Survival of the fittest isn't evolution per se. It's one facet of natural selection. It's one of the forces acting upon large collections of DNA. Many many many species evolved and died out because they were not the "fittest" but they still evolved. There are plenty of factors influencing natural selection, even something like a massive extinction caused by a meteor, or a volcano, or whatever. Sometimes species thrive just because they got lucky.
Even if humans can actually code DNA (and not just copy genes around) doesn't make it above and beyond evolution.
Darwin didn't invent evolution. He simply described what he saw. That doesn't mean things can't change, or become more complex where speciation and DNA combination are concerned.
No, you are a product of selective breeding, not DESIGN. It is still natural selection, by definition.
Natural: by means of nature, of which humans are a part Selection: selection of certain traits over other traits
Nobody designs species, nobody ever has. They have guided their progress, influenced the process, which simply means we are another form of environmental pressure on natural selection. In other words, EVOLUTION.
Try it on a multi terabyte high speed raid0 for scratch data on a big box like a 64 cpu altix. noatime can give massive, and by massive I mean MASSIVE speed increases. atime is retarded, I totally agree with Linus.
Yeah because its the PUBLIC you have to worry about, not the underground who actually know how to use these techniques? Security through obscurity never works, not ever. The general public is not going to attempt to break these, because it is highly difficult. Somebody who CAN do it, probably already knows how or can easily learn how. Somebody who can do it, is usually going to be the person who will do it (you have to be able to do something, in order to DO it), hence you are no safer with moderate "secrecy" then with none.
If you have a highly secure place that is using a non-secure lock, you are better off knowing about it. The only way you would know about it is if it is public knowledge in many cases. Then you change your locks, if the price of the thing being protected is higher than the price of the locks.
When you have a foreign invader who IS armed to the teeth, I'd say absolutely the iraqi people need weapons. Lots of them. It is THEIR land, isn't it? They have the right to sort it out however they see fit, not how some far removed foreign power sees fit. If they wanted Saddam out of power, they should have removed him. Saddam certainly wasn't harassing foreign powers when the US decided to invade.
Most revolutions need the power of an armed populace, even if said power is not used. The power of the people to enforce their will upon their leadership needs a sharp point sometimes.
The former soviet republics did not leave the union by revolt. The union collapsed and from an internal power struggle that WAS heavily armed. It doesn't really matter though, guns should never only be for those who want to use them to maintain power.
Which means that using at the command line is "linking" it. Doing so, of course, means your upstream code must be GPL as well. Ad Infinitum. Sorry, but the bulk of c/c++ code out there is non-gpl licensed and therefor can take no advantage of tools such as this.
Well, guns are only used to kill. Thats their sole purpose. I say so what? Taking away my right to possess killing devices doesn't remove them from the people I most need them for. Namely criminals and the armed authorities. The whole reason a populace needs guns is to allow them to remove those in power should that become necessary. I don't care about hunting. I care about having an equalizer that allows me and my fellow citizens to retake power. No, not retake. To reinforce who really has the true power. No government ever can control an unwilling populace, and they know that. Fortunately for them, most people are willing to take it up the ass. But that doesn't last forever. That is the true fear of any government. It is not foreign invaders. It is their own people. All revolutions come from within. As they should.
This was a joke, right? You wish to store files with RAID, by including a single failable, poorly performing bottleneck? HW raid is for windows desktops and low end usage.
SW raid allows you to have a separate controller for each drive, or bank of drives, outperforms ALL HW raid setups and as such is far superior to HW raid. Performance? I design HPC systems for a living. Very large ones. I can design a RAID-5 setup with over 400mb/s sustained transfer rates, easily. HW raid is a joke for mission critical applications, vendor ignorance notwithstanding. Ebay? WTF? I take it you build raid's for your gaming boxen at home.
The entire point of RAID-5 is redundancy. Using a single controller card defeats the ENTIRE purpose. Until they release controller cards with multiple redundant power supplies, separate replaceable channels, multiple 3ghz cpu's, 4gb ram, etc. I stick to my highly performing, highly available file server. The boxes I design for redundant storage ARE HW raid. Albeit one that costs a lot of money. If money IS an issue, perhaps HW raid is worth it. If money is no object, forget it, its a poor solution to the problem at hand.
Now, if you need drives that perform, for lets say a tb of local scratch disk, raid-0 is the way to go and hardware raid simply cannot compete in any way shape or form with the performance numbers of sw raid0. When I am forced to deal with machines that have integrated raid controllers and I cannot disable their raid features, I simply make a bunch of 1 drive raid0's (yeah an oxymoron, but it's how the controller deals with it) and then SW raid them together in a stripe. Using multiple scsi channels (or multiple serial attached scsi cards, even better) with multiple drive banks I can get drive performance that would blow your mind.
That is because there are still the same industrial pressures all over the world. China has a huge chemical production industry. Lets take paper manufacture as an example. To reduce hemp fiber for use as a paper product, a mechanical mill is used, a device invented in America earlier this century which makes hemp use for paper very economical. To reduce tree fiber for paper use, a chemical process is used. This process uses vast quantities of sulphuric acid. Sulphuric acid is a consumable which must be continually purchased in order to make the paper. Since china is a very large capitalist society, the chemical industry has a need to keep its product in high demand in order to keep making profits. The paper industry is much smaller than the chemical industry, and thus must bow to their wishes (stated very simply.) It is highly likely that the paper industry in China isn't even aware of the usefulness of hemp paper, since the industrial technology being used is based on American paper production techniques from the 1930's and 1940's on up.
Do you think China is somehow completely seperate from the industrial pressures of the rest of the world? Do you honestly think that industry is a nationalized thing and not a global entity? It has NOTHING to do with the war on drugs. It has everything to do with competing low level products and processes for large scale industrial uses. Hemp is just one example. Paper can be made from flax, corn, straw, etc. using the same process. It is environmentally friendly, and eats heavily into the profits from existing infrastructural industries, which BTW were created as a solution seeking a problem. Large scale chemical production only started this century. These giant companies (whose roots were from oil money, publishing and other large money pre-existing monopolies) have every reason to keep their products in use.
That is just the paper example. Lets not mention biodiesel, etc.
Did you know the diesel engine was invented to run on unmodified vegetable oil? Hemp oil being one of the chief producers of this oil? Do you really think oil companies want competition from some farmers with a lot of land, some tractors and a bunch of field hands?
Quit thinking nationally, start thinking globally. China is just another cog in the world wide capitalist machinery, all professing of "communism" aside. In fact China is one of the more successful capitalist societies on the planet.
Hemp is one of the top producers of biomass per acre. It is much better than corn and can be grown on fallow fields as well. And you can't even smoke this type of hemp, it grows 10-20 feet high and is all stalk with a clump of seeds at the top. Of course, nobody ever smoked this form of hemp, even when it was one of the primary cash crops of the south prior to the 1930's.
You are still completely misunderstanding the license. The lawyer mentions the DISTRIBUTION. Anything you distribute with the GPLV2 license retains that license forever.
However, since you own the code, you can also release it ("distribute" it) under any other license you so wish. The license does not retroactively impose rights onto the owner of the code, it is a license to USE the code, by others who are not the copyright holder.
Hence the term LICENSE. You do not LICENSE code to yourself.
Apple can do whatever the hell they want with the code, they own it in its entirety and can stop releasing it for free anytime they want. You can still use any version of CUPS released under GPLV2 in any way you see fit as long as YOU comply with the license.
Many many open source companies do this with the code THEY own. They release older version under GPLV2 but the latest and greatest is a commercial product released under a proprietary license. Eventually, the new product becomes the old product and gets released under the GPL. Note however that the new proprietary products contain tons of code released to the public via the GPL. It doesn't matter, if you own the code, you own the code. The only way to limit the rights of the owner would be to assign the rights of the code to some entity in the copyright which is not the owner. In this case you'd simply be transferring ownership. As long as people wish to protect code via copyright, someone has to OWN that copyright, and hence own all rights to the IP.
Well, except for the fact that you are spouting incorrect information about a topic on saving LIVES.
Another One Bites the Dust is 100-110 BPM you turd.
Just a hair over the recommended 100 compressions per minute guideline. Its a good way to know how fast to compress if you know the song. Judging 100 bpm is difficult with some guide.
I understand the common convention, however linux is the kernel if we are talking technical features of the OS, not user space tools, which are not an operating system.
The "one or two features" I pointed out are not small things at all. dtrace is the most advanced kernel instrumentation tool ever designed. There are no advanced features in the linux kernel that are not also in the commercial unixes, at least in function. For example AIX doesn't support every file system that linux does, but the file systems it does support are far more solid and safe then the linux counterparts. Try growing a file system in linux while its mounted and running a database with heavy IO. I dont care how many mp3 players there are, or games, or office tools, or whatever in a linux distro. These are not server tools, and this article was about servers.
Linux is simply not the most solid OS around. I'd have to hand that one to solaris or aix. Linux is still a great OS, I love it, use it extensively and recommend its usage over the commercial OS's in 99% of cases. But in that 1% there are reasons to go with something far more robust.
"Linux" is the base kernel, not the distro. And as a base kernel, its lacks many features of commercial unix. Look at dtrace in solaris, or rock solid lvm in aix, etc.
When something blows up on an aix or solaris box, its pretty clear what happened. It doesn't take much discovery to figure out what the true problem is as it can in linux.
AIX scales farther between bottom and top then linux ever has as well. Its a single OS that runs on single proc boxes to massive multi-million dollar SMP machines.
Linux simply doesn't compete at the high end of unix. The old school unix machines may seem unfamiliar or old or clunky to linux users, but they are solid, well documented and extremely well known by a cadre of experts. They each have their place but generally linux is the winner because of cost and flexibility of hardware choices (platforms, not scalability) plus the labor pool is larger (and cheaper) with linux. Sometimes the price/performance ratio of linux wins out, sometimes not, it all depends on the task at hand and the important variables.
I've had that exact same problem with AIX 5.3, so its not a linux only thing. Weird things like an 'ls' would work fine on an nfs dir, but 'ls -al' would hang forever, only a reboot fixed it. Eventually a TL update fixed the problem but it drove me crazy for months, not other machines had this problem just that particular rev of AIX 5.3.
You hit the nail on the head. I have written "ugly" code that would seem to be total crap until you went through the months of wrangling, testing and performance grading I had done to get the code "perfect" (in my view.) I would extensively comment these areas though, to explain to whoever came later why it was such as mess. Usually due to performance reasons and dealing with bugs in the application that I couldn't fix. This was massive amounts of glue code tying together many different commercial applications with their own API's, bugs, "features" etc. that didn't always jibe. So sometimes the code was insane, but worked well, was fast and did exactly what it was meant to do. Many times whilst profiling sections of code the "best" code turned out to be super slow, and doing some weird stuff would gain huge performance improvements. However I will say that if you are creating code that could appear to be wrong, weird, sloppy or whatever, that you explain it in comments so this very thing doesn't occur later. Not everyone can just glance at, no matter how experienced, and determine why I (or anyone) wrote it that way without having gone through the months of pain and research to get the best code for the job. Even very experienced and professional coders would look at some of that code I wrote and at a glance think I was an idiot. Only with extensive explanation of the problems over come, the performance gained and the intended function of the code could I ever hope to keep them from breaking it later.
Its totally irrelevant unless the end product is also heat pastuerized. The colonies added to yogurt are not naturally present in milk, neither is the renet added to cheese.
Now there is some merit to the argument regarding imported beer, because it is pastuerized which kills any live yeast in bottle conditioned beer. Some argue this kills some nutritional and taste benefits.
With regards to european cheeses and yogurts, its largely irrelevant. Its just food snob hype. All the cheese sold in markets in the US that is labeled cheese is CHEESE. Period. Killing microorganisms in the milk prior to the cheese making process has no effect on the cheese flavor itself, as that is a factor of the fats and solids on the milk plus to microorganisms added to create the cheese.
We are simply talking recipe's here. Not food product definitions. Nor the illegality of "real" cheese. Just marketing hype.
What the hell are you talking about? Cheese and yogurt are illegal? Everything labeled "cheese" in your local market is CHEESE. "Pastuerized process cheese food" is what you probably meant (I hope, you can't be THAT stupid), the prepackaged slices of cheese, which are NOT labeled cheese.
I buy bree, gouda, cheddar, all kinds of REAL cheese every flipping week you dumbass. From my local grocery store, in southern california. They also have a huge selection of LIVE culture yogurts. Why dont YOU try reading your food labels sometimes. Jesus. The shit people will believe about food is amazing. People want to eat all kinds of "good" foods containing live cultures, but they are terrified of genetically modified vegetables, or irradiated foods, etc. You know last time I checked, most deadly food poisoning happens with "live cultures". Not that I have anything against eating various strains of microorganisms, I love yogurts and cheeses, beer, etc. Just commenting on the stupidity of idiots like this who believe all kinds of fallacies their local "health food" morons promote to get you to buy their expensive crap.
Go get an enema and quit spreading misinformation around. I'll go enjoy some premium aged gouda, bought at a big chain supermarket. Then maybe enjoy a live yogurt culture from the same market.
BTW, you do know that yogurt is primarily milk solids, as it cheese. Do you have any idea what it is you eat or what?
You used a crucible and higher pressure oxygen (shopvac). You can melt steel with items like this in a controlled burn. But in a ventilated space that had just had a huge hole blasted into it? Forges are different entirely. I wouldn't call a huge office building a controlled furnace. The official explanation is that there was no molten steel by the way, despite the eye witness reports and photographs of - molten steel.
Steel's melting temperature (http://education.jlab.org/qa/meltingpoint_01.html ) is as I stated. If you melted *steel* with charcoal, it is because you reached a temperature of at least 2500F.
Exotic high-temp alloys do not deform under high temperatures as much as steel. Steel would definitely exhibit deformation effects at the temps of jet fuel. But would not create molten slag which can only result from actual molten steel (the melted beams were made of steel). The temperature of ground zero was extremely high for as much as 8 weeks following the collapse of the buildings, due to pools of molten steel cooling. (unless you can explain that one better)
It took much less time for regular office materials to melt steel.
Plus the fact that the WTC 7 building which collapsed much later had no jet fuel of any kind in or on it. Have you any explanation of what collapsed that building?
Especially if two planes hit by lightning dropped both towers and resulted in molten steel in the pile of rubble. Seeing as how its impossible for jet fuel to melt steel (jet fuel burns from 800F to 1500F depending on conditions) and that steel melts at 2750F. I would certainly hope it would be famous for violating the laws of physics.
Whatever tough guy. "Dealing with" an international dispute does not mean slagging millions of people. Our military is incapable of dealing with the situation in iraq because it is not a military problem. You do not invade a nation then nuke the place.
BTW, using your dumbass logic, China, Russia, France, GB and Isreal are all quite capable of "dealing with" america as well. Keep that in mind.
Remember this: Iraq never attacked the US. Iraq has not attacked a foreign nation since Kuwait. America is the aggressor. Americans are the invaders. There are no "terrorists" in Iraq, any more so then you would be a terrorist if chinese tanks were rolling down your street. America is the nazi germany of the 21st century. The rest of the world DOES get this point, even if you cannot. And we all know what the rest of the world did to germany.
I think I'm missing something here. How would 'Hi, we're all heading off to the pub now, do you want to join us?' be construed as sexual harassment?
Because when the nerd in question has a boner when asking this, its a bit of a problem.
I did a consulting gig once where the head of IT at this firm was one of the hottest women I have ever seen face to face. She was a total reclusive nerd but was just smoking hot. It was quite distracting, I couldn't imagine having to work with her on a day to day basis.
You do realize that Kiefer is an actor don't you? He is not the character on 24, he plays that role. Believe it or not, actors can portray a wide variety of characters, its their friggin job. Kiefer has a long list of voice acting credits, obviously people who KNOW, understand he can do the role very well. Thats why people whose job it is to cast the role picked him, your opinion to the contrary. For a similar role voice-wise, please see Dark City.
Slashdot Mirror
Survival of the fittest isn't evolution per se. It's one facet of natural selection. It's one of the forces acting upon large collections of DNA. Many many many species evolved and died out because they were not the "fittest" but they still evolved. There are plenty of factors influencing natural selection, even something like a massive extinction caused by a meteor, or a volcano, or whatever. Sometimes species thrive just because they got lucky.
Even if humans can actually code DNA (and not just copy genes around) doesn't make it above and beyond evolution.
Darwin didn't invent evolution. He simply described what he saw. That doesn't mean things can't change, or become more complex where speciation and DNA combination are concerned.
No, you are a product of selective breeding, not DESIGN. It is still natural selection, by definition.
Natural: by means of nature, of which humans are a part
Selection: selection of certain traits over other traits
Nobody designs species, nobody ever has. They have guided their progress, influenced the process, which simply means we are another form of environmental pressure on natural selection. In other words, EVOLUTION.
Sheesh.
Try it on a multi terabyte high speed raid0 for scratch data on a big box like a 64 cpu altix. noatime can give massive, and by massive I mean MASSIVE speed increases. atime is retarded, I totally agree with Linus.
Yeah because its the PUBLIC you have to worry about, not the underground who actually know how to use these techniques? Security through obscurity never works, not ever. The general public is not going to attempt to break these, because it is highly difficult. Somebody who CAN do it, probably already knows how or can easily learn how. Somebody who can do it, is usually going to be the person who will do it (you have to be able to do something, in order to DO it), hence you are no safer with moderate "secrecy" then with none.
If you have a highly secure place that is using a non-secure lock, you are better off knowing about it. The only way you would know about it is if it is public knowledge in many cases. Then you change your locks, if the price of the thing being protected is higher than the price of the locks.
When you have a foreign invader who IS armed to the teeth, I'd say absolutely the iraqi people need weapons. Lots of them. It is THEIR land, isn't it? They have the right to sort it out however they see fit, not how some far removed foreign power sees fit. If they wanted Saddam out of power, they should have removed him. Saddam certainly wasn't harassing foreign powers when the US decided to invade.
Most revolutions need the power of an armed populace, even if said power is not used. The power of the people to enforce their will upon their leadership needs a sharp point sometimes.
The former soviet republics did not leave the union by revolt. The union collapsed and from an internal power struggle that WAS heavily armed. It doesn't really matter though, guns should never only be for those who want to use them to maintain power.
Which means that using at the command line is "linking" it. Doing so, of course, means your upstream code must be GPL as well. Ad Infinitum. Sorry, but the bulk of c/c++ code out there is non-gpl licensed and therefor can take no advantage of tools such as this.
Well, guns are only used to kill. Thats their sole purpose. I say so what? Taking away my right to possess killing devices doesn't remove them from the people I most need them for. Namely criminals and the armed authorities. The whole reason a populace needs guns is to allow them to remove those in power should that become necessary. I don't care about hunting. I care about having an equalizer that allows me and my fellow citizens to retake power. No, not retake. To reinforce who really has the true power. No government ever can control an unwilling populace, and they know that. Fortunately for them, most people are willing to take it up the ass. But that doesn't last forever. That is the true fear of any government. It is not foreign invaders. It is their own people. All revolutions come from within. As they should.
This was a joke, right? You wish to store files with RAID, by including a single failable, poorly performing bottleneck? HW raid is for windows desktops and low end usage.
SW raid allows you to have a separate controller for each drive, or bank of drives, outperforms ALL HW raid setups and as such is far superior to HW raid. Performance? I design HPC systems for a living. Very large ones. I can design a RAID-5 setup with over 400mb/s sustained transfer rates, easily. HW raid is a joke for mission critical applications, vendor ignorance notwithstanding. Ebay? WTF? I take it you build raid's for your gaming boxen at home.
The entire point of RAID-5 is redundancy. Using a single controller card defeats the ENTIRE purpose. Until they release controller cards with multiple redundant power supplies, separate replaceable channels, multiple 3ghz cpu's, 4gb ram, etc. I stick to my highly performing, highly available file server. The boxes I design for redundant storage ARE HW raid. Albeit one that costs a lot of money. If money IS an issue, perhaps HW raid is worth it. If money is no object, forget it, its a poor solution to the problem at hand.
Now, if you need drives that perform, for lets say a tb of local scratch disk, raid-0 is the way to go and hardware raid simply cannot compete in any way shape or form with the performance numbers of sw raid0. When I am forced to deal with machines that have integrated raid controllers and I cannot disable their raid features, I simply make a bunch of 1 drive raid0's (yeah an oxymoron, but it's how the controller deals with it) and then SW raid them together in a stripe. Using multiple scsi channels (or multiple serial attached scsi cards, even better) with multiple drive banks I can get drive performance that would blow your mind.
That is because there are still the same industrial pressures all over the world. China has a huge chemical production industry. Lets take paper manufacture as an example. To reduce hemp fiber for use as a paper product, a mechanical mill is used, a device invented in America earlier this century which makes hemp use for paper very economical. To reduce tree fiber for paper use, a chemical process is used. This process uses vast quantities of sulphuric acid. Sulphuric acid is a consumable which must be continually purchased in order to make the paper. Since china is a very large capitalist society, the chemical industry has a need to keep its product in high demand in order to keep making profits. The paper industry is much smaller than the chemical industry, and thus must bow to their wishes (stated very simply.) It is highly likely that the paper industry in China isn't even aware of the usefulness of hemp paper, since the industrial technology being used is based on American paper production techniques from the 1930's and 1940's on up.
Do you think China is somehow completely seperate from the industrial pressures of the rest of the world? Do you honestly think that industry is a nationalized thing and not a global entity? It has NOTHING to do with the war on drugs. It has everything to do with competing low level products and processes for large scale industrial uses. Hemp is just one example. Paper can be made from flax, corn, straw, etc. using the same process. It is environmentally friendly, and eats heavily into the profits from existing infrastructural industries, which BTW were created as a solution seeking a problem. Large scale chemical production only started this century. These giant companies (whose roots were from oil money, publishing and other large money pre-existing monopolies) have every reason to keep their products in use.
That is just the paper example. Lets not mention biodiesel, etc.
Did you know the diesel engine was invented to run on unmodified vegetable oil? Hemp oil being one of the chief producers of this oil? Do you really think oil companies want competition from some farmers with a lot of land, some tractors and a bunch of field hands?
Quit thinking nationally, start thinking globally. China is just another cog in the world wide capitalist machinery, all professing of "communism" aside. In fact China is one of the more successful capitalist societies on the planet.
See here:
http://fuelandfiber.com/Hemp4NRG/Hemp4NRGRV3.htm
Hemp is one of the top producers of biomass per acre. It is much better than corn and can be grown on fallow fields as well. And you can't even smoke this type of hemp, it grows 10-20 feet high and is all stalk with a clump of seeds at the top. Of course, nobody ever smoked this form of hemp, even when it was one of the primary cash crops of the south prior to the 1930's.
Too bad, since hemp is evil. It makes you rape white wimin: http://www.oddfrog.com/paper.htm
You are still completely misunderstanding the license. The lawyer mentions the DISTRIBUTION. Anything you distribute with the GPLV2 license retains that license forever.
However, since you own the code, you can also release it ("distribute" it) under any other license you so wish. The license does not retroactively impose rights onto the owner of the code, it is a license to USE the code, by others who are not the copyright holder.
Hence the term LICENSE. You do not LICENSE code to yourself.
Apple can do whatever the hell they want with the code, they own it in its entirety and can stop releasing it for free anytime they want. You can still use any version of CUPS released under GPLV2 in any way you see fit as long as YOU comply with the license.
Many many open source companies do this with the code THEY own. They release older version under GPLV2 but the latest and greatest is a commercial product released under a proprietary license. Eventually, the new product becomes the old product and gets released under the GPL. Note however that the new proprietary products contain tons of code released to the public via the GPL. It doesn't matter, if you own the code, you own the code. The only way to limit the rights of the owner would be to assign the rights of the code to some entity in the copyright which is not the owner. In this case you'd simply be transferring ownership. As long as people wish to protect code via copyright, someone has to OWN that copyright, and hence own all rights to the IP.
Yeah, I could never live without multitouch on the web. Oh wait... I have been, for 10+ years.
Well, except for the fact that you are spouting incorrect information about a topic on saving LIVES.
Another One Bites the Dust is 100-110 BPM you turd.
Just a hair over the recommended 100 compressions per minute guideline. Its a good way to know how fast to compress if you know the song. Judging 100 bpm is difficult with some guide.
I understand the common convention, however linux is the kernel if we are talking technical features of the OS, not user space tools, which are not an operating system.
The "one or two features" I pointed out are not small things at all. dtrace is the most advanced kernel instrumentation tool ever designed. There are no advanced features in the linux kernel that are not also in the commercial unixes, at least in function. For example AIX doesn't support every file system that linux does, but the file systems it does support are far more solid and safe then the linux counterparts. Try growing a file system in linux while its mounted and running a database with heavy IO. I dont care how many mp3 players there are, or games, or office tools, or whatever in a linux distro. These are not server tools, and this article was about servers.
Linux is simply not the most solid OS around. I'd have to hand that one to solaris or aix. Linux is still a great OS, I love it, use it extensively and recommend its usage over the commercial OS's in 99% of cases. But in that 1% there are reasons to go with something far more robust.
"Linux" is the base kernel, not the distro. And as a base kernel, its lacks many features of commercial unix. Look at dtrace in solaris, or rock solid lvm in aix, etc.
When something blows up on an aix or solaris box, its pretty clear what happened. It doesn't take much discovery to figure out what the true problem is as it can in linux.
AIX scales farther between bottom and top then linux ever has as well. Its a single OS that runs on single proc boxes to massive multi-million dollar SMP machines.
Linux simply doesn't compete at the high end of unix. The old school unix machines may seem unfamiliar or old or clunky to linux users, but they are solid, well documented and extremely well known by a cadre of experts. They each have their place but generally linux is the winner because of cost and flexibility of hardware choices (platforms, not scalability) plus the labor pool is larger (and cheaper) with linux. Sometimes the price/performance ratio of linux wins out, sometimes not, it all depends on the task at hand and the important variables.
I've had that exact same problem with AIX 5.3, so its not a linux only thing. Weird things like an 'ls' would work fine on an nfs dir, but 'ls -al' would hang forever, only a reboot fixed it. Eventually a TL update fixed the problem but it drove me crazy for months, not other machines had this problem just that particular rev of AIX 5.3.
You hit the nail on the head. I have written "ugly" code that would seem to be total crap until you went through the months of wrangling, testing and performance grading I had done to get the code "perfect" (in my view.) I would extensively comment these areas though, to explain to whoever came later why it was such as mess. Usually due to performance reasons and dealing with bugs in the application that I couldn't fix. This was massive amounts of glue code tying together many different commercial applications with their own API's, bugs, "features" etc. that didn't always jibe. So sometimes the code was insane, but worked well, was fast and did exactly what it was meant to do. Many times whilst profiling sections of code the "best" code turned out to be super slow, and doing some weird stuff would gain huge performance improvements. However I will say that if you are creating code that could appear to be wrong, weird, sloppy or whatever, that you explain it in comments so this very thing doesn't occur later. Not everyone can just glance at, no matter how experienced, and determine why I (or anyone) wrote it that way without having gone through the months of pain and research to get the best code for the job. Even very experienced and professional coders would look at some of that code I wrote and at a glance think I was an idiot. Only with extensive explanation of the problems over come, the performance gained and the intended function of the code could I ever hope to keep them from breaking it later.
Its totally irrelevant unless the end product is also heat pastuerized. The colonies added to yogurt are not naturally present in milk, neither is the renet added to cheese.
Now there is some merit to the argument regarding imported beer, because it is pastuerized which kills any live yeast in bottle conditioned beer. Some argue this kills some nutritional and taste benefits.
With regards to european cheeses and yogurts, its largely irrelevant. Its just food snob hype. All the cheese sold in markets in the US that is labeled cheese is CHEESE. Period. Killing microorganisms in the milk prior to the cheese making process has no effect on the cheese flavor itself, as that is a factor of the fats and solids on the milk plus to microorganisms added to create the cheese.
We are simply talking recipe's here. Not food product definitions. Nor the illegality of "real" cheese. Just marketing hype.
What the hell are you talking about? Cheese and yogurt are illegal? Everything labeled "cheese" in your local market is CHEESE. "Pastuerized process cheese food" is what you probably meant (I hope, you can't be THAT stupid), the prepackaged slices of cheese, which are NOT labeled cheese.
I buy bree, gouda, cheddar, all kinds of REAL cheese every flipping week you dumbass. From my local grocery store, in southern california. They also have a huge selection of LIVE culture yogurts. Why dont YOU try reading your food labels sometimes. Jesus. The shit people will believe about food is amazing. People want to eat all kinds of "good" foods containing live cultures, but they are terrified of genetically modified vegetables, or irradiated foods, etc. You know last time I checked, most deadly food poisoning happens with "live cultures". Not that I have anything against eating various strains of microorganisms, I love yogurts and cheeses, beer, etc. Just commenting on the stupidity of idiots like this who believe all kinds of fallacies their local "health food" morons promote to get you to buy their expensive crap.
Go get an enema and quit spreading misinformation around. I'll go enjoy some premium aged gouda, bought at a big chain supermarket. Then maybe enjoy a live yogurt culture from the same market.
BTW, you do know that yogurt is primarily milk solids, as it cheese. Do you have any idea what it is you eat or what?
You used a crucible and higher pressure oxygen (shopvac). You can melt steel with items like this in a controlled burn. But in a ventilated space that had just had a huge hole blasted into it? Forges are different entirely. I wouldn't call a huge office building a controlled furnace. The official explanation is that there was no molten steel by the way, despite the eye witness reports and photographs of - molten steel.
l ) is as I stated. If you melted *steel* with charcoal, it is because you reached a temperature of at least 2500F.
8 28.htm
Steel's melting temperature (http://education.jlab.org/qa/meltingpoint_01.htm
Exotic high-temp alloys do not deform under high temperatures as much as steel. Steel would definitely exhibit deformation effects at the temps of jet fuel. But would not create molten slag which can only result from actual molten steel (the melted beams were made of steel). The temperature of ground zero was extremely high for as much as 8 weeks following the collapse of the buildings, due to pools of molten steel cooling. (unless you can explain that one better)
Interesting, that a 31 story building burnt for around 24 hours but never collapsed: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1301
It took much less time for regular office materials to melt steel.
Plus the fact that the WTC 7 building which collapsed much later had no jet fuel of any kind in or on it. Have you any explanation of what collapsed that building?
Especially if two planes hit by lightning dropped both towers and resulted in molten steel in the pile of rubble. Seeing as how its impossible for jet fuel to melt steel (jet fuel burns from 800F to 1500F depending on conditions) and that steel melts at 2750F. I would certainly hope it would be famous for violating the laws of physics.
Whatever tough guy. "Dealing with" an international dispute does not mean slagging millions of people. Our military is incapable of dealing with the situation in iraq because it is not a military problem. You do not invade a nation then nuke the place.
BTW, using your dumbass logic, China, Russia, France, GB and Isreal are all quite capable of "dealing with" america as well. Keep that in mind.
Remember this: Iraq never attacked the US. Iraq has not attacked a foreign nation since Kuwait. America is the aggressor. Americans are the invaders. There are no "terrorists" in Iraq, any more so then you would be a terrorist if chinese tanks were rolling down your street. America is the nazi germany of the 21st century. The rest of the world DOES get this point, even if you cannot. And we all know what the rest of the world did to germany.
Because when the nerd in question has a boner when asking this, its a bit of a problem.
I did a consulting gig once where the head of IT at this firm was one of the hottest women I have ever seen face to face. She was a total reclusive nerd but was just smoking hot. It was quite distracting, I couldn't imagine having to work with her on a day to day basis.
You do realize that Kiefer is an actor don't you? He is not the character on 24, he plays that role. Believe it or not, actors can portray a wide variety of characters, its their friggin job. Kiefer has a long list of voice acting credits, obviously people who KNOW, understand he can do the role very well. Thats why people whose job it is to cast the role picked him, your opinion to the contrary. For a similar role voice-wise, please see Dark City.
I wonder how this applies to things like maps?