If you called Red Hat twice a month and say each call lasted about an hour you would take up three working days of that guys time a year. If the tech support guy makes $40K/yr and you add in 30% for benefits and then some for cube rental they aren't making a fortune on this deal. Plus, you would have consider how much a developer might cost to write a few patches. I think the problem here is that people are looking at it from the perspective of the home/small business user and expecting the same sort of support one would get from an enterprise software vender. From my experience that kind of support can cost tens of thousands per quarter. Someone running SAP, peoplesoft, or Oracle shouldn't blink an eye at $800/box. If you think this is too much how do you expect Red Hat to make a profit? As a shareholder I'd really like to know.
Saying "XP isn't crashing explorer.exe is" is kind of like saying linux isn't crashing bash is.
It may be technically true but it doesn't do you a damn bit of good since explorer is the default shell. I don't know if this still works but in win 9x you could change the shell to progman, the old win 3.1 shell. I used to have some fun at my coworkers expense this way.
A modern fab is a billion dollar investment. Given that AMD can't charge a premium for thier chips and that thier credit is not as good anymore I don't see how they can expect to conitnue the race to make smaller faster chips against Intel. Intel has very deep pockets and more production capacity so in a way the Mhz race is how Intel is pushing AMD out of serious competition. Deemphasizing the cpu part of their business is a smart move for AMD but not good news for consumers.
Good point. I was thinking of NT 4.
"in those days people still thought IBM was running the show."
That whole PC compatable mentality killed off a lot of inovation IMHO. Commadore and Atari had had machines in the early to mid 80s that had came with 2 MB RAM and 3.5 floppies for less than what an XT with 640k cost with 5.25 floppy and that was a big difference in those days. It's kind of the same mentality that keeps MS in the drivers seat. What was needed then and now is open standards for exchanging data so everyone can use the tools that suit their needs best. Still, it's no ones fault not even the Romans or MS that early PCs couldn't support whizbang OSs.
Actually, at the time DOS was a pretty good OS for a a system running at 4 or 8 Mhz with anywhere from 256- 640k of RAM and it probably owes more to CPM than unix. Personal computers at the time were not networked to any significant extent and a multiuser, multitasking, secure, OS with IP support wasn't feasable on the hardware an average person could buy. The damnable thing about DOS though was that by the time MS came up with Win95 and NT 15 years had passed. In the meantime many better and cheaper OS's and hardware platforms were killed off by the sheer numbers of PC compatables cranked out running DOS and that abomination of a shell that ran on top of it. NetBUI is as much an API as it is a protocol and the previous poster is correct that it is based on NetBios which was an IBM creation. Don't be too quick to knock it though. If you ever need to transfer lot of files across a slow connection on a LAN try using NETBUI instead of TCP/IP as your protocol. IP adds a lot of overhead and and is MUCH slower.
I have a Radeon 7500 AIW and have random hard lock ups in X. When it locks up nothing works. I can't open another terminal or kill X. I have spent hours playing with my configuration, searching newsgroups, and reading documentation. Mostly though I either just work from a prompt in Linux or pop in my win2k drive. This shit is what makes it doubtful linux will be successful on the desktop. I mean ATI is what, number 1 or 2 in graphics chipsets and they can't be bothered to support a card they came out with six months ago? The card is great under windows but if I had known what a pain it would be under X windows I would have looked elsewhere.
I had LASIK 1 year ago after 30 years of nearsightedness and astigmatism. Now it seems natural to me to see well without glasses. I have 20/20 in one eye and 20/25 in the other. I think within 10 years noone over 25 will wear glasses in the developed world. LASIK too easy and safe. It's getting cheaper too but be sure to go with a doctor with a good track record.
It's your hardware but the idea of changing video cards while the PC is in sleep mode makes me cringe. The power isn't really OFF off. You can damage your PC like this and possibly electrocute yourself. I have two removeable hard drives one with Win2K and on with Linux. After installing the last service pack I haven't had anymore problems with it. The Linux install works great except that when running X it sometimes locks the PC up hard. I think this is a driver issue with my Radeon video card and I put the blame on ATI for not developing drivers for X. I should have checked before buying an ATI card. Works great under windows though.
The windows command shell is a lot more powerful than command.com. You might give it a try sometime if you use that W2K box for anything other than games.
That's quite a slippery slope ya got there.
Whether MS licensed it's winsock (I don't think they did) or not this has to be the best example of bundling benefiting the consumer I can think of and one of the best things MS ever did. Back in the day using IP on windows was a nightmare. Every ISP/online service/app had it's own IP stack and they all went by the name of winsock.dll. If you used Compuserve and decided to try Delphi the installation program would likely overwrite your previous winsock. The new one either would not work or worse worked 90% of the time and then caused everything to lock up. I used batch files to copy/rename wisock.dll for every ISP I used. Of course windows 3.x was a nightmare in itself. I used OS/2,then tried Slackware linux but I always needed a dos partition for acceptable game performance. Anyway, when windows 95 came out the integrated winsock was my favorite feature. Had MS not included it, I doubt they would have kept their market share.
One reason I don't feel bad about downloading songs from napster is that I have often already bought the albumn in some format in the past. Should I now have to pay for it again because my fuzzy warble is scratched or my tape got eaten? I don't understand the RIAAs arguments. They seem to want to regard music as a physical article when that definition maximizes their members revenue and as content to be licensed like software when that makes more money.
I agree creationsim should be taught in public schools...and subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny creationists apply to evolutionary theory. If radiocarbon dating and the relative ages of layers of sedimentary rock are open to challenge then why not have our public school teachers question the truth of the biblical account in Genesis. If a student claims it is the inerrant word of God then have them show some objective evidence of that claim. Apply Ockham's razor to the question of whether the bible is a compilation of oral history and folk tales of a group of nomadic desert people or the literal word of God. I think teaching creationsim in schools could serve a very useful purpose in getting young people to question their core beliefs.
At least in the early days the purpose of the internet and the web was the disemination of information. Any decision that forces us to choose between the free flow of information and the abililty of someone to make a profit should be decided in favor of the former. Deep linking is an issue mainly because of the commercialization of the web. Maybe there should be a separate network designed for commercial interests but I would hate to see the surrent internet go any further in that direction.
SKU=stock keeping unit
I worked at Best Buy for a couple of years. The terminology is standard across the industry.