Judging by results proudly displayed on social media, some of them seem to be agents of Zeta Reticuli.
212 posts • joined 12 Aug 2009
"Why are so many in the comments "indignant" about women being told what to wear, but nary a peep about men being told what to wear?"
Because men are such stupid sheep they think being told to dress in stupid clothes (and neck accessories) is actually a compliment on their abilities to select stupid clothes.
"Good for whoever is in charge of the programming, not so good for the company in the long run."
Citation needed. How many problems are avoided, how much spending is never even planned when you have a more-or-less fixed cost inhouse pool of expertise to draw on?
"Modern KDE can indeed be far too resource-heavy, but at least you can configure it to be light."
Can you easily get rid of crap like akonadi being a prerequisite of every thing I'd like to install but don't want a goddamn desktop indexer for?
I used to like KDE a lot. Used to.
> "coke, meth, heroin"
> When you're that loaded you need to get loaded more?
" There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. And I knew we'd get into that rotten stuff pretty soon. Probably at the next gas station.” -- Hunter S. Thompson
"So basically... Stick all your configuration in source control and you can check out old versions when you screw it up?"
It's actually more than that. The point (I think) is that you can automate that process almost completely, so you can commit a change, press a button, and the change works its way through your machine farm, paying attention to which machine does exactly what thing, and therefore needs exactly which change, and so on.
Of course, if you can automate it, you can give the button to someone who doesn't understand the inner workings, doesn't have a good model of those machines and their relationships, and is all too willing to push the button because, hey i'ts automated - the button knows all that stuff.
What can go wrong?
As I understand it, there's a reason U.S. Navy submarines have so many people on board. They think it's better to have humans who know stuff in the loop than to have a fully automated system with catastrophic failure modes.
"If OS developers - highly intelligent people with excellent knowledge and understanding of their domain"
Try to work with memory overcommit in a shared HPC environment, then try to repeat that with a straight face.
A kernel house of cards designed for no other real purpose than to make bad code run (for a while).
"f laptop makers were really serious about security, then hard swtiches for the camera and mic, just for starters."
Yes, it's not the camera that worries me nearly as much as the microphone. I'd really like a laptop without one, or failing that the confidence to open it up and cut the correct leads.
Dataless. That's the future young man! If only all our apps don't need any data, then there would be no need for any sysadmin, or security.
Software-Defined Data. I see it coming.
No, wait. Hyperconverged Software-Defined Data.
Data-driven hyperconverged software-defined data.
Yes, I think that's it. Is it Friday yet?
"I can't see any company in their right mind lining up to buy anything from IBM. "
IBM seems to be very well placed in the early development of actual quantum computers. I don't know if that will turn out to be a real thing or not, but if it does, it will probably be a massive game-changer, that could leave IBM sitting on top of practically infinite possibilities.
I wouldn't bet against their executives screwing it up, but their smart people do have something going on that's worth keeping an eye on.
"2. What services will suffer as a consequence of the loss of net neutrality? If a more lucrative end of the Internet will cost more, will the ISP throttle the bandwidth so that the connections become slower? That is, if you want faster Internet connections, you have to pay for it?"
In principle, ANY internet endpoint without the money to pay for its own distribution is at risk.
In principle, in fact, some non-favored-by-ISP endpoints are at risk of having no distribution at any price.
That means ANY internet forum run by amateurs for amateurs to discuss their interests.
ANY website collecting, for instance, freely available software or documentation.
ANY local organization who want a web presence for their members.
ANY mailing list whose traffic an ISP doesn't like for some reason.
Making the argument into Comcast vs Google is beggaring the question by assuming the internet is NOTHING BUT a top-down commercial entertainment distribution system.
With net neutrality, amateurs have a presence. Without net neutrality, it's money all the way down.
"I have a knack for picking up languages quickly, which meant that I’d often have to pitch in on eclectically coded projects. APL tested my abilities and patience and - although I got to be reasonably adept at it - I never want to touch it again."
This is actually pretty common. People who already know programming tend to have a difficult time picking up APL, but people who have never programmed at all tend to pick it up fairly easily. Understanding how the computer itself works makes it difficult to cast aside habits dealing with linear, sequential strings of instructions. What APL does well is allow mathematical ideas to be expressed without going through that 'how does a vector get processed?' step that most of us in this forum cannot ignore.
I freaking love APL. I use it as my desk calculator app. I'll never be any good at it because I've spent too many years thinking in Fortran/C/assembler/Pascal, etc., but I'll keep trying, because it rewards, maybe even forces, thinking outside the box.
"Net Neutrality is about innovative content providers being allowed to continue piggybacking on the common carriers without pulling their own weight on the cost side of infrastructure and last mile delivery"
The problem is -- well, A problem is -- wait let me start again -- among our problems is the fact that cable TV companies in the U.S. for mostly historical reasons now, have very strong regulation-mandated monopolies throughout the communities they serve. And it is entirely disingenuous to conflate "common carriers" with cable TV providers. Net neutrality is all about making them behave like common carriers.
What I mean is, in many if not most local communities, it IS NOT POSSIBLE for a content provider to legally pull their own weight by providing their own infrastructure. Whichever TV provider owns the franchise has a monopoly on "cables to the houses", mandated by the local city council or state legislature. Any content provider who wants to "pull their own weight" could only do it by paying the
TV company whatever amount the TV company demands.
That, in a nutshell, is what the Net Neutrality argument is about -- Does Comcast decide what websites you can usefully connect to? The alternative is to repeal the thousands of local ordinances that currently give Comcast that power, or alternatively, mandate that Comcast transport bytes at a non-discriminatory price for all comers.
Do we want an internet and a TV viewing system, or just the TV?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020