Comment Re:-1 Flamebait (Score 4, Informative) 562
No. Sony isn't just a "media company". It's one of the big technology companies. And it's relevant that one of the biggest technology companies hate Internet.
No. Sony isn't just a "media company". It's one of the big technology companies. And it's relevant that one of the biggest technology companies hate Internet.
Capitalism can't produce common goods. Internet would've never had existed if it weren't for the US government. It was created in an academic environment, by passionate people that cared about the advance of technolog (indirectly: of mankind). Internet advanced quickly, different protocols appeared, once replacing the other (Gopher, SMTP, HTTP, POP, IMAP, NNTP, etc.).
Then the companies came. Those set of protocols froze, some began to fade. Companies didn't care about "what's right". They didn't care about advance the network. The HTTP/1.0 -> 1.1 transition took years, and still hasn't finished (e.g. http pipelining). IMAP mail stalled, and got replaced by webmail. Multicast was never deployed at large. Newsgroups got replaced by phpbb.
These companies hate Internet. If they praise it, it's only when they realize they can't afford to ignore it (or destroy it).
You certainly don't sound like you know. Saying "trust me, it was my minor" is not very interesring or useful... The US has a history of messing with LA, an History other countries don't have. Nnot only private companies, but the CIA itself had participated in many LA tragedies. Go read a bit about this, very interesting.
Ask in Bolivia if they have forgotten.
You should read a bit about history of Latin America =). Just one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_massacre (there are more)
Of course, Bolivia doesn't have access to ocean ports because Chile took Bolivian coast by force.
Your message might look "Intereseing" to the Latin America history ignorant. The truth is that most of the time the money go to foreign companies, based on countries like yours.
The big question is if Oracle will keep being Oracle. This company has swallowed something bigger than him. Oracle might be more firmly sat on top of a revenue generator product, but Sun is a much larger operation, involving a dektop presence pretention, mobile, high end hardware design, high end software (Solaris), etc. (That's a reason IBM was a less conflicting buyer for Sun). In turn, Oracle sells a databse, and some enterprise programming tools, they have a much narrower scope (even the name implies this focus).
Perhaps, Oracle should rename themselves to Sun, and just sell a database called Oracle. =)
And I thought the only nazis here were grammar related...
I would say that a monopoly of one is better than a monopoly of zero...
This "purpose of the bible" is a new thing. That wasn't the idea of religious people until the last few centuries. As long as science advanced, there was no other choice than fall back... And if that's the purpose of the Bible... why does it leaves so much to interpretation. According to what passage we choouse we could think that it's asking us to kill all homosexuals, or to love everybody, or that jews who don't believe in Jesus are "sons of their father the devil"....
Besides, the bible does describe in detail the creation of our world. And it tells a story that, as I said in my first message, is wrong even as a metaphor.
Christianism is really incompatible with science. In that regard, I think the real fanatics are the real honest here. Accepting both science and the birth of Jesus from a Virgin is having a big unsolved puzzled in your head, and trying hard not to ever solve it.
Evolution is compatible with your believes because you are inconsistent in them, and you choose to randomly accept or reject parts of "The Book" so as to not challenge "your believes". According to the Bible god himself created all animals at once, and presented them to Adam so that he would name them. That implies that all animals were there when the first human walked on earth, and implies that animals are separate creations. And this is only a sample of the incompatibilities...
It doesn't work like that. The kernel never uses its own filesystems' support to load itself... How could it if it hasn't been loaded yet? That's the job of a "boot loader". The most user boot loader currently is Grub, and previously was Lilo.
Grub supports some filesystems, so it can access them and load the kernel. Lilo did not support filesystem, so there was a tool that you needed to run each time you changed the kernel. That tool built a list of blocks, so that Lilo could load the kernel (from those blocks) without really understanding the filesystem.
Interesting! But... what about localized builds? I like my Spanish speaking Firefox...
May Euell Gibbons eat your only copy of the manual!