Perch is a bass. So is Walleye and both species can be found in Europe and elsewhere. Granted however that North America has more bass species than other continents.
Because the carp is considered a pest. That's why it's better to get rid of it. If you introduce a market for the stock, which apparently has been tried but isn't very economically viable, the problem will NOT go away.
It's also done in a rather humane way. No fish is forced/killed or otherwise maimed. They simply won't find a mate and will ultimately die of natural causes - happy carp.
Mass breeding of sharks or other predators would upset the eco-system. Sounds far worse than the proposed solution which would only affect the carp species in question. Besides, sharks don't live in freshwater as far as I know.
Increased fishing programs would still catch other fish, not to mention evolution. The harder a species is pressed, the more it will reproduce. So when the practice of "hard" fishing is abandoned, the stock will come back in even greater numbers.
Since all carp that I know of are freshwater fish, it stands to reason by that assumption that the species was introduced by man. In fact the article mentions the word "introduced" but neglects to mention by what means. Had it been by natural cause, the choice of word would commonly be "migration".
As such it would be next to impossible to spread this gene outside of Australia, where the species isn't wanted anyway. So unless I am wrong in my basic assumption that man caused this in the first place, the problem is contained.
If you're complaining that we don't have a Communist/Socialist government which has decided that you are entitled to 5 bars even in the hills of Montana, then you are correct. We don't have such a government.
If you are complaining that there is no trade agreement in the WTO which requires participating countries to provide uniform cell phone coverage wherever a person may go, then you are also correct. No such treaty has been ratified in the US.
The coverage in this country is great where there is a market for coverage. Where there is no market, there is no coverage.
The original question was;
"If it were obviously such a big problem, how come the wireless providers haven't picked a common carrier?"
The answer is apparent. There is no problem. There may be an inconvenience to you, but it's hardly a problem for the wireless providers. Since you're not even a resident in this country, it matters even less. If it was a problem, it would be addressed quickly.
I call that Freedom of Choice and Free Markets. Why should a wireless provider not be able to choose what carrier it wants to use to provide its customers with services? If it were obviously such a big problem, how come the wireless providers haven't picked a common carrier?
If you decide to compile stuff on Solaris, some problems are likely to occur if you aren't aware of them.
1) Do NOT use GNU binutils. GNU strip and GNU ld do not understand Solaris x86 ELF headers and create corrupt binaries.
2) In almost 100% of the cases, GNU autoconf will not figure out that the Solaris linker requires the specification of a runtime linker option. Solve this by running autoconf like;
LDFLAGS="-L/foo -R/foo"./configure
This is obviously pointless to do if you're using static libraries.
Interesting how this post was moderated as a troll. Any post which isn't detrimental to SCO and preferential to Linux companies, is henceforth a troll?
I wouldn't exactly call Solaris a bare system. In fact it is a very full-featured UNIX which has pretty much everything you'd want.
It is correct that no C compiler is bundled with the OE, but there are a plentitude of choices. Ranging from GCC which is very easy to procure, to the more performance optimized Workshop compilers. Centerline also has some good C++ compilers.
Now I take it that you went to sunfreeware.com to fetch binaries of various freeware components and you decided you couldn't find a mirror? It took me approximately 2 seconds to spot a link on the left hand frame which says "FTP/Mirror Sites" on it. The link resolves to http://www.sunfreeware.com/ftp.html.
I would also take this opportunity to disagree with you about how Sun is doing. Business requirements have shifted on the lower-end hardware market and Sun is adapting to that. However you will be hard strung to find many companies that can scale as well as Sun can. Besides, SPARC is an open architecture, much different from X86. Most OpenSource lovers should like that.
The fact that you say that Linux doesn't have silly limits which would implictly be bestowed upon FreeBSD, Solaris and other very fine operating systems, brings me to think that you're clueless.
I don't like RIAA and I don't have to do business with them, so I don't. But it is quite amusing to see a Slashdot crowd all up in arms over this stuff.
A few years ago, when Napster was under fire from RIAA lawyers it seemed to me that everybody on Slashdot thought it was awful that poor Napster was sued. After all, it was the users of the P2P network that committed crimes, not Napster.
Here we are in 2003, almost 4 years later and it seems people got what they wanted. But now there's something wrong with RIAA doing exactly what people called for... So is the real answer that RIAA should just lay down and die? I doubt it will ever do so. It's a dog eat dog world.
And you are right, settling out of court is legal and it saves YOU and ME money.
Are you speaking of Clinton? As far as I know, he has already served his two terms and I believe that Amendment XXII (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut ion.amendmentxxii.html) of the Constitution has that nailed down. Looks like you can't have Clinton again.
I believe that the world isn't fair. We are all born and/or trained with certain aptitude and certain interest for certain things. Not everybody can be good at everything and obviously it is impossible for everybody to be equally good at the same things. This is in my mind true on more levels than just work. Surely, if this assumption that we aren't equal is true, it would be a near travesty to say that everybody is equally worth?
I believe in capitalism. Money is a means of exerting power. Because everybody wants power, ergo, everybody wants money. The alternative to money would be Authoritarian government, arguably something we have enough of as it is. If money is bad, then it is also true that distribution of power is bad. Hence people are not in power.
I guess since you are a Liberal, you would agree that Authoritarian Populism (communism) is bad. Strangely enough, in this bind you're in, you REQUIRE rich people in order to drive an economy. Do away with the rich and the economy is defunct, which means you can only resort to Authoritarian Populism to drive society. And communism is bad.
Tax the rich, punish them just because they are rich and they will take their money elsewhere. While the healthcare question is rather convoluted and complicated, the question of entitlement isn't. People who are entitled to something EXPECT it. And if they don't get it, they get pissed off. Once an entitlement is in place, it cannot be taken away without great trouble. Give more entitlements and more taxes must be charged. The only thing trickling down is taxes.
I don't particularly trust the government to do with my money as it pleases. In fact, the notion of a tax implies that the money that I HAVE EARNED, is not mine. I simply get to keep what the government says I can keep. That sounds very much like a Populist idea to me.
And as far as "Bush's tax cuts for the rich" goes, how is it that people who don't PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAX get a check for $300? Answer: it's not a tax cut for the poor. It is straight-out WELFARE. If you give something BACK, the implication is that there is an inverse discrepancy to start with. Otherwise it's a gift. And since it is a gift vis-a-vie taxation, it is welfare.
Your logic seems to not make much sense. On your website you say that Bush is bad. No real reason why, but you have some really strange idea about DONATING money to the guy you want out of office. Some weird reference to Orwell's 1984, yet the amount that you urge others to donate is $1.84. After reading the content on your website, it leads me to believe that you're young or uninformed. Perhaps both?
For a guy who suggests he is Libertarian, you seem quite the Liberal. Especially since you're suggesting that you, or presumably the government, knows how to spend somebody else's $50MM better. This is one of the fundamental Libertarian stances, economic freedom. Liberals tend to like redistribution of wealth. In this regard, a Libertarian is usually closer to that of a Conservative.
"When people are using software but they're using a pirated version, they're not paying the government the tax revenues it should be receiving," Holleyman said.
Wonder how our elected representatives are going to take this. Obviously they're not going to consider that people who wouldn't (couldn't afford to) buy the software in the first place would be dodging taxes. Not to mention of course the amount of PR various BSA members have received for "leaked" beta versions of software...
I was unaware that XSun ignores ~/.xinitrc. We use this heavily at work without any modifications to a default install. If ~/.xinitrc is not present however, settings are read from Xdefaults.
AFAIK, no congressmen accept bribes. That would be a felony.
I think bribery for a public servant should be severely punished. And I believe it is. At the very least, expulsion from public office should be result.
Some people confuse bribery with contributions. It is widely believed that congressmen receive contributions based on work they do for a contributor. It is not illegal to accept contributions and it isn't illegal to listen to constituents. I wouldn't know if a contribution would have an amplifying effect on the constituent's voice, but if one were to humor the idea and assume that this was the case, it could certainly seem as if a bill in congress was conscieved in return for the contribution.
Interestingly, the new campaign finance laws which bar "soft money" in excess of certain amounts are under heavy fire. The preconscieved notion is that contributions fall under freedom of speech and that the campaign finance laws are curtailing those rights. Considering that only very wealthy people and corporations can afford large contributions, some people tend to argue "freedom of speech for Who?"
Slashdot Mirror
Perch is a bass. So is Walleye and both species can be found in Europe and elsewhere. Granted however that North America has more bass species than other continents.
Because the carp is considered a pest. That's why it's better to get rid of it. If you introduce a market for the stock, which apparently has been tried but isn't very economically viable, the problem will NOT go away.
It's also done in a rather humane way. No fish is forced/killed or otherwise maimed. They simply won't find a mate and will ultimately die of natural causes - happy carp.
What's so bad about that?
Mass breeding of sharks or other predators would upset the eco-system. Sounds far worse than the proposed solution which would only affect the carp species in question. Besides, sharks don't live in freshwater as far as I know.
Increased fishing programs would still catch other fish, not to mention evolution. The harder a species is pressed, the more it will reproduce. So when the practice of "hard" fishing is abandoned, the stock will come back in even greater numbers.
Since all carp that I know of are freshwater fish, it stands to reason by that assumption that the species was introduced by man. In fact the article mentions the word "introduced" but neglects to mention by what means. Had it been by natural cause, the choice of word would commonly be "migration".
As such it would be next to impossible to spread this gene outside of Australia, where the species isn't wanted anyway. So unless I am wrong in my basic assumption that man caused this in the first place, the problem is contained.
If you're complaining that we don't have a Communist/Socialist government which has decided that you are entitled to 5 bars even in the hills of Montana, then you are correct. We don't have such a government.
If you are complaining that there is no trade agreement in the WTO which requires participating countries to provide uniform cell phone coverage wherever a person may go, then you are also correct. No such treaty has been ratified in the US.
The coverage in this country is great where there is a market for coverage. Where there is no market, there is no coverage.
The original question was;
"If it were obviously such a big problem, how come the wireless providers haven't picked a common carrier?"
The answer is apparent. There is no problem. There may be an inconvenience to you, but it's hardly a problem for the wireless providers. Since you're not even a resident in this country, it matters even less. If it was a problem, it would be addressed quickly.
I call that Freedom of Choice and Free Markets. Why should a wireless provider not be able to choose what carrier it wants to use to provide its customers with services? If it were obviously such a big problem, how come the wireless providers haven't picked a common carrier?
If you decide to compile stuff on Solaris, some problems are likely to occur if you aren't aware of them.
./configure
1) Do NOT use GNU binutils. GNU strip and GNU ld do not understand Solaris x86 ELF headers and create corrupt binaries.
2) In almost 100% of the cases, GNU autoconf will not figure out that the Solaris linker requires the specification of a runtime linker option. Solve this by running autoconf like;
LDFLAGS="-L/foo -R/foo"
This is obviously pointless to do if you're using static libraries.
For more info, read ld(1).
"Click To Feed Homeless Pets"
Finally a charity I can consider giving to. Thank you for the link.
Interesting how this post was moderated as a troll. Any post which isn't detrimental to SCO and preferential to Linux companies, is henceforth a troll?
Or the lack of XFree86 and GNU/GNOME 2.4 on your new shiny GNU/Linux.
I wouldn't exactly call Solaris a bare system. In fact it is a very full-featured UNIX which has pretty much everything you'd want.
It is correct that no C compiler is bundled with the OE, but there are a plentitude of choices. Ranging from GCC which is very easy to procure, to the more performance optimized Workshop compilers. Centerline also has some good C++ compilers.
Now I take it that you went to sunfreeware.com to fetch binaries of various freeware components and you decided you couldn't find a mirror? It took me approximately 2 seconds to spot a link on the left hand frame which says "FTP/Mirror Sites" on it. The link resolves to http://www.sunfreeware.com/ftp.html.
I would also take this opportunity to disagree with you about how Sun is doing. Business requirements have shifted on the lower-end hardware market and Sun is adapting to that. However you will be hard strung to find many companies that can scale as well as Sun can. Besides, SPARC is an open architecture, much different from X86. Most OpenSource lovers should like that.
The fact that you say that Linux doesn't have silly limits which would implictly be bestowed upon FreeBSD, Solaris and other very fine operating systems, brings me to think that you're clueless.
I don't like RIAA and I don't have to do business with them, so I don't. But it is quite amusing to see a Slashdot crowd all up in arms over this stuff.
A few years ago, when Napster was under fire from RIAA lawyers it seemed to me that everybody on Slashdot thought it was awful that poor Napster was sued. After all, it was the users of the P2P network that committed crimes, not Napster.
Here we are in 2003, almost 4 years later and it seems people got what they wanted. But now there's something wrong with RIAA doing exactly what people called for... So is the real answer that RIAA should just lay down and die? I doubt it will ever do so. It's a dog eat dog world.
And you are right, settling out of court is legal and it saves YOU and ME money.
Are you speaking of Clinton? As far as I know, he has already served his two terms and I believe that Amendment XXII (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut ion.amendmentxxii.html) of the Constitution has that nailed down. Looks like you can't have Clinton again.
Yes, as you Liberals call it.
I believe that the world isn't fair. We are all born and/or trained with certain aptitude and certain interest for certain things. Not everybody can be good at everything and obviously it is impossible for everybody to be equally good at the same things. This is in my mind true on more levels than just work. Surely, if this assumption that we aren't equal is true, it would be a near travesty to say that everybody is equally worth?
I believe in capitalism. Money is a means of exerting power. Because everybody wants power, ergo, everybody wants money. The alternative to money would be Authoritarian government, arguably something we have enough of as it is. If money is bad, then it is also true that distribution of power is bad. Hence people are not in power.
I guess since you are a Liberal, you would agree that Authoritarian Populism (communism) is bad. Strangely enough, in this bind you're in, you REQUIRE rich people in order to drive an economy. Do away with the rich and the economy is defunct, which means you can only resort to Authoritarian Populism to drive society. And communism is bad.
Tax the rich, punish them just because they are rich and they will take their money elsewhere. While the healthcare question is rather convoluted and complicated, the question of entitlement isn't. People who are entitled to something EXPECT it. And if they don't get it, they get pissed off. Once an entitlement is in place, it cannot be taken away without great trouble. Give more entitlements and more taxes must be charged. The only thing trickling down is taxes.
I don't particularly trust the government to do with my money as it pleases. In fact, the notion of a tax implies that the money that I HAVE EARNED, is not mine. I simply get to keep what the government says I can keep. That sounds very much like a Populist idea to me.
And as far as "Bush's tax cuts for the rich" goes, how is it that people who don't PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAX get a check for $300? Answer: it's not a tax cut for the poor. It is straight-out WELFARE. If you give something BACK, the implication is that there is an inverse discrepancy to start with. Otherwise it's a gift. And since it is a gift vis-a-vie taxation, it is welfare.
Your logic seems to not make much sense. On your website you say that Bush is bad. No real reason why, but you have some really strange idea about DONATING money to the guy you want out of office. Some weird reference to Orwell's 1984, yet the amount that you urge others to donate is $1.84. After reading the content on your website, it leads me to believe that you're young or uninformed. Perhaps both?
For a guy who suggests he is Libertarian, you seem quite the Liberal. Especially since you're suggesting that you, or presumably the government, knows how to spend somebody else's $50MM better. This is one of the fundamental Libertarian stances, economic freedom. Liberals tend to like redistribution of wealth. In this regard, a Libertarian is usually closer to that of a Conservative.
HOLY SMOKES!
Sun licensed the Solaris 8 source code under its Community Source License, a few years back. It is no longer the case though;
http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/source/
There was an NDA though, one which I can not recollect the therms of. But anyway, Solaris 2.x is based on SVR4, so it qualifies as a derivative.
UnixWare 7.x is SVR5 actually.
www.svs.com
Probably the cheapest in town. Plenty generous quotas and bandwith. Check them out.
"When people are using software but they're using a pirated version, they're not paying the government the tax revenues it should be receiving," Holleyman said.
Wonder how our elected representatives are going to take this. Obviously they're not going to consider that people who wouldn't (couldn't afford to) buy the software in the first place would be dodging taxes. Not to mention of course the amount of PR various BSA members have received for "leaked" beta versions of software...
If people buy this game, then yes, the word will spread. I'll be buying it, for demonstrative purposes.
Wish I had mod points. This is probably one of the better posts I've read in a long time. Factual and correct.
I was unaware that XSun ignores ~/.xinitrc. We use this heavily at work without any modifications to a default install. If ~/.xinitrc is not present however, settings are read from Xdefaults.
AFAIK, no congressmen accept bribes. That would be a felony.
I think bribery for a public servant should be severely punished. And I believe it is. At the very least, expulsion from public office should be result.
Some people confuse bribery with contributions. It is widely believed that congressmen receive contributions based on work they do for a contributor. It is not illegal to accept contributions and it isn't illegal to listen to constituents. I wouldn't know if a contribution would have an amplifying effect on the constituent's voice, but if one were to humor the idea and assume that this was the case, it could certainly seem as if a bill in congress was conscieved in return for the contribution.
Interestingly, the new campaign finance laws which bar "soft money" in excess of certain amounts are under heavy fire. The preconscieved notion is that contributions fall under freedom of speech and that the campaign finance laws are curtailing those rights. Considering that only very wealthy people and corporations can afford large contributions, some people tend to argue "freedom of speech for Who?"
The release hasn't been announced which means that it isn't released yet.