For the past week, I've been watching and reading the news with increasing trepidation as one person after another attempts to pass off their partisan opinon as the one and only correct, unbiased interpretation of the law. Campaign staffers, GOP and Dem politicians, regular voters, the digerati, and even the press. I view both the Democrats and the Republicans with equal distaste, and am equally unhappy with either candidate. I think that's about as unbiased as you're gonna get. Am I the only one in America?
Ironically, the most level-headed non-partisan statement I've heard yet has come from Al Gore. And not even that was without a slant.
And as I've been watching this whole circus, I've been hollering at the TV screen and muttering to my newspaper, "stop acting like third world politicians, pretending you aren't arguing from an extreme position!" All these people, especially James Baker and Mindy Tucker, seem to have absolutely no clue as to how biased they sound when they make their public statements. They're so blinded by their partisanship they can't see how hypocritical they look to people who are only interested in a fair outcome.
Of course, what should I expect from Florida? Chicago and Louisiana may have the reputations as corrupt, but I used to live in Florida. Based on the amount of corruption, con artisanship, and good ole boy networking I endured there, I was immediately cracking jokes about how ironic it was that the outcome of the presidential election would depend on the integrity of Florida officials. It is a banana republic folks, in a lot of ways.
There are a lot of Americans who believe that we have the most honest, ethical system of government in the world. And they have good reason to believe it - it's drummed into us from day one. And it may still be true. But always remember and never forget: that doesn't mean it's completely honest and totally ethical. To say "it can never happen here" is to leave the door wide open for corruption. And I fear that's what we have done.
Look at it this way: when money can buy policy in DC, the way it does now, just how soon will it be until money can buy an election? And has it happened already?? We need to keep asking those questions, or else it will happen right under our noses.
Heck, that's exactly why I voted for Nader. There's too much influence in Washington by special interests with lots of money. Nobody there does anything if it's not greased by megabucks. Is that ethical? Is it good government? It disturbs me that these practices are so widely accepted. I know I'm not the only one, but it seems there aren't enough of us.
And, in closing, I have to unleash my inner conspiracy theorist or he's gonna eat a hole in my spleen: it sure smells a lot to me like the Bush boys tried to buy an election, and it blew up in their faces. But we'll probably never see any evidence to support that... then again, stranger things (cough, Monica, cough) have happened!
I don't think "net devices" are going to be anything more than a niche product until they meet the following criteria:
Portabiltity. They need to be as portable as a book or a newspaper. Microsoft's recently announced product is a good example.
Peer connectivity. This has already been done with PDAs and handhelds, and in a portable net device, it will be expected.
Transparent Connectivity. The network connection needs to be totally transparent. Buy device, enter name and password, and you're on. There are many hypothetical ways to make this work, but no practical ways yet. (You still have to buy the device, arrange for a seperate network service for it, and then wait for it to activate, that's not going to fly!)
Reliability. It needs to be as reliable as a book or a newspaper as well. OK... that's impossible. But it has to be close.
Storage. It can't be just another dumb terminal like a cellphone. It has to have some provision to store and upgrade the user's choice of applications, and reference data.
Utility. The reason PDAs and Cellphones have become so popular is because they fill a necessary useful purpose. So far, browsing the web and checking email isn't a necessary useful purpose in many peoples' lives (slashdotters excepted). And until it does, net devices won't take off.
There are too many companies trying to force the next "killer app" or "insanely great thing" via marketing instead of by using old-fashioned innovation. And their corpses are beginning to pile up...
(And ironically, it's actually cheaper and easier to use innovation. Of course, that assumes one possesses creativity and insight...)
If my BS filter is working properly, I think this means that they want to change into an upstream service provider for businesses and small ISPs, and provide unspecified information services for corporate customers (you know, email, database servers, file servers, etc...).
The CNET article also says that they are going to license the I-Opener to AT&T and continue to provide the service, probably one layer removed from the consumer.
From CNET: Netpliance said it is forming a venture with AT&T's WorldNet service to jointly offer a version of the I-opener, with Netpliance providing infrastructure and helping to manage the service. The $299 units, similar to the I-opener, will go on sale after Thanksgiving on QVC, the television shopping network. Monthly service for the I-opener will be priced at $21.95.
What I haven't heard anyone talk about yet is the rules of the Florida electoral college. I learned on Tuesday nite that only about half of the states require the electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. Is Florida one of them?
If not, then presumably, with the recounted popular vote difference only ~300 votes out of 6 million, the electors will use some other method to decide how to cast their electoral votes.
I'm a cynic of the worst kind: a disillusioned idealist. And yet I still am optimistic about this project. I mean, I've read the trilogy four times, and as long as Jackson makes a diligent effort, it's going to make a very good movie. And according to what I can gather on the internet, Peter Jackson is indeed trying very hard.
When awaiting any movie, we have to remember: It's Just A Movie. I think a lot of Star Wars fans forgot that little detail, and so when Episode I sucked, they got royally peeved. They felt robbed, when they were victims of their own overexcited expectations...
I still like the Dune movie. I've read that novel two or three times, so I can fill in the parts that were skipped, ignore the ones that don't belong, and make sense of the obscure references and characters. And I can remember - It's Just A Movie. Thus, I can enjoy it - even when it comes on TV and suffers from prologues and commercials...
But seriously, are you going to be compressing images that are getting processed many times?
Sure... there are lots of lossless compression algorithms. They aren't as efficient as MPEG or wavelet compression techniques, but hey, when you're talking Terabytes, you're gonna take what you can get.
And this STScI page offers a much better look at today's new image than CNN's coverage does, and the science isn't dumbed down for the drooling masses.
I dunno about kaput, but techies.com appears to have solved their slashdot effect problem... that page crashes my Netscape every time I try and load it.
I'd tell you what platform I'm running on, but then I'd have to post as AC.
Salon is running an article that goes into a lot more detail on the deal.
The author, Damien Cave, doesn't identify his sources, other than some quotes from Napster CEO Barry. But he describes the deal as a) a loan from Bertelsmann to Napster, b) rights for Bertelsmann to buy part of Napster, c) a promise to drop the lawsuit once a membership service is online, and d) the availablilty of the Bertelsmann catalog for the membership service.
Cave also describes how the existing free service will remain.
Yah I'd say -- did you notice that Bertelsmann is a major holder in CDNow... the publisher of a new study oberving how 90 days after downloading Napster, people stop buying CDs.
Of course, this study conflicts with others that show how Napster promotes record sales. Why?
[warning: I feel a rant coming on!]
Hmm... maybe it's because CDNow's service is terrible! My first online shopping experience was with CDNow, and it took then 22 days to ship the 2 CDs I ordered. Twenty-two bloody days! On the 14th day, I used their website to cancel the order, and was sent an email on the 15th day that said it was impossible to cancel the order - it was already in process. But it still took them a week to ship it! I received it on the 24th day.
Now compare this to Amazon. Yeah, I know: "Amazon's one-click patent sux." But they shipped my single-CD order the next day. Unfortunately, UPS misplaced it. I sent an email requesting that Amazon call UPS and initiate a trace on the shipment. Instead Amazon shipped me another item, priority overnight! That's service! (On top of that, I eventually wound up with two of the items, at the cost of only one. Don't worry - Amazon is making up the trivial loss with my good word of mouth advertising.)
So the point is - maybe it takes an average of 90 days for internet users - who frequently happen to be Napster users - to recognize that they should avoid CDNow. (It took me only 30 days.)
This is the type of company that has Bertelsmann as a parent. Be afraid... very afraid.
Really, what do we know? It's going to be "membership-based."
But until they reveal more about their business model, it's too late to cry foul, bemoan corporate sellouts, cheer victory, or predict demise. I mean, come on... everyone knew Fanning was going to parley Napster's huge user base into something profitable sooner or later...
We don't even know how the big record houses are reacting to this... it's just too early!
Steve Jackson Games was publishing a manual as part of the game in question that also served as a guide to hacking/cracking.
Very effective troll, mister.
For the record, they were preparing to publish GURPS Cyberpunk, a worldbook for roleplaying in the cyberpunk genre. A small part was devoted to a fictional and rather undetailed description of cracking and security. It was no more a guide to cracking than Green Eggs and Ham is a guide to cooking.
The Feds took a very brief look at it, declared it "a handbook for computer crime," and confiscated it. SJG later filed suit, accusing the government of prior restraint, among other things, and won.
Of course it wasn't FUD, it was exaggeration, and not material to my thesis. It was inserted mainly to entrap knee-jerk zealots and distract them from the point I was trying to make. However, the zealots I was gunning for were on the right. Congratulations.
Like I said, too many party animals, especially third party animals, take themselves way too seriously. Despite that, I vote almost exclusively libertarian, and am fully aware of their platform.
If not for the income tax, where will the money come from?
From pornography.
No, hold on a sec. I'm serious.
Be realistic here. Yes we're talking a hypothetical situation of a libertarian-controlled federal government, but we're still responsible to make it "hard" poly-sci-fi. Just one element of fantasy - the rest has to be plausible.
Not everyone in this country is a libertarian. If we elect Browne (fantasy element), there are going to be conservatives and moralists who are going to howl bloody murder that things like child porn and drugs are no longer prosecuted (logical repercussion). How do you shut them up?
One answer is to tax the hell out of it: huge tax margins that make people think twice before abusing the stuff. Sure it's a regressive tax, but it's also a vice - in no way are cigarettes, pot, booze, or Natalie Portman naked and petrified necessary for existance. They're luxuries.
And (I have to get this off my chest) never forget that socialism, libertarianism, conservatism, liberalism, and any other 'ism' are ideals and that in practice, government is going to be a compromise between them. You're never going to have a purely libertarian government, despite what the Libertarian Party promotes. It seems that a lot of people forget this. Until Libertarians, Socialists, and other third party men-on-a-mission admit this to themselves and the voters, they don't have a chance in hell of getting elected.
And when you sat down and entered your personal information onto a government form, you weren't even the teensiest bit concerned? The possibility that that information could be misused never occurred to you, even in a hypothetical scenario?
If that's the case, then no one can protect you. It's like a newbie running a virgin install without changing the default passwords complaining that he's been hacked...
You have to at least be aware that there's a reason people line their hats with Reynolds Wrap... and that it's only crazy 99% of the time. The other 1%, the tinfoil wiggers get to say "I told you so."
They now have a database of [...] people who [...] have more financial liquidity than the average person.
Hah - the joke's on them! a) most of us know how ANI works, b) few of us would call from our own phone, and c) we don't have financial liquidity, we have stock options.
Well, the old LED watches were very impractical - I had one in 1977 (in jr. high school). They required two hands to operate... one at the end of the arm it's strapped to, and the other to push the buttons to light up the display.
I loathe the symbolism of strapping my body to a clock, so I seldom ever wear a watch. But when I do, I prefer a watch with both an analog face and an LCD digital display. If you can have both, why not?
People have pointed out a number of factual errors in this article, as well as a rather fugly misrepresentation of a quote, and other mistakes. I'm not here to go over them again. Those really bothered me, but I was willing to use my moderator points to whore-up other folkses' comments.
Then I remembered the thing that really peeved me and made me want to fling four-letter constructions at the "reporter" was his misuse of 'nonplussed.' I don't know why, but it really annoyed me. This isn't a flame or a troll as much as it is a confession. To wit:
And for now, in public at least, AOL seems nonplussed by Nullsoft's antics. "Nobody's slapped their hand yet."
[pedantry] Nonplussed does NOT mean unimpressed. It means perplexed... boggled... rendered speechless. [/pedantry]
I think the problem I have is, how do people like this get jobs writing stories for places like the AP? For chrissake, this is a 10th-grade vocabulary word. A journalist should at least have the same basic command of the English language as a High School senior! It really represents the deterioration of the news media in general: at first it was the idea of news as entertainment, then we had tabloid style coverage, next was sensational scare tactics and tease trailers on TV, then when the internet got anyone with a phone and a keyboard involved, regard for accuracy and truth went out the window, even at the New York Friggin Times. Now on top of it all we have to deal with uneducated writers and reporters?
Slashdot Mirror
Someone look in the box already!
For the past week, I've been watching and reading the news with increasing trepidation as one person after another attempts to pass off their partisan opinon as the one and only correct, unbiased interpretation of the law. Campaign staffers, GOP and Dem politicians, regular voters, the digerati, and even the press. I view both the Democrats and the Republicans with equal distaste, and am equally unhappy with either candidate. I think that's about as unbiased as you're gonna get. Am I the only one in America?
Ironically, the most level-headed non-partisan statement I've heard yet has come from Al Gore. And not even that was without a slant.
And as I've been watching this whole circus, I've been hollering at the TV screen and muttering to my newspaper, "stop acting like third world politicians, pretending you aren't arguing from an extreme position!" All these people, especially James Baker and Mindy Tucker, seem to have absolutely no clue as to how biased they sound when they make their public statements. They're so blinded by their partisanship they can't see how hypocritical they look to people who are only interested in a fair outcome.
Of course, what should I expect from Florida? Chicago and Louisiana may have the reputations as corrupt, but I used to live in Florida. Based on the amount of corruption, con artisanship, and good ole boy networking I endured there, I was immediately cracking jokes about how ironic it was that the outcome of the presidential election would depend on the integrity of Florida officials. It is a banana republic folks, in a lot of ways.
There are a lot of Americans who believe that we have the most honest, ethical system of government in the world. And they have good reason to believe it - it's drummed into us from day one. And it may still be true. But always remember and never forget: that doesn't mean it's completely honest and totally ethical. To say "it can never happen here" is to leave the door wide open for corruption. And I fear that's what we have done.
Look at it this way: when money can buy policy in DC, the way it does now, just how soon will it be until money can buy an election? And has it happened already?? We need to keep asking those questions, or else it will happen right under our noses.
Heck, that's exactly why I voted for Nader. There's too much influence in Washington by special interests with lots of money. Nobody there does anything if it's not greased by megabucks. Is that ethical? Is it good government? It disturbs me that these practices are so widely accepted. I know I'm not the only one, but it seems there aren't enough of us.
And, in closing, I have to unleash my inner conspiracy theorist or he's gonna eat a hole in my spleen: it sure smells a lot to me like the Bush boys tried to buy an election, and it blew up in their faces. But we'll probably never see any evidence to support that... then again, stranger things (cough, Monica, cough) have happened!
There are too many companies trying to force the next "killer app" or "insanely great thing" via marketing instead of by using old-fashioned innovation. And their corpses are beginning to pile up...
(And ironically, it's actually cheaper and easier to use innovation. Of course, that assumes one possesses creativity and insight...)
The CNET article also says that they are going to license the I-Opener to AT&T and continue to provide the service, probably one layer removed from the consumer.
From CNET: Netpliance said it is forming a venture with AT&T's WorldNet service to jointly offer a version of the I-opener, with Netpliance providing infrastructure and helping to manage the service. The $299 units, similar to the I-opener, will go on sale after Thanksgiving on QVC, the television shopping network. Monthly service for the I-opener will be priced at $21.95.
If not, then presumably, with the recounted popular vote difference only ~300 votes out of 6 million, the electors will use some other method to decide how to cast their electoral votes.
When awaiting any movie, we have to remember: It's Just A Movie. I think a lot of Star Wars fans forgot that little detail, and so when Episode I sucked, they got royally peeved. They felt robbed, when they were victims of their own overexcited expectations...
I still like the Dune movie. I've read that novel two or three times, so I can fill in the parts that were skipped, ignore the ones that don't belong, and make sense of the obscure references and characters. And I can remember - It's Just A Movie. Thus, I can enjoy it - even when it comes on TV and suffers from prologues and commercials...
Sure... there are lots of lossless compression algorithms. They aren't as efficient as MPEG or wavelet compression techniques, but hey, when you're talking Terabytes, you're gonna take what you can get.
And this STScI page offers a much better look at today's new image than CNN's coverage does, and the science isn't dumbed down for the drooling masses.
Would those be "jumping gigawatts?"
The dartboard!
I dunno about kaput, but techies.com appears to have solved their slashdot effect problem... that page crashes my Netscape every time I try and load it.
I'd tell you what platform I'm running on, but then I'd have to post as AC.
The author, Damien Cave, doesn't identify his sources, other than some quotes from Napster CEO Barry. But he describes the deal as a) a loan from Bertelsmann to Napster, b) rights for Bertelsmann to buy part of Napster, c) a promise to drop the lawsuit once a membership service is online, and d) the availablilty of the Bertelsmann catalog for the membership service.
Cave also describes how the existing free service will remain.
Of course, this study conflicts with others that show how Napster promotes record sales. Why?
[warning: I feel a rant coming on!]
Hmm... maybe it's because CDNow's service is terrible! My first online shopping experience was with CDNow, and it took then 22 days to ship the 2 CDs I ordered. Twenty-two bloody days! On the 14th day, I used their website to cancel the order, and was sent an email on the 15th day that said it was impossible to cancel the order - it was already in process. But it still took them a week to ship it! I received it on the 24th day.
Now compare this to Amazon. Yeah, I know: "Amazon's one-click patent sux." But they shipped my single-CD order the next day. Unfortunately, UPS misplaced it. I sent an email requesting that Amazon call UPS and initiate a trace on the shipment. Instead Amazon shipped me another item, priority overnight! That's service! (On top of that, I eventually wound up with two of the items, at the cost of only one. Don't worry - Amazon is making up the trivial loss with my good word of mouth advertising.)
So the point is - maybe it takes an average of 90 days for internet users - who frequently happen to be Napster users - to recognize that they should avoid CDNow. (It took me only 30 days.)
This is the type of company that has Bertelsmann as a parent. Be afraid... very afraid.
But until they reveal more about their business model, it's too late to cry foul, bemoan corporate sellouts, cheer victory, or predict demise. I mean, come on... everyone knew Fanning was going to parley Napster's huge user base into something profitable sooner or later...
We don't even know how the big record houses are reacting to this... it's just too early!
Very effective troll, mister.
For the record, they were preparing to publish GURPS Cyberpunk, a worldbook for roleplaying in the cyberpunk genre. A small part was devoted to a fictional and rather undetailed description of cracking and security. It was no more a guide to cracking than Green Eggs and Ham is a guide to cooking.
The Feds took a very brief look at it, declared it "a handbook for computer crime," and confiscated it. SJG later filed suit, accusing the government of prior restraint, among other things, and won.
Umm... have you been paying attention lately?
Like I said, too many party animals, especially third party animals, take themselves way too seriously. Despite that, I vote almost exclusively libertarian, and am fully aware of their platform.
From pornography.
No, hold on a sec. I'm serious.
Be realistic here. Yes we're talking a hypothetical situation of a libertarian-controlled federal government, but we're still responsible to make it "hard" poly-sci-fi. Just one element of fantasy - the rest has to be plausible.
Not everyone in this country is a libertarian. If we elect Browne (fantasy element), there are going to be conservatives and moralists who are going to howl bloody murder that things like child porn and drugs are no longer prosecuted (logical repercussion). How do you shut them up?
One answer is to tax the hell out of it: huge tax margins that make people think twice before abusing the stuff. Sure it's a regressive tax, but it's also a vice - in no way are cigarettes, pot, booze, or Natalie Portman naked and petrified necessary for existance. They're luxuries.
And (I have to get this off my chest) never forget that socialism, libertarianism, conservatism, liberalism, and any other 'ism' are ideals and that in practice, government is going to be a compromise between them. You're never going to have a purely libertarian government, despite what the Libertarian Party promotes. It seems that a lot of people forget this. Until Libertarians, Socialists, and other third party men-on-a-mission admit this to themselves and the voters, they don't have a chance in hell of getting elected.
If that's the case, then no one can protect you. It's like a newbie running a virgin install without changing the default passwords complaining that he's been hacked...
You have to at least be aware that there's a reason people line their hats with Reynolds Wrap... and that it's only crazy 99% of the time. The other 1%, the tinfoil wiggers get to say "I told you so."
Hah - the joke's on them! a) most of us know how ANI works, b) few of us would call from our own phone, and c) we don't have financial liquidity, we have stock options.
I loathe the symbolism of strapping my body to a clock, so I seldom ever wear a watch. But when I do, I prefer a watch with both an analog face and an LCD digital display. If you can have both, why not?
Then I remembered the thing that really peeved me and made me want to fling four-letter constructions at the "reporter" was his misuse of 'nonplussed .' I don't know why, but it really annoyed me. This isn't a flame or a troll as much as it is a confession. To wit:
And for now, in public at least, AOL seems nonplussed by Nullsoft's antics. "Nobody's slapped their hand yet."
[pedantry] Nonplussed does NOT mean unimpressed. It means perplexed... boggled... rendered speechless. [/pedantry]
I think the problem I have is, how do people like this get jobs writing stories for places like the AP? For chrissake, this is a 10th-grade vocabulary word. A journalist should at least have the same basic command of the English language as a High School senior! It really represents the deterioration of the news media in general: at first it was the idea of news as entertainment, then we had tabloid style coverage, next was sensational scare tactics and tease trailers on TV, then when the internet got anyone with a phone and a keyboard involved, regard for accuracy and truth went out the window, even at the New York Friggin Times. Now on top of it all we have to deal with uneducated writers and reporters?
Aaaargh!
I'm nonplussed!
Are you sure?
Slashdot keeps mangling my html. Specifically the closing "/a" tags. Let's try again.
Slashdot didn't "rip" that story. It published a link to that story. You're making the same indistinction that the MPAA and the Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan is guilty of.
And by no means does New Scientist own a copyright on the UNC researchers' results ...