Sweden also had geographical advantages. Getting ground troops into Sweden even now would be a hard battle. But with the ability to drop tanks from aircraft it would be possible.
During WW2 getting ground troops over the mountains surrounding Sweden was a much harder battle. So the front gate was the only real option.
Then air support was only effective to support ground troops. Now there is more options to target precisely with air attacks but still ground support is needed to win any real war short of wiping the nation out altogether.
A better comparison.
Your team has one truck. But needs to get more gear to and from the site.
You can build a bigger truck (wider datapath 64 vs 32 bit) but as you know the cost of bigger trucks becomes much greater as you go up the market.
Or you can take your current truck and make it much faster allowing more trips per hour (CPU speed 1Ghz 2Ghz) But the cost of running the truck becomes higher and higher. And technology only allows a truck to go so fast.
CPUs have gotten to this same point. We can build 128bit CPUs but it becomes expensive and difficult to manage.
We have really reached a technology limit on speed of CPUs They can get faster but the cost of producing a CPU much above 3GHz is becoming unmanageable.
The cheaper option is the buy multiple mid sized trucks and encourage your workmen to use them more efficiently.
If you want to do a big job Then you need to manage getting the trucks to devide the job effectively.
Parallel programming.
But 90% of use is lots of small quick jobs.
Most OS es nowadays have hundreds of small processes doing quick little things all the time. Having multiple trucks makes this more efficient then one big one.
Now not being a truck man Ill leave you guys to finish the metaphor.
Windows = Fix Or Repair Daily FORD
Linux = ?
Solaris = ?
Mac = ?
basically if you listen to the above advice the answer is do not open source it.
Now i am a huge open source fan. Unfortunatly your average CFO is only willing to go open source when they cannot pay. Once they can pay they need the risk to be handled garrentees etc etc.
and here is where the money is if you can build a piece of software large enougth to help mid to large size buisnesses and provide some garrentees and support contracts. (ie we back up your financial data off site) or other service like offerings that companies are willing to pay for. in the perfect world a small buisness downloads your software runs their buisness with it. some of them get bigger and need help moving to a more managed system. you charge buy the hour and provide the services they need. you grow as the users of your software grow.
Ok I gave you a pretty hard time on your first post because you seemed like a Dick.
It looks like I judged you to fast. For that I am sorry.
But I have to say. Running a buisness requires managment skills. along with all the other skills involved. If you are no good at accounts you hire an accountent. Manageing your resources is as important. A good manager is productive because he or she will increase the productivity of all your other staff.
You are also right about the 10 in one employees thing. But the hiring a employee investing in managing that employee is part of the cost that is replacing the complex and long hiring process. You do not get anything for nothing. People are not machines they cannot be programmed on mass. You either spend time and money sellecting at the front end. Or working with them to gennerate a good employee or wasting money discovering that you and they will not fit. The cost is always there. ps sorry for lack of formatting. I am typeing on a cell phone.
Translation: Me Me Me Me Me.
Come on dude. I am pretty conservative and still see this as stupid and self centered. Your company relies on those cogs you oil.
And as for risk. Sorry but when they choose to invest their time in working for an employer they are taking risks just as you. if you fail they will be looking for a job long before you will. You will look after yourself first.
If your buisness fails you loose the money you invested. Get up try again or look for a job.
The only difference for your employers is the did not likly invest money.
One would hope you have taken the same advice you would give your employees and placed some of your profits back into your bank account while being successful.
This way when you trat your most valuble resources like shit and they fucked off to a company that has treated its employees like a valuable resource. You will have something to fall back on.
Try pulling that chip of your darn shoulder and remembering how important a well motivated employee is.
ps I agree what they do outside work effects your buisness. It is the clear fact that you do not respect them for their input during work that annoys me.
But even then. You only have the moral right to control extreamist behavior. If I am cought saying i think a sport team is useless. Hard luck i aint on your payroll.
if i am cought swearing on TV. Yeah maybe. if i have a public face at your company.
The problem is they did do this millions of years ago.
The reason we cant see it is we were an insignificant solar system and got moved into the middle of the smile.
Either that or they had the plan and the technology but a bunch of environmentalist said. You cant do that one day life may evolve in those baron solar systems.
Err if we have 93 Billion light years of space to play with. Then given that all of our current communications technology travels at the speed of light. And we have no real idea how to get around that.
Then any unnatural radio waves that happen to be in our neck of the woods are still very unlikely to reach us during the time a civilization exists. and would have been sent out at the very least 1000s of years ago.
We have only been listening for about 75 years.
So the lack of unheard unnatural emissions really dose not point to the non existance of a current civilization.
The simple answer is we really have no idea if there is or even if there is likly to be other civilizations out there or if they ever have been.
And until we get a letter saying Dear Earthling please come to the party. Opps sorry you are 1 billion years to late. I am not going to vote either way. Because everything else is just cool speculation.
Ok well that screws my above posted theory.
ie that we seem to have more time bececause we are more focused on the events that may help us save our life.
Although have more time to think may be useful information. sat thinking oh this is cool time is running slow while you are plummeting into a snow bank is rather a waste of it.
And possible proof that Darwin wasent all he was cracked up to be.
sorry just teasing.
I agree that it is the feel of danger that causes the effect.
First i have experienced this during a Hangglidimg accident. so have a few theories. Sorry about typos etc i am typeing this on a treo.
This is why i think we beleaves time slows down.
During most events our mind is taking notice of way more things then our consiose realizes. this has been indicated by hypnosis experiments where people are able to discribe elements of an event they did not realized they had seen.
I think that when we are in danger it is sometimes possible for the mind to become very centered on the one subject. How can I avoid dieing. in those moments we are using all of our availble brain to analize only that information that may help.
As such we are able to consider events more completely and consider more possible solutions and even react faster. As such when we look back time seems to have slowed down.
I have an idea of how to test such a theory. but it would require people who are willing to really risk their life./. seems like a good place for this.
The percieved risk has to be beleavable.
we have 2 elements to test.
1. The human minds ability to react and plan faster in a life threatening situation.
2. The ability to register irrelevent information while in that same situation.
So we set up a small steerable buggy that can be set to run at a specified speed.
Set up a selection of obsicles made of foam but painted to look like concreate.
You also play some form of audio content that question can be asked about once complete.
The test subject is placed in the bugy and sent down the track mutiple times. increasing the speed and changing the position of the obstiles each time. this prevents the subject learning the track.
you measure the maximum speed that the test subject can make it down the course without hitting the foam bollards. you also count how many questions the test subject can answer at each speed.
you then do it all again but with concreate bollards.
in the first run the subject would know that the risk is little to none. but in the second test the risk of harm and even death would be real and understood.
it the subject is able to drive more accurately at a slightly greater speed. and also able to answer less questions from the audio tracks then we have a possitive result.
do this with aboutah 1000 people. if 1% or so have better results then it looks good to me.
While I agree with your sentiment this is not a case of laws to make everyone a criminal.
IP is a law in the US and it is an easy one to follow. Don't listen to music if they want to charge you and you don't want to pay.
Its not hard to follow and every one failing to do so if supporting the current business model. Every time you download music that is covered by IP laws and listen. You are giving the RIAA more ammunition to say well our business model would be fine if it was not for all these law breakers.
You do not have a right to music. Artists do not have to make it.
The problem with this is it dose not care if you broke the law or not. If they suspect you of copying music they can take your PC.
This is the type of law that allows government to threaten everyone.
Cross me I will report you to the INS you will spend years proving you paid all your taxes.
Cross me I will report you to the Copy Right Agency they will take you PCs and we will spend years searching for something to hang you with.
Err that is the way it has always been world wide.
You are a citizen of a country you get in easy if not you have to go through customs. Get questioned etc etc.
Fingerprinting all forign citizens is newish and the US beat most everyone else to it so they cant complain.
But treating forign citizens with less trust then local is common and always has been.
Heck we had a news article a while back that nigeria turned away Bill Gates because he had no proof that he would not settle. I still grin at that one.
Yeah it also states that the buyer has the right to distribute that source under the same license.
IE if you release RHEL under GPL then anyone else can release the code used in RHEL under GPL.
Hence they have to.
but I am still stuck with the voids surrounded by sphincter muscles Comcast. It really is impossible to get a telephone line without one of the big phone companies or the cable monopoly now.
Also as the main reason I have vonage is for free calls and a local phone line in the UK.
There is no other US alternative.
The world IS getting smaller and technology is passing the big Telco's because they have sat on their monopolies rather then use their innovations.
instead of providing services customers want to pay for they stick their head in the void and sue innovators or bribe politicians.
Unfortunately this only explains a small part of the lack of choice.
And lets be honest. If a company the size of comcast cannot go to the network and say. Give it us this way or not at all. Then something is very wrong. To get eyes the networks have to get cable companies.
The power is a 2 way thing. Just the leaders of comcast time warner etc do not have the motivation to fight for the benefit of there customers.
And the accusation being made is this is intentional.
The point is that the Network providers and the cable companies have gotten together to ensure you cannot go elsewhere and get a la carte cable.
As the article states they are being accused of forming a cartel.
This is illegal. If you can prove that the newspaper companies have conspired to force you to buy the sports section then you would have a case.
When companies conspire to limit your choice in the aim of increasing profit that is bad.
That is the point of making it illeagal to conspire to create a monopoly and that is what the Networks and cable providers.
If all the theme parks got together and said. I will only let my customers by a all ride ticket you do the same and we make 80% extra for each customer. Then you would have a point.
Or as a more related deal. If the ride builders got with the theme park owners and arranged that all parks would only sell tickets on their latest ride if they included the little ladybird ride as well.
Because the individual theme parks have decided that this is a good model you have no fight. If I wanted to start a per ride priced park I could.
If you try to start a per channel cable company atm you will not be able to buy content. This is why it is a cartel and illegal. It is a method that allows multiple suppliers to form a monopoly like pricing policy.
> Then again, Rosa Parks had no legal right to keep her bus seat from a white guy. And yet, she did.
Actually she did. Segregation laws were illegal in the south. The civil rights movement was fighting for rights Southern blacks already had not to create new ones.
I was born in the UK moved to the US in 1999. I started using UNIX at University as my university had mainly Unix workstations fewer PCs and Linux was the best option to run a UNIX like OS at home.
But I have to agree when i came to the US I was amaxed to see boxed linux distros (red hat) available in the stores. It did not last long though.
I have not seen a Linux bistro for sale in a store for 3+ years.
I see little other marketing for linux other then slashdot and other internet sites.
When you buy a laptop and try to install Linux on it you often find that some of the hardware is not well supported.
When ACER sells you a laptop with linux you can be sure you have hardware that is supported by linux. More to the point you have one more company giving the hardware manufactures a hard time for not releasing details on their product and allowing the Open source community to write hardware.
or even providing Linux drivers of their own in binary format ala Nvidia
Currently many hardware venders see little or no reason to provide linux support because there customers are not the users but PC Manufacturers.
Slashdot Mirror
Sweden also had geographical advantages. Getting ground troops into Sweden even now would be a hard battle. But with the ability to drop tanks from aircraft it would be possible. During WW2 getting ground troops over the mountains surrounding Sweden was a much harder battle. So the front gate was the only real option. Then air support was only effective to support ground troops. Now there is more options to target precisely with air attacks but still ground support is needed to win any real war short of wiping the nation out altogether.
A better comparison. Your team has one truck. But needs to get more gear to and from the site. You can build a bigger truck (wider datapath 64 vs 32 bit) but as you know the cost of bigger trucks becomes much greater as you go up the market. Or you can take your current truck and make it much faster allowing more trips per hour (CPU speed 1Ghz 2Ghz) But the cost of running the truck becomes higher and higher. And technology only allows a truck to go so fast. CPUs have gotten to this same point. We can build 128bit CPUs but it becomes expensive and difficult to manage. We have really reached a technology limit on speed of CPUs They can get faster but the cost of producing a CPU much above 3GHz is becoming unmanageable. The cheaper option is the buy multiple mid sized trucks and encourage your workmen to use them more efficiently. If you want to do a big job Then you need to manage getting the trucks to devide the job effectively. Parallel programming. But 90% of use is lots of small quick jobs. Most OS es nowadays have hundreds of small processes doing quick little things all the time. Having multiple trucks makes this more efficient then one big one. Now not being a truck man Ill leave you guys to finish the metaphor. Windows = Fix Or Repair Daily FORD Linux = ? Solaris = ? Mac = ?
basically if you listen to the above advice the answer is do not open source it. Now i am a huge open source fan. Unfortunatly your average CFO is only willing to go open source when they cannot pay. Once they can pay they need the risk to be handled garrentees etc etc. and here is where the money is if you can build a piece of software large enougth to help mid to large size buisnesses and provide some garrentees and support contracts. (ie we back up your financial data off site) or other service like offerings that companies are willing to pay for. in the perfect world a small buisness downloads your software runs their buisness with it. some of them get bigger and need help moving to a more managed system. you charge buy the hour and provide the services they need. you grow as the users of your software grow.
Ok I gave you a pretty hard time on your first post because you seemed like a Dick. It looks like I judged you to fast. For that I am sorry. But I have to say. Running a buisness requires managment skills. along with all the other skills involved. If you are no good at accounts you hire an accountent. Manageing your resources is as important. A good manager is productive because he or she will increase the productivity of all your other staff. You are also right about the 10 in one employees thing. But the hiring a employee investing in managing that employee is part of the cost that is replacing the complex and long hiring process. You do not get anything for nothing. People are not machines they cannot be programmed on mass. You either spend time and money sellecting at the front end. Or working with them to gennerate a good employee or wasting money discovering that you and they will not fit. The cost is always there. ps sorry for lack of formatting. I am typeing on a cell phone.
Translation: Me Me Me Me Me. Come on dude. I am pretty conservative and still see this as stupid and self centered. Your company relies on those cogs you oil. And as for risk. Sorry but when they choose to invest their time in working for an employer they are taking risks just as you. if you fail they will be looking for a job long before you will. You will look after yourself first. If your buisness fails you loose the money you invested. Get up try again or look for a job. The only difference for your employers is the did not likly invest money. One would hope you have taken the same advice you would give your employees and placed some of your profits back into your bank account while being successful. This way when you trat your most valuble resources like shit and they fucked off to a company that has treated its employees like a valuable resource. You will have something to fall back on. Try pulling that chip of your darn shoulder and remembering how important a well motivated employee is. ps I agree what they do outside work effects your buisness. It is the clear fact that you do not respect them for their input during work that annoys me. But even then. You only have the moral right to control extreamist behavior. If I am cought saying i think a sport team is useless. Hard luck i aint on your payroll. if i am cought swearing on TV. Yeah maybe. if i have a public face at your company.
The problem is they did do this millions of years ago. The reason we cant see it is we were an insignificant solar system and got moved into the middle of the smile. Either that or they had the plan and the technology but a bunch of environmentalist said. You cant do that one day life may evolve in those baron solar systems.
Err if we have 93 Billion light years of space to play with. Then given that all of our current communications technology travels at the speed of light. And we have no real idea how to get around that. Then any unnatural radio waves that happen to be in our neck of the woods are still very unlikely to reach us during the time a civilization exists. and would have been sent out at the very least 1000s of years ago. We have only been listening for about 75 years. So the lack of unheard unnatural emissions really dose not point to the non existance of a current civilization. The simple answer is we really have no idea if there is or even if there is likly to be other civilizations out there or if they ever have been. And until we get a letter saying Dear Earthling please come to the party. Opps sorry you are 1 billion years to late. I am not going to vote either way. Because everything else is just cool speculation.
Ok well that screws my above posted theory. ie that we seem to have more time bececause we are more focused on the events that may help us save our life. Although have more time to think may be useful information. sat thinking oh this is cool time is running slow while you are plummeting into a snow bank is rather a waste of it. And possible proof that Darwin wasent all he was cracked up to be. sorry just teasing.
I agree that it is the feel of danger that causes the effect.
/. seems like a good place for this.
First i have experienced this during a Hangglidimg accident. so have a few theories. Sorry about typos etc i am typeing this on a treo.
This is why i think we beleaves time slows down.
During most events our mind is taking notice of way more things then our consiose realizes. this has been indicated by hypnosis experiments where people are able to discribe elements of an event they did not realized they had seen.
I think that when we are in danger it is sometimes possible for the mind to become very centered on the one subject. How can I avoid dieing. in those moments we are using all of our availble brain to analize only that information that may help.
As such we are able to consider events more completely and consider more possible solutions and even react faster. As such when we look back time seems to have slowed down.
I have an idea of how to test such a theory. but it would require people who are willing to really risk their life.
The percieved risk has to be beleavable.
we have 2 elements to test.
1. The human minds ability to react and plan faster in a life threatening situation.
2. The ability to register irrelevent information while in that same situation.
So we set up a small steerable buggy that can be set to run at a specified speed.
Set up a selection of obsicles made of foam but painted to look like concreate.
You also play some form of audio content that question can be asked about once complete.
The test subject is placed in the bugy and sent down the track mutiple times. increasing the speed and changing the position of the obstiles each time. this prevents the subject learning the track.
you measure the maximum speed that the test subject can make it down the course without hitting the foam bollards. you also count how many questions the test subject can answer at each speed.
you then do it all again but with concreate bollards.
in the first run the subject would know that the risk is little to none.
but in the second test the risk of harm and even death would be real and understood.
it the subject is able to drive more accurately at a slightly greater speed. and also able to answer less questions from the audio tracks then we have a possitive result.
do this with aboutah 1000 people. if 1% or so have better results then it looks good to me.
ps i expect about 10 people to die.
While I agree with your sentiment this is not a case of laws to make everyone a criminal. IP is a law in the US and it is an easy one to follow. Don't listen to music if they want to charge you and you don't want to pay. Its not hard to follow and every one failing to do so if supporting the current business model. Every time you download music that is covered by IP laws and listen. You are giving the RIAA more ammunition to say well our business model would be fine if it was not for all these law breakers. You do not have a right to music. Artists do not have to make it. The problem with this is it dose not care if you broke the law or not. If they suspect you of copying music they can take your PC. This is the type of law that allows government to threaten everyone. Cross me I will report you to the INS you will spend years proving you paid all your taxes. Cross me I will report you to the Copy Right Agency they will take you PCs and we will spend years searching for something to hang you with.
Err that is the way it has always been world wide. You are a citizen of a country you get in easy if not you have to go through customs. Get questioned etc etc. Fingerprinting all forign citizens is newish and the US beat most everyone else to it so they cant complain. But treating forign citizens with less trust then local is common and always has been. Heck we had a news article a while back that nigeria turned away Bill Gates because he had no proof that he would not settle. I still grin at that one.
Yeah it also states that the buyer has the right to distribute that source under the same license. IE if you release RHEL under GPL then anyone else can release the code used in RHEL under GPL. Hence they have to.
Same here.
but I am still stuck with the voids surrounded by sphincter muscles Comcast. It really is impossible to get a telephone line without one of the big phone companies or the cable monopoly now.
Also as the main reason I have vonage is for free calls and a local phone line in the UK.
There is no other US alternative.
The world IS getting smaller and technology is passing the big Telco's because they have sat on their monopolies rather then use their innovations.
instead of providing services customers want to pay for they stick their head in the void and sue innovators or bribe politicians.
Unfortunately this only explains a small part of the lack of choice. And lets be honest. If a company the size of comcast cannot go to the network and say. Give it us this way or not at all. Then something is very wrong. To get eyes the networks have to get cable companies. The power is a 2 way thing. Just the leaders of comcast time warner etc do not have the motivation to fight for the benefit of there customers. And the accusation being made is this is intentional.
The point is that the Network providers and the cable companies have gotten together to ensure you cannot go elsewhere and get a la carte cable. As the article states they are being accused of forming a cartel. This is illegal. If you can prove that the newspaper companies have conspired to force you to buy the sports section then you would have a case. When companies conspire to limit your choice in the aim of increasing profit that is bad. That is the point of making it illeagal to conspire to create a monopoly and that is what the Networks and cable providers.
If all the theme parks got together and said. I will only let my customers by a all ride ticket you do the same and we make 80% extra for each customer. Then you would have a point. Or as a more related deal. If the ride builders got with the theme park owners and arranged that all parks would only sell tickets on their latest ride if they included the little ladybird ride as well. Because the individual theme parks have decided that this is a good model you have no fight. If I wanted to start a per ride priced park I could. If you try to start a per channel cable company atm you will not be able to buy content. This is why it is a cartel and illegal. It is a method that allows multiple suppliers to form a monopoly like pricing policy.
> Then again, Rosa Parks had no legal right to keep her bus seat from a white guy. And yet, she did. Actually she did. Segregation laws were illegal in the south. The civil rights movement was fighting for rights Southern blacks already had not to create new ones.
I was born in the UK moved to the US in 1999. I started using UNIX at University as my university had mainly Unix workstations fewer PCs and Linux was the best option to run a UNIX like OS at home. But I have to agree when i came to the US I was amaxed to see boxed linux distros (red hat) available in the stores. It did not last long though. I have not seen a Linux bistro for sale in a store for 3+ years. I see little other marketing for linux other then slashdot and other internet sites.
When you buy a laptop and try to install Linux on it you often find that some of the hardware is not well supported. When ACER sells you a laptop with linux you can be sure you have hardware that is supported by linux. More to the point you have one more company giving the hardware manufactures a hard time for not releasing details on their product and allowing the Open source community to write hardware. or even providing Linux drivers of their own in binary format ala Nvidia Currently many hardware venders see little or no reason to provide linux support because there customers are not the users but PC Manufacturers.