It's not exactly like the members of the Anglican church filled the streets, burned effigies of the Resistance devs and shouted "Death to Japan" when that happened. Remember the Mohammed caricatures? Islam has a very different "style" of dealing with such things. It's really a shame that the entire world has come to live in fear of a bunch of fundamentalists who can only be described as the rednecks of the middle east. I find it really peculiar that the islamic world has such a great sense of humor sometimes and when it comes to their illusory beliefs they go all bombs and burka on our ass. It's so ridiculous.
You really think this will stop anywhere soon? Nothing has changed, the rights are cut down because people are still kept in that suspended state of hysteria around "terrorism" when would the governments of the world finally stop thinking in these ridiculous NAZI mentalities and grant some freedom rights to their citizens again? When they find Bin Laden?
What people have to realize is that the leading class got a "get out of jail free" card on 9/11. For them it was a huge opportunity to change everything we know about our societies (of which most where never democracies to begin with even those that called themselves one). This will not stop until there is a MASSIVE rebellion civil war like outcry from the people that feel mistreated. But since more than 80% don't care and life in constant fear this will never happen. I'm getting ready for a world worse than everything 1984 could have ever predicted, after all Orwell loved people... governments don't.
Well you're right, religion is for people that enjoy living in illusions. They need that to cope with life and so all the other lies go down much easier because you're already used to believing in something for which there is no evidence whatsoever. And after all religion is the most important divider in our world today, if we all didn't have different beliefs there would be no "War on Terror" because nobody would be stupid enough to even make up a category of people to go against. Without religion, that is MY belief, people could realize that we are all humans. Right now you can simply call someone a fundamentalist Christian, Jew, Muslim whatever and they're the perfect enemy. That is soo moronic.
Wait a second, it's not making bad laws that gives people the impression the laws could be disobeyed for personal gain. It's not exactly like a youth looks through the law books and goes "this is some bullshit, I'm going to steal me some music". It's the environment of competition, consumerism and wealth that makes for a situation where kids growing up learn that all that counts is money and possession. Nobody cares if you're really poor if you have all the latest music to share.
They look at the news and see politicians and business people filling their pockets by lying, deception and fraud on a scale that they can't even imagine. These are the role models of society these days, pimps, hookers, liars and cheaters. That's how people learn to disrespect the law, by seeing other people stepping over it and being successful because of it. So they think you need to step over the law to be successful. Has nothing to do with the quality of the law by itself. And honestly, intellectual property is a stupid idea. There are some fields that need some protection for a very limited amount of time but after that it's pure greed that keeps us from making knowledge a public commodity again.
That one can learn from his actions, hold a person directly responsible for something and you might get the slightest chance of them looking out for mistakes in the future. Blame it on the corporate mascot and everyone will just go their way and not read the memo explaining why you should be even more cautious at work. Never worked. You need to pin down the people responsible and beat them (metaphorically speaking) into admitting their mistakes and working on a solution to the problem. Otherwise it will just keep going in an endless circle of ignorance.
In fact, we're all criminals, If you have a bank account, own a car, ever used a water toilet, swatted a bug, picked your nose, looked at someone else's wife or imagined how cool it would be to be someone else you are a criminal in some sense. Everyone has done something that offends people. It always depends on what kind of dimwit makes the laws. What's legal here might be a crime somewhere else. Unfortunately the Americans have spend a huge portion of their country's history figuring out the most effective way of fucking each other out of money over pretentious unimportant bullshit. That's why they don't know smack about foreign relations or social stability because they're too busy screwing each other over. And yes, you did some great things for the world, but then you kept bragging about it until everybody hated you again.
Sure they're only about 250 years old but one still could assume that they would learn from their mistakes.
No not the only one, but the broad majority of people doesn't give a fuck and especially wouldn't bother fighting against that stuff. It's exhausting and dangerous. You have something to fight for because you've seen the future and refuse to go back into the dark past. They don't even know what's possible and keep buying CDs because that's what they know and do as good honest people, right?
If your ecosystem wasn't so focussed on producing crap you wouldn't have that problem. We really need an institution that protects the Hanna Montanas and Jonas Brothers of the world? Really? I understand when big innovative ideas should be protected, games should be sold to support the devs not pirated to ruin them. But if 90% of the stuff that the "industry" produces is cheaper-by-the-dozen vanillaware (look at all the generic movies/games/bands) it's absolutely not surprising if that model doesn't hold up. I would pay more money for my media consumption but a) you would have to give me better ways of doing it b) a refined and realistic pricing structure and most importantly c) more stuff that's actually worth spending money on. If your economy is based on Highschool Musical movies and Violent shooter games... you shouldn't be to optimistic in the first place.
the Ultima Online community got it's petition through and shot him to the moon. I never played any Ultima game back then but I want his house, probably for sale by now.
You let me know what country takes care of their eldery to the tune of $2200 per month, because that's where I want to retire.
Last I checked, most of those "civilized parts of the world" are either reforming their State pension systems or are planning to.
QFT!
Strangely it's the "terrorist" or "developing" country where family still seems as it is. In our "civilized parts of the world" we usually send Grannie and Gramps into nursing home exile when they can't work anymore and didn't save enough.
Don't stop, if no one is doing it... no one is doing it. We already have enough passive labrat people out there that do everything they're told. Take pride in standing out like I do. It's what I believe is the only right way.
You're right. The second I clicked the submit button I already thought that should have been "by stopping sales of" I sorta confused the two sentences and mixed them. It's not my mothers tongue so even though I try every day I'm not perfect:/
Seems to me that somebody just wanted to point out that they're smarter than the BBC...
Maybe so, but usually you do that because the authors intention for making the mistake is not clear and the person quoting it doesn't know if that's some weird figure of speech that the BBC uses all the time and their readers know what it's supposed to be. So he went the safe way and just quoted it literally. Basically saying "That's what they said, I think it might be wrong but that's what was on the page after all". It's confusing, I'll give you that.
[sic] is used to indicate a word-by-word quote. Even if the quoted passage is obviously flawed or wrong. In this case the BBC source is grammatically incorrect because they literally write:
"RealNetworks - the firm behind the software - has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software."
Which is wrong because it makes no sense. It should be "has responded to a restraining order issued by a US court by stopping to sell the RealDVD software." or "stopped to sell the RealDVD software." something like that. The author of the original post was quite clever in that he used [sic] as it is used in an academic environment to direct corrections not to him but to the author of the original source because he simply quoted the erroneous text using [sic] to indicate so.
If I'm pushing a deadline, the last thing I want to do is learn anything. I just want it to work. In fact, I'll deliberately sidestep anything that isn't directly focused on my desired outcome.
What he described is an unusual situation, if you, in a time where your computer has died and you just need SOMETHING to get your work done, refuse to learn a few steps to get a solution for your problem working and instead insist of getting the old system fixed you are in fact stupid if it puts you in danger of missing the deadline.
If I had to finish a paper, and my system died, all I needed was a machine that I could check some stuff on maybe correct a few paragraphs and then get it to print I would certainly go through the hoops of learning where the print icon or font setting in OO.org is -wouldn't you?
The original discussion revolved around people buying new machines and not putting the effort in to learn how to operate them because they refuse to do so. His example is an extraordinary situation that would need extraordinary means to solve. She would just have to ask him, as she did, how to operate something she couldn't figure out for herself (for broadly explained reasons of vendor blindness and lack of flexibility). There's no reason whatsoever except ignorance that you wouldn't ask for these simple steps to get out of the way of lots more trouble. Side-stepping "problems" to get something to work is reasonable but in the long run doesn't really pay off, you learn a lot through exploration of alternatives, if only that your current solution is definitely the best one for you. If you always side-step that which doesn't directly affect your "desired outcome" then you'll never find out if an alternative approach would have gotten you a much better actual "outcome".
Let's just use Linux and Windows as an example for this again. If you never "try" Linux because it's not directly focused on your desired outcome, so you keep using Windows because that's what you normally do. You well never actually find out if you couldn't have done that better with Linux. Sure I won't start doing system migration in the middle of a process but sometimes exploring these possibilities is little investment but a huge trade-off. Imagine you figured during your last project that you could save several hundred dollars in license fees and service contracts if you did the same thing with slightly different "open" means. Is that something worth side-stepping? I don't know.
The point is, people that buy new machines don't usually do so because they desperately need to get something done. They do because they want to increase overall efficiency by using new hard/software. If you save a hundred bucks on a netbook with Linux over Windows then you could be expected to put at least a bit of work into what you just saved. Most users could learn ample command of Linux in 50$ of manhours. Even if you make 25 dollars an hour you could get two hours of education on the subject. Have an experienced user do that for you and/or read the right manuals and you will go a long way in 2-3 hours worth of learning interface changes.
Well they still handed over this technology despite knowing about things like the above. I can only hope they charged them a lot of money for the Shanghai Transrapid. But since it's Siemens and Thyssen I am not at all worried that they undersold.
If you explain to a noob that the first thing BEFORE they call you (usually you don't hand out Linux distros without warning the people that it might be a little different from what they know) is to open that package manager thingie and look for the blabla there. Anyone can use a search, when you don't know what a driver does you can remember the word "library" just as well. Both mean nothing to you but you follow through steps that might help you. That's what I do with people I want to help using other software, I explain to them how they can work out stuff by themselves. The best thing is to talk them through it. This way you might get a memory effect and the next time a problem comes up it triggers that routine and they maybe don't have to call you. Everybody wins.
Sure it's not for everyone but when they understand that and how they have to install drivers (which even the strangest of users I've met seem to understand) you can teach them a similarly complicated task of installing new programs through a package manager. It's irrelevant if the thing you're browsing for is called.exe or.deb/.rpm -for someone who doesn't know what it means anyway
Awesome car analogy... But with Linux, in some cases, there is no A/C knob at all. There is an extra step of finding the A/C knob and figuring out how to install it.
To me there's no difference between looking into the car's manual saying "Twist there" and a Linux Wiki saying for X install package lib-blabla in Synaptic.
Some things that the average user needs, like Adobe Flash, DVD decoding, Skype, etc, require some un-intuitive steps to get working. Even with Ubuntu, my mom couldn't get the programs above working if she tried. Yet she was able do just that with Mac OSX on her MacBook. A Linux distro such as Ubuntu will be ready for the desktop as soon as they figure this out.
I don't really see it. Flash is one click in Synaptic (flashplugin-nonfree), DVD decoding needs one.deb package that you could give to her in an email. Same for Skype, download the Debian package from their site. Install. Done. I run all three on my computer with little to no problems. And at least with Ubuntu you can create remote SSH access and fix that stuff from your house:p
Slashdot Mirror
It's not exactly like the members of the Anglican church filled the streets, burned effigies of the Resistance devs and shouted "Death to Japan" when that happened. Remember the Mohammed caricatures? Islam has a very different "style" of dealing with such things. It's really a shame that the entire world has come to live in fear of a bunch of fundamentalists who can only be described as the rednecks of the middle east. I find it really peculiar that the islamic world has such a great sense of humor sometimes and when it comes to their illusory beliefs they go all bombs and burka on our ass. It's so ridiculous.
And you have nothing important to say/think either. So you're good.
or Express Gate ... and it's available now:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131322
Get your game together Microsoft. We seriously need to see some self developed innovation from you soon or people will care even less.
You really think this will stop anywhere soon? Nothing has changed, the rights are cut down because people are still kept in that suspended state of hysteria around "terrorism" when would the governments of the world finally stop thinking in these ridiculous NAZI mentalities and grant some freedom rights to their citizens again? When they find Bin Laden?
... governments don't.
What people have to realize is that the leading class got a "get out of jail free" card on 9/11. For them it was a huge opportunity to change everything we know about our societies (of which most where never democracies to begin with even those that called themselves one). This will not stop until there is a MASSIVE rebellion civil war like outcry from the people that feel mistreated. But since more than 80% don't care and life in constant fear this will never happen. I'm getting ready for a world worse than everything 1984 could have ever predicted, after all Orwell loved people
Well you're right, religion is for people that enjoy living in illusions. They need that to cope with life and so all the other lies go down much easier because you're already used to believing in something for which there is no evidence whatsoever. And after all religion is the most important divider in our world today, if we all didn't have different beliefs there would be no "War on Terror" because nobody would be stupid enough to even make up a category of people to go against. Without religion, that is MY belief, people could realize that we are all humans. Right now you can simply call someone a fundamentalist Christian, Jew, Muslim whatever and they're the perfect enemy. That is soo moronic.
Take that noobs!
Sorry forgot one sentence: If you don't want other people to steal your ideas ... don't publish them PERIOD
Wait a second, it's not making bad laws that gives people the impression the laws could be disobeyed for personal gain. It's not exactly like a youth looks through the law books and goes "this is some bullshit, I'm going to steal me some music". It's the environment of competition, consumerism and wealth that makes for a situation where kids growing up learn that all that counts is money and possession. Nobody cares if you're really poor if you have all the latest music to share.
They look at the news and see politicians and business people filling their pockets by lying, deception and fraud on a scale that they can't even imagine. These are the role models of society these days, pimps, hookers, liars and cheaters. That's how people learn to disrespect the law, by seeing other people stepping over it and being successful because of it. So they think you need to step over the law to be successful. Has nothing to do with the quality of the law by itself. And honestly, intellectual property is a stupid idea. There are some fields that need some protection for a very limited amount of time but after that it's pure greed that keeps us from making knowledge a public commodity again.
But you'll not be allowed to talk about it since it's copyrighted ...
That one can learn from his actions, hold a person directly responsible for something and you might get the slightest chance of them looking out for mistakes in the future. Blame it on the corporate mascot and everyone will just go their way and not read the memo explaining why you should be even more cautious at work. Never worked. You need to pin down the people responsible and beat them (metaphorically speaking) into admitting their mistakes and working on a solution to the problem. Otherwise it will just keep going in an endless circle of ignorance.
In fact, we're all criminals, If you have a bank account, own a car, ever used a water toilet, swatted a bug, picked your nose, looked at someone else's wife or imagined how cool it would be to be someone else you are a criminal in some sense. Everyone has done something that offends people. It always depends on what kind of dimwit makes the laws. What's legal here might be a crime somewhere else. Unfortunately the Americans have spend a huge portion of their country's history figuring out the most effective way of fucking each other out of money over pretentious unimportant bullshit. That's why they don't know smack about foreign relations or social stability because they're too busy screwing each other over. And yes, you did some great things for the world, but then you kept bragging about it until everybody hated you again.
Sure they're only about 250 years old but one still could assume that they would learn from their mistakes.
No not the only one, but the broad majority of people doesn't give a fuck and especially wouldn't bother fighting against that stuff. It's exhausting and dangerous. You have something to fight for because you've seen the future and refuse to go back into the dark past. They don't even know what's possible and keep buying CDs because that's what they know and do as good honest people, right?
They already do, handing out stuff like this: http://www.boingboing.net/2006/03/13/copyright-comic-is-n.html
Abe Lincoln would go buy tickets to the theater rightaway ...
If your ecosystem wasn't so focussed on producing crap you wouldn't have that problem. We really need an institution that protects the Hanna Montanas and Jonas Brothers of the world? Really? I understand when big innovative ideas should be protected, games should be sold to support the devs not pirated to ruin them. But if 90% of the stuff that the "industry" produces is cheaper-by-the-dozen vanillaware (look at all the generic movies/games/bands) it's absolutely not surprising if that model doesn't hold up. I would pay more money for my media consumption but a) you would have to give me better ways of doing it b) a refined and realistic pricing structure and most importantly c) more stuff that's actually worth spending money on. If your economy is based on Highschool Musical movies and Violent shooter games ... you shouldn't be to optimistic in the first place.
the Ultima Online community got it's petition through and shot him to the moon. I never played any Ultima game back then but I want his house, probably for sale by now.
You let me know what country takes care of their eldery to the tune of $2200 per month, because that's where I want to retire.
Last I checked, most of those "civilized parts of the world" are either reforming their State pension systems or are planning to.
QFT! Strangely it's the "terrorist" or "developing" country where family still seems as it is. In our "civilized parts of the world" we usually send Grannie and Gramps into nursing home exile when they can't work anymore and didn't save enough.
Don't stop, if no one is doing it ... no one is doing it. We already have enough passive labrat people out there that do everything they're told. Take pride in standing out like I do. It's what I believe is the only right way.
You're right. The second I clicked the submit button I already thought that should have been "by stopping sales of" I sorta confused the two sentences and mixed them. It's not my mothers tongue so even though I try every day I'm not perfect :/
Seems to me that somebody just wanted to point out that they're smarter than the BBC...
Maybe so, but usually you do that because the authors intention for making the mistake is not clear and the person quoting it doesn't know if that's some weird figure of speech that the BBC uses all the time and their readers know what it's supposed to be. So he went the safe way and just quoted it literally. Basically saying "That's what they said, I think it might be wrong but that's what was on the page after all". It's confusing, I'll give you that.
[sic] is used to indicate a word-by-word quote. Even if the quoted passage is obviously flawed or wrong. In this case the BBC source is grammatically incorrect because they literally write:
"RealNetworks - the firm behind the software - has responded to restraining order issued by a US court stopped selling the RealDVD software."
Which is wrong because it makes no sense. It should be "has responded to a restraining order issued by a US court by stopping to sell the RealDVD software." or "stopped to sell the RealDVD software." something like that. The author of the original post was quite clever in that he used [sic] as it is used in an academic environment to direct corrections not to him but to the author of the original source because he simply quoted the erroneous text using [sic] to indicate so.
If I'm pushing a deadline, the last thing I want to do is learn anything. I just want it to work. In fact, I'll deliberately sidestep anything that isn't directly focused on my desired outcome.
What he described is an unusual situation, if you, in a time where your computer has died and you just need SOMETHING to get your work done, refuse to learn a few steps to get a solution for your problem working and instead insist of getting the old system fixed you are in fact stupid if it puts you in danger of missing the deadline.
If I had to finish a paper, and my system died, all I needed was a machine that I could check some stuff on maybe correct a few paragraphs and then get it to print I would certainly go through the hoops of learning where the print icon or font setting in OO.org is -wouldn't you?
The original discussion revolved around people buying new machines and not putting the effort in to learn how to operate them because they refuse to do so. His example is an extraordinary situation that would need extraordinary means to solve. She would just have to ask him, as she did, how to operate something she couldn't figure out for herself (for broadly explained reasons of vendor blindness and lack of flexibility). There's no reason whatsoever except ignorance that you wouldn't ask for these simple steps to get out of the way of lots more trouble. Side-stepping "problems" to get something to work is reasonable but in the long run doesn't really pay off, you learn a lot through exploration of alternatives, if only that your current solution is definitely the best one for you. If you always side-step that which doesn't directly affect your "desired outcome" then you'll never find out if an alternative approach would have gotten you a much better actual "outcome".
Let's just use Linux and Windows as an example for this again. If you never "try" Linux because it's not directly focused on your desired outcome, so you keep using Windows because that's what you normally do. You well never actually find out if you couldn't have done that better with Linux. Sure I won't start doing system migration in the middle of a process but sometimes exploring these possibilities is little investment but a huge trade-off. Imagine you figured during your last project that you could save several hundred dollars in license fees and service contracts if you did the same thing with slightly different "open" means. Is that something worth side-stepping? I don't know.
The point is, people that buy new machines don't usually do so because they desperately need to get something done. They do because they want to increase overall efficiency by using new hard/software. If you save a hundred bucks on a netbook with Linux over Windows then you could be expected to put at least a bit of work into what you just saved. Most users could learn ample command of Linux in 50$ of manhours. Even if you make 25 dollars an hour you could get two hours of education on the subject. Have an experienced user do that for you and/or read the right manuals and you will go a long way in 2-3 hours worth of learning interface changes.
Sure I was talking about two different trains to begin with. They worked hard on gaining info on both. I was talking about this in reference to the ICE: http://www.imagetours.de/wpblog/2008/05/04/chinesen-haben-den-ice-3-langst-kopiert/ (German).
Well they still handed over this technology despite knowing about things like the above. I can only hope they charged them a lot of money for the Shanghai Transrapid. But since it's Siemens and Thyssen I am not at all worried that they undersold.
If you explain to a noob that the first thing BEFORE they call you (usually you don't hand out Linux distros without warning the people that it might be a little different from what they know) is to open that package manager thingie and look for the blabla there. Anyone can use a search, when you don't know what a driver does you can remember the word "library" just as well. Both mean nothing to you but you follow through steps that might help you. That's what I do with people I want to help using other software, I explain to them how they can work out stuff by themselves. The best thing is to talk them through it. This way you might get a memory effect and the next time a problem comes up it triggers that routine and they maybe don't have to call you. Everybody wins.
.exe or .deb/.rpm -for someone who doesn't know what it means anyway
Sure it's not for everyone but when they understand that and how they have to install drivers (which even the strangest of users I've met seem to understand) you can teach them a similarly complicated task of installing new programs through a package manager. It's irrelevant if the thing you're browsing for is called
Awesome car analogy... But with Linux, in some cases, there is no A/C knob at all. There is an extra step of finding the A/C knob and figuring out how to install it.
To me there's no difference between looking into the car's manual saying "Twist there" and a Linux Wiki saying for X install package lib-blabla in Synaptic.
Some things that the average user needs, like Adobe Flash, DVD decoding, Skype, etc, require some un-intuitive steps to get working. Even with Ubuntu, my mom couldn't get the programs above working if she tried. Yet she was able do just that with Mac OSX on her MacBook. A Linux distro such as Ubuntu will be ready for the desktop as soon as they figure this out.
I don't really see it. Flash is one click in Synaptic (flashplugin-nonfree), DVD decoding needs one .deb package that you could give to her in an email. Same for Skype, download the Debian package from their site. Install. Done. I run all three on my computer with little to no problems. And at least with Ubuntu you can create remote SSH access and fix that stuff from your house :p