It's not doubtful, because I can point at many examples where languages have indeed merged.
Viking invaders to England set up their towns. They also traded their words with the locals. Today, English has many viking origin words because of the need to communicate over 1000 years ago.
Likewise, the French also invaded England. English picked up a great many French words during that time. English isn't unique in the ability to pick up foreign words. Every language has been borrowing from other languages for thousands of years.
Linguists even have a term for a merged tounge: creole.
I love dselect. It worked fine for me, and I use it about as often as apt-get.
But, I'm a new Debian user. Usually I can guess the name of the package that I want, and just type apt-get install netscape or something like that. Sometimes I don't know what the name of the package I want is, so I use dselect to hunt it down.
A couple years ago I got a bunch of spams around Christmastime for a Chili Recipe book. Their e-mail was chilibook@hotmail.com.
So, I complain to hotmail, and they yank the chilibook account. Right after that, I signed up for hotmail with the chilibook account name! I started getting some of the spammer's mail, which I replied to....:-)
"Hey fatso, try a diet! Quit stuffing your face with chili!"
"Sorry, we're out of Chili, but I've got a burrito in my pants that you can have."
Well, you get the picture. This kind of stuff really is fun when you're stuck at work with nothing to do during the holidays.
That's strange....one of the scientists analyzing the results from the instruments aboard the ballon just ran out of the room screaming "IT'S A COOKBOOK!"
Just because you've got a person from an unsterile place not renowned for its quality countrol doesn't mean you can't take that artisan somewhere else to do his work, and subject it to quality control.
If you take the artisan somewhere else and subject his work to quality control, then it's art no longer.
There needs to be a rule about companies owning the same name in multiple heirarchies. There doesn't need to be a foo.net, foo.org, foo.tc, foo.sex, foo.us, and a foo.banc. A company with the name of Foo Inc. should be foo.com only.
Unless there is some kind of rule like this, then there will not really be that many additional names available to people, but the registrars will make more money.
I am a raving lunatic acting independently, and I do not presume to speak for any of the other independent raving lunatics.
But more to the point, This won't make me angry at Be. I would like to see Be have good success, because it means more choice for users, even if I wouldn't choose Be for my own computers.
I have an interest in seeing what violations of the GPL are out there, and what is being done about them. If Be does the right thing, then I say that it is a case of no harm, no foul.
Actually, it's not so secure. I can bring my own mouse and keyboard, and where would you be then? To get more secure you'd need to entomb the machine in concrete. Then, I'd need a jackhammer before I could work on it. If you drop the thing into the ocean, I'd need a salvage ship and a robot submarine before I could work on it.
100% security makes computers too hard to use. A better solution would be to make it cost more to get the data than the data is worth. An example of what NOT to do is to put code-word (higher than top secret) information on a Laptop computer, and then leave the laptop in a conference in the state department. That's what was just reported in the newspaper.
The more sensitive data, the more security required. Something along the lines of the security our nuclear arsenal is what code-word classification should be given. That means, it never gets onto a laptop computer, and it can never be accessed unless the consent of, say, a dozen 4 star generals is given by a physical act (turning a key).
I think he's getting confused with latex sensitivity.
Some people have guesstimated that latex from the rubber in tires might be causing asthma reactions in a lot of people.
I don't know about that though. I'm allergic to cats, and breathing the air around cats doesn't give me asthma. It just makes my eyes itch. People will latch onto any explanation they can think of, without regard for facts or evidence.
Personally, I think the asthma epidemic is caused by the recent opening of all those ancient Egyptian tombs. Who knows what kinds of deadly molds were released from those things....:-) As far as I know, there is no evidence that it DOESN'T cause disease, so knee-jerk reactions are definitely in order.
If people want to drive your living room around on the highways, then they shouldn't pollute much when they do it.
You might be using your vehicle for real work, but most people never put anything in the back of their SUV or pickup, and they normally drive with one person in it. It sucks that everyone else is spoiling it for you!
Most people treat giant land crawlers as their primary vehicle, and thus must be regulated. Unfortunately, that means that people who really use their trucks for work suffer.
The alternative has been demonstrated. It was called London in the 1950's.
That is not true. I am an atheist, and I have a clear distinction between a religion and a cult. Just because I am opposed to both of them does not mean that I lump them into the same bucket.
Interestingly enough, the fact that there are very few Scientologists does make it a fringe belief system, but it does not make it a cult. The definition of cult does not depend on how popular the belief system is.
so you're sitting outside hacking away, then out of the corner of your eye, you spot it...
CLOUD! OH CRAP!
>su - password:********* $shutdown -h no
RATS! To be truly useful, this solar panel should come with a cloud scanning device, and an audible alert. Or maybe an automatic connection to the same software that UPS devices use.
I am definitely a coder, and have been since I was a kid. Coding is one of those things that most definitely does NOT take a fast processor to do. Programmers in this day and age who go out and buy a 700 MHZ processor are wasting their money unless they are also going to play Quake on that machine.
Use make, gcc, and vi. You need nothing else. Compiles and links are extremely fast even on a P133 running Linux, and completely comfortable on my Celery 300.
I guess you guys don't remember the bad old days when a fast machine was 1 mips. Even on those machines Turbo Pascal v3.0a wasn't too bad at all.
Your FreeBSD machine should be very fast. If you're compiling 1.5 megs of code every time you do compile-link-test cycle, then I'd recommend using a more modern technique: separate compilation units and makefiles.:-)
Apparently in 5 years we will have computers. [1939]
Apparently in 5 years I will have a computer. [me, in 1977]
Anyway, we're going to have super mega fast computers in 5 years, with super mega capacity hard drives, and awesome color.
If you compare computers of 5 years ago you'll find that they were all 486's which from a user's perspective were frustratingly slow. Even Linux, speedy as it was on that hardware, wasn't super fast because the hardware wasn't up to it.
Nowadays, everything on my Linux box happens instantaneously, and I have absolutely no desire for a faster computer.
The gains of the next 5 years will therefore mean less to me than the gains of the last 5 years.
If there is some real change in my computing experience, it will be because we've crossed some magical gap that allows a new technology.
I've been reading for years about how speech interfaces were just around the corner, and that the new 386 processors would have the horsepower to do it and blah blah blah. Every year it was always just around the corner.
I think really good speech recognition will still take at least 5-10 years, and will require machines at least 10, probably 100 times faster than my Celery 300A machine. Until then, I just don't need a bigger box!
Yes. You're not the government, and I've got my own cameras pointed at you too.
You won't have a camera pointed at my backyard because that would require trespassing. You can look at my front yard, and I can look at yours. When the police illegally shoot someone in front of our houses, one of our cameras will pick it up, and we'll submit the evidence.
I don't really want this to be a flame, but I guess it's going to be one. Not of you, but of journalists.
You say that we need better trained science journalists. That may be true, but let me point out a flaw in that line of thinking. As someone who is knowledgable about science, I usually spot huge errors in every single article I see. It's once a month maybe that I see an article that's basically OK.
What makes me believe that it's just science news that these idiots are screwing up? Nothing. I imagine that the police cringe every time they read an article about a crime investigation, because they can spot the obvious errors. I imagine that the sports guys do the same. And that goes for every section of the newspaper.
I want to correct you statement to declare that we have a need for better educated and trained journalists in general. From what I've seen, mega-dummies work at newspapers.
Sorry Cmdr. Taco. I guess your excuse is that you don't actually write the news, you just post it.:-)
No, I'm not joking. I want the cameras to come. Why? A better society, and a better government.
OK, now let me explain myself!:-)
We live in a free country (if you live in the U.S. or various other nations in the world). That means that the *people* will own the cameras. In 1984, only the government owned the cameras. In the U.S. every private person can put a camera on the outside of their house and film the street all day.
Who are those who get into trouble with cameras? The ordinary people? Nope. Remember the LAPD beating up Rodney King? Remember the Clinton aide caught fooling around with the prostitute? On a related subject, remember Nixon?
It's the politicians that have the most to fear from the citizens owning the cameras.
I will be buying a house this summer, and as part of the upgrades I will be doing, there will be a small camera mounted to the outside of the house, filming the street 24 hours a day. When the police decide they need to beat up an innocent man, they will do it in front of *somebody's* house. It might be mine, and I'll have the footage needed to send corrupt government representatives to jail.
Can't you add those things into a regular Debian box? I ask this because I'm just getting into Debian and I really like it. But I'm hoping that I can add the goodies when I want to, which will probably be before they are available in a regular Debian release.
Amiga 500's sell for $10 in that store! So do Commodore 64's and Atari ST's. If you get to Austin you really need to take a look. Mac Aquariums go for 5 bucks, add your own water. Working Mac classics are 10 bucks. They also sell scads of PC hardware. They take their profits and use it to further Goodwill's mission, which is something like putting people to work.
Don't throw away computers that still work, even if they are Amiga 500's. There's a Goodwill Computerworks in Austin Texas that's affiliated with Goodwill Industries. They are a non-profit, and they take donations of computers. I am positive that they would not turn away a donation that was UPS'd to them, so don't ever just throw away hardware that is old but still works.
Obviously you have no idea who I am. You should bow down to me, because I have a truly open mind. You're probably the last person posting, and I'm probably the last person with an open mind. That doesn't mean I don't criticise, but it does mean that I can acknowlege error.
You have shown me sufficient evidence that you know what you're talking about, and so I'll say for the record, I was wrong.
But if I check the book and I find out I was not wrong, you should make sure to read about it here in this thread.:-)
Where do you get the 2 million lbs of thrust figure? I've never seen that before. The Rogers report says that the flame penetrated or weakened the external tank structure causing breakup of the airframe by aerodynamic forces.
You're just plain wrong about the 2 million lbs of thrust. The fuel burned off, it didn't explode.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not doubtful, because I can point at many examples where languages have indeed merged.
Viking invaders to England set up their towns. They also traded their words with the locals. Today, English has many viking origin words because of the need to communicate over 1000 years ago.
Likewise, the French also invaded England. English picked up a great many French words during that time. English isn't unique in the ability to pick up foreign words. Every language has been borrowing from other languages for thousands of years.
Linguists even have a term for a merged tounge: creole.
I hope you don't still doubt that toungues merge.
The ballpark rule that I use is that a yen is more or less equivalent to a US penny.
That will get you in the range within a few dollars.
I love dselect. It worked fine for me, and I use it about as often as apt-get.
But, I'm a new Debian user. Usually I can guess the name of the package that I want, and just type apt-get install netscape or something like that. Sometimes I don't know what the name of the package I want is, so I use dselect to hunt it down.
You know, I did the same thing!
:-)
A couple years ago I got a bunch of spams around Christmastime for a Chili Recipe book. Their e-mail was chilibook@hotmail.com.
So, I complain to hotmail, and they yank the chilibook account. Right after that, I signed up for hotmail with the chilibook account name! I started getting some of the spammer's mail, which I replied to....
"Hey fatso, try a diet! Quit stuffing your face with chili!"
"Sorry, we're out of Chili, but I've got a burrito in my pants that you can have."
Well, you get the picture. This kind of stuff really is fun when you're stuck at work with nothing to do during the holidays.
That's strange....one of the scientists analyzing the results from the instruments aboard the ballon just ran out of the room screaming "IT'S A COOKBOOK!"
Just because you've got a person from an unsterile place not renowned for its quality countrol doesn't mean you can't take that artisan somewhere else to do his work, and subject it to quality control.
If you take the artisan somewhere else and subject his work to quality control, then it's art no longer.
There needs to be a rule about companies owning the same name in multiple heirarchies. There doesn't need to be a foo.net, foo.org, foo.tc, foo.sex, foo.us, and a foo.banc. A company with the name of Foo Inc. should be foo.com only.
Unless there is some kind of rule like this, then there will not really be that many additional names available to people, but the registrars will make more money.
I object to that term "group of raving lunatics".
I am a raving lunatic acting independently, and I do not presume to speak for any of the other independent raving lunatics.
But more to the point, This won't make me angry at Be. I would like to see Be have good success, because it means more choice for users, even if I wouldn't choose Be for my own computers.
I have an interest in seeing what violations of the GPL are out there, and what is being done about them. If Be does the right thing, then I say that it is a case of no harm, no foul.
Actually, it's not so secure. I can bring my own mouse and keyboard, and where would you be then? To get more secure you'd need to entomb the machine in concrete. Then, I'd need a jackhammer before I could work on it. If you drop the thing into the ocean, I'd need a salvage ship and a robot submarine before I could work on it.
100% security makes computers too hard to use. A better solution would be to make it cost more to get the data than the data is worth. An example of what NOT to do is to put code-word (higher than top secret) information on a Laptop computer, and then leave the laptop in a conference in the state department. That's what was just reported in the newspaper.
The more sensitive data, the more security required. Something along the lines of the security our nuclear arsenal is what code-word classification should be given. That means, it never gets onto a laptop computer, and it can never be accessed unless the consent of, say, a dozen 4 star generals is given by a physical act (turning a key).
I think he's getting confused with latex sensitivity.
:-) As far as I know, there is no evidence that it DOESN'T cause disease, so knee-jerk reactions are definitely in order.
Some people have guesstimated that latex from the rubber in tires might be causing asthma reactions in a lot of people.
I don't know about that though. I'm allergic to cats, and breathing the air around cats doesn't give me asthma. It just makes my eyes itch. People will latch onto any explanation they can think of, without regard for facts or evidence.
Personally, I think the asthma epidemic is caused by the recent opening of all those ancient Egyptian tombs. Who knows what kinds of deadly molds were released from those things....
If people want to drive your living room around on the highways, then they shouldn't pollute much when they do it.
You might be using your vehicle for real work, but most people never put anything in the back of their SUV or pickup, and they normally drive with one person in it. It sucks that everyone else is spoiling it for you!
Most people treat giant land crawlers as their primary vehicle, and thus must be regulated. Unfortunately, that means that people who really use their trucks for work suffer.
The alternative has been demonstrated. It was called London in the 1950's.
That is not true. I am an atheist, and I have a clear distinction between a religion and a cult. Just because I am opposed to both of them does not mean that I lump them into the same bucket.
Interestingly enough, the fact that there are very few Scientologists does make it a fringe belief system, but it does not make it a cult. The definition of cult does not depend on how popular the belief system is.
so you're sitting outside hacking away, then out of the corner of your eye, you spot it...
CLOUD! OH CRAP!
>su -
password:*********
$shutdown -h no
RATS! To be truly useful, this solar panel should come with a cloud scanning device, and an audible alert. Or maybe an automatic connection to the same software that UPS devices use.
Which word did you not understand?
Go back and look up the ones you didn't understand.
If you make up your own definitions of cult and religion, how can you truly understand what is meant by the the text?
Freetrek.linuxgames.com
:-)
and lots of other stuff too for work.
I am definitely a coder, and have been since I was a kid. Coding is one of those things that most definitely does NOT take a fast processor to do. Programmers in this day and age who go out and buy a 700 MHZ processor are wasting their money unless they are also going to play Quake on that machine.
Use make, gcc, and vi. You need nothing else. Compiles and links are extremely fast even on a P133 running Linux, and completely comfortable on my Celery 300.
I guess you guys don't remember the bad old days when a fast machine was 1 mips. Even on those machines Turbo Pascal v3.0a wasn't too bad at all.
Your FreeBSD machine should be very fast. If you're compiling 1.5 megs of code every time you do compile-link-test cycle, then I'd recommend using a more modern technique: separate compilation units and makefiles.
Apparently in 5 years we will have computers. [1939]
Apparently in 5 years I will have a computer. [me, in 1977]
Anyway, we're going to have super mega fast computers in 5 years, with super mega capacity hard drives, and awesome color.
If you compare computers of 5 years ago you'll find that they were all 486's which from a user's perspective were frustratingly slow. Even Linux, speedy as it was on that hardware, wasn't super fast because the hardware wasn't up to it.
Nowadays, everything on my Linux box happens instantaneously, and I have absolutely no desire for a faster computer.
The gains of the next 5 years will therefore mean less to me than the gains of the last 5 years.
If there is some real change in my computing experience, it will be because we've crossed some magical gap that allows a new technology.
I've been reading for years about how speech interfaces were just around the corner, and that the new 386 processors would have the horsepower to do it and blah blah blah. Every year it was always just around the corner.
I think really good speech recognition will still take at least 5-10 years, and will require machines at least 10, probably 100 times faster than my Celery 300A machine. Until then, I just don't need a bigger box!
>Still feeling comfortable?
Yes. You're not the government, and I've got my own cameras pointed at you too.
You won't have a camera pointed at my backyard because that would require trespassing. You can look at my front yard, and I can look at yours. When the police illegally shoot someone in front of our houses, one of our cameras will pick it up, and we'll submit the evidence.
I don't really want this to be a flame, but I guess it's going to be one. Not of you, but of journalists.
:-)
You say that we need better trained science journalists. That may be true, but let me point out a flaw in that line of thinking. As someone who is knowledgable about science, I usually spot huge errors in every single article I see. It's once a month maybe that I see an article that's basically OK.
What makes me believe that it's just science news that these idiots are screwing up? Nothing. I imagine that the police cringe every time they read an article about a crime investigation, because they can spot the obvious errors. I imagine that the sports guys do the same. And that goes for every section of the newspaper.
I want to correct you statement to declare that we have a need for better educated and trained journalists in general. From what I've seen, mega-dummies work at newspapers.
Sorry Cmdr. Taco. I guess your excuse is that you don't actually write the news, you just post it.
No, I'm not joking. I want the cameras to come. Why? A better society, and a better government.
:-)
OK, now let me explain myself!
We live in a free country (if you live in the U.S. or various other nations in the world). That means that the *people* will own the cameras. In 1984, only the government owned the cameras. In the U.S. every private person can put a camera on the outside of their house and film the street all day.
Who are those who get into trouble with cameras? The ordinary people? Nope. Remember the LAPD beating up Rodney King? Remember the Clinton aide caught fooling around with the prostitute? On a related subject, remember Nixon?
It's the politicians that have the most to fear from the citizens owning the cameras.
I will be buying a house this summer, and as part of the upgrades I will be doing, there will be a small camera mounted to the outside of the house, filming the street 24 hours a day. When the police decide they need to beat up an innocent man, they will do it in front of *somebody's* house. It might be mine, and I'll have the footage needed to send corrupt government representatives to jail.
Can't you add those things into a regular Debian box? I ask this because I'm just getting into Debian and I really like it. But I'm hoping that I can add the goodies when I want to, which will probably be before they are available in a regular Debian release.
Amiga 500's sell for $10 in that store! So do Commodore 64's and Atari ST's. If you get to Austin you really need to take a look. Mac Aquariums go for 5 bucks, add your own water. Working Mac classics are 10 bucks. They also sell scads of PC hardware. They take their profits and use it to further Goodwill's mission, which is something like putting people to work.
>would you have replied if I hadn't been so snide?
Probably it would have slipped my mind somehow...
You can find articles you wrote and see how many people responded by going to your user page. That's how I keep up with threads.
Don't throw away computers that still work, even if they are Amiga 500's. There's a Goodwill Computerworks in Austin Texas that's affiliated with Goodwill Industries. They are a non-profit, and they take donations of computers. I am positive that they would not turn away a donation that was UPS'd to them, so don't ever just throw away hardware that is old but still works.
Obviously you have no idea who I am. You should bow down to me, because I have a truly open mind. You're probably the last person posting, and I'm probably the last person with an open mind. That doesn't mean I don't criticise, but it does mean that I can acknowlege error.
:-)
You have shown me sufficient evidence that you know what you're talking about, and so I'll say for the record, I was wrong.
But if I check the book and I find out I was not wrong, you should make sure to read about it here in this thread.
Where do you get the 2 million lbs of thrust figure? I've never seen that before. The Rogers report says that the flame penetrated or weakened the external tank structure causing breakup of the airframe by aerodynamic forces.
You're just plain wrong about the 2 million lbs of thrust. The fuel burned off, it didn't explode.