In other news today, Microsoft announced the successor to WinFS, which is slated to appear in Windows LT(Long Tool) in 2012, BuzzwordFS. BuzzwordFS will not replace WinFS, it will incorporate features of WinFS, as well as every other possible TLA used in the computer industry, for complete buzzword compliance.
I recently rolled out a postfix+spamassassin+maildir+courier-imap installation, and I have to say I have been extremely pleased, and impressed. It took a little while to figure everything out, as I'm not very experienced in mail administration, but I got the job done.
I chose postfix over sendmail because my limited experience with sendmail, while not too bad, lead me to believe postfix would be easier to maintain.
So we're using an MTA with a proven security, reliability and performance track record, all for the cost of only my time, which was significantly less than the cost of Windows+Exchange. Shit, it took me 1 full day to set it up, Windows alone can cost more than one day's pay.
Using calendars and tasks and notes does not make the MTA suck any less, of course.
I'm just wondering why the fuck that needs to be part of the same program as the MTA in the first place. Why not use separate programs for those tasks? That would be much better for security, stability, performance, and peoples' sanity...
I think the reason people like Starbucks so much has (almost)nothing to do with aesthetics. Starbucks sells pretty fuckin' good coffee. I don't know if it's worth $5, but it's pretty fuckin' good.
You said "insurance" and "efficient" in the same sentence, which was obviously caused by an error in your logic:)
Seriously, insurance is anything but efficient. Indeed, it is inefficient by definition. Let me explain...
Insurance companies are in business to make money. They make money by accepting payments from customers, all the while doing their best to never do anything for said customers. Insurance companies don't bank on having to provide a service for you, it is just the opposite. That is why they create so many loopholes in your coverage to avoid having to provide service.
So, by default insurance companies choose to accept clients that they will never have to provide a service to, and those who need the service the most can't get it. That is not efficiency.
Socialized healthcare has the potential to be the absolute most efficient, because only the exact amount needed would be paid - no one needs to make a profit - and nobody would be denied healthcare. However, government tends to ruin efficiency in anything it touches, so we're fucked either way.
I don't know, but I hope it's difficult to claim damages from a non-profit. Of course, they could probably go after AOL/Netscape for starting the Mozilla project.
Personally, I hope Microsoft gets the patent nullified in the appeal. Of course, I'm also hoping that Al-Queda's next target is our patent office:) (yeah yeah, poor taste, I know...)
I am surprised that Forbes employs "writers" who resort to such ridiculous ad hominem rhetoric.
Perhaps the OSS community should respond by writing articles implying that Forbes employs a bunch of fascists?
I would like to know what Mr. Daniel Lyons thinks the FSF should do when companies violate their copyrights? Should OSS authors not get the same protections under copyright that everyone else receives?
Historically, the FSF has been very cooperative when resolving infringements, simply asking for removal of the infringing code or release of the source.
I have authored several OSS projects and contributed to a few others, and if Mr. Lyons thinks I should allow large corporations to walk all over me, then I say to Mr. Lyons, "Hagel Hitler!"
Perhaps Mr. Lyons should stop pretending to be a journalist and get a marketing job for a large proprietary software firm, owned and operated by Neo-Fascists?
See, Mr. Lyons isn't the only one who can make ridiculous, insulting remarks.
Aha, thank you. I will consider that my SCO-related entertainment for today:)
More seriously, I'll bet IBM is compiling as many examples of this sort of behavior to display in court. There will be nothing left of SCO when this is done. Hopefully the SEC will properly deal with the executives, after being sued for all they're worth by the shareholders of course.
So religion is genetic, eh? How very politically correct...
Please avoid resorting to ad hominem arguments.
But I was not trying to insult you, I was simply making a point. Your beliefs, to everyone who hasn't grown up with the Bible, ARE no different than fairy-tales. If that insults you... well, that is your problem, grow a thicker skin.
I begin to feel like you are trolling.
Trolling? I don't think anyone else is still reading this, so what would be the point. Trolling implies I am trying to provoke you, when the response I was hoping for was simply for you to understand that to most people the Bible is a work of fiction no different than old Greek mythology.
Read my second reply to you, it is obvious that I am trying to be amicable. See these things, ":)", those are smiley faces. People often smile when they're trying to be friendly. If you can't take a few good natured jabs, I feel sorry for you.
I called you deluded because you were confusing bogus science(or at least very poor science) with actual science. Real science doesn't work the way creationist scientists do, however much they claim to be doing real science. I would love to point out the holes in whatever you are personally basing your exact creationist beliefs on, but you refuse to post a link in a public forum. If you are too stubborn to post a link in a public forum, then it's not worth my time. I refuse to email you, because frankly, I prefer not to give out my email address to people I don't know, especially persons who are offended so easily.
I called your beliefs "fairy-tales", because that is what they are to me. I am sorry that offends you; would you like me to pretend otherwise so as to spare your feelings? I have no more reason to believe the Bible than I do old "fairy-tales" about Zeus sitting on Mount Olympus shooting lightning bolts from his ass. To be fair, I would probably be a little less harsh if I were dealing with someone so primitive they believed that old nonsense, but you're grown up enough to accept what other people really think about your beliefs, no?
Slashdot is one of the poorest mediums for discussing evolution and creation.
Why? Because people, not being face-to-face, are more comfortable asking hard questions? Being exposed to a lot of Christian "teaching," I find that Christians often use intimidation as a means of silencing dissent. There is no public discourse among average Christians.
I'm trying a different approach
It doesn't seem to be working well. I think it's just scaring away everyone who is interested; your approach is reminiscient of Scientology... "Let's discuss this in private and I'll let you in on the 'truth.'"
I am especially not interested in discussing with people who call my beliefs "fairy-tales".
And why is that? From the perspective of anyone who didn't grow up having the Bible beat into their head, that's exactly what it is. And you call me ignorant and biased.
It shows a clear bias and ignorance
Bias? Because I don't believe what an ancient book that has been dragged through history and misinterpreted and abridged a number of times says without question, that means I'm biased?
Further, if you don't want to start a discussion on/., then why did you post on/.?
I at least tried to be somewhat friendly. You could have responded in kind and given me a link to more information, which I was at least willing to look at...
LoL! I enjoy the way you argue on/. "email me and I'll tell you the truth!" - I'm kidding, mostly:)
Look, I don't have any "beliefs", I simply accept what empirical evidence shows. Said evidence shows that the Earth is quite old, and humans evolved from chimps. That is the simplest, most logical explaination that is backed up by empirical evidence.
Then you creationists come along and work backwards from the Bible, add a bunch of non-sensical axioms, and come up with models of how it's possible that the Earth is only 7,000 years old...
Why not work forwards from what is observable, instead of backwards from a bunch of fairy-tales? To do otherwise is simply not science.
If you want to present your beliefs on/. in a story about science, you'll have to back up your beliefs a little better to be taken seriously.
Now, if you care to respond in the forum instead of telling me to email you, I would be willing to look at any information you have to present. Some links would be fine. I'll take a look, but I don't expect to be impressed.
OTOH, kudos to you for presenting opinions that are so unpopular around here:) If nothing else, it sparks interesting "discussion."
LoL, yeah, that's been my reasoning for quite some time now too:)
I don't consider myself an atheist, I simply don't "believe" in anything so I'm not sure the term fits... I don't like the label agnostic either, though.
Bleh, too much baggage with terms for us non-believers, I'll just call myself a heathen:)
If you think Safari is so hot, try Galeon 1.3.9 on Linux. It is by far the greatest browsing experience ever, period. It is 200% more stable and has more features than safari, and the moz rendering engine is far more complete and robust.
Unfortuneatley, Camino development seems to be very slow, otherwise it would be the best browser available for OS X.
Not that I'm knocking Safari, it's an excellent browser, in fact, it's better than vanilla Mozilla.
Windows needs a feature complete browser based on moz, but one that has a *better interface than mozilla.
Firebird is looking really good, but isn't quite there yet.
* better being defined as something people would like more, although I think it's better than most windows UIs...
Then why have human and almost human remains been found that are 35 (human) to over a hundred thousand years old? I know 1 hundred thousand years is still "young," but that already doesn't jive with creationist theory.
Also, please explain the nearly human remains that have been found. They're more human than ape, yet not quite human, and they're 100 thousand + years old.
Then there's dinosaur remains from hundreds of millions of years ago...
Did God put all that there as a test of our "faith?"
Sorry to be an asshole, but you are indeed deluded.
SGI can now demonstrate in court that they tried their best to remedy the situation, which is completely frivolous BTW, and have done everything in their power to correct a perfectly honest mistake, if you could even call it that, as the ONLY code SGI donated that was even possibly not theirs, was code that was already in the public domain.
I really believe SCO is going to get squashed in court, but it's always possible that our ridiculous court system will let this shit fly.
It's ridiculous that SCO is still allowed to continue this nonsense considering the obvious insider trading going on, etc.
I think people have seen way too many pictures of Bill Gates to ever, and I mean ever, associate Microsoft with "Cool."
With Apple, Jobs has always tried to be cool. From the early stages, Jobs wanted his products to look cool. Jobs actually likes making things look cool for the sake of looking cool, how can Microsoft compete with that?
Slashdot Mirror
I recently rolled out a postfix+spamassassin+maildir+courier-imap installation, and I have to say I have been extremely pleased, and impressed. It took a little while to figure everything out, as I'm not very experienced in mail administration, but I got the job done.
I chose postfix over sendmail because my limited experience with sendmail, while not too bad, lead me to believe postfix would be easier to maintain.
So we're using an MTA with a proven security, reliability and performance track record, all for the cost of only my time, which was significantly less than the cost of Windows+Exchange. Shit, it took me 1 full day to set it up, Windows alone can cost more than one day's pay.
I'm just wondering why the fuck that needs to be part of the same program as the MTA in the first place. Why not use separate programs for those tasks? That would be much better for security, stability, performance, and peoples' sanity...
Seriously, insurance is anything but efficient. Indeed, it is inefficient by definition. Let me explain...
Insurance companies are in business to make money. They make money by accepting payments from customers, all the while doing their best to never do anything for said customers. Insurance companies don't bank on having to provide a service for you, it is just the opposite. That is why they create so many loopholes in your coverage to avoid having to provide service.
So, by default insurance companies choose to accept clients that they will never have to provide a service to, and those who need the service the most can't get it. That is not efficiency.
Socialized healthcare has the potential to be the absolute most efficient, because only the exact amount needed would be paid - no one needs to make a profit - and nobody would be denied healthcare. However, government tends to ruin efficiency in anything it touches, so we're fucked either way.
Cheers.
Personally, I hope Microsoft gets the patent nullified in the appeal. Of course, I'm also hoping that Al-Queda's next target is our patent office :) (yeah yeah, poor taste, I know...)
nt - to avoid the lameness filter, i will type some junk. blah blah blah. please mod the parent up.
"Such a pity, comrade."
I am surprised that Forbes employs "writers" who resort to such ridiculous ad hominem rhetoric.
Perhaps the OSS community should respond by writing articles implying that Forbes employs a bunch of fascists?
I would like to know what Mr. Daniel Lyons thinks the FSF should do when companies violate their copyrights? Should OSS authors not get the same protections under copyright that everyone else receives?
Historically, the FSF has been very cooperative when resolving infringements, simply asking for removal of the infringing code or release of the source.
I have authored several OSS projects and contributed to a few others, and if Mr. Lyons thinks I should allow large corporations to walk all over me, then I say to Mr. Lyons, "Hagel Hitler!"
Perhaps Mr. Lyons should stop pretending to be a journalist and get a marketing job for a large proprietary software firm, owned and operated by Neo-Fascists?
See, Mr. Lyons isn't the only one who can make ridiculous, insulting remarks.
More seriously, I'll bet IBM is compiling as many examples of this sort of behavior to display in court. There will be nothing left of SCO when this is done. Hopefully the SEC will properly deal with the executives, after being sued for all they're worth by the shareholders of course.
Please avoid resorting to ad hominem arguments.
But I was not trying to insult you, I was simply making a point. Your beliefs, to everyone who hasn't grown up with the Bible, ARE no different than fairy-tales. If that insults you... well, that is your problem, grow a thicker skin.
I begin to feel like you are trolling.
Trolling? I don't think anyone else is still reading this, so what would be the point. Trolling implies I am trying to provoke you, when the response I was hoping for was simply for you to understand that to most people the Bible is a work of fiction no different than old Greek mythology.
I called you deluded because you were confusing bogus science(or at least very poor science) with actual science. Real science doesn't work the way creationist scientists do, however much they claim to be doing real science. I would love to point out the holes in whatever you are personally basing your exact creationist beliefs on, but you refuse to post a link in a public forum. If you are too stubborn to post a link in a public forum, then it's not worth my time. I refuse to email you, because frankly, I prefer not to give out my email address to people I don't know, especially persons who are offended so easily.
I called your beliefs "fairy-tales", because that is what they are to me. I am sorry that offends you; would you like me to pretend otherwise so as to spare your feelings? I have no more reason to believe the Bible than I do old "fairy-tales" about Zeus sitting on Mount Olympus shooting lightning bolts from his ass. To be fair, I would probably be a little less harsh if I were dealing with someone so primitive they believed that old nonsense, but you're grown up enough to accept what other people really think about your beliefs, no?
Slashdot is one of the poorest mediums for discussing evolution and creation.
Why? Because people, not being face-to-face, are more comfortable asking hard questions? Being exposed to a lot of Christian "teaching," I find that Christians often use intimidation as a means of silencing dissent. There is no public discourse among average Christians.
I'm trying a different approach
It doesn't seem to be working well. I think it's just scaring away everyone who is interested; your approach is reminiscient of Scientology... "Let's discuss this in private and I'll let you in on the 'truth.'"
And why is that? From the perspective of anyone who didn't grow up having the Bible beat into their head, that's exactly what it is. And you call me ignorant and biased.
It shows a clear bias and ignorance
Bias? Because I don't believe what an ancient book that has been dragged through history and misinterpreted and abridged a number of times says without question, that means I'm biased?
Further, if you don't want to start a discussion on /., then why did you post on /.?
I at least tried to be somewhat friendly. You could have responded in kind and given me a link to more information, which I was at least willing to look at...
Look, I don't have any "beliefs", I simply accept what empirical evidence shows. Said evidence shows that the Earth is quite old, and humans evolved from chimps. That is the simplest, most logical explaination that is backed up by empirical evidence.
Then you creationists come along and work backwards from the Bible, add a bunch of non-sensical axioms, and come up with models of how it's possible that the Earth is only 7,000 years old...
Why not work forwards from what is observable, instead of backwards from a bunch of fairy-tales? To do otherwise is simply not science.
If you want to present your beliefs on /. in a story about science, you'll have to back up your beliefs a little better to be taken seriously.
Now, if you care to respond in the forum instead of telling me to email you, I would be willing to look at any information you have to present. Some links would be fine. I'll take a look, but I don't expect to be impressed.
OTOH, kudos to you for presenting opinions that are so unpopular around here :) If nothing else, it sparks interesting "discussion."
I don't consider myself an atheist, I simply don't "believe" in anything so I'm not sure the term fits... I don't like the label agnostic either, though.
Bleh, too much baggage with terms for us non-believers, I'll just call myself a heathen :)
What's a poor Linux user to do? :(
Unfortuneatley, Camino development seems to be very slow, otherwise it would be the best browser available for OS X.
Not that I'm knocking Safari, it's an excellent browser, in fact, it's better than vanilla Mozilla.
Windows needs a feature complete browser based on moz, but one that has a *better interface than mozilla.
Firebird is looking really good, but isn't quite there yet.
* better being defined as something people would like more, although I think it's better than most windows UIs...
Also, please explain the nearly human remains that have been found. They're more human than ape, yet not quite human, and they're 100 thousand + years old.
Then there's dinosaur remains from hundreds of millions of years ago...
Did God put all that there as a test of our "faith?"
Sorry to be an asshole, but you are indeed deluded.
Whoever modded the parent "Insightful" needs a severe beating...
I really believe SCO is going to get squashed in court, but it's always possible that our ridiculous court system will let this shit fly.
It's ridiculous that SCO is still allowed to continue this nonsense considering the obvious insider trading going on, etc.
I would really like to see a Linux port, is anyone working on it yet? :)
With Apple, Jobs has always tried to be cool. From the early stages, Jobs wanted his products to look cool. Jobs actually likes making things look cool for the sake of looking cool, how can Microsoft compete with that?