Re: Is Linux Unix?
Simon Kitching wrote:
On Mon, 2004-07-26 at 20:58, John Summerfield wrote:
Simon Kitching wrote:
They do in the long term. Name a system of government that has been more
efficient than democracy over a 100 year period. The most significant
The Roman Empire.
From my memory of history, the Roman Empire was fairly close to a
democracy until Julius (you got to vote as long as you had sufficient
cash). And went downhill rapidly after that.
That was the Republic. The form of government couldn't cope with the
pressures of expansion, and it disintegrated over a hundred years or so,
culminating with the famous death of Caesar.
Yes, they had elections, and the electorates were carefully structured
so the aristocracy didn't lose control.
We're wandering a little, but....
Did you know that Julius was the family name, like Smith, Jones, Ng? The
Caesar was an added name, sort of like a nickname, in this case denoting
a branch of the Caesar family. At the time, Caesar meant (roughly)
"Hairy Head." Romans could also acquire additional names, so _that_
Caesar became Gaius Julius Caesar Dictator.
At the time the romans had something like two dozen given names. Julius
Caesar was quite a common name: his father, grandfather, uncles etc
were all Julius Caesar.
Caesar adopted his nephew, Gaius Octavius, in his will and he became the
first of the Roman Emporers.
Marcus Antonius was another nephew.
In contrast, Debian makes a decision. Whoops. we didn't mean that. Let's
change it!
I think the agreement to exempt Sarge from the new requirement for free
documentation & supporting files to be a fine example of when
backtracking was useful.
Indeed. Better though if the first decision was properly researched. As
it was, it wasted countless hours on making the first decision, then
haggling over the consequences, and then over the subsequent changes.
That debate is like a procedural motion in a meeting. It doesn't
actually _achieve_ anything, it is just an argument over _how_ to do
something. The time would have been more useful in squashing bugs,
finishing features, writing documentation, even helping users.
Umm. First lesson in project managment. Projects have defined
starting-points and defined end-points.
I once worked on some IBM projects. Documentation was part of the
project, and it can be written when the specs are done. That's not to
say it will be _complete_ then - it has to be adapted as the product is
changes as design errors are found and some of the fine detail evolves.
Intriguingly, I worked for IBM once in my life. Detailed specs, done by
Richard Helm (of the "gang of four"). Documentation up the wazoo. Didn't
help in the slightest. The main problem was the design was "tossed over
the wall" and the superstar designer then went back home, resulting in
an inability to adapt the project design to reality later.
Another large IBM project failed around the same time. You can find the
details here, in the document titled "Ministerial Inquiry into INCIS"
(that's *never* a good title for a report!). I would say that the
"waterfall" method of development has had its day. But quite how you
document an app being created using Agile/XP/etc is indeed an
interesting question.
http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/reports/2000/incis_rpt/
Our projects were fairly easy to define: we had some MVS software (COBOL
and PL/1 compilers and their RTLsplus LE/370, a common RTL) and we had
to get them performing identically on whatever version of DOS/VS (VSE)
it was we had.
Developing software from scratch is an entirely different matter.
Yes, except that a truly benevolent, tolerant and trusting dictator
won't last long. And one who isn't those things won't be a good ruler.
If te dictator is truly benevolent, & tolerant then there is no need to
overthrow him. How long since an English monarch was overthrown?
About the same amount of time since the power of an English monarch was
overtaken by the power of parliament I believe.
Instead, over centuries it's evolved into a democracy arguably better
than the American example.
Which would you prefer? the US model? or what you have?
I don't even believe the US model is a democracy. A system where the
third candidate in a presidential election is roundly criticised for
running at all, because he can split the vote and allow someone else in
is not democracy. Nor is one that requires accepting major donations
from corporations in order to have a chance of being elected.
:-))
The US is what you get when voting is optional. This is not the forum,
but the Americans here really should learn how the NZ voting system
works, that it was voted in (oh my gosh!) at a referendum, and what the
choices were.
In practice I think our system is better, because governments don't have
such threadbare margins.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@computerdatasafe.com.au Z1aaaaaaa@computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/
Reply to: