It's a bit player in a competitive market. Microsoft has not leveraged Windows Phone 8 to better integrate with Windows business technologies (I'm talking Active Directory and Group Policies), and since both iOS and Android support ActiveSync for Exchange connectivity, it's not as if Microsoft is going to improve on that.
So I'd say the odds are stacked against Microsoft. It's about three years too late to the party, and not leveraging its phone OS with other Microsoft products means there is absolutely no reason for a business customer like myself to give a damn about it.
Rush has one of the best drummers in rock history, and a bass player that is considered by many to certainly be in the top ten or twenty. It's hard to say Rush does not have musical talent, even if the music they make isn't to your liking.
And a big "Fuck you" to you pal. Name the number of bands who have been around for almost forty years, that have 20 studio albums under the belt, sell out pretty much every tour they've done since the late 1970s, and the 20th album is a commercial and critical success. Oh, and they also have the guy who is pretty much considered the best rock drummer of them all.
No one says you have to like Rush, or any other band, but you remind me of those arrogant holier-than-thou types who go "The Beatles were talentless hacks."
And if you're being run out of town by angry folk with pitchforks, tar and feathers?
No liberty is absolute, not even speech. Some lies have disastrous, possibly even catastrophic consequences, and your scenario seems to presume you would have the liberty to even do what you claim. In all likelihood you would be investigated, your reputation destroyed even when they inevitably determine your innocence. Look at what happens when school teachers are accused of it. Even when cleared, they frequently lose their careers due to the stigma.
Defamation laws do not just exist for the rich, they exist so that you have a lawful remedy when someone seeks to destroy your reputation.
Currently I'm using Linux KVM with the libvirt libraries. There are limitations, such as there is no simple way to move images between servers, but all in all it works well.
And in other news, semi-retarded politician proposes idiotic and unenforceable law to minor problem. And in other news, we talk with King Canute about his upcoming attempt to hold back the tide.
To some extent virtualization has done away with even this. Frankly, I doubt I will ever run a server that isn't a guest, unless I'm looking at something like a dedicated backup server (which I have right now) or some very high capacity database server (for my business's needs, I can't see that happening any time in the near future). So for most of my needs, I'd be buying something good RAID, fast drives, lots of RAM and CPU that I can install VMWare or Debian with KVM or Xen support on (running KVM right now). The guests won't know the difference between Dell, HP or something I put together on my own, In the medium term, I'm looking at two NASs, one primary, one failover, and the virtualization server can do it that way.
As much as anything, I think virtualization is murdering the market. I bought a $3000 server that hosts six VM guests; two Windows installs (one a DC, one an Exchange server) and four Linux. A couple of years ago, I would have needed at least three servers to do it (one for each Windows install) and one Linux. Admittedly they wouldn't have to have the balls that the new server has, but still, I think we'd be talking about $4000 to $6000 in hardware. Even worse, these are all just basically images sitting on hard drives, so they can essentially be perpetual. Two or three years, when the current server dies or I decide I need more juice, just move the VM images over and away I go, and with hardware prices the way they are, I doubt the next generation server will cost any more than the one I have now, and maybe even less.
Factor in the cloud, VPS hosting and so on, the demand for servers will inevitably drop.
Because Tardigrades, genetically and morphologically, fall into the twin nested hierarchy of life on Earth; just like bananas, hyenas, humans, etc. If Tardigrades are from space, then everything is from space.
What's needed is guns to the heads of the CEOs, Boards of Directors and top shareholders, with a promise that if such spills are not completely resolved in five years entirely at the company's cost, most assuredly the triggers will be pulled.
I doubt you would need any more regulation than that.
What does the total amount of taxes have to do with anything? One should expect as an economy grows that taxes will increase. After all, isn't that the whole underlying notion behind trickle-down economics?
When that paving truck comes down your street, or a hospital is built, or a government meat inspector is hired, or a hurricane tracking center is built, you're trying to tell us that taxes are just a pure negative drag on the economy?
You have created this hopelessly oversimplified economic view, which is why I call Libertarian economics a sort of religious faith (my reference to the Temple of the Unseen Hand Of The Unregulated Free Market). The real world is a complex place, and simplistic economic theories, while perhaps persuasive precisely because they are easily graspable, ultimately are shit poor if applied. I'd place Libertarian Free Market economics on the same level as various forms of anarchistic economics (some economists basically consider Libertarian economics to be a form of economic anarchism). It sounds lovely that you could achieve some sort of equilibrium simply by relying on free market competition, but reality is significantly messier, and castrating the government's, and really, society's ability to moderate market behaviors.
I don't think Standard Oil got monstrous because of any sort of government interference. Government interference is what brought it down to size. Simply put, you cannot demonstrate anywhere at any time where a market has behaved in the way you claim, and the historical evidence suggests that unregulated markets tend towards very large conglomerates, or towards large competitors who will create what amounts to a treaty to divvy the market up (what we like to call collusion). That's why the Sherman Act and various other related acts through the industrialized world were created to begin with, because left to their own devices, large interests became ever larger.
If you can show me any example of a market producing the phenomenon you claim above, I would gladly consider it.
Could you point me to any historical example of a society that has ever functioned on Libertarian principles? Even the Jeffersonian-Madisonian ideal state, while perhaps invoking some Libertarian principles, certainly was not Libertarian in application. As I said elsewhere, the Founding Fathers were not against taxes, they were against taxes being imposed without representation. They certainly were not advocating "An every man for himself" kind of society.
You don't get a free pass on Libertarianism just because you say "Well, the social safety net will be replaced by charity." I don't think there is anyone in their right mind who believes that charity is some sort of suitable replacement. You have decided that taxation is theft, even where that taxation is formulated by a government for the people, of the people and by the people, so you're left with pat answers that really do amount to Qu'ils mangent de la brioche.
Well, Mr. Moderator Guy, please explain why I am an idiot with a clue. Go into detail, please. You've called me an idiot, but apparently you don't have the brains to actually explain why you modded me down (not that it mattered, apparently four other fellow idiots of mine think differently).
Here's your big chance, boy-o. Explain your moderation.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a bit player in a competitive market. Microsoft has not leveraged Windows Phone 8 to better integrate with Windows business technologies (I'm talking Active Directory and Group Policies), and since both iOS and Android support ActiveSync for Exchange connectivity, it's not as if Microsoft is going to improve on that.
So I'd say the odds are stacked against Microsoft. It's about three years too late to the party, and not leveraging its phone OS with other Microsoft products means there is absolutely no reason for a business customer like myself to give a damn about it.
Rush has one of the best drummers in rock history, and a bass player that is considered by many to certainly be in the top ten or twenty. It's hard to say Rush does not have musical talent, even if the music they make isn't to your liking.
And I would, if my ISP had ipv6 addresses available.
And a big "Fuck you" to you pal. Name the number of bands who have been around for almost forty years, that have 20 studio albums under the belt, sell out pretty much every tour they've done since the late 1970s, and the 20th album is a commercial and critical success. Oh, and they also have the guy who is pretty much considered the best rock drummer of them all.
No one says you have to like Rush, or any other band, but you remind me of those arrogant holier-than-thou types who go "The Beatles were talentless hacks."
And if you're being run out of town by angry folk with pitchforks, tar and feathers?
No liberty is absolute, not even speech. Some lies have disastrous, possibly even catastrophic consequences, and your scenario seems to presume you would have the liberty to even do what you claim. In all likelihood you would be investigated, your reputation destroyed even when they inevitably determine your innocence. Look at what happens when school teachers are accused of it. Even when cleared, they frequently lose their careers due to the stigma.
Defamation laws do not just exist for the rich, they exist so that you have a lawful remedy when someone seeks to destroy your reputation.
Currently I'm using Linux KVM with the libvirt libraries. There are limitations, such as there is no simple way to move images between servers, but all in all it works well.
So If I go to your neighbors and tell them you're a pedophile, you don't think there should be legal remedy?
If you want to actually have free speech, you have to have the good with the bad.
And in other news, semi-retarded politician proposes idiotic and unenforceable law to minor problem. And in other news, we talk with King Canute about his upcoming attempt to hold back the tide.
To some extent virtualization has done away with even this. Frankly, I doubt I will ever run a server that isn't a guest, unless I'm looking at something like a dedicated backup server (which I have right now) or some very high capacity database server (for my business's needs, I can't see that happening any time in the near future). So for most of my needs, I'd be buying something good RAID, fast drives, lots of RAM and CPU that I can install VMWare or Debian with KVM or Xen support on (running KVM right now). The guests won't know the difference between Dell, HP or something I put together on my own, In the medium term, I'm looking at two NASs, one primary, one failover, and the virtualization server can do it that way.
I'm having a hard time putting "software RAID" and "reliable" in the same sentence.
As much as anything, I think virtualization is murdering the market. I bought a $3000 server that hosts six VM guests; two Windows installs (one a DC, one an Exchange server) and four Linux. A couple of years ago, I would have needed at least three servers to do it (one for each Windows install) and one Linux. Admittedly they wouldn't have to have the balls that the new server has, but still, I think we'd be talking about $4000 to $6000 in hardware. Even worse, these are all just basically images sitting on hard drives, so they can essentially be perpetual. Two or three years, when the current server dies or I decide I need more juice, just move the VM images over and away I go, and with hardware prices the way they are, I doubt the next generation server will cost any more than the one I have now, and maybe even less.
Factor in the cloud, VPS hosting and so on, the demand for servers will inevitably drop.
It would be like insisting your niece, even after genetic tests shows her affinity to you, is not your niece at all and is in fact not even human.
Because Tardigrades, genetically and morphologically, fall into the twin nested hierarchy of life on Earth; just like bananas, hyenas, humans, etc. If Tardigrades are from space, then everything is from space.
I'll repeat, the guy is a fucking retard.
What's needed is guns to the heads of the CEOs, Boards of Directors and top shareholders, with a promise that if such spills are not completely resolved in five years entirely at the company's cost, most assuredly the triggers will be pulled.
I doubt you would need any more regulation than that.
40% of the oil remains in the gulf. Or, to put it more simply, you're a fucking retard.
Shouldn't "amateur tardigrade enthusiast Mike Shaw" read "complete fucking moron Mike Shaw"?
What does the total amount of taxes have to do with anything? One should expect as an economy grows that taxes will increase. After all, isn't that the whole underlying notion behind trickle-down economics?
When that paving truck comes down your street, or a hospital is built, or a government meat inspector is hired, or a hurricane tracking center is built, you're trying to tell us that taxes are just a pure negative drag on the economy?
You have created this hopelessly oversimplified economic view, which is why I call Libertarian economics a sort of religious faith (my reference to the Temple of the Unseen Hand Of The Unregulated Free Market). The real world is a complex place, and simplistic economic theories, while perhaps persuasive precisely because they are easily graspable, ultimately are shit poor if applied. I'd place Libertarian Free Market economics on the same level as various forms of anarchistic economics (some economists basically consider Libertarian economics to be a form of economic anarchism). It sounds lovely that you could achieve some sort of equilibrium simply by relying on free market competition, but reality is significantly messier, and castrating the government's, and really, society's ability to moderate market behaviors.
I don't think Standard Oil got monstrous because of any sort of government interference. Government interference is what brought it down to size. Simply put, you cannot demonstrate anywhere at any time where a market has behaved in the way you claim, and the historical evidence suggests that unregulated markets tend towards very large conglomerates, or towards large competitors who will create what amounts to a treaty to divvy the market up (what we like to call collusion). That's why the Sherman Act and various other related acts through the industrialized world were created to begin with, because left to their own devices, large interests became ever larger.
If you can show me any example of a market producing the phenomenon you claim above, I would gladly consider it.
Could you point me to any historical example of a society that has ever functioned on Libertarian principles? Even the Jeffersonian-Madisonian ideal state, while perhaps invoking some Libertarian principles, certainly was not Libertarian in application. As I said elsewhere, the Founding Fathers were not against taxes, they were against taxes being imposed without representation. They certainly were not advocating "An every man for himself" kind of society.
You don't get a free pass on Libertarianism just because you say "Well, the social safety net will be replaced by charity." I don't think there is anyone in their right mind who believes that charity is some sort of suitable replacement. You have decided that taxation is theft, even where that taxation is formulated by a government for the people, of the people and by the people, so you're left with pat answers that really do amount to Qu'ils mangent de la brioche.
What are you talking about? Taxes were much higher fifty years ago.
Repeat after me; we are not sociopaths, we live in a society that has afforded us great freedoms and we have various obligations to it.
The Founding Fathers were not against taxes, but against taxation without representation.
Translation: I can't.
How did you get your mod points? Regurgitating anti-Microsoft, anti-Apple and anti-Gnome 3 posts, no doubt.
Well, Mr. Moderator Guy, please explain why I am an idiot with a clue. Go into detail, please. You've called me an idiot, but apparently you don't have the brains to actually explain why you modded me down (not that it mattered, apparently four other fellow idiots of mine think differently).
Here's your big chance, boy-o. Explain your moderation.
Lemme guess. Ron Paul 2012 right?