The innovations from Linux don't come from widespread appeal and revolutionary ideas; usually it comes from old-fashioned principles that are being ignored. Windows Server for years was unable to be administered well from the command line, whereas with linux servers the command line was the only way to administer it.
...
Windows goes for flash over performance, Linux makes sure to do both.
Uh, if Linux actually made sure to do both flash and performance you would be able to administer it from the command line and the GUI.
It was my year for Linux on the laptop too, after a piece of hardware in my lappy broke and I couldn't get Windows XP to install. I like Linux alot for alot of reasons, but there are still some aspects to it that are downright infuriating.
Hey, Ubuntu, you haven't quite figured out a way sensibly handle legacy software that requires root permissions. Your "Cancel or Allow"esque abomination works ok for GUI stuff that is built to incorperate it, but it breaks so many apps that I have already learned to hate it.
So even Ubuntu, imo the best distro out there is still gimped by outmoded thinking that only covers their own smaller world. Don't even get me started on how unnecessarily hard it is to get rpm packages to work. Yes, you can do it an it's not too hard but I see 8 extra steps that should never have been necessary.
Sigh.. another year where Linux is almost ready for the desktop.
That may work on flights within the U.S. but don't try it on international flights.
My father abbreviated his name from Joseph to Joe, which is what he goes by, when he booked a flight to Europe. Everything was fine until we tried to come back in to the United States. At passport control he was escorted to a separate room where he couldn't take cell phone calls - but could call people from a tapped phone.
He waited in line there for over 2 hours to explain that Joe is the same name as Joseph.
So once again, regulation is the problem. Where have we heard that before?
I wonder what the health care equivalent of a deceptively marketed adjustable rate mortgage that the "bank" knows (or should know) the borrower can not afford, but the borrower is tricked in to blieving he can afford?
It's an individual health "care" plan that costs a fortune and doesn't cover the pre-existing conditions that you need it for. This is the only option for many people. No health care company wants to offer the coverage/price that these people need to survive because it would cost them money.
And your solution is to remove barriers of competition? Nobody wants to insure these people, but you think if a few rugulations I've never heard of were overturned these people would magically get treatment?
It's not going to happen. What you have offered is a non-solution that almost sounds like a solution. It is the standard politically correct way of obfuscating the monst important element of the current system:
At the end of the day, if you can't pay for your treatment, you are left to die.
"Or, if such a treatment does not exist they can just let the illness kill them. Why do you tip-toe around that?"
I didn't. I covered that in the very next sentence, which you conveniently disregarded.......
the next sentance being...
If the government is preventing less expensive treatments from being available to the public (which is at the root of your concern), then such laws should be overturned, allowing less expensive treatments to exist.
Where in that sentance did you say that you would rather let people die of treatable illness than chip in for their treatment? It seems to me to be some nonsensical scheme whereby the government can just will cheaper healthcare in to existance. What laws are you talking about overturning? How would they even make a dent in real health care costs? Are you fucking nuts??
OK, so say it with me: "I am purposely ignoring part of your argument."
That part of your argument is just so nonsensical that it is not worth my time to argue with it. I'm just going to ignore it.
Who is "bankrupting" who? If people opt for expensive treatments, then they should pay for that treatment. Or, if they can't afford it, they should choose a less expensive treatment.
Or, if such a treatment does not exist they can just let the illness kill them. Why do you tip-toe around that? I could almost understand your position if you would just tell it like it is. Say it with me:
I would rather watch someone die of a treatable illness than to chip in for their treatment.
I'm not even going to get in to the tortured logic that somehow equates economy stimulating rebate checks for people to printing money, but sees printing money to pay for a war we can not afford as "putting money in the system".
1) And how exactly is printing more money (in the form of "tax rebate" checks funded through deficit spending) going to increase the value of the dollar? (Source) Doesn't it do the exact opposite?
A tax rebate check is only printed money if you are running deficits like we are under Republican rule, not if you have a surplusses like we had by the time Bill Clinton left office.
Not only that, but consider the difference between a one time stimulous check, and an occupation of a foreign country that costs us $341 Million per day and has left us less safe. That is $341 Million of printed money per day. Convenient you would forget about that
4) And Obama would replace that number with the "percentage of Americans completely losing their property rights to socialism", which of course would be 100%. McCain is of course doing the same thing, though possibly to a lesser degree (or maybe he's just better at hiding it).
The only alternative to letting people bankrupt themselves until they die broke, their illness untreated is to scare people with the idea of socialism. If you want to pay through the nose for health "coverage" that specifically excludes the pre-existing conditions you need it for, I support your right to do that.
It is immoral to bankrupt people for getting sick and any society that has the ability to prevent this has a moral duty to. All other industrialized nations provide a health care system to their citizens that actually treats their conditions rather than just extracting as much money while providing as little healthcare as possible.
5) have no sympathy for people who sign contracts without reading them, nor for banks that associate with such shady sources. Companies and individuals that purposely do not investigate the risk of such endeavors will fall.
Falling home prices hurt everyone, not just people who took out bad loans - often while being tricked in to thinking they were agreeing to different terms. If you need to move for a job and find that your home is now worth significantly less than you paid for it, you are screwed.
At that point do you give thanks to a regulatory system that let some slimey, deceptive, piece of shit make a buck at everyone else's expense?
A startup company I used to work for hosted their servers at The Planet. I took a tour of The Planet's server room back when I was working for that company. It's a pretty cool place. I wonder what it's like after an explosion.
I like how there is a cut up pice of printer paper with larger labels around the buttons.
That tells me that somebody looked at the Space Shuttle self destruct buttons and said, "You know this 'test' button looks alot like the 'destruct' button. We should probably do something about that."
C# allows for SQL parameters, which render sql injection all but impossible in most cases. It doesn't require that you use them, but makes them painfully easy to use.
By the way I have been forced to use a C# framework that was so jacked up that I ended up with no choice but to allow sql injection vulnerabilities. I got around this by making sure that every time I had to do that I would make sure that the input came from server side code which read an "int" and then converted it to a string to build the sql injection vulnerable command.
Par for the course, this framework was forced down my throat by someone with more seniority but far less common sense and skill.
You can tell that Apple is still the same company they have always been when they are patenting functionality that is already on most modern cell phones and is noticably absent from the iPhone.
So not only is Apple late bringing this feature to market, but they are trying to patent something which has prior art in products which are already competing against their own.
I do already have GPS but I really hope the next iPhone has it and is available soon. If the first version had GPS I would already own an iPhone and I probably wouldn't have a normal suction cup GPS. I would instead be suction cupping my iPhone to the windshield.
Now that I have a good car GPS system to save me from getting lost all the time, I want one in my pocket. I can think of a few times when I have been out in a city on foot, and had to worry about getting lost. It would have been nice to have GPS in my pocket whith the confidence that I would never get lost again. Knowing that you will never get lost makes you free to explore. This is as true in a car as on foot.
I think the main reason that the iPhone doesn't have GPS is that it is a tough feature to really get right. All the GPS systems I have owned have had their flaws. I can understand why you wouldn't want to introduce all that complexity and accompanying scrutiny when you are trying to get an already compelling (to some people) product out the door. I'm still basing my next cell phone purchase on GPS capabilities.
It is obvious that there is room for a larger screen on the Eee PC that wouldn't make it any bigger. So if you want to beat the Eee PC, just make the exact same screen with a screen that is as big as it can be.
While I do not have a plan for patent reform yet, I would want to work with Congress to make sure that the US patent system encourages and rewards innovation. Making sure the patent system is fair to small business and entrepreneurs, rewards the actual inventors of a product, and does not tilt the playing field to large corporations will be a priority in my administration's approach to patent law.
Are you really going to denegrate a question which caused Ron Paul to take a position on an issue that he previously had no position on?
Every time I hear that a tax cut will actually produce something I can't help but roll my eyes.
Just imagine what would have happened if we had tried to go to the moon with tax breaks and encouragement. We would have been laughed out of the space race.
I'm 2 years out of College and I regularly write code that is dramatically better than what is produced by the people around me, who have many years of experience.
I am worth more money than someone who has been around longer because what I produce is worth more than what they produce.
It's really simple: Look at my code. Look at their code. Pay me more.
This is definately one of the most informative posts I have read all day. You must have played a dizzying amount of games this year to come up with the conclusion that Super Mario Bros. 3 is the best game ever.
Your backup choice for Game of the Year is equally inspired. Whatever Wii game you played at the mall is an unforgetable classic that will be played for years to come.
My choice for Game of the Year is Super Mario Galaxy. The number of mindblowingly cool levels and awesome game play put this game in a class of its own.
You can specify the redering method in the header of html.
In other words, the user doesn't have to do anything. The web developer can gleefully tell Internet Explorer that he wants his webpage rendered correctly for a change.
Slashdot Mirror
The innovations from Linux don't come from widespread appeal and revolutionary ideas; usually it comes from old-fashioned principles that are being ignored. Windows Server for years was unable to be administered well from the command line, whereas with linux servers the command line was the only way to administer it.
...
Windows goes for flash over performance, Linux makes sure to do both.
Uh, if Linux actually made sure to do both flash and performance you would be able to administer it from the command line and the GUI.
It was my year for Linux on the laptop too, after a piece of hardware in my lappy broke and I couldn't get Windows XP to install. I like Linux alot for alot of reasons, but there are still some aspects to it that are downright infuriating.
Hey, Ubuntu, you haven't quite figured out a way sensibly handle legacy software that requires root permissions. Your "Cancel or Allow"esque abomination works ok for GUI stuff that is built to incorperate it, but it breaks so many apps that I have already learned to hate it.
So even Ubuntu, imo the best distro out there is still gimped by outmoded thinking that only covers their own smaller world. Don't even get me started on how unnecessarily hard it is to get rpm packages to work. Yes, you can do it an it's not too hard but I see 8 extra steps that should never have been necessary.
Sigh.. another year where Linux is almost ready for the desktop.
We are within 2 days of making the Republican party pay for it's failure, dishonorable behavior, and fraud.
Can't wait!
I think we can all agree that what we need more OMG Panties.
That may work on flights within the U.S. but don't try it on international flights.
My father abbreviated his name from Joseph to Joe, which is what he goes by, when he booked a flight to Europe. Everything was fine until we tried to come back in to the United States. At passport control he was escorted to a separate room where he couldn't take cell phone calls - but could call people from a tapped phone.
He waited in line there for over 2 hours to explain that Joe is the same name as Joseph.
What is the best way to falsify and then pass on phoney intelligence to fool the country in to supporting a war for oil?
Plese give specific ways to manipulate government agencies in pursuit of this goal.
George W Bush used the National Intelligence Estimate to great effect, but is that still the best tool for the job?
So once again, regulation is the problem. Where have we heard that before?
I wonder what the health care equivalent of a deceptively marketed adjustable rate mortgage that the "bank" knows (or should know) the borrower can not afford, but the borrower is tricked in to blieving he can afford?
It's an individual health "care" plan that costs a fortune and doesn't cover the pre-existing conditions that you need it for. This is the only option for many people. No health care company wants to offer the coverage/price that these people need to survive because it would cost them money.
And your solution is to remove barriers of competition? Nobody wants to insure these people, but you think if a few rugulations I've never heard of were overturned these people would magically get treatment?
It's not going to happen. What you have offered is a non-solution that almost sounds like a solution. It is the standard politically correct way of obfuscating the monst important element of the current system:
At the end of the day, if you can't pay for your treatment, you are left to die.
"Or, if such a treatment does not exist they can just let the illness kill them. Why do you tip-toe around that?"
I didn't. I covered that in the very next sentence, which you conveniently disregarded.......
the next sentance being...
If the government is preventing less expensive treatments from being available to the public (which is at the root of your concern), then such laws should be overturned, allowing less expensive treatments to exist.
Where in that sentance did you say that you would rather let people die of treatable illness than chip in for their treatment? It seems to me to be some nonsensical scheme whereby the government can just will cheaper healthcare in to existance. What laws are you talking about overturning? How would they even make a dent in real health care costs? Are you fucking nuts??
OK, so say it with me: "I am purposely ignoring part of your argument."
That part of your argument is just so nonsensical that it is not worth my time to argue with it. I'm just going to ignore it.
Who is "bankrupting" who? If people opt for expensive treatments, then they should pay for that treatment. Or, if they can't afford it, they should choose a less expensive treatment.
Or, if such a treatment does not exist they can just let the illness kill them. Why do you tip-toe around that? I could almost understand your position if you would just tell it like it is. Say it with me:
I would rather watch someone die of a treatable illness than to chip in for their treatment.
I'm not even going to get in to the tortured logic that somehow equates economy stimulating rebate checks for people to printing money, but sees printing money to pay for a war we can not afford as "putting money in the system".
1) And how exactly is printing more money (in the form of "tax rebate" checks funded through deficit spending) going to increase the value of the dollar? (Source) Doesn't it do the exact opposite? A tax rebate check is only printed money if you are running deficits like we are under Republican rule, not if you have a surplusses like we had by the time Bill Clinton left office.
Not only that, but consider the difference between a one time stimulous check, and an occupation of a foreign country that costs us $341 Million per day and has left us less safe. That is $341 Million of printed money per day. Convenient you would forget about that
4) And Obama would replace that number with the "percentage of Americans completely losing their property rights to socialism", which of course would be 100%. McCain is of course doing the same thing, though possibly to a lesser degree (or maybe he's just better at hiding it).
The only alternative to letting people bankrupt themselves until they die broke, their illness untreated is to scare people with the idea of socialism. If you want to pay through the nose for health "coverage" that specifically excludes the pre-existing conditions you need it for, I support your right to do that.
It is immoral to bankrupt people for getting sick and any society that has the ability to prevent this has a moral duty to. All other industrialized nations provide a health care system to their citizens that actually treats their conditions rather than just extracting as much money while providing as little healthcare as possible.
5) have no sympathy for people who sign contracts without reading them, nor for banks that associate with such shady sources. Companies and individuals that purposely do not investigate the risk of such endeavors will fall.
Falling home prices hurt everyone, not just people who took out bad loans - often while being tricked in to thinking they were agreeing to different terms. If you need to move for a job and find that your home is now worth significantly less than you paid for it, you are screwed.
At that point do you give thanks to a regulatory system that let some slimey, deceptive, piece of shit make a buck at everyone else's expense?
Does your E-Vote equipment produce a voter verifieable paper trail?
If it doesn't have a paper trail, ask yourself why.
A startup company I used to work for hosted their servers at The Planet. I took a tour of The Planet's server room back when I was working for that company. It's a pretty cool place. I wonder what it's like after an explosion.
I like how there is a cut up pice of printer paper with larger labels around the buttons.
That tells me that somebody looked at the Space Shuttle self destruct buttons and said, "You know this 'test' button looks alot like the 'destruct' button. We should probably do something about that."
C# allows for SQL parameters, which render sql injection all but impossible in most cases. It doesn't require that you use them, but makes them painfully easy to use.
By the way I have been forced to use a C# framework that was so jacked up that I ended up with no choice but to allow sql injection vulnerabilities. I got around this by making sure that every time I had to do that I would make sure that the input came from server side code which read an "int" and then converted it to a string to build the sql injection vulnerable command.
Par for the course, this framework was forced down my throat by someone with more seniority but far less common sense and skill.
You can tell that Apple is still the same company they have always been when they are patenting functionality that is already on most modern cell phones and is noticably absent from the iPhone.
So not only is Apple late bringing this feature to market, but they are trying to patent something which has prior art in products which are already competing against their own.
Bravo Steve Jobs!
*slow hand clap*
So you know how to get from 2500 Bumblefuck Dr to 234 Martin Luther King Blvd?
No? Well that's ok because you have a big ass folded map in your pocket.
I do already have GPS but I really hope the next iPhone has it and is available soon. If the first version had GPS I would already own an iPhone and I probably wouldn't have a normal suction cup GPS. I would instead be suction cupping my iPhone to the windshield.
Now that I have a good car GPS system to save me from getting lost all the time, I want one in my pocket. I can think of a few times when I have been out in a city on foot, and had to worry about getting lost. It would have been nice to have GPS in my pocket whith the confidence that I would never get lost again. Knowing that you will never get lost makes you free to explore. This is as true in a car as on foot.
I think the main reason that the iPhone doesn't have GPS is that it is a tough feature to really get right. All the GPS systems I have owned have had their flaws. I can understand why you wouldn't want to introduce all that complexity and accompanying scrutiny when you are trying to get an already compelling (to some people) product out the door. I'm still basing my next cell phone purchase on GPS capabilities.
It is obvious that there is room for a larger screen on the Eee PC that wouldn't make it any bigger. So if you want to beat the Eee PC, just make the exact same screen with a screen that is as big as it can be.
I should really charge a consulting fee.
This is Apple we're dealing with here. They won't even let you build your own computer even though OS X runs on x86.
For all the crap Microsoft gets for its tactics, it should be clear from actions like this that Apple is the real villain.
Did I just convince Ron Paul of the need for patent reform?
While I do not have a plan for patent reform yet, I would want to work with Congress to make sure that the US patent system encourages and rewards innovation. Making sure the patent system is fair to small business and entrepreneurs, rewards the actual inventors of a product, and does not tilt the playing field to large corporations will be a priority in my administration's approach to patent law.
Are you really going to denegrate a question which caused Ron Paul to take a position on an issue that he previously had no position on?
Every time I hear that a tax cut will actually produce something I can't help but roll my eyes.
Just imagine what would have happened if we had tried to go to the moon with tax breaks and encouragement. We would have been laughed out of the space race.
I'm 2 years out of College and I regularly write code that is dramatically better than what is produced by the people around me, who have many years of experience.
I am worth more money than someone who has been around longer because what I produce is worth more than what they produce.
It's really simple: Look at my code. Look at their code. Pay me more.
First of all, great analysis.
This is definately one of the most informative posts I have read all day. You must have played a dizzying amount of games this year to come up with the conclusion that Super Mario Bros. 3 is the best game ever.
Your backup choice for Game of the Year is equally inspired. Whatever Wii game you played at the mall is an unforgetable classic that will be played for years to come.
My choice for Game of the Year is Super Mario Galaxy. The number of mindblowingly cool levels and awesome game play put this game in a class of its own.
You can specify the redering method in the header of html.
In other words, the user doesn't have to do anything. The web developer can gleefully tell Internet Explorer that he wants his webpage rendered correctly for a change.
Is it ok if I use my free speach rights to complain about corruption?
May I vote against politicans who uplhold the system of bribes for laws?
Oh yeah, that's right. I can. Fuck off.