Slashdot Mirror

Communism (or socialism) works for ants, but humans are possessive animals

Or, as one of my favorite economists once said,
Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff.

The political system was just fine until Gorbachev started messing with it without understanding how it works. The old system was just like what China has now - a rule of few, and you could be one of those few if you are smart enough and if you know the right people. The economy was bad, that's the real problem.

Why was the economy bad? Because they couldn't "produce enough to feed, cloth, and house everyone." Most of the USSR is too far North, and agriculture there is a risky business. Summer is only 3 months if you are lucky, and if you are not then the year's harvest is dead (rains, for example, make it impossible to gather whatever you grew.) This is the reference to Ph.D's slogging through the potato fields and picking potatoes from the deep mud with their hands, one potato at a time. It's no Idaho there.

Clothing was generally OK, as long you don't demand variety. Most men wouldn't even realize that such a thing exists :-) But housing was terribly bad. The problem was so bad that most cities had mandatory residence permits (some still do) and it was almost impossible to get some of those, like in Moscow. With a permit you could rent from the state, but there was very little of available living space, and the growing population ate up all the new construction. Many families lived in a small apartment for their whole life, including their children and sometimes grandchildren. Why so? Because the state had a specific plan for new construction, and so much space, and so many workers. A capitalist would ask "why not to buy more land and hire more workers" and a socialist would reply that there is no money to pay for the land because the rents are unreasonably cheap (25R/mo, for example) and the construction workers are expensive (300R/mo) and there isn't enough of them anyway, and the machinery is in short supply because (points to another Ministry, across the road.) Dependencies everywhere; right now the free market fixes most of them, but 30 years ago it was impossible. If you wanted to open just a private car wash, with nothing but a bucket and a brush, you couldn't do it - such things were against the law, only the State could own means of production. That got dumped in 1990, in the first phase of Gorbachev's reforms.

But this assumes that fast technological progress is a good thing

Technological progress buys you better and faster tools to build more houses, to grow more food, and to make better clothes, for example. If you don't do that then your naturally growing population will starve (and that started to happen in 1980's.) Also if you don't employ your scientists then don't be so amazed when they leave the country, and then don't wonder why your TV is still black and white, and not that color-HD-whatever that Japanese watch every day. Military is also a major consumer of technology, and if you get rid of your scientists the generals will be very upset, and a wise man should not upset generals needlessly.

Note that the US may be doing just this also by offshoring all the non-people-facing technology/sci work to the 3rd world

"They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing." (link.)

Pristine? FTA: Not that the Moon can be actually said to be pristine. After being formed billions of years ago, the Moon has been subject to bombardment by meteors, asteroids, and comets that has left craters and other scars on its surface.

I think the author has about as much understanding of the meaning of "pristine" as Alaska's Sen. Ted Stevens.

For the record, Fred Allen was saying the frontal lobotomy quote before Tom Waits was even born. I think it might be older than that, even.

Aside from that, I entirely agree with you. This is completely self-serving on the part of symantec. It's the corporate marketing equivalent of a strawman: invent a problem that doesn't exist, solve it, charge lots to those who buy into your fearmongering.

First, I am not a lawyer.

Linden Lab, the company responsible for Second Life [SL] is physically located in California, therefore it seems that they would fall under that jurisdiction in taxation matters.

There are no California taxes collected on monies paid to Linden Lab, AFAIK, unless they are bundled into the cost. Neither the TOS nor the membership plan page nor the pricing plan page nor the billing policies make any reference to any included taxes.

The California Tax Service Center page says clearly that "Retail sales of tangible personal property in California are generally subject to sales tax." However, software delivered over the net is *not* taxed by CA under Reg. 1502of the California State Board of Equalization. {From LinkScan(tm)}.

State of California

BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

SALES AND USE TAX REGULATIONS

Regulation 1502. COMPUTERS, PROGRAMS, AND DATA PROCESSING.

Reference: Sections 995.2, 6006, 6007, 6010, 6010.9, 6011, 6012, 6015, and 6016, Revenue and Taxation Code.

(b) DEFINITIONS OF TERMS.

Prewritten Program - A program held or existing for general or repeated sale or lease. The term also includes a program developed for in-house use which is subsequently offered for sale or lease as a product.

(f) COMPUTER PROGRAMS.

(D) The sale or lease of a prewritten program is not a taxable transaction if the program is transferred by remote telecommunications from the seller's place of business, to or through the purchaser's computer and the purchaser does not obtain possession of any tangible personal property, such as storage media, in the transaction.

-----

This is certainly the case with Second Life software. The server software remains in California while the client is downloaded to your computer. This is the general business model for most MMORGs. However, not all states support this model of software taxation. This non-uniformity between states is the wedge that will be seized upon by Congress (under its interstate regulation powers (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec.8) to tax virtual wealth.

Of course, they *could* just as easily apply the over-the-net exemption as the state of California does. Considering how godawful-friendly they are to the business community, and how much they scream about "new taxes", you'd think that they would. Unfortunately, their second loyalty is to themselves and the "public pocketbook" (citizens, of course, are dead last), and so they are likely to grab that pie with both hands and start stuffing their faces (after assuring their corporate overlords that it is an unfortunate "necessity".)

Found the quote:

http://thinkexist.com/quotation/if_you_give_me_six _lines_written_by_the_hand_of/188939.html

Except it was Monty Python. strange women...

In a real war, where the winning side is the side that lose the most people

WWI central powers lost 4 million+, the 'winners' lost 5 million+. WWII the axis lost 8 million+, the 'winners' lost 12 million

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power"

I was glad to hear Fran Allen had won the Turing prize and went searching for an inspirational quote that would help me to appreciate the genius that sets her apart from other humans.

But alas... I only found these.

So I'm left wondering... maybe Fran Allen IS a computer...(?)

In which case... I'm excited! Fran Allen deserves the Turing prize!

I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ

IANA cosmologigst but if spacetime is continually being created (stretched) as demonstrated by observing an expanding universe is it not possible that atomic particles "spontneously" arise in a similar manner to the "extra" spacetime? I have not heard a convincing argument against this theory (not mine) so science does not automatically demand creation. OTOH: If I am to be taken seriously by science I must demonstrate the "matter streching" theory is as good or better than the widely accepted big-bang theory.

Science admits it's failures anywhere "god divided by zero", including "the other side" of the big bang. What it asserts is that the big bang is the most complete explaination that fits what we currently percieve as "the Universe".

I would say it's a safe bet that the ability of science to provide answers to the jigsaw of life will continue to improve but will remain incomplete and ultimately subservient to brute force laced with ignorance and dogma.

Also there is a very good reason why faith in god must be blind.

The tricky part is reading between the lines...

From TFA:

[Gates on "powerful ideas"]

If I knew medicine like I do computers, I would like to be able to control the [human] immune system, to fight against the onset of disease on a world level ... but I think the idea of the PC still would have topped that.

Translation: "Y'all better be glad I'm just screwing up your PC."

[Gates on how Live.com competes with Google]

Competition between our two companies will be good for the whole industry.

...until we leverage all the content out of Google with IP lawsuits.

[Gates on recent struggles with the EU]

We have worked out our differences. If they wanted us to leave out some of our components for some reason, we could have delivered a European version of Vista for them. But it turned out that wasn't necessary.

Interesting that there's no specific mention of what was modified to make the European Edition "unnecessary". It's obvious that Vista is still packing Windows Media Player (component in question) Is this IE/Netscape all over again)?

[Gates on the next 10 years]

We're on to another wave of innovation; we just need to make sure the United States continues to stay right up there in relation to the rest of the world.

This is after quoting all the "amazing stuff" that's coming with the Xbox360, Zune and voice recognition. Yes, World, be like the good ol' U.S. of A-holes! Cave-in to an oppression of content not seen since the book burnings of 1938 Germany!

[Gates on the delays of Vista]

Yes, it's later than we planned. But we want it to be right. It reminds me of when we released Windows 95 late that year, taking much longer than we planned.

...and we all know how "right" Windoze95 turned out to be. (...but it's got a killer version of MS-DOS!)

[Gates on the exposure of medical research furthered by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation]

I get a little upset with the media, which will cover a plane crash in India that killed 100 people, but it won't cover the fact that 1,000 times that many died in Africa today from malnutrition or disease.

Of course! That's why Billy has a problem with the media. ...or is it another reason?

If Gates did turn out to be a doctor, I'm sure he'd be a plastic surgeon. If he can't make you well, he can at least make you look good.

"If you can't make it good, at least make it look good." - Bill Gates.

eln says:

skeptical of claims that hundreds or thousands of supposedly respectable scientists hold a non-mainstream view but can't express it because some shadowy cabal is forcing them to stay quiet.

On the other hand, the real debate is sort of like "nature vs. nurture", and the real answer is that there is an as yet unmeasured proportion of climate change that humans cause, and it looks like that change is global warming. The debate should be on (1) what that proportion is, then (2) how much of that is it possible to prevent (China's 1.2B all want to live like New Yorkers, near as I can tell).

Just remember this post when your local subnet gets knocked out when this new thing and some titan of a spammer start slamming each other and happen to be near you. I believe there is an old African proverb about what happens when two elephants fight that is appropriate here.

Where does he say "half of the average"? In your example, the number of people stupider (or the same as) the average is the number of A's plus the number of B's.
Assuming a normal distribution (for want of anything better), you'll actually find that if the average intelligence is I, then half the people have intelligence less than I and half of them greater than I. (Assuming intelligence is a quantity that can vary continuously, there will be a negligible number of people with one fixed value of the intelligence, so don't ask about how many of them have intelligence exactly equal to I.)
(Of course, it is possible that the distribution is not normal, and there are a few people with such high intelligence that skew the average higher (so that actually more than half the people are stupider than average), and it is also possible that some people are so mindnumbingly stupid that they bring the average down (so that less than half the people are stupider than average).)
FWIW, it was George Carlin.

http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/those_who_desir e_to_give_up_freedom_in_order_to/12888.html

Ben Franklin, not Thomas Jefferson. How hard is it to Google this stuff?

"Open source becomes successful when major industrial corporations invest heavily in that open source product,"

"Major industrial corporations invest heavily in Open source when that open source product becomes successful"

Don't ask me if the analyses that have been suggested are right, but I must say, M-L has been given a gift in the way that the different aspects of the report have been criticized (and corrected?) by slashdot-ers. If I'm trying to predict the future, I might as well see if I can get a report noticed by slashdot. On the other hand, the reports author, Joe Osha, is fairly well respected in his area of financial analysis, semi-conductor companies. But if you look at his old quotes, he's taken it in the shorts a few times, too, as evidenced by saying "It's very hard to find evidence of a real end to the upturn that began in late 1998" in 2000 (when everyone was saying those sorts of things).

"Cake or death?"

"Eh, cake please."

"Very well! Give him cake!"

"Oh, thanks very much. It's very nice."

"You! Cake or death?"

"Uh, cake for me, too, please."

"Very well! Give him cake, too! We're gonna run out of cake at this rate. You! Cake or death?"

"Uh, death, please. No, cake! Cake! Cake, sorry. Sorry..."

"You said death first, uh-uh, death first!"

"Well, I meant cake!"

"Oh, all right. You're lucky I'm Church of England!"

the question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than whether a submarine can swim.

Edsger Dijkstra

Now, before you dismiss it, he also said one of the great truths:

The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offense.

From TFA:

"The spaceport, to be located some 25 miles south of the town of Truth or Consequences, will be constructed 90 percent underground, with just the runway and supporting structures above ground........Virgin Galactic also unveiled its logo _ the pupil of an eye incorporating an eclipse. Branson's iris will be used for the final design......."

Is anyone else wondering why Richard Branson now seems to be channeling an old James Bond villain? Underground spaceports and creepy logos with overtones of world dominion make you wonder, especially coming from the man who said, "I believe in benevolent dictatorship provided I am the dictator".

When Winston Churchill was stumbling home from a bender, a lady stopped him and said "Sir, you are drunk." To which he responded Yes, Madam, I am drunk. But in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.

I'm proud to be distantly related to the man. Oh, and then there's his parrot.

Of course with all quotations and factoids of famous eccentric people, these may have to be taken with a grain of salt. Or several grains of salt on the rim of your glass...

Oh, okay. And what makes you think I got it from the web? I really can't believe I'm continuing to dignify this. Your principle really does mean that if ANYONE ELSE has ever quoted the same passage, you have to also quote them. You and I both know that's wrong, so you can spare me the lecture. I bolded the passage, not because someone else happened to do it a few years ago in an obscure little internet article, but because that is the part I wanted to emphasize! And guess what? I sorta kinda mentioned that I added the bold.

You know what my favorite intro to a book is? It's the one in A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. It goes "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..." (p. 1, bold added) as quoted in

http://www.fidnet.com/~dap1955/dickens/cities.html

http://www.bartleby.com/59/6/itwasthebest.html

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/29595.html

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/charles dic101118.html

http://www.epinions.com/content_3173621892

http://www.courierpostonline.com/columnists/cxan06 1104a.htm

http://www.answers.com/topic/it-was-the-best-of-ti mes-it-was-the-worst-of-times

http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=75 62_0_10_0_C

http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/it_was_the_best _of_times-it_was_the_worst_of/147366.html

According to you and only you, I have to quote all those webpages whenever I want to quote the first like of that book. Otherwise, it's plagiarism. Oh, and I better cross my fingers and hope no one has bolded any part of that sentence.

Well, good work. You got me to dignify another person who really doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

Fruit flies like a banana

G Marx

It was Stephen Wright that said that. Truly one of the greatest physicists ever...eh? Oh, never mind.

I am not a pirate, although a) you won't believe me, and b) whether I am or not does not change the fact that copyright is currently eternal, which goes completely against the reason that copyright was created, which was to give a temporary monopoly on the ability to sell copies of the work in question.

Public domain was never a privilege. Public domain is the natural state of things; copyright is an artificial human restriction which does not exist in nature.

Let's examine the Berne Convention. Article 7 states that a work will be protected for life of author plus 50 years. So don't even attempt to state that the public domain doesn't matter, because it is specifically written into the very document which you're using to defend your position!

The entire Berne Convention starts here. It appears that this was written into law around 1967, which means that even if an author died the day after it was ratified, their works will not hit the public domain until 2017. Martin Luther King Jr. died in 1968; I would bet money that his written works will not be placed into the public domain in 2018, but that's 13 years in the future. Here's a list of authors who died in 1968, and whose works I never expect to see in the public domain.

Copyright did not exist a few hundred years ago. The Earth got along fine without it, and we'll get along fine without it in the future as well. This restriction on sharing of information is necessarily temporary, unless we decided to kill all the humans, and then copyright won't matter anyway. But if we decide to let the race survive, we'll hit nanotechnology within 20 years, and then all material goods will be free (the cost of sunlight + dirt), so there won't be any incentive to restrict copying (the producer crying over "loss of profit" is a silly motive when the producer can just create the items that they would have used that money to purchase -- so, in effect, money will be obsolete in 20 years).

You're not thinking far enough into the future, nor are you recalling history. You're fun to play with but I'm done, since obviously we're not convincing each other (I think I'm doing a better job of providing evidence, and you refuse to stop calling me names, so it's obvious we're just going to have to disagree to disagree).

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men."

Several decades ago, a computer filled an entire room, and "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers"

A few decades ago, people thought Bill Gates was wrong when he reckoned there would soon be a time when there was a computer in every home.

Now, a supercomputer fills an entire room. So how long before someone reckons that there will come a time when there will be a supercomputer in every home?

Well, let's see. You've got the individual's standard hourly wage, plus overhead. Overhead includes office space, equipment, electricity, insurance, retirement programs, coffee supplies, restroom facilities, and so on, and so forth.

If that's not vague enough, add to the actual cost of source distribution any meetings (and the associated cost of the meetings' participants), plus the meeting space (which may or may not already exist), along with any steak, beer, and whores consumed while figuring out how to distribute the source.

All said and done, the actual cost incurred by Samsung to conclude the acts of figuring out how to get Joe Sixpack a copy of their kernel mods (which is plainly the first step of actually doing it) it could quite easily be a few thousand dollars. The GPL provides that they may recover that cost from individuals seeking source code.

Outrageous? Yes.

Unlikely? Of course.

"Whatever they feel like?" A bit of an exageration, perhaps. But even if taken literally: Who are you to say any different, lest you've got a copy of Samsung's books in front of you?

I've read the GPL enough times that I don't need it quoted to me. I understand it rather well, I think. And when you came along attempting to disprove my statements with quotations that I already know, the best word I could summon to describe you was "dipfuck."

But upon further reflection, I've hence decided that it is indeed not a very apt moniker with which to describe you. Therefore, instead of you being a dipfuck, I've determined that you, sir, are a shitworm: A varied and largely ubiquitous, parasitic thing that lives on the pre-digested shit of other, larger organisms.

I do hope you find this classification more satisfying.

HAND.

This page attributes it to Winston Churchill.

I could have sworn that I read an excerpt from a document related to Hitler's orders to invade Poland that used the phrase (or, rather, the history book's translator chose to translate it that way). It would be ironic if the Nazis had quoted the British politician in ordering the actions that eventually brought Churchill to power. It would have been sort of like reading from a cursed scroll for the Nazis.

When I get a little money I buy computer hardware; and if any is left I buy food and clothes.

"While intelligent people can often simplify the complex, a fool is more likely to complicate the simple." ~ Anon.

"It's what made me go from agnostic to atheist. We just use the concept of God whenever we reach personal limits. Time and time again we use God to explain things and we're proven wrong." (emphasis added)

because it's easy.

but we all know what happens when the easy path is taken, don't we?

People are: a) basically good b) basically bad c) basically neutral There is no way to be certain without taking a measurement is there? Everything else is conjecture and opinion. And how do you make take the measurement? Observation. Read this page for a few quotes from people who had experience:
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/The_price_of_fr eedom_is_eternal_vigilance/12143.html

But before that, I believe it was said by none other than Winston Churchill.

believe Poor Richard's Almanac (written by Benjamin Franklin) which went something like this:
When solving a problem it is common to take a method and try it. When it fails, try another. But above all, do something."

Are you sure you don't mean Franklin Roosevelt? Here, here, and another here. Of course, F. Franklin might have paraphrased B. Franklin.

What is interesting is the use of the word 'method'. It is usually used in a Scientific or Mathematical sense.

What do you mean "fights"? The UN would simply decree that rich nations (read USA) have to subsidize internet development in poorer nations. Except that since development is under the auspices of the UN, the USA cannot protest that the money is really going to set up firewalls (and other censors of speach) and promote general anti-americanism. They tried to do it with the Kyoto treaty, and until Kofi Annan is removed from power, they'll keep doing it again and again.