Actually, there was talk of that back in the 1970s. I don't remember if there was any serious science behind it or not. It could have just been a general cultural concern because of all of the fears of a Nuclear Winter.
Most of my career has been in telecom/datacom companies, and perl is the preferred language for testing and infrastructure. The last stint I did at a true startup ended in 2003 (I got the hell out) and they used tcl for testing. Since then I've only seen perl. Perl certainly is less popular in CGI and LAMP than it used to be, but that is the only major pull back I've noticed. But it isn't new and sexy, which is fine by me, and that is what many people seem to notice.
That said, I'm not sure if/when I'll adopt perl6. I like much of what I've seen, but I've got an install base to worry about. I either need a killer reason to switch, or a lot of dead time in my schedule. I jumped on perl4 -> perl5 back in the winter of 94/95, but that was such a huge step forward that it could not be ignored.
Under the GPL, if it has been distributed internally, then only those local users have the right to demand the source. The fact that one set of users has access to the product (and also the source) in no way affects any users not in that set. There is nothing in the GPL that says you have to make the product available to the whole world. It just says that if you do make it available, then the source has to be made available too.
I have no idea if "making available" is to the individual or to the company for whom that individual works. But I'm not sure it matters. If they are using it as part of their job, then just put your foot down and say that they are not allowed to touch the source on company time. Since it was never distributed to them as individuals outside of work, just as employees, then I think you're safe.
But this all begs the question: What are you trying to gain from this? Just grant them access and be done with it. Prohibit them from touching the source while on the clock, but let them do whatever they want outside of work. Who knows, one of them just might make the product better for everyone.
AC, you are basically right that the French have fought for centuries, and they've done well in most of those wars. With Napoleon they took on the whole world and nearly won. But since 1870 France has pretty much lost every war it has been in. In WWI the French did do most of the fighting, but it wasn't until the Brittish and Americans showed up in numbers that they started winning. France was simply a battleground and a footnote in WWII: France was a Major Power in May 1940, and before the end of June it had surrendered. The wars in Indochine (Vietnam) and Algiera weren't been any better. After a 140 years without a major victory, France's reputation as a nation of warriors is tarnished, and so it will remain until France wins something on its own.
BTW: I said as much when I lived in France. Yes, I'm perfectly capable of being an ugly American when I feel like it. This point of view wasn't popular, but what could they say?
- doug
PS: The French did win a battle with Greenpeace in 1985, but I don't think that counts as winning a war.
Meh. It happens to every army. Didn't some German Peacekeepers in Afghanistan waste a truckload of local soldiers? It isn't good, but every soldier everywhere lives in a Kill or Be Killed situation. And nearly everyone decides to err on the side of self preservation. This is human nature, and as long as we have wars, we will have senseless killing of civilians.
What is unexpected about MS doing this? The only thing unexpected is Brown saying this publicly. From what I saw a few years ago, I figured that he was Microsoft's play thing forever and ever.
That is true for some of the lawyers, but David Boies's company took a one time fee up front and that is all that they get. They bet that SCO would win early (basically IBM caving in) and lost that bet.
I agree. I used to live in Paris, and I can tell you that I've seen people going way too fast in very dense/congested places. There might be a slow down at first, and it might even be 10%. But once the drivers become accustomed to denser conditions, they'll speed right back up. This just increases the risk with little/no long term reduction in bad driving habits.
The only way this will actually make a long term dent would be via gridlock.
If I understand things, VA just made that a violation of state law. It is now on the books there, so passing this law will give VA something to sue over. We all know that Federal law nearly always trumps state laws, but I think the Republican plan is to rush it to SCOTUS and let the 5-4 conservative majority declare it to be unconstitutional. After Obama's comment about the SCOTUS in his SotU, some of the Supremes might be looking forward to this case.
Yeah, but they always do it by stretching the commerce clause. I hope that one day it snaps back. And with SCOTUS being 5-4 to the right, if someone can push a challenge up through the appeals process before a conservative dies/retires, then this is could be declared unconstitutional.
But I ain't holding my breath
- doug
Re:It is bad, wrong way to go about it
on
Health Care Reform
·
· Score: 1
The US Postal Service
In the 18th century, there was no other means of delivering mail everywhere. It was a huge investment, and losing money was worth it because it was a big deal. Now days, not so much. I think I'd rather that the USPS subsidy went to building out our broadband footprint in rural areas.
- doug
Re:It is bad, wrong way to go about it
on
Health Care Reform
·
· Score: 1
If you really want to fix healthcare, do tort reform first. Then break up the AMA cartel. Then look at other things that may need to be changed.
Is there anything that the government runs that really functions correctly/efficiently?
I don't think that would be enough, but it would be a wonderful start. Why does this have to be big bang, all-chips-in major plan? Why can't we go for the low hanging fruit first?
I basically agree with you, but look at it a bit differently: The Feds can only do anything well if expense is not a limit. Who won the cold war? Who went to the moon? The Guv'ment can do this stuff, but only at incredible cost. Since health care is a large fraction of GDP, they have to do it on the cheap in a way that the military never has to do. And therein lies the problem: The US Federal government cannot tie its own shoes when it is having to manage costs.
- doug
PS: Full disclosure: I'm one of the non-left American public that you mention, and I trust that if passed, this plan will be a fiasco. I've lived in Europe, and I've seen many of the pluses of Socialised Medicine, and am sure that we can't do it here.
I'm rarely in before 10am, often closer to 11. But I've found that answering a few customer emails at 2am helps. The folks in Asia get an answer sooner, so they're happier. I've done it regularly and that my boss has asked when I actually sleep. It's enough that I don't get any grief when I zone out in the afternoon. I'm not sure how many bosses are like that, but there is at least one of 'em.
Actually, I believe it is specifically the education of women that gets the biggest bang for the buck. I don't remember the logic behind this, just the statement.
1960s movies aren't my thing. Tron was the only pre-War Games movie that I thought of. You should RTFA because we have all seen 4 of the 6 listed before War Games.
Don't worry, your plan is still good if you intend to take over the world. Contrary to popular (US) opinion, the world does extend beyond US borders.
Of course it does. The world is divided into two parts: The US of A, and targets. If every place was part of the US, then where would we bomb? Shesh, some people just don't think about the important things.
I've been annoyed at the government's use of proprietary formats since some moron at the IRS made wrapped some PDFs in a self extracting ZIP file. The linux tools at the time (the was in the 90s) didn't work well enough, and I had to work around it all. Now days most data files in closed formats have open source viewers, but not all. My son's school uses a bunch of MS only crap and I can't stand it. I have a MS netbook just so he can view everything. If you have any say in how the data is presented, format everything in a linux friendly way.
Likewise, keep IE specific junk off of your webserver.
I also liked someone else's idea of doing a writeup of how much you save annually by not buying close source tools. This can help others in Government/Corporate America make the case of switching to Linux. And any publicity is good publicity.
While you're right about the chaos, I'm not sure that those who die in the first wave would be lucky. War, chaos, famine, disease, and the like are how the human race has lived for most of its history. Sure, more people are alive now, and few alive today have seen anything remotely similar. Compare the centuries with modern comforts to those without. The future would be bleak, and it isn't the world that I want to live in, but I'd rather take my chances there than just plain die. I'll always take a shot and go down fighting rather than give in for no good reason. Perhaps that is just me.
Then don't use apt-get. I usually use synaptic, which is presents a GUI with bunches of options. Click what you want, and it does all the apt-get stuff for you. It is about as painless as can be. Perhaps there are too many packages, but that is just a question of organisation of the repositories, or filtering at the client (synaptic) side. I can see the advantage of presenting "applications only" for "desktop application users", and leaving all the system stuff, the helpers, the libraries, and other minutia to those of us who care. There is already some of that the very coarse level, such as "I want a webserver", but I think you want an inbetween point.
Slashdot Mirror
And I bet that no one made a backup of that tablet.
Actually, there was talk of that back in the 1970s. I don't remember if there was any serious science behind it or not. It could have just been a general cultural concern because of all of the fears of a Nuclear Winter.
- doug
Most of my career has been in telecom/datacom companies, and perl is the preferred language for testing and infrastructure. The last stint I did at a true startup ended in 2003 (I got the hell out) and they used tcl for testing. Since then I've only seen perl. Perl certainly is less popular in CGI and LAMP than it used to be, but that is the only major pull back I've noticed. But it isn't new and sexy, which is fine by me, and that is what many people seem to notice.
That said, I'm not sure if/when I'll adopt perl6. I like much of what I've seen, but I've got an install base to worry about. I either need a killer reason to switch, or a lot of dead time in my schedule. I jumped on perl4 -> perl5 back in the winter of 94/95, but that was such a huge step forward that it could not be ignored.
- doug
Under the GPL, if it has been distributed internally, then only those local users have the right to demand the source. The fact that one set of users has access to the product (and also the source) in no way affects any users not in that set. There is nothing in the GPL that says you have to make the product available to the whole world. It just says that if you do make it available, then the source has to be made available too.
I have no idea if "making available" is to the individual or to the company for whom that individual works. But I'm not sure it matters. If they are using it as part of their job, then just put your foot down and say that they are not allowed to touch the source on company time. Since it was never distributed to them as individuals outside of work, just as employees, then I think you're safe.
But this all begs the question: What are you trying to gain from this? Just grant them access and be done with it. Prohibit them from touching the source while on the clock, but let them do whatever they want outside of work. Who knows, one of them just might make the product better for everyone.
- doug
AC,
you are basically right that the French have fought for centuries, and they've done well in most of those wars. With Napoleon they took on the whole world and nearly won. But since 1870 France has pretty much lost every war it has been in. In WWI the French did do most of the fighting, but it wasn't until the Brittish and Americans showed up in numbers that they started winning. France was simply a battleground and a footnote in WWII: France was a Major Power in May 1940, and before the end of June it had surrendered. The wars in Indochine (Vietnam) and Algiera weren't been any better. After a 140 years without a major victory, France's reputation as a nation of warriors is tarnished, and so it will remain until France wins something on its own.
BTW: I said as much when I lived in France. Yes, I'm perfectly capable of being an ugly American when I feel like it. This point of view wasn't popular, but what could they say?
- doug
PS: The French did win a battle with Greenpeace in 1985, but I don't think that counts as winning a war.
Meh. It happens to every army. Didn't some German Peacekeepers in Afghanistan waste a truckload of local soldiers? It isn't good, but every soldier everywhere lives in a Kill or Be Killed situation. And nearly everyone decides to err on the side of self preservation. This is human nature, and as long as we have wars, we will have senseless killing of civilians.
- doug
What is unexpected about MS doing this? The only thing unexpected is Brown saying this publicly. From what I saw a few years ago, I figured that he was Microsoft's play thing forever and ever.
That is true for some of the lawyers, but David Boies's company took a one time fee up front and that is all that they get. They bet that SCO would win early (basically IBM caving in) and lost that bet.
I agree. I used to live in Paris, and I can tell you that I've seen people going way too fast in very dense/congested places. There might be a slow down at first, and it might even be 10%. But once the drivers become accustomed to denser conditions, they'll speed right back up. This just increases the risk with little/no long term reduction in bad driving habits.
The only way this will actually make a long term dent would be via gridlock.
If I understand things, VA just made that a violation of state law. It is now on the books there, so passing this law will give VA something to sue over. We all know that Federal law nearly always trumps state laws, but I think the Republican plan is to rush it to SCOTUS and let the 5-4 conservative majority declare it to be unconstitutional. After Obama's comment about the SCOTUS in his SotU, some of the Supremes might be looking forward to this case.
- doug
Yeah, but they always do it by stretching the commerce clause. I hope that one day it snaps back. And with SCOTUS being 5-4 to the right, if someone can push a challenge up through the appeals process before a conservative dies/retires, then this is could be declared unconstitutional.
But I ain't holding my breath
- doug
The US Postal Service
In the 18th century, there was no other means of delivering mail everywhere. It was a huge investment, and losing money was worth it because it was a big deal. Now days, not so much. I think I'd rather that the USPS subsidy went to building out our broadband footprint in rural areas.
- doug
If you really want to fix healthcare, do tort reform first. Then break up the AMA cartel. Then look at other things that may need to be changed.
Is there anything that the government runs that really functions correctly/efficiently?
I don't think that would be enough, but it would be a wonderful start. Why does this have to be big bang, all-chips-in major plan? Why can't we go for the low hanging fruit first?
- doug
I basically agree with you, but look at it a bit differently: The Feds can only do anything well if expense is not a limit. Who won the cold war? Who went to the moon? The Guv'ment can do this stuff, but only at incredible cost. Since health care is a large fraction of GDP, they have to do it on the cheap in a way that the military never has to do. And therein lies the problem: The US Federal government cannot tie its own shoes when it is having to manage costs.
- doug
PS: Full disclosure: I'm one of the non-left American public that you mention, and I trust that if passed, this plan will be a fiasco. I've lived in Europe, and I've seen many of the pluses of Socialised Medicine, and am sure that we can't do it here.
I'm rarely in before 10am, often closer to 11. But I've found that answering a few customer emails at 2am helps. The folks in Asia get an answer sooner, so they're happier. I've done it regularly and that my boss has asked when I actually sleep. It's enough that I don't get any grief when I zone out in the afternoon. I'm not sure how many bosses are like that, but there is at least one of 'em.
Easy: yes, Funny: not so much
Actually, I believe it is specifically the education of women that gets the biggest bang for the buck. I don't remember the logic behind this, just the statement.
1960s movies aren't my thing. Tron was the only pre-War Games movie that I thought of. You should RTFA because we have all seen 4 of the 6 listed before War Games.
- doug
I'm a geek and I didn't (and still don't) know who Kevin Smith is.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=who+is+kevin+smith
Don't worry, your plan is still good if you intend to take over the world. Contrary to popular (US) opinion, the world does extend beyond US borders.
Of course it does. The world is divided into two parts: The US of A, and targets. If every place was part of the US, then where would we bomb? Shesh, some people just don't think about the important things.
I've been annoyed at the government's use of proprietary formats since some moron at the IRS made wrapped some PDFs in a self extracting ZIP file. The linux tools at the time (the was in the 90s) didn't work well enough, and I had to work around it all. Now days most data files in closed formats have open source viewers, but not all. My son's school uses a bunch of MS only crap and I can't stand it. I have a MS netbook just so he can view everything. If you have any say in how the data is presented, format everything in a linux friendly way.
Likewise, keep IE specific junk off of your webserver.
I also liked someone else's idea of doing a writeup of how much you save annually by not buying close source tools. This can help others in Government/Corporate America make the case of switching to Linux. And any publicity is good publicity.
- doug
While you're right about the chaos, I'm not sure that those who die in the first wave would be lucky. War, chaos, famine, disease, and the like are how the human race has lived for most of its history. Sure, more people are alive now, and few alive today have seen anything remotely similar. Compare the centuries with modern comforts to those without. The future would be bleak, and it isn't the world that I want to live in, but I'd rather take my chances there than just plain die. I'll always take a shot and go down fighting rather than give in for no good reason. Perhaps that is just me.
Oh, I get it. We build a cloud to fight their cloud.
Actually, I did give it to my Mom. She didn't get it.
Then don't use apt-get. I usually use synaptic, which is presents a GUI with bunches of options. Click what you want, and it does all the apt-get stuff for you. It is about as painless as can be. Perhaps there are too many packages, but that is just a question of organisation of the repositories, or filtering at the client (synaptic) side. I can see the advantage of presenting "applications only" for "desktop application users", and leaving all the system stuff, the helpers, the libraries, and other minutia to those of us who care. There is already some of that the very coarse level, such as "I want a webserver", but I think you want an inbetween point.
- doug