Obviously it's too soon to apply the "permanent" label to anything just yet. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much "long-term" confidence I'd put in the recent gains on the Dow Jones either... We're in uncharted territory here.
Anyway, if you thought the Matt Taibi piece was "radical" then you'll love Jim Kunstler's blog...
This is only tangentially related to this thread, but... I've been getting an annoying delay in Firefox, when downloading files and I wonder if it's rare or common. Right between the time when I hit "save as" and the time when the download-progress dialog appears... Firefox freezes. Not just that one tab or window, and not the whole computer... just Firefox, and ALL of Firefox.
I tend to run 4 or 5 Firefox windows, with 8~10 tabs in each, so I'm giving it a workout, I know... but I've got 1GB of ram in this box, and that's plenty to keep my other programs happy. When this hang-up occurs, I can switch desktops and use my other applications, but when I switch back to the desktop with Firefox, if it's still "hung", it won't even repaint its client windows (just leaves artifacts from the previous desktop). Most of the time, this isn't much bother, but when you encounter a slow server or connection, it can make the entire browser unusable for 40 or 50 seconds each time.
As near as I can tell, the browser is waiting for the download to start, before it will display the progress dialog. And hey, that's fine with me... but WHY, for heaven's sake, does the ENTIRE BROWSER have to wait on that one slow website? Why can't I click on the download and forget about it, and go about browsing other pages? What POSSIBLE benefit is there in making me wait for some unknown web server to start spewing data, before I can get on with my business?
Actually, a game interface in the email client might be kinda fun... "deleting" SPAMs by shooting them with missiles and lasers, and watching them explode in balls of flame might relieve some workplace tension.
It would certainly give new meaning to the name "Thunderbird"...;-)
The condition of having a "microphallus" would be "microphallusy," no?
With different spelling, it would also indicate the sort of "little deception" that sufferers of this disorder might use when discussing matters of size.
I find it odd that some posters here are assuming this question to be a troll... as if the questioner must be demanding photographic "proof" that the landings occurred in the first place!
Fer chrissakes, is there no place for plain old curiosity anymore?
I watched the landings on live TV. And though one could say I was gullible, being just shy of six years old in July of '69, I never doubted the authenticity of the landings.
Be that as it may, I'd still LOVE to see some photos of the discarded equipment from orbit. Why? Cuz it would be f#$%ing COOL!!
I clicked on this story/headline BECAUSE I want to see some photos of the old landing sites. And thankfully, some other posters have provided links. And because of that, now I know that in fact there aren't very many such photos in existence, and why.
Sheesh! Give the guy a break, he's just asking an honest, curious question...
Communism COULD work if you had a way to sort out the most altruistic individuals for committee positions, the next most altruistic individuals for bureaucrats, and keep the greedy away from power or resources that could be used to harm society.
Yes, by all means, get politically aware. Something we who live in "free" and "democratic" societies often seem to forget is that freedom comes with responsibility. That responsibility is not just to exercise our freedoms in a "responsible" manner, it also includes active participation in the workings of government. Voting is just the most obvious "responsibility" we have in this regard. Far more important is the habitual awareness and involvement with current events and politics... Not only will your vote be more "informed," you'll also be better equipped to influence the "debate" at the dinner table, the pub, the church, etc..
Here are the five most fundamental and important changes, which I think provide the best leverage to make American democracy work better:
These issues are not in the news much, but they have a common-sense appeal to most people, regardless of their political orientation. These are "systemic" issues, with the potential to have broad effects throughout the society. There are many other things I'd wish for as well, but these five are a good starting point, for beating back the encroachment of Big-Brother government.
The parent's suggestion of an RFC is not nearly as silly as it sounded at first though it would have to involve far more than just NASA however wrong that may seem to us US centric folks.
Yes, well, it was intentionally silly. Actually, I reckon the current ISS docking "standard" would be a likely place to start, since it's already "supported" by some portion of the ISA partners.
Having a well supported standard would also make it easier to mount rescue missions, in the event of an accident, because more spacefaring nations (or commercial interests like SpaceX et al) would be able to offer hardware. More useable launch vehicles would potentially be available at any given time.
I agree with both you and the parent comment. Competition is healthy, but working together could save a bundle. How about agreeing on a few standards, such as the size and shape of airlocks, so that different countries' vessels could dock with each other? That would allow easier cooperation, while preserving the competitive environment. It would also allow private companies like SpaceX to interoperate with everyone else in the game.
It sure would be a lot better than the lets make fun of the Americans show I last saw where they dumped these people in Namibia. All we got to see is how useless these people were and how much extra work the Namibians had to do just having them there.
I missed that one, but I'm both surprised and disappointed to hear about it. I'm surprised by the fact that somebody actually attempted such a thing, but disappointed that they made such a mess of it. What was the problem? Did they simply not train the volunteers before dumping them in Namibia?
I'd like to see a reality-TV show that focuses on something that actually matters -- for example, third-world development. Take a dozen volunteers and run them through a couple months of training with the Peace Corps or some NGO, then ship them off to Africa to build a school or dig a well or whatever. Then follow their progress through the season, etc...
But with this tech, and a comm-link of some sort, existing development teams could broadcast their own shows. Might help out with recruitment and donations.
You do remember IBM had a computer called the PS/2, right?
I started out with punch-cards on the HP-2000 in the mid-1970s... Yes, I remember!;-)
At the time the AT-style keyboard connector was put on PCs (early 1980s), nobody ever dreamed we'd be having roomfuls of these things all cabled up to a single monitor/keyboard/mouse.
But the AT-style ("old" style) keyboard ports were hot-swappable.
(Again, this was back in the days when IBM did something and everybody followed.)
No. The PS/2 came out in the late-1980s if memory serves. But the industry standard remained "old style" keyboard plugs up until just a few years ago... say 96~97. By that time, IBM was just another player in the commoditized PC industry.
No, the industry-wide switch did NOT happen just because IBM came out with the PS/2. It happened a decade later. I bought my last "old-style" motherboard in 1998, which was just about the time when they were starting to get scarce (well, here in Taiwan anyway). (And I bought it specifically because I already had a KVM switch for the old-style keyboard (w/ serial mouse) and had a couple of machines still in service that didn't even have PS/2 ports.
The kind of switching talked about here just wasn't envisioned, and in fact, would have been considered insane.
Hmm... no, when the changeover actually occurred (late 1990s) this kind of switching was already commonplace. And the price of any serial device had already dropped more-or-less to commodity levels. (Hell, by that time we didn't even have to ask whether or not it had a 16550A chip!)
Actually, the most sensible explanation I've heard so far is that RS-232 is half-duplex and PS/2 is full-duplex. But I don't even know if this factoid is accurate... let alone why it would make a significant difference with stuff like kbds and mice...
But eventually technology catches up, and the marriage of USB with keyboard/mouse permits the right thing to happen.
Yes, I'm planning to buy a USB kbd and KVM soon. I need to upgrade my systems anyway, now that the new Debian is out... just busy with other shit lately...
Frankly, by the time this "sea-change" occurred, there was plenty of reason to anticipate losing the connection to any given input device, and yet nobody ever thought to upgrade the PS/2 protocol to make it hot-swappable. That's what always made me wonder what those motherboard designers were smoking...;-)
Anyway, what's done is done. Just gotta deal with it... I'm just curious about the motivation behind it. And I still don't have a satisfactory answer...:-/
--jrd
PS: Here's some info on PS/2 ports that might be of interest to folks who know more about electronics that I do...
Re:PS/2 ports... WHY??
on
USB KVMs Compared
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I've had noxious troubles with PS/2 KVMs as well. Tried two different ones (about US$150/ea) and they both did exactly what you describe. Dropping the mouse, sending random key-events to machines... lockups... just plain DANGEROUS. I switched back to an old mechanical one, which also drops the mouse, but at least doesn't crash my systems. (I also use VNC for most work, and only use the KVM when absolutely necessary... which ain't very often.)
My question is: WHY did everyone switch to PS/2 in the first place? The old RS-232(?) ports could be hot-swapped at will. What POSSIBLE benefit could there be in switching to a protocol that requires a reboot to "re-capture" the input device if the connection is lost?
I've been wondering about this for years, and never heard a satisfactory answer. Anyone know?
"Each country believes that Taiwan and China are parts of the same country."
Actually, it's more correct to say that "One China" is the official government policy of both countries. In fact, most people on this island consider themselves to be "Taiwanese" nowadays. The only reason Taiwan's policy hasn't changed is because the PRC has said REPEATEDLY that it will attack immediately if Taiwan declares independence.
What a friendly, affectionate sentiment from our "tong-bao" brothers on the mainland...:-/
Sorta like the "affection" shown by a psychopathic stalker-type... I love you, and if you don't love me back, I'll KILL YOU!
"If we really owned everything south of Maryland, why did we have to invade it?"
Um... because they (the South) were threatening to SECEDE and form a new (hostile) country right nextdoor.
The case in Taiwan is completely different. The "new" country already exists, and has for 50 years. It's no longer a matter of secession, just nomenclature.
China has been getting along fine without Taiwan since 1895. Why not leave well enough alone?
Published in the Waterloo Courier (Iowa) 2002/04/07:
TO THE EDITOR:
With the Microsoft antitrust case so much in the news lately, and since Iowa is one of the nine states opting out of the DOJ settlement, I find it curious that all this media attention has missed one simple point: the government could end Microsoft's monopoly tommorow, with the stroke of a pen.
Governor Vilsack could simply sign an executive order that, henceforth all digital communication with the Sate of Iowa must be transmitted and stored in "open" (publicy documented, royalty free) file formats. Since Microsoft's popular Office file formats (.DOC,.XLS,.PPT) are propretary, they would be unacceptable under the new rule. Any email sent to any government agency with a DOC or XLS file attachment would be automatically returned, with a request to re-send the content in an open file format.
The downstream repercussions would be massive. It would eliminate the need for businesses and individuals to purchase Microsoft software, at least as far as State business is concerned, and would popularize the notion that "not everyone uses Microsoft." Within weeks, it would be common knowledge among computer users, that some people can't read DOC files, and you can easily get around this problem with Save-As.
The single biggest obstacle to Microsoft's competition is not its illegal business practices, but simple inertia -- everyone else uses Microsoft. And no business that hopes to stay in business would risk "turning off" a potential customer by requesting a different file format.
The State, however, can and should make that request. Transparency in government is a hallmark of modern democracy. When I am forced to purchase Microsoft products in order to view "public" documents, then the term "Microsoft Tax" is not just a metaphor, it's a disgrace.
Enhancements include anti-aliased text and first class internationalisation support
Does this mean that now I can finally get Chinese/Japanese input methods (*Wnn) working without having to change my entire frickin' GUI (including menus, calendar, etc) over to the target language?...ie: the way it's supposed to work?...eg: the way it works in that other OS?
The way it is now (Gnome 1.4, stock RH7.2 install), I had to set up a separate user account, with the LANG variable set to zh_TW, and run a separate X session (all in Chinese) just to get the ability to key-in some text. Wnn won't work without the LANG variable set, but setting it changes the global Gnome environment too. If there's a way around this, nobody I know has been able to figure it out yet...
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously it's too soon to apply the "permanent" label to anything just yet. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much "long-term" confidence I'd put in the recent gains on the Dow Jones either... We're in uncharted territory here.
Anyway, if you thought the Matt Taibi piece was "radical" then you'll love Jim Kunstler's blog...
http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/
Enjoy, ;-)
--jrd
>>(The truth about AIG and Congress.) http://www.foxnews..../
Hm, I think the "truth" according to Glenn Beck is missing a few chapters.
The truth is, we're far more deeply screwed than most people have realized yet.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/
Enjoy,
--jrd
...is the way my editor says it. But the idea is the same.
--jrd
Hehe... "Hey baby, if I said you had a hot body, would you hold it against my phone?" ;-)
Good call. Thanks! ;-)
--jrd
This is only tangentially related to this thread, but... I've been getting an annoying delay in Firefox, when downloading files and I wonder if it's rare or common. Right between the time when I hit "save as" and the time when the download-progress dialog appears... Firefox freezes. Not just that one tab or window, and not the whole computer... just Firefox, and ALL of Firefox.
I tend to run 4 or 5 Firefox windows, with 8~10 tabs in each, so I'm giving it a workout, I know... but I've got 1GB of ram in this box, and that's plenty to keep my other programs happy. When this hang-up occurs, I can switch desktops and use my other applications, but when I switch back to the desktop with Firefox, if it's still "hung", it won't even repaint its client windows (just leaves artifacts from the previous desktop). Most of the time, this isn't much bother, but when you encounter a slow server or connection, it can make the entire browser unusable for 40 or 50 seconds each time.
As near as I can tell, the browser is waiting for the download to start, before it will display the progress dialog. And hey, that's fine with me... but WHY, for heaven's sake, does the ENTIRE BROWSER have to wait on that one slow website? Why can't I click on the download and forget about it, and go about browsing other pages? What POSSIBLE benefit is there in making me wait for some unknown web server to start spewing data, before I can get on with my business?
Has anyone else encountered this odd behavior?
Cheers,
--jrd
Actually, a game interface in the email client might be kinda fun... "deleting" SPAMs by shooting them with missiles and lasers, and watching them explode in balls of flame might relieve some workplace tension.
;-)
It would certainly give new meaning to the name "Thunderbird"...
--jrd
who thought this post was going to be about the Sylpheed email client? --jrd
The condition of having a "microphallus" would be "microphallusy," no?
With different spelling, it would also indicate the sort of "little deception" that sufferers of this disorder might use when discussing matters of size.
--jrd
I find it odd that some posters here are assuming this question to be a troll... as if the questioner must be demanding photographic "proof" that the landings occurred in the first place!
Fer chrissakes, is there no place for plain old curiosity anymore?
I watched the landings on live TV. And though one could say I was gullible, being just shy of six years old in July of '69, I never doubted the authenticity of the landings.
Be that as it may, I'd still LOVE to see some photos of the discarded equipment from orbit. Why? Cuz it would be f#$%ing COOL!!
I clicked on this story/headline BECAUSE I want to see some photos of the old landing sites. And thankfully, some other posters have provided links. And because of that, now I know that in fact there aren't very many such photos in existence, and why.
Sheesh! Give the guy a break, he's just asking an honest, curious question...
--jrd
The same is true of any government system, no?
--jrd
I don't think I've ever seen a native Asian eat ramen with a fork. They always use chopsticks.
It's easier with chopsticks...
--jrd
Yes, by all means, get politically aware. Something we who live in "free" and "democratic" societies often seem to forget is that freedom comes with responsibility. That responsibility is not just to exercise our freedoms in a "responsible" manner, it also includes active participation in the workings of government. Voting is just the most obvious "responsibility" we have in this regard. Far more important is the habitual awareness and involvement with current events and politics... Not only will your vote be more "informed," you'll also be better equipped to influence the "debate" at the dinner table, the pub, the church, etc..
m l
o rtional
Here are the five most fundamental and important changes, which I think provide the best leverage to make American democracy work better:
1. End "personhood" for corporations.
http://www.thomhartmann.com/unequalprotection.sht
2. End the War On Drugs.
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/
3. Open the televised debates to 3rd party candidates.
http://debatethis.org/
4. Ensure transparent ballot counting and elections.
http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/
5. Require proportional delegation in the Electoral College (ie: no more winner-takes-all)
http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/reform.htm#prop
These issues are not in the news much, but they have a common-sense appeal to most people, regardless of their political orientation. These are "systemic" issues, with the potential to have broad effects throughout the society. There are many other things I'd wish for as well, but these five are a good starting point, for beating back the encroachment of Big-Brother government.
--jrd
Sure, there's plenty of piracy in China, but how can you "pirate" GPL'd software?
--jrd
Yes, well, it was intentionally silly. Actually, I reckon the current ISS docking "standard" would be a likely place to start, since it's already "supported" by some portion of the ISA partners.
Having a well supported standard would also make it easier to mount rescue missions, in the event of an accident, because more spacefaring nations (or commercial interests like SpaceX et al) would be able to offer hardware. More useable launch vehicles would potentially be available at any given time.
--jrd
I agree with both you and the parent comment. Competition is healthy, but working together could save a bundle. How about agreeing on a few standards, such as the size and shape of airlocks, so that different countries' vessels could dock with each other? That would allow easier cooperation, while preserving the competitive environment. It would also allow private companies like SpaceX to interoperate with everyone else in the game.
Maybe somebody at NASA will write an RFC...
--jrd
I missed that one, but I'm both surprised and disappointed to hear about it. I'm surprised by the fact that somebody actually attempted such a thing, but disappointed that they made such a mess of it. What was the problem? Did they simply not train the volunteers before dumping them in Namibia?
--jrd
But with this tech, and a comm-link of some sort, existing development teams could broadcast their own shows. Might help out with recruitment and donations.
--jrd
> For those who need purpose in their lives...
Don't forget your "special purpose"...
--jrd
I started out with punch-cards on the HP-2000 in the mid-1970s... Yes, I remember! ;-)
At the time the AT-style keyboard connector was put on PCs (early 1980s), nobody ever dreamed we'd be having roomfuls of these things all cabled up to a single monitor/keyboard/mouse.
But the AT-style ("old" style) keyboard ports were hot-swappable.
(Again, this was back in the days when IBM did something and everybody followed.)
No. The PS/2 came out in the late-1980s if memory serves. But the industry standard remained "old style" keyboard plugs up until just a few years ago... say 96~97. By that time, IBM was just another player in the commoditized PC industry.
No, the industry-wide switch did NOT happen just because IBM came out with the PS/2. It happened a decade later. I bought my last "old-style" motherboard in 1998, which was just about the time when they were starting to get scarce (well, here in Taiwan anyway). (And I bought it specifically because I already had a KVM switch for the old-style keyboard (w/ serial mouse) and had a couple of machines still in service that didn't even have PS/2 ports.
The kind of switching talked about here just wasn't envisioned, and in fact, would have been considered insane.
Hmm... no, when the changeover actually occurred (late 1990s) this kind of switching was already commonplace. And the price of any serial device had already dropped more-or-less to commodity levels. (Hell, by that time we didn't even have to ask whether or not it had a 16550A chip!)
Actually, the most sensible explanation I've heard so far is that RS-232 is half-duplex and PS/2 is full-duplex. But I don't even know if this factoid is accurate... let alone why it would make a significant difference with stuff like kbds and mice...
But eventually technology catches up, and the marriage of USB with keyboard/mouse permits the right thing to happen.
Yes, I'm planning to buy a USB kbd and KVM soon. I need to upgrade my systems anyway, now that the new Debian is out... just busy with other shit lately...
Frankly, by the time this "sea-change" occurred, there was plenty of reason to anticipate losing the connection to any given input device, and yet nobody ever thought to upgrade the PS/2 protocol to make it hot-swappable. That's what always made me wonder what those motherboard designers were smoking... ;-)
Anyway, what's done is done. Just gotta deal with it... I'm just curious about the motivation behind it. And I still don't have a satisfactory answer... :-/
--jrd
PS: Here's some info on PS/2 ports that might be of interest to folks who know more about electronics that I do...
My question is: WHY did everyone switch to PS/2 in the first place? The old RS-232(?) ports could be hot-swapped at will. What POSSIBLE benefit could there be in switching to a protocol that requires a reboot to "re-capture" the input device if the connection is lost?
I've been wondering about this for years, and never heard a satisfactory answer. Anyone know?
--jrd
Actually, it's more correct to say that "One China" is the official government policy of both countries. In fact, most people on this island consider themselves to be "Taiwanese" nowadays. The only reason Taiwan's policy hasn't changed is because the PRC has said REPEATEDLY that it will attack immediately if Taiwan declares independence.
What a friendly, affectionate sentiment from our "tong-bao" brothers on the mainland... :-/
Sorta like the "affection" shown by a psychopathic stalker-type... I love you, and if you don't love me back, I'll KILL YOU!
--jrd
Um... because they (the South) were threatening to SECEDE and form a new (hostile) country right nextdoor.
The case in Taiwan is completely different. The "new" country already exists, and has for 50 years. It's no longer a matter of secession, just nomenclature.
China has been getting along fine without Taiwan since 1895. Why not leave well enough alone?
--jrd
TO THE EDITOR:
With the Microsoft antitrust case so much in the news lately, and since Iowa is one of the nine states opting out of the DOJ settlement, I find it curious that all this media attention has missed one simple point: the government could end Microsoft's monopoly tommorow, with the stroke of a pen.
Governor Vilsack could simply sign an executive order that, henceforth all digital communication with the Sate of Iowa must be transmitted and stored in "open" (publicy documented, royalty free) file formats. Since Microsoft's popular Office file formats (.DOC, .XLS, .PPT) are propretary, they would be unacceptable under the new rule. Any email sent to any government agency with a DOC or XLS file attachment would be automatically returned, with a request to re-send the content in an open file format.
The downstream repercussions would be massive. It would eliminate the need for businesses and individuals to purchase Microsoft software, at least as far as State business is concerned, and would popularize the notion that "not everyone uses Microsoft." Within weeks, it would be common knowledge among computer users, that some people can't read DOC files, and you can easily get around this problem with Save-As.
The single biggest obstacle to Microsoft's competition is not its illegal business practices, but simple inertia -- everyone else uses Microsoft. And no business that hopes to stay in business would risk "turning off" a potential customer by requesting a different file format.
The State, however, can and should make that request. Transparency in government is a hallmark of modern democracy. When I am forced to purchase Microsoft products in order to view "public" documents, then the term "Microsoft Tax" is not just a metaphor, it's a disgrace.
--jrd
PS: Still no reply from Vilsack... :-/
Does this mean that now I can finally get Chinese/Japanese input methods (*Wnn) working without having to change my entire frickin' GUI (including menus, calendar, etc) over to the target language? ...ie: the way it's supposed to work? ...eg: the way it works in that other OS?
The way it is now (Gnome 1.4, stock RH7.2 install), I had to set up a separate user account, with the LANG variable set to zh_TW, and run a separate X session (all in Chinese) just to get the ability to key-in some text. Wnn won't work without the LANG variable set, but setting it changes the global Gnome environment too. If there's a way around this, nobody I know has been able to figure it out yet...
--jrd