Having made the switch from Mac to the Evil Empire, it seems to me that the biggest reason Mac does not have the difficulties that Windows does with plug and play and installer installation is that Mac makes and/or controls most of the hardware.
There are less problems simply because there aren't as many options.
Look at the PC market... count the number of hardware manufacturers of motherboards, video cards, sound cards, etc. So many different configurations are possible. It's an amazing feat that Windows runs on most of them.
I'll give you this though. Microsoft makes exceptionally poor Mac software.
Wow, that's a great idea. So you plan on planting these values into your children before their first library trip? At what age would you wait then? 8? 10? 12? You're really going to sit there and tell me your kid, at that age, will just "know" certain "advanced" topics are bad/unproductive and they won't be interested in pulling them off of the library shelves?
I'm far beyond the planning stage. I have a twelve-year old and a nine year old child. Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know my children well enough that I do not fret over "advanced" subjects. They aren't interested.
I really am of the opinion that you have no children at all, or if you do, you are extremely naive and obviously don't remember your own childhood (or maybe you just think you can do a whole lot better than your own parents did).
Now, who's name calling? Parenting is not a science. My methods may be unorthodox but so far, I am pleased by my children. I do not see any reason why they should not grow to be responsible adults. With luck, they will be far more tolerant of others and dissenting opinions then the generations before them. Of course, maybe I'm wrong and I should just beat them whenever they misbehave. It seemed to work for my parents.
1. I'm far from a "right-wing nutball", and I resent the name-calling.
I did not call you, Fastolfe, a right-wing nutball nor have I stated that you, Fastolfe, do not want to parent your own kids. Please accept my apologies if I led you to believe otherwise.
2. Nobody said you had to accept DICK...
In my opinion, filters are censorship. If one wishes to use filters at home, that's their business. I do not want them used indiscriminately by the public library.
Like you, I want the library to be free from federal interference. This doesn't mean I'm willing to accept community "standards", whatever that means. As I stated before, I find little fault in setting up a library system that could restrict access based upon parental consent. It would suit both liberal and conservative parents.
Stop turning this around into an argument about how I don't want to parent my own kids so I'll let the library do it for me.
I will if you stop turning this into an argument about how I want to kill the public library system.
If you honestly have children, and you can honestly say you supervise your child 100% of the day, then you must be super-human.
I'm going to let you into a little secret... If your children require 100% supervision you are failing as a parent. The idea is to instill your child with your values. If you have their love and respect, they will honor those values even when you are not there.
I refuse to accept censorship simply because some right-wing nutball is afraid that his children will run amok the moment they are unchaperoned.
Any of the above that still believes that military -style thinking (regimentation, need-to-know, obeying orders blindly) has any place whatsoever outside of the military.
Mormons, Scientologists, and Masons all fit the above description.
So basically because you don't keep information from your children, you feel that other parents shouldn't have the ability to do so?
Oh no... far from it. I simply do not want other parents keeping information away from my children.
In a simple form, a "child" versus "adult" library card, with a child card having filtering options when using online resources and restrictions as far as what they can/can't check out.
This sounds like a good plan. Is is workable? What's to stop Johnny from borrowing Jimmy's unlimited access card?
By forcing all libraries to carry all online material, you're taking my abilities to parent my children away from me...
My parenting skills extend beyond that of a chaperone. I'm not worried.
So what, you think my 8-year-old son should be allowed to go to the library with his other 8-year-old friends and proceed to goof off and start pulling up pictures of old women eating feces from some guy?
What your son does is your problem. I censor very little from my children.
The thing that amazes me is that they tend to censor themselves.
I refuse to allow the "community" to determine how my children will be raised. They are mine.
...and for what it's worth, I think they are doing great.
Without the ability to selectively determine what my child sees when he's at the library on his own, I will be forced to simply forbid him access to the library until such a time as he is mature enough to handle all of the content, or at least until he's responsible enough to understand what's crap and what's not.
You do that. I will set my children free in the library confident that they will do the right thing.
I have children. I am not the least bit worried about what they will find on the internet.
You job as a parent is to prepare your children for the world that they will face and to protect them from being injured.
If your child's life and mind is so vacuous that you need to worry about pornography and the White Aryan Resistance, then you failed as a parent. Do your parental duty and take care of your own kids and quit expecting technology to do it for you.
...and another thing. If you don't have children, shut the hell up. You have absolutely no clue about what it takes to raise a child.
I haven't rushed out to see Man On The Moon yet. I doubt that I will.
I remember watching Kaufman on television as a kid. He wasn't entertaining, just ridiculous.
As for Jim Carrey, I'm not a big fan. Another reason to not run out to see MOTM. I'll admit that Jim Carrey can be a talented actor, but slapstick isn't my thang.
I've read a lot of posts that say things like, "I don't like Jim Carrey, but I liked the Truman Show." There was nothing special about Carrey's performance in that film. ANY actor could have done just as well. On the other hand, I doubt that there is anyone else who could have played the Cable Guy.
Back the f*cking truck up! My son (as I do) has allergies. He most likely got them from me. Are you saying that I'm a bad person for giving him allergies? I don't think so. I would never hurt my children intentionally. I am not maiming my children by not having them genetically engineered.
My son has asthma. I do not, but it's rather common in my family. If there were a way for me to remove that affliction, I would have.
You are not a bad person because you passed on your allergies to your son. You do not have the tools to do anything about it.
If the technology were available and you could remove this affliction, but you choose not to then you have failed in your duty to your children and you are a bad person IMHO.
Someone might use this information to create harm...
Here's an analogy... Automobiles are considered almost essential to quite a lot of people. I know I would have a very tough time living without one. At the same time, that same automobile subjects me and my family to many risks. Thousands of people are hurt and/or killed by them every year in this country. Does this mean we should not have automobiles?
...leave it up to the almighty.
Hit the nail on the head with that one. Were I a religious man, I would find the HGP offensive. It goes against god.
Fortunately, I'm a godless heathen. Information is not evil.
Be honest, here! If someone built a car that could do 200 miles to the gallon, would you buy it? Probably not. Gas is still so cheap in America, that nobody is going to care that such a car would help the environment, as well as posess some of the greatest technology invented.
I find it interesting that gas prices caused a great reduction in the size and weight of cars in the late 70's and 80's. Then as gas prices lowered and the new technology allowed more fuel efficient and powerful engines, the cars have once again grown large.
Were it not for technology, I don't think we would have this rash of SUVs. Gawd, I hate those things. cheers sand
Slashdot Mirror
Having made the switch from Mac to the Evil Empire, it seems to me that the biggest reason Mac does not have the difficulties that Windows does with plug and play and installer installation is that Mac makes and/or controls most of the hardware.
There are less problems simply because there aren't as many options.
Look at the PC market... count the number of hardware manufacturers of motherboards, video cards, sound cards, etc. So many different configurations are possible. It's an amazing feat that Windows runs on most of them.
I'll give you this though. Microsoft makes exceptionally poor Mac software.
cheers,
Wow, that's a great idea. So you plan on planting these values into your children before their first library trip? At what age would you wait then? 8? 10? 12? You're really going to sit there and tell me your kid, at that age, will just "know" certain "advanced" topics are bad/unproductive and they won't be interested in pulling them off of the library shelves?
I'm far beyond the planning stage. I have a twelve-year old and a nine year old child. Yes, as a matter of fact, I do know my children well enough that I do not fret over "advanced" subjects. They aren't interested.
I really am of the opinion that you have no children at all, or if you do, you are extremely naive and obviously don't remember your own childhood (or maybe you just think you can do a whole lot better than your own parents did).
Now, who's name calling? Parenting is not a science. My methods may be unorthodox but so far, I am pleased by my children. I do not see any reason why they should not grow to be responsible adults. With luck, they will be far more tolerant of others and dissenting opinions then the generations before them. Of course, maybe I'm wrong and I should just beat them whenever they misbehave. It seemed to work for my parents.
1. I'm far from a "right-wing nutball", and I resent the name-calling.
I did not call you, Fastolfe, a right-wing nutball nor have I stated that you, Fastolfe, do not want to parent your own kids. Please accept my apologies if I led you to believe otherwise.
2. Nobody said you had to accept DICK...
In my opinion, filters are censorship. If one wishes to use filters at home, that's their business. I do not want them used indiscriminately by the public library.
Like you, I want the library to be free from federal interference. This doesn't mean I'm willing to accept community "standards", whatever that means. As I stated before, I find little fault in setting up a library system that could restrict access based upon parental consent. It would suit both liberal and conservative parents.
Stop turning this around into an argument about how I don't want to parent my own kids so I'll let the library do it for me.
I will if you stop turning this into an argument about how I want to kill the public library system.
cheers,
That certainly simplifies the arrest process. :-)
cheers,
If you honestly have children, and you can honestly say you supervise your child 100% of the day, then you must be super-human.
I'm going to let you into a little secret... If your children require 100% supervision you are failing as a parent. The idea is to instill your child with your values. If you have their love and respect, they will honor those values even when you are not there.
I refuse to accept censorship simply because some right-wing nutball is afraid that his children will run amok the moment they are unchaperoned.
cheers,
I wonder if there are any consequences for such an act? And if anyone would have enforced them.
If so, who would be charged with the offense? The person accessing the site? The content provider? etc...
Heck... it'd be easier to just go out and burn a few flags. You'll get the same reaction. hehe
cheers,
Any of the above that still believes that military -style thinking (regimentation, need-to-know, obeying orders blindly) has any place whatsoever outside of the military.
Mormons, Scientologists, and Masons all fit the above description.
Here's your chance... an obvious troll... hah!
cheers,
So basically because you don't keep information from your children, you feel that other parents shouldn't have the ability to do so?
Oh no... far from it. I simply do not want other parents keeping information away from my children.
In a simple form, a "child" versus "adult" library card, with a child card having filtering options when using online resources and restrictions as far as what they can/can't check out.
This sounds like a good plan. Is is workable? What's to stop Johnny from borrowing Jimmy's unlimited access card?
By forcing all libraries to carry all online material, you're taking my abilities to parent my children away from me...
My parenting skills extend beyond that of a chaperone. I'm not worried.
cheers,
So what, you think my 8-year-old son should be allowed to go to the library with his other 8-year-old friends and proceed to goof off and start pulling up pictures of old women eating feces from some guy?
What your son does is your problem. I censor very little from my children.
The thing that amazes me is that they tend to censor themselves.
I refuse to allow the "community" to determine how my children will be raised. They are mine.
...and for what it's worth, I think they are doing great.
Without the ability to selectively determine what my child sees when he's at the library on his own, I will be forced to simply forbid him access to the library until such a time as he is mature enough to handle all of the content, or at least until he's responsible enough to understand what's crap and what's not.
You do that. I will set my children free in the library confident that they will do the right thing.
cheers,
I have children. I am not the least bit worried about what they will find on the internet.
You job as a parent is to prepare your children for the world that they will face and to protect them from being injured.
If your child's life and mind is so vacuous that you need to worry about pornography and the White Aryan Resistance, then you failed as a parent. Do your parental duty and take care of your own kids and quit expecting technology to do it for you.
...and another thing. If you don't have children, shut the hell up. You have absolutely no clue about what it takes to raise a child.
cheers,
Military people rarely get out of the military way of thinking
That's a rather broad generalization. What defines a "military" person? Active-duty? Retired? Veteran?
cheers,
there are already laws in place to cope with people jerking off in public.
Are there laws in place to cope with someone watching a streaming video of people jerking off on a computer in a public place?
cheers,
Okay, you're probably right but Carrey isn't the first "actor" to have a part written for specifically for him.
For the record, I can't stand watching Carrey either.
:-)
cheers,
Shit!
I just blew coffee all over my keyboard.
cheers,
Hmmm...
Wouldn't that be 31 Dec 1999 CE?
:-)
cheers,
I haven't rushed out to see Man On The Moon yet. I doubt that I will.
I remember watching Kaufman on television as a kid. He wasn't entertaining, just ridiculous.
As for Jim Carrey, I'm not a big fan. Another reason to not run out to see MOTM. I'll admit that Jim Carrey can be a talented actor, but slapstick isn't my thang.
I've read a lot of posts that say things like, "I don't like Jim Carrey, but I liked the Truman Show." There was nothing special about Carrey's performance in that film. ANY actor could have done just as well. On the other hand, I doubt that there is anyone else who could have played the Cable Guy.
Like it or not, THAT is talent.
cheers,
There's the ticket... SUE YOUR 3RD GRADE TEACHER. HAH!
cheers,
The networks have one thing to sell, that's us, the viewers. The advertisers pay the network for the privilege of attracting our attention.
cheers,
Back the f*cking truck up! My son (as I do) has allergies. He most likely got them from me. Are you saying that I'm a bad person for giving him allergies? I don't think so. I would never hurt my children intentionally. I am not maiming my children by not having them genetically engineered.
My son has asthma. I do not, but it's rather common in my family. If there were a way for me to remove that affliction, I would have.
You are not a bad person because you passed on your allergies to your son. You do not have the tools to do anything about it.
If the technology were available and you could remove this affliction, but you choose not to then you have failed in your duty to your children and you are a bad person IMHO.
Are Christian Scientists bad people?
cheers,
Someone might use this information to create harm...
Here's an analogy... Automobiles are considered almost essential to quite a lot of people. I know I would have a very tough time living without one. At the same time, that same automobile subjects me and my family to many risks. Thousands of people are hurt and/or killed by them every year in this country. Does this mean we should not have automobiles?
Hit the nail on the head with that one. Were I a religious man, I would find the HGP offensive. It goes against god.
Fortunately, I'm a godless heathen. Information is not evil.
cheers,
Absolutely, Lynnaea...
I agree with you completely.
The "average American" simply regurgitates what they see on television and the mainstream media.
cheers,
Well said...
cheers,
Be honest, here! If someone built a car that could do 200 miles to the gallon, would you buy it? Probably not. Gas is still so cheap in America, that nobody is going to care that such a car would help the environment, as well as posess some of the greatest technology invented.
I find it interesting that gas prices caused a great reduction in the size and weight of cars in the late 70's and 80's. Then as gas prices lowered and the new technology allowed more fuel efficient and powerful engines, the cars have once again grown large.
Were it not for technology, I don't think we would have this rash of SUVs. Gawd, I hate those things. cheers sand
cheers,
After reading the survey report, I find the pessimists are much more interesting...
More than one-third of Americans say the U.S. will most likely be involved in a nuclear war within the next 50 years.
Nearly one-third believe an asteroid will hit the Earth within the next 50 years.
52% expect the average American will be hurt by the global economy.
53% do not expect the U.S. to remain the world's lone superpower.
67% believe that China will emerge as our global rival.
41% forsee a nuclear war. 37% think the U.S. will be involved in it.
69% say that the gap between rich and poor will widen.
59% say the crime rate will climb in the next 50 years.
60% see less affordable health care in the next 50 years.
52% anticipate less honesty from political leaders.
The future is so bright...
cheers,
Really?
Which part of did you not agree with?
Microsoft may in fact have become a de facto monopoly.
Apple and IBM certainly squandered their opportunity for dominance and market-share. If not Microsoft? Who else?
cheers,
Gate's big idea was to make sure his company's software and operating systems were distributed so freely and aggressively they were on every desktop.
Sun is offering StarOffice 5.1 for FREE. Sound familiar?
cheers,