I have attended a live talk by Stallman, he's very careful with his words and says things exactly as he wants to convey. In other words, he's a pedant with definitions. Hence, if he meant anything other than children, he would have used another word.
For simplicity I like Microsoft media center. For functionality either xbmc or myth. The last two are a pita to setup.
Wha...What???
XBMC can be set up faster and easier than you can get the Windows Vista install CD out of the box. XBMC live does it all for you.
The same for MythTV Mythbuntu does everything but set up the cable provider zipcode.
If you think for a minute that Windows Media center can even touch those in ease of setup you have never tried XBMC or MythTV or your experience is from 5 years ago.
What about drivers for the hardware? Have you used Windows 7? It seems to be getting all the drivers from Windows update, atleast for the rigs I have tried it on(3 year old machines too). Looks like they bundled a ton of network drivers on the disc, and once you connect to the internet, voila, almost all hardware has drivers. This is one of the most tricky and annoying aspects of installing MythBuntu.
Local account != Physical access. For example, website accounts on hosting sides, shell accounts, in fact any ssh account. So what about referencing real local user exploits for Windows that dont' need local access?
Linux runs on a lot of shell servers, gameservers, webhosts etc. where normal user accounts are sold to customers. This happens much less with Windows servers which tend to be more owned and used by a single entity with full admin rights.
Does this mean that Linux was never more secure than Windows--only more obscure?
It's hardly obscure since they could look and find it, evidenced by the fact they found it.
Go try that with the Windows kernels!
In addition, there is already a patch out for this, which by end of the week will be pushed down from the distro managers. We don't have to wait years after finding it for the fix to be released, as Microsoft historically does.
In fact, why just assume this similar bug is NOT in the windows kernel? Did you check? Did any reputable security company check? I'm not saying it is there, only that you can't easily prove otherwise.
*that* is the security being spoken of.
As far as I know, only one OS claims no exploits, and that is OpenBSD.
The transparent thing works both ways... it's easier for black hats to find holes too, by your own logic. And they can keep it secret and exploit it as long as they can. A similar bug existing in Windows doesn't prove anything and is irrelevant here. After all 'M$ can't code shit'. Linux and FOSS is commonly claimed to be more secure because of it's development model and bug free here in these parts. Any data that runs counter to this is routinely downplayed by commenters and moderators... just like your post got modded up.
Looks like you don't know what you're talking about. International students cannot work in Walmart or Mcdonalds. It's prohibited. They can only do work related to their field of study. In fact the program is called Curricular Practical Training.
Companies routinely hire students as interns, including students involved in specialized research. Just waving arms that there are plenty of US ones to pick from doesn't mean anything.
Yes. They are getting a benefit working here over than at home, so I have no problem with them being taxed for that benefit.
The businesses(and in effect, the country) is also getting a benefit by using their services. Even if your point is granted, the tax should be labeled as such, instead of social security and medicare. Already a $1500 training fee for Americans is needed to be paid while filing for a work visa. Additionally, workers need to pay unemployment fees to the states, but never see a dime of that ever.
What you say is right, but is it okay to tax people temporarily in the country for what they're not going to use? They're on a temporary F1 and J1 and most will never likely see themselves using social security or medicare. Note that H1B is a temporary worker visa that runs out at 6 years max but they're still charged social security and medicare taxes.
The point of Chrome is not for people to switch to Chrome. Nor is it to write killer apps unique for Chrome. The point of Chrome is to make Microsoft start writing web apps, and moving away from desktop. It's like luring the shark out of water to compete in your territory on the land. Google lives on the Internet, and Chrome OS is the Internet OS, that will hopefully move Microsoft to the Internet even more than they have (Office online, Windows Live etc). And more of Microsoft services online, the better it is for Google. Since Google are the king of Internet and in effect are making Microsoft compete with them outside of their core competence (desktop). And having to compete with Google online, takes away resources from desktop.
The reverse is true too. The problem is that in order to lure the shark out to the land, Google has to go into the water itself. It has to spend a ton of money, hire hundreds of developers and managers(not to mention wasted upper management time) just to get a Linux GUI running. It will definitely have teething problems, because OS development is not their core competence. All this can instead be used to further develop search, better ads marketing and maybe to innovate and create new markets. In short, the opportunity cost of Chrome OS is very high and Google is not on their home turf, and does risk drowning itself trying to lure the shark out of the water.
The whole thing is a marketing game, and it's there that Google may be able to penetrate
That worked so well for Chrome Browser? It is faster, lighter and is pushed heavily by Google on Youtube.com, Google.com etc. An OS can be pre-installed by OEMs, but so can a browser. Still it's at 2.59% share, which is nothing to sneeze at, but it's definitely not groundbreaking.
[...] That means Google Chrome won't have a Killer App, [...]
Not a "killer app" but "killer features" like having always the latest software version, having access to professional tools on demand - while at the beach in between different kinds of surfing - tools you wouldn't dream of installing on Windows (because of the price, or just because you didn't think in time to purchase/download them).
I think a few years from now we will look back and see that through this way of thinking a whole new class of applications will evolve. Like how we take Facebook, cell phones, online news, email etc. for granted, who would have thought that 20 years ago?
For now the weak point is the availability of internet access...
The latest software version can be(and is) taken care of with updates. Access to professional tools on demand? So stuff similar to AutoCad would be free to use on the Web from the beach and would work as fast as AutoCad on Windows? I'm sorry but this sounds like hyperbole and almost vaporware. And for your claim that "a whole new class of applications will evolve", what prevents them currently from evolving on Windows/OS X/Linux ? What do you think will Chrome OS enable that the current OSes cannot? The point is that not everything needs internet access and hence doesn't need to be used in a browser. Not to mention that HTML/JS/AJAX/CSS is one of the worst development platforms ever in terms of developer effort requirement to make things working.
Microsoft has nearly missed the boat before. During Chicago's development, Microsoft all but dropped the ball on that whole Internet thing, at the last moment pasting in Windows for Workgroup's networking engine to support TCP/IP. The initial version of IE sucked, but, in the end, they beat the snot out of Netscape. They even retroactively threw in the Shiva PPP dialer and their own Winsock stack for Windows 3.1, thus pretty much killing Trumpet Winsock.
I won't believe Microsoft's going down the tubes until I actually see Microsoft down the tubes. They're the Energizer Bunny of the computer world, even if they have to steal or assassinate their competition to keep going.
Missing the boat didn't hurt them that much. Why? Because third parties(like Trumpet that you mentioned) filled in the gap for the most popular OS. I don't see a reason that will change much now. Why? Because even Google said this during their announcement. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies. And of course, these apps will run not only on Google Chrome OS, but on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux thereby giving developers the largest user base of any platform.
So Windows and Macs will run all the Win32 and Mac programs like Office and Photoshop and also run the same web apps that Chrome will run. That means Google Chrome won't have a Killer App, except for the UI, security and cost? So Chrome has to be THAT GOOD in order to make people switch from Windows since stuff like Gmail already runs well in browsers.
And there are lots applications that make no sense to be run in a browser with Back, Forward, Refresh buttons. And not to mention the performance overhead. For example, I like my IDE to be native, thanks. It's slow enough as it is. Will people be willing to give up their native apps just to make the interface better or faster(lets assume Google can do that)? Will Chrome OS innovate that much in UI and security that it will make people switch? I doubt it. Chrome browser already has improvements in speed and UI but that hasn't motivated people to switch.
to the grandparent only: if you dont see the advantages of Open Source software to all users be it commercial or personal then you are not a user yourself and are just a corporate type with the corportista mindset, i got news for you = money is not everything and people will go out of their way to get your greedy little paws out of their pockets.
So, if I need Photoshop as part of my job to feed my family, I'm just a corporate type with the corportista mindset and I should either switch to Gimp and pull my hair and lose time and clients or let my family starve?
Whatever happened to using the right tool for the job, instead of letting zealotry take over?
I was wondering if Microsoft was going to just get all of Yahoo's search data and it was stated that Microsoft gets Yahoo's search technology along with 400 of their engineers. So just how useful is the opt-out feature when you've handed your competition all your data, technology, and engineers and you've not kept the technology up for 5 years? Answer: their opt-out clause is only good for fooling the investors and board into thinking there's a way out.
LoB
But what options does Yahoo have at this point? Their search market share is in a free fall, falling from 20% to 10% in just one year, they have had heavy downsizing. This last ditch deal is better than dying out without even a whimper.
Word definitely should be on its way out. Not because we don't print everything out (digital distribution is MORE of a reason for everyone using the same program), but because the free alternatives do everything just as well (or better, they are much more lightweight)
Strategy Letter IV: Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth by Joel Spolsky Friday, March 23, 2001
Version 5.0 of Microsoft's flagship spreadsheet program Excel came out in 1993. It was positively huge: it required a whole 15 megabytes of hard drive space. In those days we could still remember our first 20MB PC hard drives (around 1985) and so 15MB sure seemed like a lot.
By the time Excel 2000 came out, it required a whopping 146MB... almost a tenfold increase! Dang those sloppy Microsoft programmers, right?
Wrong.
I'll bet you think I'm going to write one of those boring articles you see all over the net bemoaning "bloatware". Whine whine whine, this stuff is so bloated, oh woe is me, edlin and vi are so much better than Word and Emacs because they are svelte, etc.
Ha ha! I tricked you! I'm not going to write that article again, because it's not true.
In 1993, given the cost of hard drives in those days, Microsoft Excel 5.0 took up about $36 worth of hard drive space.
In 2000, given the cost of hard drives in 2000, Microsoft Excel 2000 takes up about $1.03 in hard drive space.
(These figures are adjusted for inflation and based on hard drive price data from here.)
In real terms, it's almost like Excel is actually getting smaller!
What is bloatware, exactly? The Jargon File snidely defines it as "software that provides minimal functionality while requiring a disproportionate amount of diskspace and memory. Especially used for application and OS upgrades. This term is very common in the Windows/NT world. So is its cause."
I guess those guys just hate Windows. I haven't run out of memory in more than a decade, ever since virtual memory appeared in Windows 386 (1989). And hard drive space is down to $0.0071 per megabyte and still plummeting like a sheep learning to fly by jumping out of a tree.
Maybe Linus Ã...kerlund can explain it. On his web page, he writes, "The big disadvantage of using these bloated programs is that you have to load this very large program, even if you just want to accomplish one tiny little thing. It eats up all your memory... you're not using your system in an efficient way. You make the system seem more inefficient than it really is, and this is totally unnecessary."
Ohhh. It eats up all your memory. I see. Actually, well, no, it doesn't. Ever since Windows 1.0, in 1987, the operating system only loads pages as they are used. If you have a 15MB executable and you only use code that spans 2MB worth of pages, you will only ever load 2MB from disk to RAM. In fact if you have a modern version of Windows, the OS will automatically rearrange those pages on the hard drive so that they're consecutive, which makes the program start even faster next time.
And I don't think anyone will deny that on today's overpowered, under-priced computers, loading a huge program is still faster than loading a small program was even 5 years ago. So what's the problem?
RA Downes gives us a clue. It looks like he spent hours dissecting a small Microsoft utility, apparently enraged that it was a whole megabyte in size. (That's 3.15 cents of hard drive space at the time he wrote the article). In his opinion, the program should have been around 95% smaller. The joke is that the utility he dissected is something called RegClean, which you've probably never heard of. This is a program that goes through your Windows re
Look at me, I can cut+paste. Please mod me up so I can be a successful cut+paste karma whore. Its so much easier than actually coming up with something on my own!
Wanna prove your not a karma whore? Post your cut+paste as AC.
It's not text from TFA. It's a blog that I found quite interesting and just wanted to link to it. But people on here don't like clicking and reading, so I posted a few quotes(the article is much much longer) to pique the interest so that people will go read the full version. I don't see any reason to post as AC.
Slashdot Mirror
I have attended a live talk by Stallman, he's very careful with his words and says things exactly as he wants to convey. In other words, he's a pedant with definitions. Hence, if he meant anything other than children, he would have used another word.
For simplicity I like Microsoft media center. For functionality either xbmc or myth. The last two are a pita to setup.
Wha...What???
XBMC can be set up faster and easier than you can get the Windows Vista install CD out of the box. XBMC live does it all for you.
The same for MythTV Mythbuntu does everything but set up the cable provider zipcode.
If you think for a minute that Windows Media center can even touch those in ease of setup you have never tried XBMC or MythTV or your experience is from 5 years ago.
What about drivers for the hardware? Have you used Windows 7? It seems to be getting all the drivers from Windows update, atleast for the rigs I have tried it on(3 year old machines too). Looks like they bundled a ton of network drivers on the disc, and once you connect to the internet, voila, almost all hardware has drivers. This is one of the most tricky and annoying aspects of installing MythBuntu.
Local account != Physical access. For example, website accounts on hosting sides, shell accounts, in fact any ssh account. So what about referencing real local user exploits for Windows that dont' need local access?
So white hats can't easily find bugs in Windows but black hats can? I don't follow your logic.
No no... not "wordpress". Youd need an exploit in the PHP-Apache stack, not just in a random web app.
Care to find us one of those tha tis currently unpatched?
Why would a Wordpress exploit be not possible as a vector for this? For example see this --> http://secunia.com/advisories/25794/
If you can run arbitrary PHP code, you could possibly trigger this NULL exploit to get root.
As was stated before: if someone has a local account on your Windows machine, they already own you.
Citation? And please don't cite 9X/ME or older in the Windows Home line.
Linux runs on a lot of shell servers, gameservers, webhosts etc. where normal user accounts are sold to customers. This happens much less with Windows servers which tend to be more owned and used by a single entity with full admin rights.
Does this mean that Linux was never more secure than Windows--only more obscure?
It's hardly obscure since they could look and find it, evidenced by the fact they found it.
Go try that with the Windows kernels!
In addition, there is already a patch out for this, which by end of the week will be pushed down from the distro managers. We don't have to wait years after finding it for the fix to be released, as Microsoft historically does.
In fact, why just assume this similar bug is NOT in the windows kernel? Did you check? Did any reputable security company check?
I'm not saying it is there, only that you can't easily prove otherwise.
*that* is the security being spoken of.
As far as I know, only one OS claims no exploits, and that is OpenBSD.
The transparent thing works both ways... it's easier for black hats to find holes too, by your own logic. And they can keep it secret and exploit it as long as they can. A similar bug existing in Windows doesn't prove anything and is irrelevant here. After all 'M$ can't code shit'. Linux and FOSS is commonly claimed to be more secure because of it's development model and bug free here in these parts. Any data that runs counter to this is routinely downplayed by commenters and moderators... just like your post got modded up.
Looks like you don't know what you're talking about. International students cannot work in Walmart or Mcdonalds. It's prohibited. They can only do work related to their field of study. In fact the program is called Curricular Practical Training.
Companies routinely hire students as interns, including students involved in specialized research. Just waving arms that there are plenty of US ones to pick from doesn't mean anything.
People on work visas pay unemployment taxes but don't see a penny of it ever, so his point still stands.
Yes. They are getting a benefit working here over than at home, so I have no problem with them being taxed for that benefit.
The businesses(and in effect, the country) is also getting a benefit by using their services. Even if your point is granted, the tax should be labeled as such, instead of social security and medicare. Already a $1500 training fee for Americans is needed to be paid while filing for a work visa. Additionally, workers need to pay unemployment fees to the states, but never see a dime of that ever.
Vote it down then, there's + and - buttons on the slashdot post for a reason.
What you say is right, but is it okay to tax people temporarily in the country for what they're not going to use? They're on a temporary F1 and J1 and most will never likely see themselves using social security or medicare. Note that H1B is a temporary worker visa that runs out at 6 years max but they're still charged social security and medicare taxes.
The point of Chrome is not for people to switch to Chrome. Nor is it to write killer apps unique for Chrome. The point of Chrome is to make Microsoft start writing web apps, and moving away from desktop. It's like luring the shark out of water to compete in your territory on the land. Google lives on the Internet, and Chrome OS is the Internet OS, that will hopefully move Microsoft to the Internet even more than they have (Office online, Windows Live etc). And more of Microsoft services online, the better it is for Google. Since Google are the king of Internet and in effect are making Microsoft compete with them outside of their core competence (desktop). And having to compete with Google online, takes away resources from desktop.
The reverse is true too. The problem is that in order to lure the shark out to the land, Google has to go into the water itself. It has to spend a ton of money, hire hundreds of developers and managers(not to mention wasted upper management time) just to get a Linux GUI running. It will definitely have teething problems, because OS development is not their core competence. All this can instead be used to further develop search, better ads marketing and maybe to innovate and create new markets. In short, the opportunity cost of Chrome OS is very high and Google is not on their home turf, and does risk drowning itself trying to lure the shark out of the water.
The whole thing is a marketing game, and it's there that Google may be able to penetrate
That worked so well for Chrome Browser? It is faster, lighter and is pushed heavily by Google on Youtube.com, Google.com etc. An OS can be pre-installed by OEMs, but so can a browser. Still it's at 2.59% share, which is nothing to sneeze at, but it's definitely not groundbreaking.
[...] That means Google Chrome won't have a Killer App, [...]
Not a "killer app" but "killer features" like having always the latest software version, having access to professional tools on demand - while at the beach in between different kinds of surfing - tools you wouldn't dream of installing on Windows (because of the price, or just because you didn't think in time to purchase/download them).
I think a few years from now we will look back and see that through this way of thinking a whole new class of applications will evolve. Like how we take Facebook, cell phones, online news, email etc. for granted, who would have thought that 20 years ago?
For now the weak point is the availability of internet access...
The latest software version can be(and is) taken care of with updates. Access to professional tools on demand? So stuff similar to AutoCad would be free to use on the Web from the beach and would work as fast as AutoCad on Windows? I'm sorry but this sounds like hyperbole and almost vaporware. And for your claim that "a whole new class of applications will evolve", what prevents them currently from evolving on Windows/OS X/Linux ? What do you think will Chrome OS enable that the current OSes cannot? The point is that not everything needs internet access and hence doesn't need to be used in a browser. Not to mention that HTML/JS/AJAX/CSS is one of the worst development platforms ever in terms of developer effort requirement to make things working.
Microsoft has nearly missed the boat before. During Chicago's development, Microsoft all but dropped the ball on that whole Internet thing, at the last moment pasting in Windows for Workgroup's networking engine to support TCP/IP. The initial version of IE sucked, but, in the end, they beat the snot out of Netscape. They even retroactively threw in the Shiva PPP dialer and their own Winsock stack for Windows 3.1, thus pretty much killing Trumpet Winsock.
I won't believe Microsoft's going down the tubes until I actually see Microsoft down the tubes. They're the Energizer Bunny of the computer world, even if they have to steal or assassinate their competition to keep going.
Missing the boat didn't hurt them that much. Why? Because third parties(like Trumpet that you mentioned) filled in the gap for the most popular OS. I don't see a reason that will change much now. Why? Because even Google said this during their announcement. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies. And of course, these apps will run not only on Google Chrome OS, but on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux thereby giving developers the largest user base of any platform.
So Windows and Macs will run all the Win32 and Mac programs like Office and Photoshop and also run the same web apps that Chrome will run. That means Google Chrome won't have a Killer App, except for the UI, security and cost? So Chrome has to be THAT GOOD in order to make people switch from Windows since stuff like Gmail already runs well in browsers.
And there are lots applications that make no sense to be run in a browser with Back, Forward, Refresh buttons. And not to mention the performance overhead. For example, I like my IDE to be native, thanks. It's slow enough as it is. Will people be willing to give up their native apps just to make the interface better or faster(lets assume Google can do that)? Will Chrome OS innovate that much in UI and security that it will make people switch? I doubt it. Chrome browser already has improvements in speed and UI but that hasn't motivated people to switch.
Fake Steve's interesting take on Chrome OS here --> http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2009/07/lets-all-take-deep-breath-and-get-some.html
No, that'd be Soviet Russia.
Because pythons are long and big and will not fit the title.
to the grandparent only: if you dont see the advantages of Open Source software to all users be it commercial or personal then you are not a user yourself and are just a corporate type with the corportista mindset, i got news for you = money is not everything and people will go out of their way to get your greedy little paws out of their pockets.
So, if I need Photoshop as part of my job to feed my family, I'm just a corporate type with the corportista mindset and I should either switch to Gimp and pull my hair and lose time and clients or let my family starve?
Whatever happened to using the right tool for the job, instead of letting zealotry take over?
I was wondering if Microsoft was going to just get all of Yahoo's search data and it was stated that Microsoft gets Yahoo's search technology along with 400 of their engineers. So just how useful is the opt-out feature when you've handed your competition all your data, technology, and engineers and you've not kept the technology up for 5 years? Answer: their opt-out clause is only good for fooling the investors and board into thinking there's a way out.
LoB
But what options does Yahoo have at this point? Their search market share is in a free fall, falling from 20% to 10% in just one year, they have had heavy downsizing. This last ditch deal is better than dying out without even a whimper.
Word definitely should be on its way out. Not because we don't print everything out (digital distribution is MORE of a reason for everyone using the same program), but because the free alternatives do everything just as well (or better, they are much more lightweight)
I don't really understand the complaints about bloat. I will just block quote(since Slashdotters don't like to click on links) from this article here http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000020.html
Strategy Letter IV: Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth
by Joel Spolsky
Friday, March 23, 2001
Version 5.0 of Microsoft's flagship spreadsheet program Excel came out in 1993. It was positively huge: it required a whole 15 megabytes of hard drive space. In those days we could still remember our first 20MB PC hard drives (around 1985) and so 15MB sure seemed like a lot.
By the time Excel 2000 came out, it required a whopping 146MB ... almost a tenfold increase! Dang those sloppy Microsoft programmers, right?
Wrong.
I'll bet you think I'm going to write one of those boring articles you see all over the net bemoaning "bloatware". Whine whine whine, this stuff is so bloated, oh woe is me, edlin and vi are so much better than Word and Emacs because they are svelte, etc.
Ha ha! I tricked you! I'm not going to write that article again, because it's not true.
In 1993, given the cost of hard drives in those days, Microsoft Excel 5.0 took up about $36 worth of hard drive space.
In 2000, given the cost of hard drives in 2000, Microsoft Excel 2000 takes up about $1.03 in hard drive space.
(These figures are adjusted for inflation and based on hard drive price data from here.)
In real terms, it's almost like Excel is actually getting smaller!
What is bloatware, exactly? The Jargon File snidely defines it as "software that provides minimal functionality while requiring a disproportionate amount of diskspace and memory. Especially used for application and OS upgrades. This term is very common in the Windows/NT world. So is its cause."
I guess those guys just hate Windows. I haven't run out of memory in more than a decade, ever since virtual memory appeared in Windows 386 (1989). And hard drive space is down to $0.0071 per megabyte and still plummeting like a sheep learning to fly by jumping out of a tree.
Maybe Linus Ã...kerlund can explain it. On his web page, he writes, "The big disadvantage of using these bloated programs is that you have to load this very large program, even if you just want to accomplish one tiny little thing. It eats up all your memory... you're not using your system in an efficient way. You make the system seem more inefficient than it really is, and this is totally unnecessary."
Ohhh. It eats up all your memory. I see. Actually, well, no, it doesn't. Ever since Windows 1.0, in 1987, the operating system only loads pages as they are used. If you have a 15MB executable and you only use code that spans 2MB worth of pages, you will only ever load 2MB from disk to RAM. In fact if you have a modern version of Windows, the OS will automatically rearrange those pages on the hard drive so that they're consecutive, which makes the program start even faster next time.
And I don't think anyone will deny that on today's overpowered, under-priced computers, loading a huge program is still faster than loading a small program was even 5 years ago. So what's the problem?
RA Downes gives us a clue. It looks like he spent hours dissecting a small Microsoft utility, apparently enraged that it was a whole megabyte in size. (That's 3.15 cents of hard drive space at the time he wrote the article). In his opinion, the program should have been around 95% smaller. The joke is that the utility he dissected is something called RegClean, which you've probably never heard of. This is a program that goes through your Windows re
Can Apple be forced to refund the cost of OS X on a Mac in the EU like OEMs are?
most OS X apps have already been ported from PowerPC to x86 so have no CPU dependencies
Huh what? Porting a app to another CPU means it has no CPU dependencies? What are you smoking? An RDF cigar?
Look at me, I can cut+paste. Please mod me up so I can be a successful cut+paste karma whore. Its so much easier than actually coming up with something on my own!
Wanna prove your not a karma whore? Post your cut+paste as AC.
It's not text from TFA. It's a blog that I found quite interesting and just wanted to link to it. But people on here don't like clicking and reading, so I posted a few quotes(the article is much much longer) to pique the interest so that people will go read the full version. I don't see any reason to post as AC.