mrbuwch

What I find most interesting about this article is the following irony: All of the security software in use causes users to habitually click Yes on any dialog any that comes up.

This brings back (mostly) fond memories of writing PowerPC assembler many years ago. One thing that seems odd to me is that the author credits Motorola with naming of the eieio instruction. I would have thought that instruction would have been in the original Power instruction set and thus it would have been IBM that named it. Anyone know?

This is solving the wrong problem. What I really want is a service that tells me if a particular link is NSFW. How about a Firefox plugin which links back to a database of NSFW links on a server somewhere. Then, whenever I click on a NSFW link on Reddit, a little box can pop up saying "warning, don't view this at work" and I have the choice to wait till I go home to visit it.

Seriously, it's a great idea and I would totally implement it if I had the time/motivation.

Funny, because my job at one point involved porting a piece of (C++) software from Solaris and it was actually rather more difficult than you'd think from reading this article. Why? Because the two OSs were rather different. Threading and networking were particularly troublesome and the UNIX trademark didn't help me. Methinks this guy is making things seem rather more easy than they really are.

Agreed. Remember, IBM already has quite a few different hardware platforms: x86 based servers (running Linux or Windows), System p (formerly RS/6000) servers running AIX, System i (formerly AS/400) servers, System x (formerly system/390) mainframes. Adding Solaris Sparc to that would be just be adding one more to a long list. I don't think IBM would have trouble supporting Solaris for a very long time so long as customers still want it.

For me, IBM has looked likely to buy Sun for many years, because doing so would give IBM two things that would be very valuable to it

1) Java 2) Sun's Solaris customers.

Why do you say that you can't believe that people still use it in this day and age? Does Norton have a reputation for being absoluately terrible that I'm not aware of?

It sounds like you're saying that these particular founders don't have confidence in their ability to do x and are pleasantly surprised when, after a little push, they achieve it (even if it did turn out to be harder than they thought). From achieving x, they uncover the virgin territory of y.

So: is gaining greater confidence in one's ability to achieve stuff part of becoming relentlessly resourceful?

Agreed: this was the first time I'd actually seen a video of PG and the level of enthusiasm was unexpected. In a good way :-)

The thing that surprised me most is that PG kind of reminds me of Mike Myers.

I found this book to be a good introduction: http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Mindfulness-Thich-Nhat-Hanh/dp...