Of course, IMHO, companies should have the full right to choose who to hire under what conditions, and who not.
But still, firing someone for a mere opinion is very unprofessional. What if that person does a good job and never pushes her opinion on clients? Professionals can keep their work and private life separate.
Looking for free ISOs? Make my own? That's just what I was talking about, FYI. I don't care enough to somehow create my own iso, I simply download one and install it.
Oh, if that's sooo below your level of sophistication, go ahead. I only stated why I was perfectly happy with NetBSD, and convenience was a small factor too.
Yes, OpenBSD is great. It's probably just as clean as NetBSD, but NetBSD has more cutting-edge features, such as UBC, and it's more portable.
One of my reasons for NetBSD is also that the OpenBSD guys don't provide free disk images. I don't want to spend any money on software right now.
I don't know about Linux's internals compared to the BSDs. Public opinion has it that Linux and FreeBSD are both pretty optimized. Maybe you've found a "hole" in Linux's performance after all...
FreeBSD and its fork Dragonfly focus mainly on high-performance production servers, a little like Linux.
OpenBSD focuses on the best-ever security on earth. This also includes clean code and good documentation (though even FreeBSD is quite good, IMHO compared to Linux/GNU).
NetBSD focuses on exceptionally clean code/architecture, excellent documentation, but also on interesting features, and of course awesome portability. This includes having very clearly-written, modular drivers, where other systems sometimes only have drivers for, say, a specific device when it's behind a specific bus, but not in general...
I like NetBSD, because it's fast enough IMHO, and very clean and well documented. If you want maximum performance, and maybe more multimedia drivers, get FreeBSD; if you're paranoid, use OpenBSD.
And this too will create a great incentive for poor countries to sell their laptops above buying price. And of course the very high price will incent me to just build my own Turion desktop machine instead of buying one.
So far I read about prices up to $150 or $180 to subsidize the poorer countries, but when I have to pay a premium of about $125, it simply makes me angry.
It seems like these people care much more about being gooder-than-thou (as if laptops were the top thing needed in poor countries; they might be a nice idea, but then I'd just let people choose to invest in a machine that costs maybe $130 worldwide; probably lots of organizations would provide them for $100 as well) than creating a working product in the first place.
I'd separate the product creation and the third-world subsidizing part, so that there is a cheap product first; and organizations could team up to subsidize them for poorer countries.
They won't even *sell* them. They'll only give laptops to institutions in the developing world.
But me, and many others want one. The end result is that because of artificial scarcity the market value of the laptop will be well above $100, and there'll be a strong incentive for whoever is a school-admin in those countries, to sell those things. Not a good thing.
Why not just sell them in quantities of 1000 to whoever pays the price, so all of us Geode/Linux fans can get one?
One excerpt: "In many parts of many countries, bandit groups win the passive consent of the majority in a particular area and establish what amounts to effective governments, or States, within the area. The difference between a government and a criminal band, then, is a matter of degree rather than kind, and the two often shade into each other."
Wow, that's quite impressive. However, I don't know how much power a ULV AMD would take. Probably more, but I'm sure less than 10W would be achievable *somehow*;)
Where do you think AMD doesn't come close in mobile offers?
The only difference between the Pentium-M and the Turion is that the P-M is designed specifically for mobiles, so it has a much slower FPU, for instance, and eats a little less energy.
But most power consumption is related to voltage, and a volted-down Turion has 25W, just like an Intel (well, new Intels have up to 35W). The difference is that because the Turion is just a good scaled down CPU, it's a bit slower than the P-Ms @ 25W. Ooooh, is that the huge difference?
Seriously, AMD is lacking in mobile offers. That's because you don't have a choice of laptops with AMD CPUs. It's marketing, nothing else.
Of course part of that is due to AMD's fault in never telling you WHICH Mobile Athlon or Turion you got. Stores never advertise if it's the 25W or the 35W or another version. I'd only ever buy 25W CPUs in mobile devices.
(I went for a G4, by the way; 15W is even nicer:D)
Well, the Intel chips were more advanced than the RISC ones, that's why they ran faster.
But there's another trend too that makes CISC more attractive these days: CPUs keep becoming exponentially faster (well, until recently at least), while memory speed is stagnant, even cache memory speed (only the size increases dramatically with shrinking structure sizes).
So when memory is the bottleneck, the solution is to compress instructions. What the Thumb instruction set is to the ARM, the Intel instruction set is to an imaginary 8-register RISC architecture. It's small and fast to load, and the super-fast CPU has to trouble at all expanding those little complex instructions into something more RISCy, like the Pentium4 does, and probably the various AMD chips, too.
We're past the stage where CPU speed is the limiting factor. It's all about cache, and about hard disk speed (ever watched a Mac load an application, or boot?).
It's not really a new architecture, like the first PPCs were. PCs with Intel CPUs have been standard for decades, and Intel did a lot of the design work (mainboards probably), so I'm quite positive that there won't likely be any big problems or surprises.
Hm, I wish someone would mod you insightful for that. At least it sounds interesting for some uses.
I still won't like normal Perl syntax, though, and the customizability of syntax is likely to make things even worse, IMHO. It'd be nice to hear some opinions from new Perl6 hackers.
Anyway, be it from sys-admins or from developers, if it's any good, I guess we'll hear some news about its successful uses.
yet another Virtual Machine nobody needs, that's supposed to be well at executing lots of different languages, but probably won't really.
It's a new language built by rewriting an ugly, old hack, that only fans of the old version will probably ever use. Everybody who didn't like Perl already moved on.
Thanks for a very informative comment. Living in a very industrialized country (and having never been in a tropical country at all, especially not in a small island state), I restrict myself to saying corrupt government has to go, but of course your real-life asking HOW it can be made to go plays a very important step in that direction;)
Well, whatever technology brings, I hope it'll help you guys...
I know, I hate those comments that say either "they need computers" or "they don't need them; they need food". I'm only saying that we shouldn't choose for them. Maybe we should give them money, and let THEM choose what they need, choose with their money. We should try to produce low-cost value items, both for poor countries, and for poor people in our countries.
Sorry, but I don't see the point in creating a charity that will give out *computers*.
Maybe I don't know enough about life in poor countries, but I think with some help, some books, and a working economy that'll keep them from starving, those people can work their education just fine. I don't think creating a new MIT over there and giving them some computers will do *anything*. It's like the magic in the USA or Europe, that computers in schools will help children. Thanks, I got my first PC when I was 19, and I'm doing computer science just fine.
Y'know, perhaps your opinion is better than mine, i.e. more right, because you know more about developing countries than me, but maybe not. I'm saying we should offer help and money, instead of claiming that they need anything specific. In that regard I also disagree with you, coz I'm not sure if you really know jack shit about poor countries either. Both of us shouldn't choose for them what's right or wrong.
Yes, and the separate organization part and the patented APIs part is what's bugging me. Without a guarantee, why should I use.NET, even though C# is a bit better than Java, as a language?
No thanks, I'd rather have some safety for my planning. No lawsuits, and a platform that DOES run.
I don't want to spend time trying. I want a platform that's guaranteed to run on different systems. I want to be able to use an API that WILL work everywhere, not one that's patented, or that's at least not existent on Mono.
But the moderators think I'm only a poor, stupid troll, so be it...
What's funny is that a.NET program compiled on Windows still doesn't run on any other platform, like Unix or Mac OS. It won't run on Mono, either, because some Windows.NET APIs are patented, and because there is no single set of libraries for GUI and other stuff that is cross-platform.
I agree in part, but education != expensive university. It's not too hard to explain why a stable, fair legal system makes sense, because it'd treat everybody equally.
Unfortunately too many people seem to profit from corruption and violence, so they won't change it. Maybe someone should educate and arm the others, so they can protect themselves? But that has its own problems, too.
I hope that the MIT laptop will succeed, and that I'll be able to buy one in Germany, but I think, or fear, that it will fail horribly. If it doesn't fail at production and marketing (and selling it to those people who want to buy one for a fair price), it will at least fail in bringing any education to poorer countries.
Those countries don't need computers and universities. They need food, stable currencies, no war, a fair legal system, and less state, taxes, regulations, and corruption. Then they'll find out how much education they'll need, and they'll be able to build that education themselves in a way that fits their needs.
It seems that everybody doesn't want the GPL anyway. Then why don't they simply use something legal, like NetBSD, instead of adapting Linux to the device and dealing with lots of legal trouble? This sort of thing seems to happen every year or so.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that's true.
Of course, IMHO, companies should have the full right to choose who to hire under what conditions, and who not.
But still, firing someone for a mere opinion is very unprofessional. What if that person does a good job and never pushes her opinion on clients? Professionals can keep their work and private life separate.
Why, we don't need those $s. Inflation is reducing their value every day anyway.
Real power lies elsewhere (usually government these days).
Cool, thanks. I might try it out sometime.
Yeah right, insult me, call me dumbass, fuckhead.
Looking for free ISOs? Make my own? That's just what I was talking about, FYI. I don't care enough to somehow create my own iso, I simply download one and install it.
Oh, if that's sooo below your level of sophistication, go ahead. I only stated why I was perfectly happy with NetBSD, and convenience was a small factor too.
Yes, OpenBSD is great. It's probably just as clean as NetBSD, but NetBSD has more cutting-edge features, such as UBC, and it's more portable.
One of my reasons for NetBSD is also that the OpenBSD guys don't provide free disk images. I don't want to spend any money on software right now.
I don't know about Linux's internals compared to the BSDs. Public opinion has it that Linux and FreeBSD are both pretty optimized. Maybe you've found a "hole" in Linux's performance after all...
Why not octopus?
In 10 words? Sorry, no.
FreeBSD and its fork Dragonfly focus mainly on high-performance production servers, a little like Linux.
OpenBSD focuses on the best-ever security on earth. This also includes clean code and good documentation (though even FreeBSD is quite good, IMHO compared to Linux/GNU).
NetBSD focuses on exceptionally clean code/architecture, excellent documentation, but also on interesting features, and of course awesome portability. This includes having very clearly-written, modular drivers, where other systems sometimes only have drivers for, say, a specific device when it's behind a specific bus, but not in general...
I like NetBSD, because it's fast enough IMHO, and very clean and well documented. If you want maximum performance, and maybe more multimedia drivers, get FreeBSD; if you're paranoid, use OpenBSD.
And this too will create a great incentive for poor countries to sell their laptops above buying price. And of course the very high price will incent me to just build my own Turion desktop machine instead of buying one.
So far I read about prices up to $150 or $180 to subsidize the poorer countries, but when I have to pay a premium of about $125, it simply makes me angry.
It seems like these people care much more about being gooder-than-thou (as if laptops were the top thing needed in poor countries; they might be a nice idea, but then I'd just let people choose to invest in a machine that costs maybe $130 worldwide; probably lots of organizations would provide them for $100 as well) than creating a working product in the first place.
I'd separate the product creation and the third-world subsidizing part, so that there is a cheap product first; and organizations could team up to subsidize them for poorer countries.
They won't even *sell* them. They'll only give laptops to institutions in the developing world.
But me, and many others want one. The end result is that because of artificial scarcity the market value of the laptop will be well above $100, and there'll be a strong incentive for whoever is a school-admin in those countries, to sell those things. Not a good thing.
Why not just sell them in quantities of 1000 to whoever pays the price, so all of us Geode/Linux fans can get one?
*pfft, stupid non-capitalists*
Read the beginning of http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap16a.asp
One excerpt:
"In many parts of many countries, bandit groups win the passive consent of
the majority in a particular area and establish what amounts to effective
governments, or States, within the area. The difference between a
government and a criminal band, then, is a matter of degree rather than
kind, and the two often shade into each other."
Wow, that's quite impressive. However, I don't know how much power a ULV AMD would take. Probably more, but I'm sure less than 10W would be achievable *somehow* ;)
Where do you think AMD doesn't come close in mobile offers?
:D)
The only difference between the Pentium-M and the Turion is that the P-M is designed specifically for mobiles, so it has a much slower FPU, for instance, and eats a little less energy.
But most power consumption is related to voltage, and a volted-down Turion has 25W, just like an Intel (well, new Intels have up to 35W). The difference is that because the Turion is just a good scaled down CPU, it's a bit slower than the P-Ms @ 25W. Ooooh, is that the huge difference?
Seriously, AMD is lacking in mobile offers. That's because you don't have a choice of laptops with AMD CPUs. It's marketing, nothing else.
Of course part of that is due to AMD's fault in never telling you WHICH Mobile Athlon or Turion you got. Stores never advertise if it's the 25W or the 35W or another version. I'd only ever buy 25W CPUs in mobile devices.
(I went for a G4, by the way; 15W is even nicer
Well, the Intel chips were more advanced than the RISC ones, that's why they ran faster.
But there's another trend too that makes CISC more attractive these days: CPUs keep becoming exponentially faster (well, until recently at least), while memory speed is stagnant, even cache memory speed (only the size increases dramatically with shrinking structure sizes).
So when memory is the bottleneck, the solution is to compress instructions. What the Thumb instruction set is to the ARM, the Intel instruction set is to an imaginary 8-register RISC architecture. It's small and fast to load, and the super-fast CPU has to trouble at all expanding those little complex instructions into something more RISCy, like the Pentium4 does, and probably the various AMD chips, too.
We're past the stage where CPU speed is the limiting factor. It's all about cache, and about hard disk speed (ever watched a Mac load an application, or boot?).
It's not really a new architecture, like the first PPCs were. PCs with Intel CPUs have been standard for decades, and Intel did a lot of the design work (mainboards probably), so I'm quite positive that there won't likely be any big problems or surprises.
Hm, I wish someone would mod you insightful for that. At least it sounds interesting for some uses.
I still won't like normal Perl syntax, though, and the customizability of syntax is likely to make things even worse, IMHO. It'd be nice to hear some opinions from new Perl6 hackers.
Anyway, be it from sys-admins or from developers, if it's any good, I guess we'll hear some news about its successful uses.
yet another Virtual Machine nobody needs, that's supposed to be well at executing lots of different languages, but probably won't really.
It's a new language built by rewriting an ugly, old hack, that only fans of the old version will probably ever use. Everybody who didn't like Perl already moved on.
Thanks for a very informative comment. Living in a very industrialized country (and having never been in a tropical country at all, especially not in a small island state), I restrict myself to saying corrupt government has to go, but of course your real-life asking HOW it can be made to go plays a very important step in that direction ;)
Well, whatever technology brings, I hope it'll help you guys...
I know, I hate those comments that say either "they need computers" or "they don't need them; they need food". I'm only saying that we shouldn't choose for them. Maybe we should give them money, and let THEM choose what they need, choose with their money. We should try to produce low-cost value items, both for poor countries, and for poor people in our countries.
Sorry, but I don't see the point in creating a charity that will give out *computers*.
Maybe I don't know enough about life in poor countries, but I think with some help, some books, and a working economy that'll keep them from starving, those people can work their education just fine. I don't think creating a new MIT over there and giving them some computers will do *anything*. It's like the magic in the USA or Europe, that computers in schools will help children. Thanks, I got my first PC when I was 19, and I'm doing computer science just fine.
Y'know, perhaps your opinion is better than mine, i.e. more right, because you know more about developing countries than me, but maybe not. I'm saying we should offer help and money, instead of claiming that they need anything specific. In that regard I also disagree with you, coz I'm not sure if you really know jack shit about poor countries either. Both of us shouldn't choose for them what's right or wrong.
Yes, and the separate organization part and the patented APIs part is what's bugging me. Without a guarantee, why should I use .NET, even though C# is a bit better than Java, as a language?
No thanks, I'd rather have some safety for my planning. No lawsuits, and a platform that DOES run.
I don't want to spend time trying. I want a platform that's guaranteed to run on different systems. I want to be able to use an API that WILL work everywhere, not one that's patented, or that's at least not existent on Mono.
But the moderators think I'm only a poor, stupid troll, so be it...
What's funny is that a .NET program compiled on Windows still doesn't run on any other platform, like Unix or Mac OS. It won't run on Mono, either, because some Windows .NET APIs are patented, and because there is no single set of libraries for GUI and other stuff that is cross-platform.
I agree in part, but education != expensive university. It's not too hard to explain why a stable, fair legal system makes sense, because it'd treat everybody equally.
Unfortunately too many people seem to profit from corruption and violence, so they won't change it. Maybe someone should educate and arm the others, so they can protect themselves? But that has its own problems, too.
Ok, let me do it.
I hope that the MIT laptop will succeed, and that I'll be able to buy one in Germany, but I think, or fear, that it will fail horribly. If it doesn't fail at production and marketing (and selling it to those people who want to buy one for a fair price), it will at least fail in bringing any education to poorer countries.
Those countries don't need computers and universities. They need food, stable currencies, no war, a fair legal system, and less state, taxes, regulations, and corruption. Then they'll find out how much education they'll need, and they'll be able to build that education themselves in a way that fits their needs.
It seems that everybody doesn't want the GPL anyway. Then why don't they simply use something legal, like NetBSD, instead of adapting Linux to the device and dealing with lots of legal trouble? This sort of thing seems to happen every year or so.