The advantage with a bus is that its much easier to add new stops and routes. You only have to build up the charging station, whereas with a trolley, one has to tear up the road, put in tracks, and build stations.
Yeah, that could work, but I don't think it'd be as seamless as the OP wants. The user would still have to select which db file to use. Still, its a solution.
Well, that runs into the problem the OP has discussed. If the data is present as a network share, it'd take slocate forever to index the data on the remote server. Basically, he or she wants a way to run slocate once on the server and have that index file be merged with all of the individual desktops. That way, each desktop wouldn't have to go through the effort of duplicating work.
It seems that the parent wants to merge a remote index with his desktop search so that he doesn't have to do this. Also, wouldn't giving each desktop its own copy of the data defeat the purpose of having a shared server?
There is nothing government can accomplish that can't be done better by private entities subject to healthy free market pressures.
Even the most die-hard supporters of Hayek would disagree with you there. Any sort of good or service that suffers from positive externalities will be a good candidate for government support. For example, take roads. We realize that there are positive externalities from having a free flow of goods and services. This externality would largely disappear if roads were privatized, because the tolls would be high enough to impose a significant burden on new ventures. Therefore, the government builds the roads, because the benefits to society from having free roads outweighs the costs.
The distinction between negative and positive rights is an entirely false one. All rights are positive rights. You say that you have the right to free speech. If I disagree and punch you in the face, you don't have any ability to demand legal recourse without the infrastructure of the legal system. Guess what? The legal system is staffed by people. So, for any negative right that requires enforcement (i.e. all negative rights) there needs to be a system that enforces those rights. That system needs to be staffed by people. By your logic, every judge, attorney, and police officer is a "slave", since their jobs include enforcing the rights of others.
The social contract is not an unchangeable, inviolable institution. You are free to work within the democratic system to try to get said social contract changed. This is what differentiates the social contract from private contracts. Private contracts normally cannot be changed after they are signed.
Well, the Therac-20 "worked fine" in the sense that the mechanical limit on the device prevented the software from delivering lethal doses. It doesn't mean that the Therac-20 was a "good" machine in any sense of the word.
I thought that cars were designed to protect against head-on collisions because head-on collisions involve more energy, and are easier to guard against (e.g. you have more room for crumple zones and the like). It doesn't necessarily mean that head-on collisions are more likely. In fact, I'd say that average collision isn't a head-on one, simply because the driver is likely to see the obstacle approaching and swerve to avoid it.
Humans can respond very well when the system they're dealing with gives them nearly instant feedback about what they're doing. To use your example, a driver can correct a skid because there are specific inputs that the car gives in real time when goes into a skid (namely, the steering becomes loose, and the brakes seem to become "grabby"). When the system doesn't give immediate, intuitive responses (like this CT scanner, the Therac 25, or the 3 Mile Island control system), knowing the underlying principles of the device becomes crucial. If one has a firm grasp of the principles of the device's operation, he or she can predict the output for a given input, rather than blindly trying various combinations of settings hoping to discover one that solves the problem.
My question is, why is that perceived as a "problem"? Since when was it a natural law for every profession to have the same gender balance as society at large? As long as no one is coercing a person into choosing one path over another, what's the issue?
If I haven't seen it, and no around me has seen it, isn't the onus on you to give some more proof other than, "Really, guys! Sexism in OSS is real!" I mean, to say you have to show some causal relationship between OSS "culture" (however you measure it) and sexism. Simply saying that the number of women who work on open source projects is less than the number of women working on proprietary projects isn't enough, for that is correlation, not causation.
You hear the same sort of rhetoric about other group/profession combinations. The other day, I was hearing a person rant about how men were underrepresented in nursing. When did it become mandatory for every profession to have perfect gender balance?
Perhaps women just don't like spending hours and hours of their free time on a project for little monetary gain. In other words, perhaps they aren't as likely to be chumps compared to men.:)
That only works if the data you've got isn't protected by a law like HIPPA or somesuch. In that case, you could find yourself in big trouble for letting private data off your secure production server.
Anyone can arise to compete with a corporation, even a monopoly.
The definition of a monopoly is a corporation with the ability to set prices in a way that competitors are driven out of business. So, a monopolistic corporation can drive off competition as effectively as a government. It might take a little longer, and there might be fewer guns involved, but the end result would be the same.
A private company ignores its customers at its peril.
Only when that corporation has competition. If I have a monopoly on a good that has a highly inelastic demand curve (e.g. food, communications, heating oil, medicine, etc.) I can be as big of a jerk to my customers, and they'll have no choice but to take it. In fact, I can be an even bigger jerk than the government, because, in the case of the government, the people have the choice of voting me out when my term ends. In the case of a corporation, there's no such recourse. Heck, a corporation doesn't even have to accept petitions from its citizens, which is something that the US government is constitutionally required to do.
There are a few idiots in every country, but claiming that the entire nation is racist is more than a bit hypocritical.
Well, I used to think so, but then I read this. At the very least, the government believes the majority of citizens will support such a plan. If the government is correct, then the grandparent's point may very well be correct.
Of course, given the recent unpopularity of the Labour government, this seems like a half-cocked plan designed to win supporters amongst the BNP faction, rather than a serious proposal.
Geeks going to LAN parties, of course. What's the point of buying a case like this, if you can't take it around and show to all your (now green with envy) friends?
Not necessarily. If the user is running the Chrome plugin inside IE, then its quite possible that IE's reduced permission mode would thwart an attack that was relying on Chrome running with normal privileges.
The problem with UI work is that its fundamentally tedious in a way that coding isn't. When one is coding, they're working on adding new functionality or fixing something that's pretty obviously broken. UI isn't like that. Good UI design involves carefully and incrementally changing the interface so that it fits and goes well together. Its very fine-grained work, and often takes as much time as putting together the major bits of functionality.
UI is like the fine sanding and polishing that distinguishes fine furniture from something that was thrown together from scraps. No one enjoys those final hours of polishing. But, a master carpenter knows that if he does not sand and polish the piece, no one will be able to appreciate its craftsmanship. Similarly, I posit that it is impossible to admire good code without a good UI.
On the other hand, this is why open source software always tends to lag in terms of user interfaces. The developers work on the UI to the point where its usable, but, without management telling them to keep improving it, the UI tends to get stuck at that barely usable stage for a long time.
I mean, look at Linux window managers. Both Gnome and KDE were pretty much stuck on the usability front until Canonical brought money and focus to the task of UI design.
Precisely. The grandparent is forgetting that, in the proprietary world, the scenario you described can't happen. I can't go to my boss and tell him, "Screw this, I'm going to spend the next month refactoring our messy code, rather than adding new functionality." However, I can do that in an open-source project.
Slashdot Mirror
The advantage with a bus is that its much easier to add new stops and routes. You only have to build up the charging station, whereas with a trolley, one has to tear up the road, put in tracks, and build stations.
Disk space is cheap when you're outfitting a single server. Outfitting even ten workstations with the same amount of disk can become quite expensive.
Yeah, that could work, but I don't think it'd be as seamless as the OP wants. The user would still have to select which db file to use. Still, its a solution.
Well, that runs into the problem the OP has discussed. If the data is present as a network share, it'd take slocate forever to index the data on the remote server. Basically, he or she wants a way to run slocate once on the server and have that index file be merged with all of the individual desktops. That way, each desktop wouldn't have to go through the effort of duplicating work.
It seems that the parent wants to merge a remote index with his desktop search so that he doesn't have to do this. Also, wouldn't giving each desktop its own copy of the data defeat the purpose of having a shared server?
There is nothing government can accomplish that can't be done better by private entities subject to healthy free market pressures.
Even the most die-hard supporters of Hayek would disagree with you there. Any sort of good or service that suffers from positive externalities will be a good candidate for government support. For example, take roads. We realize that there are positive externalities from having a free flow of goods and services. This externality would largely disappear if roads were privatized, because the tolls would be high enough to impose a significant burden on new ventures. Therefore, the government builds the roads, because the benefits to society from having free roads outweighs the costs.
The distinction between negative and positive rights is an entirely false one. All rights are positive rights. You say that you have the right to free speech. If I disagree and punch you in the face, you don't have any ability to demand legal recourse without the infrastructure of the legal system. Guess what? The legal system is staffed by people. So, for any negative right that requires enforcement (i.e. all negative rights) there needs to be a system that enforces those rights. That system needs to be staffed by people. By your logic, every judge, attorney, and police officer is a "slave", since their jobs include enforcing the rights of others.
The social contract is not an unchangeable, inviolable institution. You are free to work within the democratic system to try to get said social contract changed. This is what differentiates the social contract from private contracts. Private contracts normally cannot be changed after they are signed.
Well, the Therac-20 "worked fine" in the sense that the mechanical limit on the device prevented the software from delivering lethal doses. It doesn't mean that the Therac-20 was a "good" machine in any sense of the word.
I thought that cars were designed to protect against head-on collisions because head-on collisions involve more energy, and are easier to guard against (e.g. you have more room for crumple zones and the like). It doesn't necessarily mean that head-on collisions are more likely. In fact, I'd say that average collision isn't a head-on one, simply because the driver is likely to see the obstacle approaching and swerve to avoid it.
Humans can respond very well when the system they're dealing with gives them nearly instant feedback about what they're doing. To use your example, a driver can correct a skid because there are specific inputs that the car gives in real time when goes into a skid (namely, the steering becomes loose, and the brakes seem to become "grabby"). When the system doesn't give immediate, intuitive responses (like this CT scanner, the Therac 25, or the 3 Mile Island control system), knowing the underlying principles of the device becomes crucial. If one has a firm grasp of the principles of the device's operation, he or she can predict the output for a given input, rather than blindly trying various combinations of settings hoping to discover one that solves the problem.
My question is, why is that perceived as a "problem"? Since when was it a natural law for every profession to have the same gender balance as society at large? As long as no one is coercing a person into choosing one path over another, what's the issue?
If I haven't seen it, and no around me has seen it, isn't the onus on you to give some more proof other than, "Really, guys! Sexism in OSS is real!" I mean, to say you have to show some causal relationship between OSS "culture" (however you measure it) and sexism. Simply saying that the number of women who work on open source projects is less than the number of women working on proprietary projects isn't enough, for that is correlation, not causation.
You hear the same sort of rhetoric about other group/profession combinations. The other day, I was hearing a person rant about how men were underrepresented in nursing. When did it become mandatory for every profession to have perfect gender balance?
Perhaps women just don't like spending hours and hours of their free time on a project for little monetary gain. In other words, perhaps they aren't as likely to be chumps compared to men. :)
Which you can play, actually: DefCon.
That only works if the data you've got isn't protected by a law like HIPPA or somesuch. In that case, you could find yourself in big trouble for letting private data off your secure production server.
Anyone can arise to compete with a corporation, even a monopoly.
The definition of a monopoly is a corporation with the ability to set prices in a way that competitors are driven out of business. So, a monopolistic corporation can drive off competition as effectively as a government. It might take a little longer, and there might be fewer guns involved, but the end result would be the same.
A private company ignores its customers at its peril.
Only when that corporation has competition. If I have a monopoly on a good that has a highly inelastic demand curve (e.g. food, communications, heating oil, medicine, etc.) I can be as big of a jerk to my customers, and they'll have no choice but to take it. In fact, I can be an even bigger jerk than the government, because, in the case of the government, the people have the choice of voting me out when my term ends. In the case of a corporation, there's no such recourse. Heck, a corporation doesn't even have to accept petitions from its citizens, which is something that the US government is constitutionally required to do.
There are a few idiots in every country, but claiming that the entire nation is racist is more than a bit hypocritical.
Well, I used to think so, but then I read this. At the very least, the government believes the majority of citizens will support such a plan. If the government is correct, then the grandparent's point may very well be correct.
Of course, given the recent unpopularity of the Labour government, this seems like a half-cocked plan designed to win supporters amongst the BNP faction, rather than a serious proposal.
Indeed they are! I'm going to one this weekend, actually.
First, who moves their desktop computer?
Geeks going to LAN parties, of course. What's the point of buying a case like this, if you can't take it around and show to all your (now green with envy) friends?
But the lesson is the same. Filter your user input. If necessary, remove all tags, and only allow plain text.
Not necessarily. If the user is running the Chrome plugin inside IE, then its quite possible that IE's reduced permission mode would thwart an attack that was relying on Chrome running with normal privileges.
The problem with UI work is that its fundamentally tedious in a way that coding isn't. When one is coding, they're working on adding new functionality or fixing something that's pretty obviously broken. UI isn't like that. Good UI design involves carefully and incrementally changing the interface so that it fits and goes well together. Its very fine-grained work, and often takes as much time as putting together the major bits of functionality.
UI is like the fine sanding and polishing that distinguishes fine furniture from something that was thrown together from scraps. No one enjoys those final hours of polishing. But, a master carpenter knows that if he does not sand and polish the piece, no one will be able to appreciate its craftsmanship. Similarly, I posit that it is impossible to admire good code without a good UI.
On the other hand, this is why open source software always tends to lag in terms of user interfaces. The developers work on the UI to the point where its usable, but, without management telling them to keep improving it, the UI tends to get stuck at that barely usable stage for a long time.
I mean, look at Linux window managers. Both Gnome and KDE were pretty much stuck on the usability front until Canonical brought money and focus to the task of UI design.
Precisely. The grandparent is forgetting that, in the proprietary world, the scenario you described can't happen. I can't go to my boss and tell him, "Screw this, I'm going to spend the next month refactoring our messy code, rather than adding new functionality." However, I can do that in an open-source project.