This is similar to why computers are grandmasters in chess. The computer gets to calculate all the possible choices before it makes its move, because it has data on the opponent. Poker, on the other hand (crappy pun not intended), is a game where you're not supposed to give data to your opponent. A computer will only win a game when it has enough data on the opponent (or game itself in some situations) to do so.
Because they already know that Windows is a cheap whore for viruses and malware and other shit, and they want the user to buy their software to protect it, giving them a version of Windows they know their software will work on.
It's like using flytraps. If you have lots of flies, you have to keep buying flytraps, and that only controls them. It doesn't eliminate the need for their use.
They're just doing this so that a format they created becomes de facto, and any use of other formats will greatly diminish. It'll just enable them to make more money.
Their religion is not like Christianity, that explicitly leaves politics outside of it's scope
Have you heard of Army of God? The Lambs of Christ? And if Christianity leaves politics outside of it's scope, then how come a disturbing majority of students from Regent University (a Christian university) were found to be hired by the Bush administration?
I'd love to see "digital manners" enforcement in theaters, restaurants, buses, etc. If mobile phones are so important that people cannot turn them off, then how did people live thirty years ago? Haven't you seen those old movies, where the detective had to stop at a public phone to send instructions to his associates? Yes, I'd love to see a way to enforce manners in public places.
However, a kill switch is no answer. If people abuse cell phones by using them in obnoxious ways, how long would it take them to abuse the kill switch? History has shown us, and it should be clear by now, that any sort of digital key is subjected to abuse.
This is the same as using law to control things that society finds unappealing. Hate speech, for example. One would argue that banning hate speech would make the country a much nicer place. However, it isn't about banning the speech. It's about getting people to stop hating each other. Hate speech is just an expression of hatred. And besides, that would violate freedom of speech (no matter how crude one's statements may be.)
If you wanted people to stop being obnoxious and shut off their cell phones in a restaurant, theater, etc., you have to get them to do so themselves, not force their cellphones off.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure if these are actually sci-fi, but I enjoyed Brave New World and Island by Aldous Huxley. I read them when I was 15.
Of course they do. Everybody knows the Internet is a series of tubes and that you can't just dump stuff on it. (Oh yeah, that Al Gore invented.)
Right now it may not be valuable enough to preserve. But give it 10 or 20 years, and you'll be glad you kept them intact. (read: eBay).
That's [citation needed].
Yeah. And Microsoft encourages fairness and competition.
I view it more as socialism than communism.
Next, Duke Nukem Forever will get released.
I tried to get it to run, but it didn't compile for some reason.
That's UppityGiggidyDataTransfr. Didn't you learn anything about Web 2.0 naming conventions?
This is similar to why computers are grandmasters in chess. The computer gets to calculate all the possible choices before it makes its move, because it has data on the opponent. Poker, on the other hand (crappy pun not intended), is a game where you're not supposed to give data to your opponent. A computer will only win a game when it has enough data on the opponent (or game itself in some situations) to do so.
Mom's upstairs calling you for dinner.
Nah. The sharks with lasers would get them first.
It's because they don't watch porn. If they watched porn, they'd switch to broadband in an instant.
An interesting point -- but who created the internet and home computers for you?
Al Gore, of course! (I'm not sure about computers, though.)
For a good time, call localhost:37.
Because they already know that Windows is a cheap whore for viruses and malware and other shit, and they want the user to buy their software to protect it, giving them a version of Windows they know their software will work on.
It's like using flytraps. If you have lots of flies, you have to keep buying flytraps, and that only controls them. It doesn't eliminate the need for their use.
I claim Natalie Portman. Now I can throw that statue of her away (keep the hot grits though.)
Forget the unicorns. They have Duke Nukem Forever!
They're just doing this so that a format they created becomes de facto, and any use of other formats will greatly diminish. It'll just enable them to make more money.
The better question is, What don't you want on future browsers?
The best comedians laugh at themselves.
Their religion is not like Christianity, that explicitly leaves politics outside of it's scope
Have you heard of Army of God? The Lambs of Christ? And if Christianity leaves politics outside of it's scope, then how come a disturbing majority of students from Regent University (a Christian university) were found to be hired by the Bush administration?
Then I discover that the real parent post has been hidden by Slashdot's new comment system, and the child post linked to the grandparent.
Will someone think of the parents?!?!?
Um, a terrorist's goal is to terrorize.
Often, people forget this.
I'd love to see "digital manners" enforcement in theaters, restaurants, buses, etc. If mobile phones are so important that people cannot turn them off, then how did people live thirty years ago? Haven't you seen those old movies, where the detective had to stop at a public phone to send instructions to his associates? Yes, I'd love to see a way to enforce manners in public places. However, a kill switch is no answer. If people abuse cell phones by using them in obnoxious ways, how long would it take them to abuse the kill switch? History has shown us, and it should be clear by now, that any sort of digital key is subjected to abuse.
This is the same as using law to control things that society finds unappealing. Hate speech, for example. One would argue that banning hate speech would make the country a much nicer place. However, it isn't about banning the speech. It's about getting people to stop hating each other. Hate speech is just an expression of hatred. And besides, that would violate freedom of speech (no matter how crude one's statements may be.)
If you wanted people to stop being obnoxious and shut off their cell phones in a restaurant, theater, etc., you have to get them to do so themselves, not force their cellphones off.