In general terms, having your collective dna stuck at the bottom of a gravity well relying on the "stability" of a single biosphere is not a a good long term policy.
Hey glesga you do know that you just quoted a high school paper as a reference! If your point is that everyone has a bias than you have certainly have proven that by displaying your own bias and desire to exaggerate the suffering. enuf said.
Believe it or not some people prefer to aim for the truth.
I don't think you are particularly interested in the truth but here is link that discusses recent research.
I like the line at the bottom that states:
And while we're tossing blame around willy-nilly, aren't the Native Americans responsible for introducing tobacco to the world -- and for the 90 million deaths which followed? A holocost if there ever was one.
I would say you were a "little hasty" with the 20M number also. Can you point to a credible source or reference that comes close to supporting your claim?
Some of the wildest liberal estimates claim that North American precolumbia population at 18M. That is all of North America including Canada and Alaska. So how can you manufacture 20M in the continential US region from that? A little history revisioning perhaps?
You maybe confusing the mesoamerica with north america.
Those numbers are almost a couple of orders of magnitude too low.
Is that a wag or based on some facts or evidence?
If there were the killing field like you say where is the evidence? Do you know of large mass graves or bone piles. It is actually quite hard to hide remains of millions and millions of people.
"citing figures from a 1894 estimate by the United States Census Bureau, one scholar has noted that the more than 40 Indian wars from 1775 to 1890 reportedly claimed the lives of some 45,000 Indians and 19,000 whites.1 This rough estimate includes women and children, since noncombatants were often killed in frontier warfare"
Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: "You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete _honestly_. Don't compete by looking at my solution."
Does Larry really believe that he developed his tool in a vacuum and is not riding on the coat-tails of others? Almost every instance of his life involves "riding on the coat-tails" of others.
Quote I've talked to developing nations, representatives from academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate GPL software into their products, then...found they had an obligation to deliver their IP back into the world
Why do these supposedly smart people Balmer, Gates, Lyons, McBride, Schwartz, etc. of the world always sound so stupid when they attept to attack the GPL? They always make it sould like the GPL stipulation to give back your improvements as a nasty surprise at the bottom of the cracker jack box.
Could I not also say:
academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate propriety software into their products, then...found they had an obligation to pay royalities back to the companies that licences their IP
Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the military hates it You got that right. NCMI is the ill thought out, poorly implemented and costly. Where I work everyone now has two computers on their desk, their legacy system where the work gets done and the NMCI email kiosk. What a waste.
Oh that is easy. We assume that the background radiation should be a gradient since we are thinking one universe and one big bang. But suppose that universes are popping off like popcorn all around our "special" universe and take sum of the superposition of the residual energy of the aggregate universes and you would expect indeed for the background radiation to be uniform and not a gradient.
The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate not because of some dark matter but because of the gravitational attraction of other universes in the local vicinity of our own. sheeshh why do folks want to believe we are special with our own little private universe.
Just like at various times in history, humans believed that our tribe was the center of the universe, then the earth, then the sun, and now no one wants to think "outside the box" so to speak, and so they invent dark matter to account for observations that don't match up.
I can't even count the number of times I have set people up with firefox only to have them to switch back to IE because firefox would not let them view video at msnbc.com or would not let them view their childs school assignment because the website only supports IE.
MS most certaintly wants to prevent the web browser market from being commoditized! Which is exactly what standards do.
The best hope for firefox is to be picked up by some large ISP vendor or be installed by default by some large pc provider.
I have a NMCI computer on my desk that I log into it once a day to read my email. Expensive email reader. The rest of my work is done on my "legacy" machine where I can actually install open source and propriety specialized tools I need.
In addition NMCI moved our lan server to over 2000 miles away. Now our NMCI machines are "click and wait" for most operations - makes me long for my 286 days.
Our activity is still maintaining the "legacy" network and will continue to do so. So can someone explain the cost savings?
When is someone going to let the emperor of his new clothes.
I current working on a project that is doing machine-to-machine transactions. We started off using XML to bundle and unbundle the data. However as the data rates went up performance went south.
Some bright bunny came up with the idea of using perl stringified data structures instead using Data::Dumper.
On the receiveing end the data structure is Safe eval'ed and viola there is the data - orders of magnitude faster and there is still the ability to read or edit the data via text editor.
XML is just a representation of hierarchy data via named parameters and list. Perl (or Python if want) or very adept at parsing code strings.
Also with code structures you can add dynamic functionality like
Recently I went the other way with rewritting a C windows program in perl. A section of the code was parsing a string sent from an rfid reader with temperature measurement. The prior author spent 2 pages of code tokenizing and using a if/elseif/else and cases structures which I replaced with a single well written regexp. The regexp is compaction of meaning and is much easier to understand.
Secondly the prior application used a "ping" to test if the interface was up. Again the original C programmer spent over 100 lines of code dropping down to do socket connections using select etc. I used Net::Ping and two lines and was done. Could the guy have used a C ping library? Maybe i don't know, but I spent no more than 10 minutes researching, installing and implementing the Net::Ping code with no prior experience or knowledge of the module.
As far as readability goes I find badly written perl easier to decode than badly written C or C++. Not sure why Perl acquired the reputation of being hard to maintain. I read other peoples perl code all the time and never really had a problem. On the other hand, I have spent days on a small section of C that had includes of includes and with heavy usage of global data. Having the ability to inspect the current scoped symbol table with a print Dumper(\%main::) or Dumper(%package::) is pretty cool.
Slashdot Mirror
forget quantum computing I want to be the first on the block to have a fecal matter computer.
Somewhere in a perl book I came across a comment that said:
"It works just like you would expect it to, however it is hard for us to write how you think"
Is Tridge the elusive IBM hacker who "hacked" into SCO when the claimed:
"IBM exploited the bug to bypass SCO's security system, hack into SCO's computers, and download the very files IBM has now attached to its motion"
In general terms, having your collective dna stuck at the bottom of a gravity well relying on the "stability" of a single biosphere is not a a good long term policy.
Hey glesga you do know that you just quoted a high school paper as a reference! If your point is that everyone has a bias than you have certainly have proven that by displaying your own bias and desire to exaggerate the suffering. enuf said.
Believe it or not some people prefer to aim for the truth.
I don't think you are particularly interested in the truth but here is link that discusses recent research.
I like the line at the bottom that states:
And while we're tossing blame around willy-nilly, aren't the Native Americans responsible for introducing tobacco to the world -- and for the 90 million deaths which followed? A holocost if there ever was one.
I would say you were a "little hasty" with the 20M number also. Can you point to a credible source or reference that comes close to supporting your claim?
Some of the wildest liberal estimates claim that North American precolumbia population at 18M. That is all of North America including Canada and Alaska. So how can you manufacture 20M in the continential US region from that? A little history revisioning perhaps?
You maybe confusing the mesoamerica with north america.
Those numbers are almost a couple of orders of magnitude too low.
Is that a wag or based on some facts or evidence?
If there were the killing field like you say where is the evidence? Do you know of large mass graves or bone piles. It is actually quite hard to hide remains of millions and millions of people.
Insightful?
Americans gloss-over cowboys genociding 20,000,000 native Americans over 20 or so years
This is the myth passed around by europeans and arabs as a way to justify their own atrocities.
From the Indian Wars wiki
"citing figures from a 1894 estimate by the United States Census Bureau, one scholar has noted that the more than 40 Indian wars from 1775 to 1890 reportedly claimed the lives of some 45,000 Indians and 19,000 whites.1 This rough estimate includes women and children, since noncombatants were often killed in frontier warfare"
but Tridge wanted to instead get at the native data and be difficult about it
Uh? So what the heck is wrong with that? This could be almost a quote from McBride or Brown about Linus
Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: "You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete _honestly_. Don't compete by looking at my solution."
Does Larry really believe that he developed his tool in a vacuum and is not riding on the coat-tails of others? Almost every instance of his life involves "riding on the coat-tails" of others.
Is outsourcing to North America part of their plan :)
and dispense with moderation. Just have a perl script determine if a post is insightful, funny, redundant or troll.
Now that I think about it, I would just be thankful if they integrated a simple spelling and grammer checker for the editors.
Quote I've talked to developing nations, representatives from academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate GPL software into their products, then...found they had an obligation to deliver their IP back into the world
Why do these supposedly smart people Balmer, Gates, Lyons, McBride, Schwartz, etc. of the world always sound so stupid when they attept to attack the GPL? They always make it sould like the GPL stipulation to give back your improvements as a nasty surprise at the bottom of the cracker jack box.
Could I not also say:
academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate propriety software into their products, then...found they had an obligation to pay royalities back to the companies that licences their IP
evil propriety software evil evil...
Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the military hates it
You got that right. NCMI is the ill thought out, poorly implemented and costly. Where I work everyone now has two computers on their desk, their legacy system where the work gets done and the NMCI email kiosk. What a waste.
Oh that is easy. We assume that the background radiation should be a gradient since we are thinking one universe and one big bang. But suppose that universes are popping off like popcorn all around our "special" universe and take sum of the superposition of the residual energy of the aggregate universes and you would expect indeed for the background radiation to be uniform and not a gradient.
The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate not because of some dark matter but because of the gravitational attraction of other universes in the local vicinity of our own. sheeshh why do folks want to believe we are special with our own little private universe.
Just like at various times in history, humans believed that our tribe was the center of the universe, then the earth, then the sun, and now no one wants to think "outside the box" so to speak, and so they invent dark matter to account for observations that don't match up.
Why stop at 10 why not release at 100 or 1000. While your at it tack on a "turbo" or "advanced" moniker.
This is such an obvious troll for a Bush joke that I refuse to take the bait :)
Bingo! This is exactly what MS is doing.
I can't even count the number of times I have set people up with firefox only to have them to switch back to IE because firefox would not let them view video at msnbc.com or would not let them view their childs school assignment because the website only supports IE.
MS most certaintly wants to prevent the web browser market from being commoditized! Which is exactly what standards do.
The best hope for firefox is to be picked up by some large ISP vendor or be installed by default by some large pc provider.
Evil Data Systems indeed.
I have a NMCI computer on my desk that I log into it once a day to read my email. Expensive email reader. The rest of my work is done on my "legacy" machine where I can actually install open source and propriety specialized tools I need.
In addition NMCI moved our lan server to over 2000 miles away. Now our NMCI machines are "click and wait" for most operations - makes me long for my 286 days.
Our activity is still maintaining the "legacy" network and will continue to do so. So can someone explain the cost savings?
When is someone going to let the emperor of his new clothes.
I current working on a project that is doing machine-to-machine transactions. We started off using XML to bundle and unbundle the data. However as the data rates went up performance went south.
Some bright bunny came up with the idea of using perl stringified data structures instead using Data::Dumper.
On the receiveing end the data structure is Safe eval'ed and viola there is the data - orders of magnitude faster and there is still the ability to read or edit the data via text editor.
XML is just a representation of hierarchy data via named parameters and list. Perl (or Python if want) or very adept at parsing code strings.
Also with code structures you can add dynamic functionality like
'rsv_time' = localtime(time)
which you can't with XML...
Did anyone else read this as a proposed new tax on Open Source software. shesssh. I gotta get my first coffee of the day.
Actually it would not suprise me if California is already considering such a bill.
One word "portability"
Good point!
Recently I went the other way with rewritting a C windows program in perl. A section of the code was parsing a string sent from an rfid reader with temperature measurement. The prior author spent 2 pages of code tokenizing and using a if/elseif/else and cases structures which I replaced with a single well written regexp. The regexp is compaction of meaning and is much easier to understand.
Secondly the prior application used a "ping" to test if the interface was up. Again the original C programmer spent over 100 lines of code dropping down to do socket connections using select etc. I used Net::Ping and two lines and was done. Could the guy have used a C ping library? Maybe i don't know, but I spent no more than 10 minutes researching, installing and implementing the Net::Ping code with no prior experience or knowledge of the module.
As far as readability goes I find badly written perl easier to decode than badly written C or C++. Not sure why Perl acquired the reputation of being hard to maintain. I read other peoples perl code all the time and never really had a problem. On the other hand, I have spent days on a small section of C that had includes of includes and with heavy usage of global data. Having the ability to inspect the current scoped symbol table with a print Dumper(\%main::) or Dumper(%package::) is pretty cool.