Who ever said that getting the whole picture was easy or quick? It's your whole attitude of consulting some other "trusted" source, rather than investigating the matter on your own, which leads to people being easily manipulated.
Unfortunately, that happened to many Americans during the run-up to the ongoing war in Iraq. Most Americans didn't investigate the claims made by politicians and the media, and thus were ignorant to the fact that they were being seriously mislead.
I know you're joking, but you should go look into what Ron Paul has written, especially if you are an American. Notice how vastly different his thoughts are compared with those of the other politicians in the US today. It'd be a good exercise for any American to do. It's the closest you'll get to what America truly stands for.
But you do know who used it last, and what specifically they changed. It's extremely easy to compare different versions of the same article. You can even be shown exactly what text differs between the two, for instance.
So rather than suggesting it's a flaw that anyone can change the most recent copy of the information, we need to realize that it's beneficial that we can see past edits, and who performed them.
Indeed, if we see a trend of certain information being edited out of articles about Republicans, it could be quite safe to assume the information that was removed is completely valid, and is being removed because it is the unfortunate truth. The same would go for the Democrats, or basically any other group, for instance. At least, however, we can see what was changed, and what it was changed from. That's just as beneficial as the information itself.
As flawed as the Wikipedia system might be, at least it is known to all what sort of errors are being made.
Anyone with an ounce of intelligence could use the list you posted a link to to their advantage. Chances are that if Republicans are adding material to an article, such information is likely a lie. Likewise, if they're removing information, it is probably truthful information they wish to hide from the public. Likewise for the Democrats.
Democrats and Republicans are basically the same today. The Republicans don't represent conservatives, and the Democrats don't represent liberals. They represent the various corporations and industries of America, or the best interests of foreign nations. With perhaps the exception of Ron Paul, they do not stand for the people of America. They are both morally deficient, and it's quite obvious to anyone who sees the American system as it truly is that both parties participate in the same sort of nonsense.
Don't blame just something like MTV. The forums at GameFAQs.com are a perfect example of a non-TV related environment that encourages and breeds stupidity.
Take a look at the typical discussion there. The vast majority of the postings there look as though they have been written by morons. There's not even a hint of proper writing skills.
The problem may be that, for whatever reason, the stupidest fools often become the most popular. And in what may be the online version of the old elementary school "imitate the cool kid" routine, many of the more impressionable youth act like morons themselves (even if they are capable of intelligence). Thus the current cesspool of stupidity flourishes there.
I would consider the forums at GameFAQs to be far more harmful to the intelligence of a teen than MTV. One of my grandsons showed me the GameFAQs.com forums while we were looking for information about Myst. At first I thought he was one of the fools there, but thankfully he joked with me about how stupid so many of his peers were. So there is some hope; the truly intelligent youth will notice that their peers are fucktards, and will be keen on not becoming such an individual.
CNN recently reported about a study that found that bat species with larger testes have smaller brains, and vice versa. Maybe these kids just have extremely large gonads, and that's why they're morons.
There's nothing special about the chav "movement" of today. It's much like the punks of the late 1970s. They wear different clothes, but the attitude is still the same.
Even then, it's something that they'll be forced to grow out of. If any of them wish to obtain and retain jobs, even as custodians or trash collectors at McDonalds, they won't be able to act like chavs or punks. And if they don't conform, then they'll likely turn to crime, and end up dead or in prison.
The basic economics of living, and the criminal justice system after that, acts as the good parents that these kids didn't have.
Nevertheless, those with intellectual talent do almost always manage to succeed, even in the fact of punkism or chavism. There won't be a shortage of British scientists or researchers, for instance.
Don't mistake a "drop" in IQ with rising IQs elsewhere.
Recall that places like India and China have, for various reasons, not been the best places to foster intellect in recent times (the last two or three hundred years). The people there are just as intellectually capable as anyone from a Western nation, but did not have many of the advantages that Western society was able to offer due to its better economic position, and so forth.
But times have changed, and education is far more available in places like India and China, in addition to many other developing countries. So it's no wonder that the comparative IQ gap between Western and Eastern cultures is closing, and closing quickly. It's not because people in the Western world are becoming stupider; it's because the people in the East are now able to take advantage of better educational opportunities.
What is a "dungeon" in this game? Is it like a real-life dungeon (Tower of London, Abu Ghraib, etc.), where people are imprisoned and tortured after being caught doing something wron? Does "beating the dungeon" mean escaping from it? Or is a "dungeon" just another area of the world which requires one to find treasure, fight some bad guys, and so on?
For those of us who don't play World of Warcraft, can somebody explain what a "raid zone" is? What are the "Eastern Plaguelands"? What is the "Undercity"?
Not just social problems, my friend.
on
Buy Vista or Else
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You didn't read my post. While the game playing was indeed a social problem, the malware problem was an even more significant technical issue.
It was indeed the higher security of OpenBSD, Konqueror, and the other software we used that helped improve the problem of malware. Blame it on the popularity of Windows all that you want; since the transition, we have not had to go back and clean up an infected system yet.
You must not have worked in a real office of any significant size. Policy rules like you suggest don't always work. People will keep playing Solitare, for instance, until it is deleted from the system. A better solution is to use a system that doesn't include such distractions in the first place, and makes it even more difficult for the average user to install them if they are that desperate.
That said, even from just a technical standpoint, OpenBSD was the right decision to make. It has saved the company time and money, offering a return far greater than the initial and ongoing investment.
KDE can be easily configured to be quite Windows-like. Many people didn't even notice, to be quite honest. We did our best to make the transition as seamless as possible, and we managed to do that well.
We labelled the OpenOffice Writer icon as "Microsoft Word", for instance, and people didn't know the difference.
We imported the Word templates and Excel spreadsheets they were using, tested them out with the OpenOffice equivalents, and for the most part they worked. The one problem we ran into was the font on the standard company letterhead was a bit too large under OpenOffice. That took about a second or so to remedy, of course.
When they asked about the games and MSN, they were simply told that they were deleted.
A little bit of preparation, forethought, and the use of quality software lead to a transition that went very well.
The parent poster was saying that Mac OS X was based on BSD, which it is. Mach was derived from BSD, and Mac OS X builds upon Mach. Of course, it also integrates code from the other BSDs, which tend to use code from each other, too.
At one point there was a BSD-derived networking stack included with Windows. However, it is reported these days that a new implementation was written.
OpenBSD is a great system for secretaries and people in a finance department, for instance.
I worked at one firm that was having problems with the computer systems their secretaries and finance department were using. Many of the workers would play games, or worse, they'd manage to infect the existing Windows XP systems with spyware.
Considering they were doing basic word processing, spreadsheet and web-based data entry tasks, we decided that Windows XP was excessive. OpenBSD, OpenOffice, and Konqueror would be sufficient.
The main benefit was that the systems just plain didn't get infected with viruses, spyware, and some such software. The price was a big benefit, too. And the ignorance of the general staff towards OpenBSD, and UNIX in general, helped. Instead of playing games and chatting, the employees had little to do but work. Productivity rose significantly within the weeks after switching over to OpenBSD.
Even though I'm a geezer, I find games like Vice City and San Andreas to be supreme. Why is that? Because I can easily edit the vehicle properties, for instance. I like having Cabbies that can go 800 km/h, while cop cars and paddy wagons that top out at 2 km/h. Even modifying the landscape is fun to do. People have added additional islands to Vice City, for instance.
Then again, card games are also always entertaining, and keep me coming back for more.
And beyond that it's probably safer to use something like OpenBSD instead of XP. It not only has a far more stable and secure base, but it also has far stricter security-wise development policies, and apparently more thorough code audits.
NeXT did reach a level of stardom within the engineering, scientific, and academic community. However, that was due to their innovative systems, rather than Jobs himself.
Indeed, if you went into nearly any modern engineering firm or research lab around 1991 or so, you'd often hear about how many of the employees there wanted even just access to a NeXT system, if they couldn't have one for themselves. Often times the price of such a system was quite prohibitive, but those who did have access were often far more productive than their peers.
Come to think of it, it could even be he who tops himself! Imagine that! It is not often that one is so great that they are able to reach a level of unparalleled stardom, only to turn around and trump themselves!
The only way I think it would be possible for him to raise the bar higher would be to sing "It's Raining Men" on stage at the next Macworld Conference.
Indeed, one of the facts of life is that everyone gets topped by somebody who is better, or by somebody who will take it to the next level. That is why I am very intrigued to see who will do that to Jobs. He has already set the bar pretty high, and whoever comes along afterwards will really have to do something spectacular to be noticed, and to earn their name.
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea I "hate" Intel. Frankly, I don't have any feelings or emotions towards them. All I care about is providing stable systems for my clients. If a company puts out products that don't work, be it because of their hardware design or the software that runs on their hardware, I will have to avoid such products until I am sure that the problems have been resolved.
I think the problem might be that you don't have much experience when it comes to real-world systems. We're not talking about some college student writing an English report. Often times there are situations where executives are making presentations to potential clients for contracts worth tens of millions of dollars. It could be financially dangerous for such a company if a laptop that's supposed to give them 5 hours of life unexpectedly only gives 4 hours, especially while sending important emails or while doing a presentation.
The minor savings in terms of reduced power usage would never make up for a lost $45 million contract.
How exactly is it "Intel bashing" to point out that similar systems from other manufacturers do not suffer from the same problem? Indeed, following such a faulty train of thought one could easily argue that pointing out the higher stability of Linux relative to Windows 98 is "Microsoft bashing". It obviously isn't "bashing" in any way, but merely pointing out that one manufacturer's product is deficient when compared to another product from another set of developers.
AMD does have dual core chips available, and from another comment in this topic they reportedly work fine. So indeed, this may very well not be a problem with just the Windows XP driver, but may also be a problem with th Intel chips.
Regardless, we can't use faulty systems like these in production settings, regardless of who manufactures them. Even if it is just a problem with Microsoft's driver, I can't recommend this hardware to clients who do wish to use Windows, just because they will run into problems. So I'll just continue to recommend AMD-, PPC- and SPARC-based systems, which often just work.
It is suggested that it may not be the Windows driver that is purely at fault here. It is said that this problem does not manifest itself on AMD systems, for instance. Thus, it should be considered that the problem is more hardware-based, rather than just confined to the Windows XP driver. And when you consider that Apple is using such hardware in their recent systems, it is clearly obvious that they may be affected as well.
But that's not the whole situation here. AMD-based systems are apparently not affected, if the summary is correct.
So it's more akin to the driver being useless in one car, but perfectly fine in a very similar car from a different manufacturer. That would suggest that it is perhaps more of a problem with the particular model of car, as well as perhaps a problem with the driver.
Let us use the proper term for such malicious discussion style, first of all. They are not flames; they are ad hominem attacks.
In order to present rational, logical arguments, one needs to build their case on fact and the truth. When one has the correct viewpoint and opinion, that is quite easy to do, as such a foundation will be readily available. Being correct naturally leads one away from using ad hominem attacks, just because one can easily present fact and truth at ease.
Ad hominem attacks arise when one party bases their argument around deceit, ignorance, bias, and hate. Indeed, people use ad hominem attacks because their stand is not built upon a solid foundation of truth and fact. Thus they use ad hominem attacks because they are in the wrong. As we clearly see, anyone who resorts to ad hominem attacks automatically loses a debate or discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
Who ever said that getting the whole picture was easy or quick? It's your whole attitude of consulting some other "trusted" source, rather than investigating the matter on your own, which leads to people being easily manipulated.
Unfortunately, that happened to many Americans during the run-up to the ongoing war in Iraq. Most Americans didn't investigate the claims made by politicians and the media, and thus were ignorant to the fact that they were being seriously mislead.
I know you're joking, but you should go look into what Ron Paul has written, especially if you are an American. Notice how vastly different his thoughts are compared with those of the other politicians in the US today. It'd be a good exercise for any American to do. It's the closest you'll get to what America truly stands for.
But you do know who used it last, and what specifically they changed. It's extremely easy to compare different versions of the same article. You can even be shown exactly what text differs between the two, for instance.
So rather than suggesting it's a flaw that anyone can change the most recent copy of the information, we need to realize that it's beneficial that we can see past edits, and who performed them.
Indeed, if we see a trend of certain information being edited out of articles about Republicans, it could be quite safe to assume the information that was removed is completely valid, and is being removed because it is the unfortunate truth. The same would go for the Democrats, or basically any other group, for instance. At least, however, we can see what was changed, and what it was changed from. That's just as beneficial as the information itself.
As flawed as the Wikipedia system might be, at least it is known to all what sort of errors are being made.
Anyone with an ounce of intelligence could use the list you posted a link to to their advantage. Chances are that if Republicans are adding material to an article, such information is likely a lie. Likewise, if they're removing information, it is probably truthful information they wish to hide from the public. Likewise for the Democrats.
Democrats and Republicans are basically the same today. The Republicans don't represent conservatives, and the Democrats don't represent liberals. They represent the various corporations and industries of America, or the best interests of foreign nations. With perhaps the exception of Ron Paul, they do not stand for the people of America. They are both morally deficient, and it's quite obvious to anyone who sees the American system as it truly is that both parties participate in the same sort of nonsense.
Don't blame just something like MTV. The forums at GameFAQs.com are a perfect example of a non-TV related environment that encourages and breeds stupidity.
Take a look at the typical discussion there. The vast majority of the postings there look as though they have been written by morons. There's not even a hint of proper writing skills.
The problem may be that, for whatever reason, the stupidest fools often become the most popular. And in what may be the online version of the old elementary school "imitate the cool kid" routine, many of the more impressionable youth act like morons themselves (even if they are capable of intelligence). Thus the current cesspool of stupidity flourishes there.
I would consider the forums at GameFAQs to be far more harmful to the intelligence of a teen than MTV. One of my grandsons showed me the GameFAQs.com forums while we were looking for information about Myst. At first I thought he was one of the fools there, but thankfully he joked with me about how stupid so many of his peers were. So there is some hope; the truly intelligent youth will notice that their peers are fucktards, and will be keen on not becoming such an individual.
CNN recently reported about a study that found that bat species with larger testes have smaller brains, and vice versa. Maybe these kids just have extremely large gonads, and that's why they're morons.
There's nothing special about the chav "movement" of today. It's much like the punks of the late 1970s. They wear different clothes, but the attitude is still the same.
Even then, it's something that they'll be forced to grow out of. If any of them wish to obtain and retain jobs, even as custodians or trash collectors at McDonalds, they won't be able to act like chavs or punks. And if they don't conform, then they'll likely turn to crime, and end up dead or in prison.
The basic economics of living, and the criminal justice system after that, acts as the good parents that these kids didn't have.
Nevertheless, those with intellectual talent do almost always manage to succeed, even in the fact of punkism or chavism. There won't be a shortage of British scientists or researchers, for instance.
Don't mistake a "drop" in IQ with rising IQs elsewhere.
Recall that places like India and China have, for various reasons, not been the best places to foster intellect in recent times (the last two or three hundred years). The people there are just as intellectually capable as anyone from a Western nation, but did not have many of the advantages that Western society was able to offer due to its better economic position, and so forth.
But times have changed, and education is far more available in places like India and China, in addition to many other developing countries. So it's no wonder that the comparative IQ gap between Western and Eastern cultures is closing, and closing quickly. It's not because people in the Western world are becoming stupider; it's because the people in the East are now able to take advantage of better educational opportunities.
What is a "dungeon" in this game? Is it like a real-life dungeon (Tower of London, Abu Ghraib, etc.), where people are imprisoned and tortured after being caught doing something wron? Does "beating the dungeon" mean escaping from it? Or is a "dungeon" just another area of the world which requires one to find treasure, fight some bad guys, and so on?
For those of us who don't play World of Warcraft, can somebody explain what a "raid zone" is? What are the "Eastern Plaguelands"? What is the "Undercity"?
You didn't read my post. While the game playing was indeed a social problem, the malware problem was an even more significant technical issue.
It was indeed the higher security of OpenBSD, Konqueror, and the other software we used that helped improve the problem of malware. Blame it on the popularity of Windows all that you want; since the transition, we have not had to go back and clean up an infected system yet.
You must not have worked in a real office of any significant size. Policy rules like you suggest don't always work. People will keep playing Solitare, for instance, until it is deleted from the system. A better solution is to use a system that doesn't include such distractions in the first place, and makes it even more difficult for the average user to install them if they are that desperate.
That said, even from just a technical standpoint, OpenBSD was the right decision to make. It has saved the company time and money, offering a return far greater than the initial and ongoing investment.
KDE can be easily configured to be quite Windows-like. Many people didn't even notice, to be quite honest. We did our best to make the transition as seamless as possible, and we managed to do that well.
We labelled the OpenOffice Writer icon as "Microsoft Word", for instance, and people didn't know the difference.
We imported the Word templates and Excel spreadsheets they were using, tested them out with the OpenOffice equivalents, and for the most part they worked. The one problem we ran into was the font on the standard company letterhead was a bit too large under OpenOffice. That took about a second or so to remedy, of course.
When they asked about the games and MSN, they were simply told that they were deleted.
A little bit of preparation, forethought, and the use of quality software lead to a transition that went very well.
The parent poster was saying that Mac OS X was based on BSD, which it is. Mach was derived from BSD, and Mac OS X builds upon Mach. Of course, it also integrates code from the other BSDs, which tend to use code from each other, too.
At one point there was a BSD-derived networking stack included with Windows. However, it is reported these days that a new implementation was written.
OpenBSD is a great system for secretaries and people in a finance department, for instance.
I worked at one firm that was having problems with the computer systems their secretaries and finance department were using. Many of the workers would play games, or worse, they'd manage to infect the existing Windows XP systems with spyware.
Considering they were doing basic word processing, spreadsheet and web-based data entry tasks, we decided that Windows XP was excessive. OpenBSD, OpenOffice, and Konqueror would be sufficient.
The main benefit was that the systems just plain didn't get infected with viruses, spyware, and some such software. The price was a big benefit, too. And the ignorance of the general staff towards OpenBSD, and UNIX in general, helped. Instead of playing games and chatting, the employees had little to do but work. Productivity rose significantly within the weeks after switching over to OpenBSD.
Even though I'm a geezer, I find games like Vice City and San Andreas to be supreme. Why is that? Because I can easily edit the vehicle properties, for instance. I like having Cabbies that can go 800 km/h, while cop cars and paddy wagons that top out at 2 km/h. Even modifying the landscape is fun to do. People have added additional islands to Vice City, for instance.
Then again, card games are also always entertaining, and keep me coming back for more.
And beyond that it's probably safer to use something like OpenBSD instead of XP. It not only has a far more stable and secure base, but it also has far stricter security-wise development policies, and apparently more thorough code audits.
NeXT did reach a level of stardom within the engineering, scientific, and academic community. However, that was due to their innovative systems, rather than Jobs himself.
Indeed, if you went into nearly any modern engineering firm or research lab around 1991 or so, you'd often hear about how many of the employees there wanted even just access to a NeXT system, if they couldn't have one for themselves. Often times the price of such a system was quite prohibitive, but those who did have access were often far more productive than their peers.
Come to think of it, it could even be he who tops himself! Imagine that! It is not often that one is so great that they are able to reach a level of unparalleled stardom, only to turn around and trump themselves!
The only way I think it would be possible for him to raise the bar higher would be to sing "It's Raining Men" on stage at the next Macworld Conference.
Indeed, one of the facts of life is that everyone gets topped by somebody who is better, or by somebody who will take it to the next level. That is why I am very intrigued to see who will do that to Jobs. He has already set the bar pretty high, and whoever comes along afterwards will really have to do something spectacular to be noticed, and to earn their name.
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea I "hate" Intel. Frankly, I don't have any feelings or emotions towards them. All I care about is providing stable systems for my clients. If a company puts out products that don't work, be it because of their hardware design or the software that runs on their hardware, I will have to avoid such products until I am sure that the problems have been resolved.
I think the problem might be that you don't have much experience when it comes to real-world systems. We're not talking about some college student writing an English report. Often times there are situations where executives are making presentations to potential clients for contracts worth tens of millions of dollars. It could be financially dangerous for such a company if a laptop that's supposed to give them 5 hours of life unexpectedly only gives 4 hours, especially while sending important emails or while doing a presentation.
The minor savings in terms of reduced power usage would never make up for a lost $45 million contract.
How exactly is it "Intel bashing" to point out that similar systems from other manufacturers do not suffer from the same problem? Indeed, following such a faulty train of thought one could easily argue that pointing out the higher stability of Linux relative to Windows 98 is "Microsoft bashing". It obviously isn't "bashing" in any way, but merely pointing out that one manufacturer's product is deficient when compared to another product from another set of developers.
AMD does have dual core chips available, and from another comment in this topic they reportedly work fine. So indeed, this may very well not be a problem with just the Windows XP driver, but may also be a problem with th Intel chips.
Regardless, we can't use faulty systems like these in production settings, regardless of who manufactures them. Even if it is just a problem with Microsoft's driver, I can't recommend this hardware to clients who do wish to use Windows, just because they will run into problems. So I'll just continue to recommend AMD-, PPC- and SPARC-based systems, which often just work.
It is suggested that it may not be the Windows driver that is purely at fault here. It is said that this problem does not manifest itself on AMD systems, for instance. Thus, it should be considered that the problem is more hardware-based, rather than just confined to the Windows XP driver. And when you consider that Apple is using such hardware in their recent systems, it is clearly obvious that they may be affected as well.
But that's not the whole situation here. AMD-based systems are apparently not affected, if the summary is correct.
So it's more akin to the driver being useless in one car, but perfectly fine in a very similar car from a different manufacturer. That would suggest that it is perhaps more of a problem with the particular model of car, as well as perhaps a problem with the driver.
Let us use the proper term for such malicious discussion style, first of all. They are not flames; they are ad hominem attacks.
In order to present rational, logical arguments, one needs to build their case on fact and the truth. When one has the correct viewpoint and opinion, that is quite easy to do, as such a foundation will be readily available. Being correct naturally leads one away from using ad hominem attacks, just because one can easily present fact and truth at ease.
Ad hominem attacks arise when one party bases their argument around deceit, ignorance, bias, and hate. Indeed, people use ad hominem attacks because their stand is not built upon a solid foundation of truth and fact. Thus they use ad hominem attacks because they are in the wrong. As we clearly see, anyone who resorts to ad hominem attacks automatically loses a debate or discussion.