A dump is conveniently ambiguous. It also guarantees that 99.999% of us will not read it, and those who do, will skim.
But a Machiavellian, like any true politician, does it for his own sake, not for theirs -- and Machiavelli thus talked about how to reconcile this fundamental selfishness with the need to keep the people's support.
This is what I was alluding to.
SirGarlon doesn't understand, and when he says:
the closest relevant chapter in _the Prince_ is
I realize that he's projecting -- this was the only thing he could find that he thought was relevant, and he mistook that for reality at large. An unfortunate mistake.
In the process, he missed about a dozen more relevant quotations. That's why you read more than the Cliff's Notes, kids!
If government is allowing you to see these "leaks," they're benefiting in some way from the environment that results.
To assume that government is actually constrained by such things is to assume benevolence in government; perhaps it is most beneficial for them that you think this is all they have to reveal.
It's not paranoia to realize that in an age of utter selfishness, people will hoard power and use it deviously. What would Machiavelli do?
I dunno, release about a billion documents unrelated to what he's actually trying to hide.
Why do americans put the metal genre under the "rock" tag?
Not all of us do, and in fact, I'm very glad to meet someone else who agrees with me that this is an important distinction.
Metal is its own genre, composed by its own standards. It emerged from rock (specifically, prog rock, soundtracks to horror films, loud hard rock and early punk combined) but it is not rock.
If you're up for some analytical historical data, would you read The Heavy Metal F.A.Q.?
Cathedral's founding vocalist, Lee Dorrian, was one of the original vocalists of Napalm Death and can be heard on Scum and From Enslavement to Obliteration.
Most people consider Cathedral to be doom metal.
I must respectfully disagree with Schnier on this one.
A cyber Cold War doesn't come about without another Cold War having occurred first.
In this case, Cold War II is playing out between NATO, the Russians the Chinese.
Just like Cold War I, this one is rooted in a practical geopolitical concern: who will be the ruling superpower for the next century?
Expect a Cold War II, if you're lucky. If not, expect WWIII, which will probably be more limited than the last two but still devastating.
If we all had two image/sound/video formats (lossy and non-lossy), one time format, one type of graphics card and CPU, one file format or data transmission format, one (spoken) language (which we'll all move to eventually given enough centuries), or (horror) one OS or programming language, software would be much more exciting to write, knowing it will stand the test of time.
I get dreamy thinking about this. It would simply everything. However, I have one thought of caution.
Standardization creates a single point of failure.
Allowing solutions to exist simultaneously, and develop independently, allows there to be no single point of failure and for multiple solutions to be tried at once.
I think there's a reason nature (insert name of deity or deities if you'd prefer; I'm agnosticism agnostic!) chose to go with natural selection. While less efficient on the surface, it works in every situation and eventually, produces a time-tested quality result.
Just food for thought, not a contrarian argument.
This was the core of his rant:
The combination of Canonical and community is what makes that amazing. There are lots of pure community distro's. And wow, they are full of politics, spite, frustration, venality and disappointment. Why? Because people are people, and work is hard, and collaboration is even harder. That's nothing to do with Canonical, and everything to do with life.
He's side-stepping the issue in that the point is that Canonical wields more power than the average contributor, and thus is in more of an authoritarian relationship.
However, he's hit on a bigger point, which is that in any collaborative software project, someone needs to be the silverback who forces everyone else to focus, or people do only what they want to do and blow off the unfun stuff.
Unfortunately, unfun stuff includes refinements to code to make sure it works well, drivers, documentation, gnarly bug fixes, and the like.
Have you reconsidered a computer career?