No. He was being racist.
Sometimes there is little or no ambiguity.
Re:Promotion of science/arts
on
P2P and TV
·
· Score: 1
My approach would be to use the President's (assuming U.S. here) executive powers, and declare the invention a national security asset. Between that, and the Supreme's ruling on eminent domain, we should have cheap automobiles with infinite gas mileage in no-time at all!
You are right. I went to Best Buy, however, to get memory installed on my mac mini (yes, I know....)
Apple told me when I got a blue tooth adapter installed that they would void my warranty if I installed third party memory myself!
$29 later, Geek Squad installed my 1Gb DIMM, but only with *36 hours for the work!*
I think that this is a racket.
D
You have a very interesting blog, and I read some of your entries. I think that freedom is its own justification. Blogs will not "rise or fall", they will merely vary in quality - just like everything else.
I think that your blog is very well thought out -- you should write for it more often, however. You clearly have sometihng important to contribute.
As for the mainstream media, like one other respondent earlier in the parent thread, I think that pos 9/11 and post-Iraq the mainstream broadcast and print news are so ethically compromised (a great phrase!) that they may never recover their credibility.
Keep blogging. Out of this "soup" a new and freer media may emerge.
I use Firefox on a mac (OS 10.4 Tiger on a Powerbook), and was unaware that there *was* an indicator that showed when updates were available.
I just use slashdot to notify me of the updates (or some other online source).
I guess I should pay closer attention.
D
The NY Times may "lose" relevance, but it is unlikely to be as "fast and loose" with the truth as are its more right wing alternatives.
Fox news fan?
D
I agree with this. I use the NYT all the time, and would gladly pay to reward high quality reporting - and what I consider to be a fair-minded editorial orientation.
Given the drivel that comes from other news sources (Fox, etc.), I think that the NY Times is a bargain at $50.00
D
Well, it is *their* money, not yours!
I think that it is interesting, and given the fear and paranoia that the proposal seems to have raised, long overdue!
D
I agree. My father is a diabetic and takes a quite large number of different medications. I live in the U.S. now, but am glad that my parents still live near Toronto. The costs of my father's medical care alone would have them in bankruptcy if they had to pay U.S. prices and deal with U.S. medical systems.
Just outside Toronto they get to see a doctor on a fairly regular basis, have insurance with very low co-pay (around 35 cents CDN) for each of the medications they use, and they still own their own home.
While not perfect, healthcare in Canada is at least a 21st century system -- unlike the victorian - no - Darwinian - environment that persists down here.
No, I don't want to go back. But then again, if I ever lost my job (and health insurance) here, at least I still have an option.
I absolutely agree. This is just a new version of greedy corporations trying to take the public's property while denying access to the public *to* that property.
Maybe if they had to pay more for it they would appreciate it more. And NOAA could have a bigger budget for its obviously valuable services.
I agree with your points about severe weather in North America. It is not true, however, that government owned weather forecasting is a particularly American construct. The UK, Canada, France, Germany and many other countries all provide weather information to their publics. Much of this information is also readily available on the public internet. One characteristic that is fairly unique to the U.S., however, is the existence of a large private sector weather information industry.
It is that industry that wants to narrow the government-supplied information services available -- at tax payer expense -- to the public. It is quite clear why they want to do this -- they want to secure their market positions. I think that the choice between these two arguments -- public data dissemination using open standards, with selective provision of value-added "data products", and purely market oriented capture of economic rents created from raw data paid for by the public -- is obvious. Accuweather and its industry partners should be free to exploit whatever niches they can develop. Other uses, most importantly governmental users in the first-responder (fire, police, EMTs), etc. should not be hostage to the profit concerns of private data providers either.
There is also the issue of potential open source-based value-added weather analytical services. These other potential options should not be disabled because of the narrow economic interests of a small group of private corporations.
Slashdot Mirror
No. He was being racist. Sometimes there is little or no ambiguity.
My approach would be to use the President's (assuming U.S. here) executive powers, and declare the invention a national security asset. Between that, and the Supreme's ruling on eminent domain, we should have cheap automobiles with infinite gas mileage in no-time at all!
You are right. I went to Best Buy, however, to get memory installed on my mac mini (yes, I know....) Apple told me when I got a blue tooth adapter installed that they would void my warranty if I installed third party memory myself! $29 later, Geek Squad installed my 1Gb DIMM, but only with *36 hours for the work!* I think that this is a racket. D
You have a very interesting blog, and I read some of your entries. I think that freedom is its own justification. Blogs will not "rise or fall", they will merely vary in quality - just like everything else. I think that your blog is very well thought out -- you should write for it more often, however. You clearly have sometihng important to contribute. As for the mainstream media, like one other respondent earlier in the parent thread, I think that pos 9/11 and post-Iraq the mainstream broadcast and print news are so ethically compromised (a great phrase!) that they may never recover their credibility. Keep blogging. Out of this "soup" a new and freer media may emerge.
I use Firefox on a mac (OS 10.4 Tiger on a Powerbook), and was unaware that there *was* an indicator that showed when updates were available. I just use slashdot to notify me of the updates (or some other online source). I guess I should pay closer attention. D
The NY Times may "lose" relevance, but it is unlikely to be as "fast and loose" with the truth as are its more right wing alternatives. Fox news fan? D
I agree with this. I use the NYT all the time, and would gladly pay to reward high quality reporting - and what I consider to be a fair-minded editorial orientation. Given the drivel that comes from other news sources (Fox, etc.), I think that the NY Times is a bargain at $50.00 D
If you want a gmail account but don't have one, reply to this message and I will give you one of my invitations. D
Well, it is *their* money, not yours! I think that it is interesting, and given the fear and paranoia that the proposal seems to have raised, long overdue! D
Nice. Racist, but nice. D
Of course, this might also give you a number of WWE and NASCAR channels.... Way to go Jeff Gordon!
How about "mundanes"?
Is this really a scam site? I found it pretty much indistinguishable from the genuine artilce. D
It would be an act of war under "international" law as well. Probably of more importance if you were out past 100 miles.
This makes sense if the delta V on the delta (hah) can be adjusted to handle the change in mission. D.
I'm with you on this. I could hardly believe I saw it either.
Yeah... and it is obvious that our (U.S. citizen here) money has to be given away to others to solve problems of their making...
Not to be extreme, but I thought that the Internet and e-commerce were supposed to do something about the barrier of distance and price competition.
Guess I must be missing something.
D
The macos X version of the Firefox 1.0 PR has the update feature in the following position
Preferences --> Advanced --> Software Update
Hope this helps -- and slashdot -- please check that *all* OSs have the same update instructions.
david614
Well said!
If, that is, he/she is infringing copyright. There is such a thing (for now) as fair use..... D
I agree. My father is a diabetic and takes a quite large number of different medications. I live in the U.S. now, but am glad that my parents still live near Toronto. The costs of my father's medical care alone would have them in bankruptcy if they had to pay U.S. prices and deal with U.S. medical systems. Just outside Toronto they get to see a doctor on a fairly regular basis, have insurance with very low co-pay (around 35 cents CDN) for each of the medications they use, and they still own their own home. While not perfect, healthcare in Canada is at least a 21st century system -- unlike the victorian - no - Darwinian - environment that persists down here. No, I don't want to go back. But then again, if I ever lost my job (and health insurance) here, at least I still have an option.
I absolutely agree. This is just a new version of greedy corporations trying to take the public's property while denying access to the public *to* that property. Maybe if they had to pay more for it they would appreciate it more. And NOAA could have a bigger budget for its obviously valuable services.
Of courese, it would be great if they had an active (not beta) open source client for the project.
I agree with your points about severe weather in North America. It is not true, however, that government owned weather forecasting is a particularly American construct. The UK, Canada, France, Germany and many other countries all provide weather information to their publics. Much of this information is also readily available on the public internet. One characteristic that is fairly unique to the U.S., however, is the existence of a large private sector weather information industry. It is that industry that wants to narrow the government-supplied information services available -- at tax payer expense -- to the public. It is quite clear why they want to do this -- they want to secure their market positions. I think that the choice between these two arguments -- public data dissemination using open standards, with selective provision of value-added "data products", and purely market oriented capture of economic rents created from raw data paid for by the public -- is obvious. Accuweather and its industry partners should be free to exploit whatever niches they can develop. Other uses, most importantly governmental users in the first-responder (fire, police, EMTs), etc. should not be hostage to the profit concerns of private data providers either. There is also the issue of potential open source-based value-added weather analytical services. These other potential options should not be disabled because of the narrow economic interests of a small group of private corporations.