It only works if everyone does it. If you are the only business in a market selling at high prices and compensating your workers well, whereas all your competitors are selling at low prices and not paying their workers very much, then you will go out of business and the prevailing supply and demand relationship will not change.
So long as there is competition, all businesses will attempt to win by lowering costs and reducing overheads (i.e. wages). It isn't greed, it is just the necessary logic of how business competition works.
I had a similar thing today - a customer of ours on the phone who is ultimately wanting to spend about £3-4000, but I can't understand a word she's saying. And she is just Irish, from Co Tyrone.
I don't in everyday life notice any language problem with asian/muslim/hundi types. I can chat well enough with anyone under 35, and anyone over 60 I doubt we'll hit it off. But the that it true of most of my middle class friends and their parents.
Apart from your triteness in the last comment, I agree. So how to counter this, People need to vote with more intelligence (obvious beyond words) and need to be presented will better information (as obvious but 10x harder to answer)
But, why is that particular point the responsibility of the bankers, politicians?
We need better candidates, as if it is a matter of just choosing what they should do, but we should look at their remit and see what they should do.
An MP ought to be designed to initiate, read, scrutinise and then reject/accept that piece of legislation. If each MP did that the there would be an affective Lower Hower to scrutinise Govt bils.
We lack this now - parliament checknig govt bills befoer they become legislation, which mean that most sensible national political debate begin done in the Lords.
And then we areonto the qiestion of they're valifiy......
Surely it is more likely that, assuming the article on the pcadvisor website is incorrect, the poster was wrong.
Why must is be the case that because the article might be incorrect then they must be 'astroturfing' (i.e. grassroots campaigning for a cause in a clandestine fashion)?
(I've not even read the article, might be right, might be wrong, but nothing in the conversation suggests that the poster is being deceitful)
However, you have no idea how often such "countries who really have no business with them" have decline following certain policies based on said "pressure".
You only hear of the cases where they ignore the pressue, not of the case where they cave.
You're trying to apply linguistic logic to an applied logic situation.
By which I mean, has anybody's experience found that My Computer or the Start menu are confusing people? I don't know anyone for whom these metaphors have ever caused a problem.
They might be bad metaphors but they are effective none the less.
I've never understood how a package manager can work on a system where the software is a free market commodity.
If I download from a package manager do I pay the people that made the software or do I pay the package archive maintainers?
If I pay the producers then what is in it for the package mantainers to keep the archive going? Where is their incentive to keep going?
If I pay the package archive mainainers then how does the money filter down to the producers? Are the archive maintainers obliged to add every piece of software that applies? If not then how can it be effective or at least fair? What about large companies (Microsoft, Adobe, AutoDesk, etc.), what is to stop them from marketing their product through independent channels?
As most Windows software is a free market commodity who is funding this package archive? An industry consortium (what if some companies don't want to join), or are we suggesting this should be publicly funded?
I don't see package managers working in a paid for commodity setting.
Initially Goerge Osborne of the Conservative party wrote an essay criticising the Labour government on its handling of large IT projects. His essay argues that the use of OSS and open standard would allow smaller more dynamic companies to tender for these project, rather than the large companies who currently do them so badly.
Osborne's essay was then criticised by a private company, who claim that his proposed use of OSS and open standard would lead to reduced overall security.
One can speculate that the private company has at least two incentives to say this:
1. Bashing OSS is likely to drum up worl for them (as they make closed source software), and
2. Bashing the Tories may cause the Labour executives assessing any future tenders to look more favourably on this company.
Oppression through overt force is very second millenium. Nowadays it is done by convincing the people that your evil scheme is something they really want and strive for, even choose to pay for.
Opt in is no defence in the face of socialogical statistical manipulation.
Following the chap above's reference to 1984 - the central theme of the book wasn't simply that there was a totalitarian state, but rather that such a state existed and it had managed to make the population believe in and love it.
However (to calm things down a second) it could just be that Google can see the increase hits inherent in this plan, and therefore the increased ad revenue.
Hi nabsltd,
I do agree entirely that almost any quantifiable of comparable situations will end up with Windows (any version) using more memory (and for that matter, I would expect from personal experience, more CPU resources) than the Linux equivilant,
While I certainly do agree that efficiency is a necessary aspect of an OS, I also worry that the differences we're talking about are about 5-8 years out of date.
A couple of 10s or 100s of MiB of RAM usage is not going make much difference to the '%AVERAGE%' user, who's computer now probably has either Vista + 2GiB+ or XP + 1GB+. The only folks not running these system are businesses who are probably trying to avoid the upgrade cycle and are still runing 512MiB P4s on XP, but only running MS Office + 1 industry specific app.
Anyway, to summarise, I agree that there are differences in resource usage betwen the 2 OSes, but are they that significant on even slightly modern hardware?
As a side note, I do competely agree with the obvious response to my post, which I guess would be: anyone who is not running at least reasonably recent hardware and/or who consider efficient usage of system resources to be imperative should run some form of Linux/Unix/BSD/etc.
Out of interest them, would you draw a distinction between an absence of theistic belief and a belief in non-theistic ontologies.
How would you define each?
(For my opinion, I would be happy taking atheism as being the absence of any belief in supernatural ideas, to do otherwise would presuppose that we have a theistic starting point to diverge from)
Is this a common turn of phrase in the US?
I hear it often on American TV and it always sounds odd to me. The UK habitually used the phrase 'couldn't care less', which to me makes sense.
Hi,
He's not confusing anything. You're just being unnecessary materialist about the definition of value.
As qw0ntum says, value is essentially a function human creativity and human need. It is an artificial measure we chose to apply to goods and services - to objects real or abstract.
A set of atoms have little intrinsic value to a given person, but when configured (by whatever means) in a particular way might make a car or a computer or anything else. To certain people a car or a computer have more value than an unformed bunch of atoms.
That doesn't imply that there is anything materially different or extra in the atoms in car configuration than in the random mess configuration (lets ignore the different enegry states and such, and just pretend that atoms work like lego) - none the less one is deemed to have more value than the other.
In this instance value is not a property of the matter itself, but rather a property of its configuration.
A person who can change one configuration into the other has the capability to add value to the matter (for a given subject).
P.S. Your arguement of instrinsic material value is even harder to justify when dealing with the provision of services rather than goods - if a dancer contained all the instrinsic value within their constituent parts, then we would value bad dnaces as much as good?
It seems resonable to assume that the MoD are not putting sufficient emphasis on data security when placing contract with private companies.
There have been several instances of private companies losing government data.
The common factor is the government involvement.
Seems that their procurement contract ought to be drawn up in such away to put safeguards against this happening.
That is why it is the UK Govternment's fault.
Are you sure you're not overstating your case just a little? If you're really honest?
Vista is a little unfamiliar compared with XP, by definition, as it is a different operating system, if it was completely familiar there would be no difference and it would in fact be XP.
But as more foregin than Linux, more foreign than Cyrillic to an Anglophone?
Slashdot Mirror
By your definition then 1980 was not in the eighties, whereas 1990 was?
It only works if everyone does it. If you are the only business in a market selling at high prices and compensating your workers well, whereas all your competitors are selling at low prices and not paying their workers very much, then you will go out of business and the prevailing supply and demand relationship will not change.
So long as there is competition, all businesses will attempt to win by lowering costs and reducing overheads (i.e. wages). It isn't greed, it is just the necessary logic of how business competition works.
I had a similar thing today - a customer of ours on the phone who is ultimately wanting to spend about £3-4000, but I can't understand a word she's saying. And she is just Irish, from Co Tyrone.
I don't in everyday life notice any language problem with asian/muslim/hundi types. I can chat well enough with anyone under 35, and anyone over 60 I doubt we'll hit it off. But the that it true of most of my middle class friends and their parents.
Hmmm, maybe drop the insult.
If you have a case to make ( I don't know - I know little about Scotland) make it clearly, but don;t insult the person.
Apart from your triteness in the last comment, I agree. So how to counter this, People need to vote with more intelligence (obvious beyond words) and need to be presented will better information (as obvious but 10x harder to answer)
But, why is that particular point the responsibility of the bankers, politicians?
We need better candidates, as if it is a matter of just choosing what they should do, but we should look at their remit and see what they should do.
An MP ought to be designed to initiate, read, scrutinise and then reject/accept that piece of legislation. If each MP did that the there would be an affective Lower Hower to scrutinise Govt bils.
We lack this now - parliament checknig govt bills befoer they become legislation, which mean that most sensible national political debate begin done in the Lords.
And then we areonto the qiestion of they're valifiy......
Sorry to raise a point of terminology point, on /. of all places, but it while I agree with your general point, I don't think it is necessarily racism.
A persons abilities can be based on their genetics - many forms of disabilities will affect a person's abilities and may be based on genetics.
And as I read the summary, the DNA tests were to determine their country of origin, and so aren't in intention racist, merely xenophobic.
I don't claim either of the above arguments are moral rebuttals, only that they seem like points of fact....
Surely it is more likely that, assuming the article on the pcadvisor website is incorrect, the poster was wrong.
Why must is be the case that because the article might be incorrect then they must be 'astroturfing' (i.e. grassroots campaigning for a cause in a clandestine fashion)?
(I've not even read the article, might be right, might be wrong, but nothing in the conversation suggests that the poster is being deceitful)
Spot on. Which is why during the United States' Savings and Loan crisis in the 80's a lot of the finance institutions were refered to as zombies.
Well exactly. What their spokeperson says doesn't necessarily have any correlation to what their head of IT thinks.
The spokesperson's job is to put the best spin on things. Saying "We lost loads of public data" would not be doing their job well.
Except,of course, you can choose which of the auto-update elements to install.
Simply set the auto-updater to download updates and notify you before installing and you can choose which you want before they install them selves.
I'm in the UK, and I manage websites for various organisations, perhaps 10 different sites, and not one of them is running PHP5.
I can't think that I've ever seen a web host running v5. (although I accept my experience is not universal, it is merely anecdotal).
The only times I can reliably run OOP code in my PHP is when I run it on servers I own (basically my work servers.)
However, you have no idea how often such "countries who really have no business with them" have decline following certain policies based on said "pressure".
You only hear of the cases where they ignore the pressue, not of the case where they cave.
Sorry, are you somehow trying to claim that the Vietnam war was designed to help the French?
You're trying to apply linguistic logic to an applied logic situation.
By which I mean, has anybody's experience found that My Computer or the Start menu are confusing people? I don't know anyone for whom these metaphors have ever caused a problem.
They might be bad metaphors but they are effective none the less.
I've never understood how a package manager can work on a system where the software is a free market commodity.
If I download from a package manager do I pay the people that made the software or do I pay the package archive maintainers?
If I pay the producers then what is in it for the package mantainers to keep the archive going? Where is their incentive to keep going?
If I pay the package archive mainainers then how does the money filter down to the producers? Are the archive maintainers obliged to add every piece of software that applies? If not then how can it be effective or at least fair? What about large companies (Microsoft, Adobe, AutoDesk, etc.), what is to stop them from marketing their product through independent channels?
As most Windows software is a free market commodity who is funding this package archive? An industry consortium (what if some companies don't want to join), or are we suggesting this should be publicly funded?
I don't see package managers working in a paid for commodity setting.
It isn't.
Initially Goerge Osborne of the Conservative party wrote an essay criticising the Labour government on its handling of large IT projects. His essay argues that the use of OSS and open standard would allow smaller more dynamic companies to tender for these project, rather than the large companies who currently do them so badly.
Osborne's essay was then criticised by a private company, who claim that his proposed use of OSS and open standard would lead to reduced overall security.
One can speculate that the private company has at least two incentives to say this:
1. Bashing OSS is likely to drum up worl for them (as they make closed source software), and
2. Bashing the Tories may cause the Labour executives assessing any future tenders to look more favourably on this company.
Doesn't matter.
Oppression through overt force is very second millenium. Nowadays it is done by convincing the people that your evil scheme is something they really want and strive for, even choose to pay for.
Opt in is no defence in the face of socialogical statistical manipulation.
Following the chap above's reference to 1984 - the central theme of the book wasn't simply that there was a totalitarian state, but rather that such a state existed and it had managed to make the population believe in and love it.
However (to calm things down a second) it could just be that Google can see the increase hits inherent in this plan, and therefore the increased ad revenue.
Hi nabsltd, I do agree entirely that almost any quantifiable of comparable situations will end up with Windows (any version) using more memory (and for that matter, I would expect from personal experience, more CPU resources) than the Linux equivilant,
While I certainly do agree that efficiency is a necessary aspect of an OS, I also worry that the differences we're talking about are about 5-8 years out of date.
A couple of 10s or 100s of MiB of RAM usage is not going make much difference to the '%AVERAGE%' user, who's computer now probably has either Vista + 2GiB+ or XP + 1GB+. The only folks not running these system are businesses who are probably trying to avoid the upgrade cycle and are still runing 512MiB P4s on XP, but only running MS Office + 1 industry specific app.
Anyway, to summarise, I agree that there are differences in resource usage betwen the 2 OSes, but are they that significant on even slightly modern hardware?
As a side note, I do competely agree with the obvious response to my post, which I guess would be: anyone who is not running at least reasonably recent hardware and/or who consider efficient usage of system resources to be imperative should run some form of Linux/Unix/BSD/etc.
I've haven't seen XP do this that I can recall.
I routinely try to install Thunderbird to replace Outlook (where clients don't object), and I haven't seen residual Outlook updates afterwards.
Out of interest them, would you draw a distinction between an absence of theistic belief and a belief in non-theistic ontologies.
How would you define each?
(For my opinion, I would be happy taking atheism as being the absence of any belief in supernatural ideas, to do otherwise would presuppose that we have a theistic starting point to diverge from)
Is this a common turn of phrase in the US?
I hear it often on American TV and it always sounds odd to me. The UK habitually used the phrase 'couldn't care less', which to me makes sense.
A neutron walk into a bar and orders a drink.
"How much is that?" he asks the barman.
The barman replies "For you, there's no charge"
Hi, He's not confusing anything. You're just being unnecessary materialist about the definition of value.
As qw0ntum says, value is essentially a function human creativity and human need. It is an artificial measure we chose to apply to goods and services - to objects real or abstract.
A set of atoms have little intrinsic value to a given person, but when configured (by whatever means) in a particular way might make a car or a computer or anything else. To certain people a car or a computer have more value than an unformed bunch of atoms.
That doesn't imply that there is anything materially different or extra in the atoms in car configuration than in the random mess configuration (lets ignore the different enegry states and such, and just pretend that atoms work like lego) - none the less one is deemed to have more value than the other.
In this instance value is not a property of the matter itself, but rather a property of its configuration.
A person who can change one configuration into the other has the capability to add value to the matter (for a given subject).
P.S. Your arguement of instrinsic material value is even harder to justify when dealing with the provision of services rather than goods - if a dancer contained all the instrinsic value within their constituent parts, then we would value bad dnaces as much as good?
It seems resonable to assume that the MoD are not putting sufficient emphasis on data security when placing contract with private companies. There have been several instances of private companies losing government data. The common factor is the government involvement. Seems that their procurement contract ought to be drawn up in such away to put safeguards against this happening. That is why it is the UK Govternment's fault.
Are you sure you're not overstating your case just a little? If you're really honest? Vista is a little unfamiliar compared with XP, by definition, as it is a different operating system, if it was completely familiar there would be no difference and it would in fact be XP. But as more foregin than Linux, more foreign than Cyrillic to an Anglophone?