And the great irony here is that I'm the one with evidence and all of you who accuse me of being a Bill O'Reilly fan are without it. (By the way, I'm ultra liberal, and lived in Paris for many years.)
Yes, there are knee jerk reactionary "France Sucks" types, and I'm not one of them. But to deny that there is a powerful (Powerful) anti--American sentiment which is alive and well among French beaurocrats would be painfully naive at best.
The anti-American sentiment has its roots deep in both cultural xenophobia (no headscarves?), a loss of historic linguistic prestige (ie: lingua franca, lingua diplomata, etc.) and historical contest with their historic adversary, England. There are many scholarly books on French anti-amerianism, and its (sometimes hilarious) manifestation in politics, law and popular culture.
The situation has grown so out of hand in recent years, that the French intelligentsia write books in an effort to understand their own cultural fascination with America bashing. (I recommend Jean-Francois Revel's "L'Obsession Anti-Americaine", 2002).
But I see sadly that writing such comments on Slashdot are akin to pointing out that the "iPhone has no keyboard and will probably make a bad smartphone because texting and email are somewhat crucial". (For which I was similarly modded down as Flamebait)
There are broadcast limits on networks for all languages besides French. English has its own specially defined limits.
Advertisers who use English words (but not the words of other languages) are fined.
France took center stage during the ICANN fiasco in the effort to wrest "control" away from the US. And who was the proposed entity for transferring the power to (from NSI)? Why, "France Telecom" of course.
French anti-Americanism is very real. The French have a deep resentment for the pervasiveness of the English language and for the "American-ness" of the Internet. To deny this is to ignore far too much recent history.
Now kids, mod me down as flamebait and go to bed believing that the whole world is in this together, and that America is the only country that behaves like a dick. Russia plays fair. China plays fair. France plays fair. We're jerks. I know.
'Just thinking off the top of my head, but there are a few issues here that make this interesting:
1) The punishment sure doesn't fit the crime. Gates is being asked to absolve this man of his crime, and that only seems like a moral imperative because the the punishment is so severe. 2) Gates is in a world of trouble over this one because if he acquiesces he's opening the door to far more crime.
So the only route Gates can take is to work "on behalf" of the teacher to reduce his penalty to a penalty which would be more in proportion to a US one.
> "Many users are calling this BS, saying it's all about Yahoo marketing its other properties to Flickr's user-base."
And this is somehow unacceptable? They're a portal with multiple service offerings. They also gain tremendous synergies from integrating these services, as do all portals.
Why does the OP feel he has the right to be shielded somehow from this integration, or from Yahoo's other free service offerings?
This is a little OT, but I have to say that personally I think Yahoo is on a tear and no one has noticed. IMHO Yahoo's mail beta blows huge holes in Gmail, which has a wacky threading system and an interface that's damn hard to love.
Does it seem like every day, Apple is seeming less like the good guy?
This isn't flamebait... (I love my Mac) its an observation that IMHO over the past year Apple seems to have been far more agressive at implementing "control" measures through legal means -- not as bad as MSFT, but a far cry f rom the "We want everyone to love us" attitude of the past.
My question is: what changed? And is this the Apple of the future? Or is this a result of some shift in management attitudes. (Or a case of money and power corrupt, no matter who you are?)
So the goal of the non-profit is *not* to provide access to a cost-saving alternative, but to overcome the inherent laziness and stupidity of American educators and school systems. Ok. I just wanted to make sure I had that straight.
Hmmm... but that shifts the focus of the project from one of 'granting access to software' and 'enabling students to overcome prohibitive costs' to one of evangelizing a specific platform.
Which isn't what it says on your site:
"OSSDI believes that commercial software costs can be prohibitive for students in impoverished regions. We also believe that no child should be prevented from fully utilizing technology to further their education."
I'm not sure I understand the reasons for CD based distribution. Don't most schools (even inner city schools) have a connection that could download OO? The complete distro is 93 megs. Am I so naive to think that most schools don't have at least some access to broadband and a CD burner somewhere in the building, or among the staff/community?
Most Americans of course, are still on dial-up, or without computers/access altogether... but most schools/communities? That puts our current state of connectivity in a pretty dim light.
The entire web isn't made up of Web 2.0 community-generated content sites. And even if you've got the latest greatest custom CMS -- someone's got to maintain it. Newspapers and magazines still have webmasters -- those are publications with dozens of writers, editors, photo editors and community features.
Most of the web is still (and will always be) about content, and not all content exists on blogs and news aggregators. (Although, TFA is correct in its observation that an increasing amount of it is). Enterprise level publishing still requires webmasters to manage increasingly complex sites with multiple integrated systems, databases servers, ad networks and a distributed team of editors, writers and programmers.
If you're the New York times, WebMD, iVillage, MSN, etc. a WordPress install isn't going to replace your webmaster.
I think a better question might be: who killed the low level webmaster?
The Majority of Certified Analysts in 2006 did not beat the S&P 500 with their portfolio rec's.
That's right "MAJORITY". Which actually means you'd be better off doing the opposite of what they suggested.
I just read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" --- highly recommended if anyone is interested in the mathematical provability of analysts' incompetance. Any analyst who believes he is operating in an enviornment with a limited enough set of variables to render a prediction, is inherently mathematically incompetent.
One of NORML's primary arguments about private (ie: 'at home') consumption is that it is protected under the Constitutional "right to privacy".
Hillary? Is this just going to be about electronic surveillance and security of digital information repositories? Or are you going to tackle the larger issue of protecting personal activities in private spaces....Because those the rocks that many ships have wrecked upon.
> "But why didn't YouTube pay its users from the start? "
Actually, this is a true story: they posted an ad on craigslist in their first months of business, offering cute girls $100 to upload video blogs or videos of themselves and their friends.
Not one single girl responded.
There's a video on YouTube somewhere of the "early days" when the YouTube guys were discussing this "plan". Its actually pretty funny.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh, GoldenEye. Why is GoldenEye important?
Because it was on a console?
Does that make it important?
As a PC (and cosole) gamer I was pretty unimpressed by GoldenEye judging
from PC standards. Just my 2 cents.
I'm the original poster.
And the great irony here is that I'm the one with evidence and all of you who accuse me of
being a Bill O'Reilly fan are without it. (By the way, I'm ultra liberal, and lived in Paris
for many years.)
Yes, there are knee jerk reactionary "France Sucks" types, and I'm not one of them. But to
deny that there is a powerful (Powerful) anti--American sentiment which is alive and well among French
beaurocrats would be painfully naive at best.
The anti-American sentiment has its roots deep in both cultural xenophobia (no headscarves?), a loss of historic
linguistic prestige (ie: lingua franca, lingua diplomata, etc.) and historical contest with their historic
adversary, England. There are many scholarly books on French anti-amerianism, and its (sometimes hilarious)
manifestation in politics, law and popular culture.
The situation has grown so out of hand in recent years, that the French intelligentsia
write books in an effort to understand their own cultural fascination with America bashing.
(I recommend Jean-Francois Revel's "L'Obsession Anti-Americaine", 2002).
But I see sadly that writing such comments on Slashdot are akin to pointing out that the "iPhone has no keyboard
and will probably make a bad smartphone because texting and email are somewhat crucial". (For which I was similarly
modded down as Flamebait)
There are broadcast limits on networks for all languages besides French. English has its own specially defined limits.
Advertisers who use English words (but not the words of other languages) are fined.
France took center stage during the ICANN fiasco in the effort to wrest "control" away from the US. And who
was the proposed entity for transferring the power to (from NSI)? Why, "France Telecom" of course.
French anti-Americanism is very real. The French have a deep resentment for the pervasiveness of the English language
and for the "American-ness" of the Internet. To deny this is to ignore far too much recent history.
Now kids, mod me down as flamebait and go to bed believing that the whole world is in this together, and that America is the
only country that behaves like a dick. Russia plays fair. China plays fair. France plays fair. We're jerks. I know.
No one should underestimate the amount of anti-Americanism in this "give-away".
The French are more "sore" about the Internet being in English (and software being American) than most people realize.
'Just thinking off the top of my head, but there are a few issues here that make this
interesting:
1) The punishment sure doesn't fit the crime. Gates is being asked to absolve this man of his crime, and that only seems like a moral imperative because the the punishment is so severe.
2) Gates is in a world of trouble over this one because if he acquiesces he's opening the door to far more crime.
So the only route Gates can take is to work "on behalf" of the teacher to reduce his penalty to a penalty which would be more in proportion to a US one.
My prediction..my 2 cents...
Is unmanaged user uploads.
Did anyone not see a potential problem with this?
By playing the video on a site bearing the YouTube logo, they are by definition advertising on
something they do not own.
Sony will be Japan's General Motors.
Like GM is to the US, Sony is the poster child of Japan's industrial growth -- and in ten years
they will be in a desperate struggle for survival.
Think that's too grim?
Watch.
> "Many users are calling this BS, saying it's all about Yahoo marketing its other properties to Flickr's user-base."
And this is somehow unacceptable? They're a portal with multiple service offerings.
They also gain tremendous synergies from integrating these services, as do all portals.
Why does the OP feel he has the right to be shielded somehow from this integration, or from
Yahoo's other free service offerings?
This is a little OT, but I have to say that personally I think Yahoo is on a tear and no one has
noticed. IMHO Yahoo's mail beta blows huge holes in Gmail, which has a wacky threading
system and an interface that's damn hard to love.
I've been turning carbohydrates into methane for years.
My Eve Corporation's greatest enemy is a player named "Achomemnon".
Currently he's in the trunk of my car.
What? Its all just part of the game people!
Does it seem like every day, Apple is seeming less like the good guy?
This isn't flamebait... (I love my Mac) its an observation that IMHO
over the past year Apple seems to have been far more agressive at implementing
"control" measures through legal means -- not as bad as MSFT, but a far cry f
rom the "We want everyone to love us" attitude of the past.
My question is: what changed? And is this the Apple of the future? Or
is this a result of some shift in management attitudes. (Or a case of
money and power corrupt, no matter who you are?)
Ah. Interesting ... so the finished product was an improvement over the beta?
Has anyone ever come up with one really good reason why a paper record of all votes is a bad idea?
The book is, as the OP states, excellent.
The problem lies with its index. Actually using the book is very difficult because the Index is so non-inclusive of the subjects within the book.
Worth getting, but be prepared to flip through it a whole lot more than you would if the Index was well written.
My 2 cents.
So the goal of the non-profit is *not* to provide access to a cost-saving alternative, but to overcome the inherent laziness and stupidity of American educators and school systems. Ok. I just wanted to make sure I had that straight.
Hmmm... but that shifts the focus of the project from one of 'granting access to software' and 'enabling students to overcome prohibitive costs' to one of evangelizing a specific platform.
Which isn't what it says on your site:
"OSSDI believes that commercial software costs can be prohibitive for students in impoverished regions. We also believe that no child should be prevented from fully utilizing technology to further their education."
Because there's something very strange about providing a free office suite that runs on an expensive OS.
Why not distribute a Linux distro bundled with OOo?
Otherwise the overall mission seems compromised by the platform.
I'm not sure I understand the reasons for CD based distribution. Don't most schools (even inner city schools)
have a connection that could download OO? The complete distro is 93 megs. Am I so naive to think that most
schools don't have at least some access to broadband and a CD burner somewhere in the building, or among the
staff/community?
Most Americans of course, are still on dial-up, or without computers/access altogether... but most schools/communities?
That puts our current state of connectivity in a pretty dim light.
Usage stats for some of those can't be too good.
Or maybe I'm wrong. But it seems like the big 2 or 3 would command 99.99% of all search traffic,
leaving very little for these guys.
Webmasters are still around.
The entire web isn't made up of Web 2.0 community-generated content sites.
And even if you've got the latest greatest custom CMS -- someone's got to maintain it.
Newspapers and magazines still have webmasters -- those are publications with
dozens of writers, editors, photo editors and community features.
Most of the web is still (and will always be) about content, and not all content
exists on blogs and news aggregators. (Although, TFA is correct in its observation that
an increasing amount of it is). Enterprise level publishing still requires webmasters
to manage increasingly complex sites with multiple integrated systems, databases
servers, ad networks and a distributed team of editors, writers and programmers.
If you're the New York times, WebMD, iVillage, MSN, etc. a WordPress install isn't
going to replace your webmaster.
I think a better question might be: who killed the low level webmaster?
The Majority of Certified Analysts in 2006 did not beat the S&P 500 with their portfolio rec's.
That's right "MAJORITY". Which actually means you'd be better off doing the opposite of what they suggested.
I just read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" --- highly recommended if anyone is interested in the
mathematical provability of analysts' incompetance. Any analyst who believes he is operating in
an enviornment with a limited enough set of variables to render a prediction, is inherently mathematically
incompetent.
One of NORML's primary arguments about private (ie: 'at home') consumption is that it is protected under the Constitutional "right to privacy".
...Because those the rocks that many ships have wrecked upon.
Hillary? Is this just going to be about electronic surveillance and security of digital information repositories?
Or are you going to tackle the larger issue of protecting personal activities in private spaces.
This is the first step in a monetization process that involves
Google placing ads on every single video.
The only reason they're paying is because soon they'll be profiting...
> "But why didn't YouTube pay its users from the start? "
Actually, this is a true story: they posted an ad on craigslist in their first months of business,
offering cute girls $100 to upload video blogs or videos of themselves and their friends.
Not one single girl responded.
There's a video on YouTube somewhere of the "early days" when the YouTube guys were discussing
this "plan". Its actually pretty funny.