As posted previous -- here is the PDF of the report: http://www.chessvibes.com/plaatjes/rybkaevidence/Rybka_Investigation_report.pdf

Specifically see section 2. Investigation:

2.1 Executable file analysis

Quote “Rybka 1.0 Beta and Fruit 2.1 have exactly the same evaluation features“. Disassembly of the root search analysis indicates nearly identical code and variables, even including the ordering of the variables. Appendix B on the evaluation of Rybka 2.3.2a shows “the evaluation function in Rybka 2.3.2a is substantially the same as in Rybka 1.0 Beta”. Watkins compares evaluation function features between Rybka, Fruit and four other open source programs (Phalanx, Pepito, Crafty and Faile). In section D.2.3 he shows an overlap of 18.8 out of 24 evaluation terms for Rybka-Fruit (73% overlap), with much lower overlaps than between the other programs. Crafty 19.0-Fruit eval overlap: 12.9/24 = 54%, Phalanx-Fruit overlap: 43%, Pepito-Fruit overlap 37%, Faile-Fruit Overlap 23%. This has been expanded with more statistical rigour in a separate 50+ page paper mentioned in 2.4 below.

And what's wrong with this? You are not guaranteed success, even if you have a superior product. You can write the most fantastic novel in the history of the world, but that doesn't mean you automatically get fame & fortune bestowed upon you. You still have to market it & sell it to your audience. If your marketing strategy is "publish on Amazon, sit back, and wait for the $$$ to roll in", well, good luck with that. Maybe it'll work. And maybe I'll win the lottery one day. Yay for games of chance!

The fact is, there's a lot of "worthless" content out there -- books, movies, magazines, music, websites, videos, blogs, podcasts, photos. And yet, there are those who produce great content, of all types, and make a living doing it. Amazon has simply opened up another medium for user content creation/distribution, just like Geocities and Youtube and iTunes and Flickr and what-have-you.

Not sure what your problem is -- my Windows 7 workstation (and Windows XP before that) are typically up for at least a month at a time, at least until I decided to institute a monthly reboot (just because). And my home PCs would have even longer uptimes, except for Windows 7 deciding to automatically reboot to install patches when I'm not looking.

My ubuntu box, however, seems to like to give me trouble - losing network connectivity, random errors, stopped talking to our ActiveDirectory server, etc. And it seems like I every time I log in, it's telling me a restart is required, probably due to some security update being auto-loaded. (I run it headless as a playground box and rarely use it, so I'm sure it would have better reliability if I was more proficient with it.)

But the point is -- both Windows and Linux are more than capable of providing good uptime, given proper administration. Linux (at least Ubuntu) can be just as flakey as Windows used to be, if you don't know what you are doing. And Windows can be very stable.

No, actually, that's exactly what it means. Its not "freedom" if you have severe consequences for an action.

No one can physically stop me from yelling "The president is stupid".
However, with freedom of speech, the government is prohibited from locking me up for saying that.
Contrast that with other regimes where yelling such an insult would result in a death squad knocking on your door, or you being thrown away in a deep dark jail cell forever.

GP was right -- lack of consequences are exactly what defines freedom.

For the fire example -- yes, yelling fire in a crowded theater and being fined/locked up for it is EXACTLY an infringement of the freedom of speech. However, it is an infringement that the courts decided was appropriate and still met the principle of the law (if not the letter).

That's exactly the point -- why, after 40+ years of computational progress, are we STILL using the lowest common denominator?

Yes, text works - no arguing that, its not going away.
But the point is -- we have these powerful, cryptic CLI systems, or these prettier-but-less-powerful GUIs -- why can't we have both?

The power of the CLI, with a more intuitive, aesthetically-pleasing, GUI sitting on it that doesn't require point'n'click.

Wish I had mod points!
Instead I'll just say "+5, insightful" and hope it comes true for you!

Is there, realistically, an area on Earth that does NOT have some likelihood of natural disasters?

Speaking about the US specifically, North Dakota not at much risk for earthquakes or tsunamis, but they do get tornadoes, blizzards/heavy snow, spring flooding, etc. Not to mention that its pretty far away from the population centers that actually *need* the electricity being generated, so then you are looking at transmission costs, capacity, maintenance (and of course the risks associated with those).

That is not a technology problem, that is a management problem.

Sure, its not fun when other staff get bigger & better toys/tools than you. But when that crosses the line to stealing equipment and personal attacks, there's a manager there who is not doing his duty to outline what his expectations of behavior are, and what the consequences are for violating those boundaries, and actually enforcing those consequences.

Of course, failures of management are not uncommon.

Just out of curiosity -- what do you hire developers to do?
I'm sort of assuming that its to "develop code". So if my assumption is correct, wouldn't you want them to develop code as quickly, efficiently, and as bug-free as possible? I will also make the assumption (based on links in other posts and the TFA itself) that a second monitor improves this productivity.

And finally, if I'm a developer who knows that I work best with the right tools, and I start a job where I don't feel I'm being given the best tools to do my best work -- then you'd stomp me in my face? Do you like to drive around with your emergency brake on, too, to cure your engine of its sense of "entitlement" (of low friction)?

There is no "need" vs "want" -- I'm now convinced that's a made-up, over-simplified dichotomy. Its really about costs vs benefits.

What's the true cost of a second monitor? If you are really diligent, you could factor in capital/acquisition cost, operational cost (how much electricity does it cost), maintenance cost (how much will it add in support calls, failure & replacement rates, etc), and even opportunity cost (if you buy this, what can you no longer afford to buy?).

And then you calculate the benefits -- typically much more difficult. But given the sibling post's example, at $155/hr, if a second monitor makes him 10% more effective, that means its worth effectively $15.50/hr. This could manifest in multiple ways -- he could do 10% more work per client (handle more scope creep / logic changes without going over budget); he could get the work done 10% faster and build customer goodwill (and ultimately handle more customers), or he could just be a happier developer and more likely to stick around longer (meaning less turnover and lower hiring replacement costs).

If benefits > costs for your target time-frame, then yes, you do it.
If not, then you don't. Or you re-evaluate your costs & benefits to ensure you took everything into account.