Generally speaking, one does not start up a console gaming company without having had a lot of previous industry experience and some sort of financial backing.

Right, follow the argument. CGC (console gaming companies) must be established to be allowed to develop, because only established CGC currently develop. Round and round we go. Maybe we should throw the developers into water, and if they float that means they can't develop games.

The obvious refutation of this circle of insanity is Braid, basically developed by one guy while living with his parents. Big shocker that it isn't out for anything but the 360.

Some of us find it a bit improper/offensive when these people claim copyright over something that doesn't actually contain any of their work.

Ahh, yes, the magic BSD world view where it's "good" if someone takes something you've created doing whatever they want with it and giving you nothing in return (possibly including the original work). But it's "bad" if someone dares to share with you, only stipulating that you not screw them over in return.

If you are a bank/credit company, would you rather have more rich clients or more poor clients?

More poor clients. Mainly because the rich clients will pay off their debt. each month, where the poor clients will only pay off the minimum (so you make a lot more money from them).

"The usual amount" for a PLAYSTATION 3 game is $60 because "the usual" PS3 game is a retail package. So Wipeout HD sells for one-third the usual amount.

If you buy a disc based game for $60 you can resell it for (at least) $20-$30, if you buy a PSN game for $20 you can't.

For example if there was a thousand little Intel's I'd wager we would have much cheaper, much slower chips - to the point that per unit of computing power we'd actually be paying more.

Well I'd wager that we'd have been where we are now, in about 1994. At half the current price. Luckily nobody can reset history so it's not like we can test that and that's assuming you could keep all of them alive, and one wouldn't become dominant again within a year or so due to a natural monopoly emerging.

It is not a bug. How much is 2+2*2?

Well I get "dc: stack empty", if I fix that bug though "0 2+2*2?" needs a line of input from the user, and has 2 and then 4 on the stack.

Personally I'm waiting for them to add better integration of PPAs into Synaptic.

Well unless the authors become dumbasses overnight, you'll probably be waiting a long time. Package management needs to be a single coherent database, making it much more distributed than it needs to be is just asking for pain ... PPAs/KoPeRs aren't terrible in moderation, and solve a couple of problems. But if you make them easily available (ie. available to people who don't know what problems they cause) the solution is much worse than the problem.

Alas. whenever they try and get a new computer the websites don't work in their web browser.

Less sarcastically, assuming there is a correlation between "runs new web browser" and "buys my product" is not the same as having actual data (and I've never seen anyone with actual data make this kind of decision).

First problem is they require bzr 1.16.1 to download their rocket-fuel-setup script, the latest available version in the Ubuntu repo is 1.13.1 -- so you have to manually add the PPA source.

bzr-1.16.1-1.fc11 is the current version in Fedora 11 :)

This is the Unix philosophy: Write programs that do one thing and do it well

Like? "cat -n" or "nl"? make? Awk? Perl? bash/zsh? Which mythical version of unix is this which has programs which only do one thing, but do it well?

The absolute worst kind of cat owner is the ones that let kitty roam the neighborhood free. That is wrong and incredibly rude. Kiltty can die or get hurt in tons of ways [outside]

The absolute worst kind of parent is the one who doesn't lock their child in the basement. That is wrong and incredibly rude. Children can die or get hurt in tons of ways [outside]

You can forego having a real UPS on your live servers too, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

You can have all your production servers be z10 mainframes too, doesn't mean it's a good (or cheap) idea.

RAID5 write hole due to system crash (or power loss) between data and parity updates. Resulting in loss of redundancy and eventual data corruption.

It's easy to have pairs of RAID1 drives in a RAID0, no RAID5 no RAID5 write hole.

if your boot drive fails in a manner that allows access to bootsector but blocks access to the kernel image on Drive0, the system will not boo

Why would /boot not contain the kernel you need to boot? This is an automatic default setup if you choose SW RAID in Eg. RHEL.

Array health monitoring does not display red lights on failed drives, as it does on an integrated RAID controller.

Bullshit. In fact it's not too hard to setup soft. RAID setups where when you issue commands to drop a drive the red led above the drive starts flashing, until the tech. replaces it. It's also possible to have hot swap.

Integrated RAID devices typically integrate with system monitoring software and can send proper alerts to admins via SNMP and e-mail, in a manner that integrates with common production grade monitoring solutions. On a system running mdadm, there is no method of doing so, short of cobbling together an ad-hoc script, that would be error prone.

Riiight, madm etc. doesn't integrate with SNMP.

Of course the "HW" RAID is much more expensive, operates like a black box sometimes leaving you totally screwed if the HW dies (esp. any of the cheaper solutions, which I don't think you were advocating but is what people tend to use instead of SW RAID when seeing rants like yours).

I'm not saying it should always be used, sometimes the cost really is worth it, just as it is with PostgreSQL vs. Oracle ... but to dismiss it out of hand like you do is insane, IMNSHO.

I guess that's possible, although I wonder if you included the fact the company invested in knowledge they still have or that Oracle is a serious POS to setup properly (and really needs a dedicated DBA) ... and the fact you'll be paying for the Oracle licenses forever, and that the cost of those licences will dictate what types of HW you can use (want to use a set of 16 "cheap" x86_64 boxes ... sucks to be you).

And while that is possible, personally I find it much more common that a company is paying significant sums of money to Oracle when they could just type "yum install postgresql-server" on their RHEL box.

I can honestly say that the feel and smoothness of the Mac OS X GUI blows x.org out of the water

Here let me fix that for you:

FYI I have yet to hear anyone knowledgeable say that X.org is slow for any reason other than driver quality. HTH. HAND.

You seem to be under the misconception that dynamic linking gets around the GPL. It doesn't. It can, in certain cases, make a difference for the LGPL.

You seem to be under the misconception that the above are facts, and not just the opinions of some lawyers. "The most widely repeated opinion, is that you can't dynamically link against GPL code" is probably the most truthful thing to say.