of course, the euro has only been around for a few years, so "historic"
has less weight, but it is in fact the accurate adjective to use...
back OT, the larger trend to look at is commoditization of "business
methods" programs, which is the demand side of the equation. if all these
supposedly super-specialized vertical apps can be refactored into a common
base plus the specialization, the common base is bound to find footing in
some free software project sooner or later, and grow from there. refactoring
is expensive but rewriting for each new platform du jour (jour == 5-7 years
in this case) is even more expensive.
so, really: just how specialized are these programs? i'm no
accountant but it seems to me there are very few ways to combine "plus" and
"minus" in a fashion that supports accountability. what's the big deal?
gratis doesn't work businesswise, but there is value in liberty nonetheless.
of course, when you're on crack this is hard to see, so these ad-sellers
cannot be faulted for their lack of vision. you can safely ignore them and
their ludicrous predictions, until the day they actually participate and
either write and distribute code, write and distribute docs on that code,
submit useful bug reports, or help others to do the same. that will be the
day they become part of this community, no sooner. that's all there is to it.
the problem w/ your analysis is that attitude is also an "externally
manifested attribute", just like clothes (hence the fashion industry).
perhaps you could focus more on the actions of those you wish to describe.
on the contrary, being paranoid is getting easier all the time;
there are more reasons for it and the reasons are more explicit.
what's more work is REMAINING CALM!
i would normally say "next!" here but there are sensitive
souls out there (w/ whom i can identify
completely)
for whom re-inventing email clients is a touchy subject, ready
to rail on and on about their latest 5MB grep-child. so i add
this blurb around the "next!" to cushion the message somewhat.
(also, slashdot bean-counting requires this verbosity, blech.)
but a government need not kill all its citizens to retain power, just
those it can't corrupt and co-opt. and even then, there are large buildings
with bars in the windows where these people can easily be placed (at great
expense to the other people), one at a time, peaceably and w/o argument from
the others (the ones who are paying), so that killing is not necessary. in
fact, the industry for keeping people alive and quiet is more profitable than
dead and quiet.
and should some hot-heads start noticing disquieting trends in their
government, it is no big deal to redirect their anger towards each other.
mal-educated for years to be pliant (but "individualistically" so) and
unskeptical, the conjuring of a bogeyman to hate is not only easy, it is
expected. the "social advancement" of illiterate gradeschool children w/o
understanding of basic civics and basic science produces a superstitious
people willing to elect a goofy smile (or in the case of CA, abs of steel)
because their identity has already been assigned: servants to the machine,
polishers but never turners of the power knob, ready to complain but mostly
unaccustomed to taking action.
and w/o action, it is all words, just like this spew here.
the answer is that typical education in the united states doesn't involve
reading, only listening (to radio ads) and watching (television ads).
education for the rich is different, of course. they learn how to pump out
radio and television ads to the illiterate, and print ads to to those who
somehow find themselves able to read despite their education. although i'm
being mostly facetious, this is not so far from the reality; how else can you
explain functionally illiterate high school graduates?
this is why stephenson's hackworth (diamond age) is ironically
named. although capable and crafty, he exploited his superior (in terms of
technical skill and knowledge) position in a way that was a fine hack but only
to the eyes of those also in the same elite position. one could argue that
the manifestation of the hack is more important than the details, but then, a
hack that is not self-evident is always suspect, and always in risk of
recidivism. nel is the new leader, ok, but is she a new hacker? a truly
worthy hack begets another generation capable of ratcheting against the
entropic constant.
Re:UNIX is generic, there are hundreds of versions
on
On The Death Of Unix
·
· Score: 1
why doesn't someone just release "Kleenex", the commodity, generic
why-differentiate-its-just-nose-tissue operating system? all the
trademark litigation has already been slogged through, to boot!
(in fact, "slog" should combine lilo and grub: "system loader, oh great!".)
wow no wonder people go into marketing. it's fun in its own demented way.
these "to most people" kind of arguments are lame. they use quantitative
reasoning (which is fine in limited context), but based on the wrong
quantities. reality is: "most people" are either not yet born, have no
connection to the internet, or have no computers, period.
thus, if you want
to use quantitive reasoning based on "most people", your argument needs to
take into account trends in the future to be self-consistent and complete, in
this case
touching upon the mechanisms of change (education, disenfranchisement,
catharsis, inspiration) as well as simply underscoring
the tired old mechnaisms of equilibrium (inertia basically).
you can gain self-consistency and completeness another way of course: drop
the "most people" basis. your argument then would be along the lines of:
"from the people i've seen (i.e. bounded by my experience,
i.e. anecdotally)...", which would be enjoyable for raving critics to read
about in its own respect,
w/o their having to filter out the "most people" pseudo-authoritative b.s.
best wishes on your evolution of style whether you choose to pander to
critics or not.
good points, on the dangers of editorializing, but don't forget florida has
already been party to the "editorialization" of the election process for the
U.S. presidency. why not extend this behavior and mindset to the precious
university-bred children of the future?
you smell only your putrescent misunderstanding, starting w/ the malodorous
conflation of "free software" and "open source software", moving onto the
fetid projection of belief systems onto the motivations of people you don't
know, and topping it off w/ a plain-stinky dollop of puerile simplification
and smugly blamecasting.
(of course, where there's shit there's flies, hence my response in kind...;-)
it is only sad until you realize that what people enjoy is the act of
creation, but only a few people understand creation in relation to synthesis.
there is the romantic notion that what springs fully formed from the
fingertips of the mad hacker has no relation to the thought patterns said
programmer may be unconsciously emulating, patterns whose study was the
conscious endeavor of mad programmers past.
more simply, joy of implementation is not joy of design, but one learns
to allow for joy in others as best one can, for life is short.
what can hackers interested in economics read in the few
minutes free from hacking they might have each day?
(honest question. please provide beginner-purpose links.)
what people want, they will first tell their neighbors, next their
spouses, next their kids, and only last some faceless "proprietary software
concern".
proprietary software can never evolve a feature such that using that
software brings you closer to understanding your neighbor. this is especially
true if your neighbor is a vietnamese hacker (when was the last time you
checked?;-).
people will mod this down as cliche (it is, admittedly), but what other
almost-universal symbol addresses the balance of the act of hacking? the
project unmaintained rots until a new maintainer picks it up (balance). the
interesting bits are explored until they are no longer interesting (balance).
one hacker's romp on the net is another's security breach (balance). one anal
admin's lockdown is another's challange (balance). and always, in the ashes
of a {failed, successful} project is the inspiration for the next {success,
failure}.
insurance companies using windows? snort. irony meter pegged.
here's a hint to those shopping for cheaper insurance (or any other
service for that matter): ask the vendor if they use usloth servers. if so,
that's maintenance overhead that you are paying too much for, overhead that
could have been spent on you instead.
next time you get in an accident and the check doesn't come swiftly
(enough) you now have a new question to ask. lucky you!
Slashdot Mirror
of course, the euro has only been around for a few years, so "historic" has less weight, but it is in fact the accurate adjective to use...
back OT, the larger trend to look at is commoditization of "business methods" programs, which is the demand side of the equation. if all these supposedly super-specialized vertical apps can be refactored into a common base plus the specialization, the common base is bound to find footing in some free software project sooner or later, and grow from there. refactoring is expensive but rewriting for each new platform du jour (jour == 5-7 years in this case) is even more expensive.
so, really: just how specialized are these programs? i'm no accountant but it seems to me there are very few ways to combine "plus" and "minus" in a fashion that supports accountability. what's the big deal?
gratis doesn't work businesswise, but there is value in liberty nonetheless. of course, when you're on crack this is hard to see, so these ad-sellers cannot be faulted for their lack of vision. you can safely ignore them and their ludicrous predictions, until the day they actually participate and either write and distribute code, write and distribute docs on that code, submit useful bug reports, or help others to do the same. that will be the day they become part of this community, no sooner. that's all there is to it.
the problem w/ your analysis is that attitude is also an "externally manifested attribute", just like clothes (hence the fashion industry). perhaps you could focus more on the actions of those you wish to describe.
on the contrary, being paranoid is getting easier all the time; there are more reasons for it and the reasons are more explicit. what's more work is REMAINING CALM!
the world is a nice place to see on two wheels. however, i don't need more bugs on the helmet than accumulate naturally, thanks.
Emacs Gnus
i would normally say "next!" here but there are sensitive souls out there (w/ whom i can identify completely) for whom re-inventing email clients is a touchy subject, ready to rail on and on about their latest 5MB grep-child. so i add this blurb around the "next!" to cushion the message somewhat. (also, slashdot bean-counting requires this verbosity, blech.)
but a government need not kill all its citizens to retain power, just those it can't corrupt and co-opt. and even then, there are large buildings with bars in the windows where these people can easily be placed (at great expense to the other people), one at a time, peaceably and w/o argument from the others (the ones who are paying), so that killing is not necessary. in fact, the industry for keeping people alive and quiet is more profitable than dead and quiet.
and should some hot-heads start noticing disquieting trends in their government, it is no big deal to redirect their anger towards each other. mal-educated for years to be pliant (but "individualistically" so) and unskeptical, the conjuring of a bogeyman to hate is not only easy, it is expected. the "social advancement" of illiterate gradeschool children w/o understanding of basic civics and basic science produces a superstitious people willing to elect a goofy smile (or in the case of CA, abs of steel) because their identity has already been assigned: servants to the machine, polishers but never turners of the power knob, ready to complain but mostly unaccustomed to taking action.
and w/o action, it is all words, just like this spew here.
the answer is that typical education in the united states doesn't involve reading, only listening (to radio ads) and watching (television ads). education for the rich is different, of course. they learn how to pump out radio and television ads to the illiterate, and print ads to to those who somehow find themselves able to read despite their education. although i'm being mostly facetious, this is not so far from the reality; how else can you explain functionally illiterate high school graduates?
porn industry thrives mostly in the valley next to the one where hollywood is located, if i recall correctly.
well since you admit you're surrounded by cynics, let me chime in and point out that you are advocating "end justifies the means" mindset.
apparently you know what joe blow knows. nice to meet you, joe!
this is why stephenson's hackworth (diamond age) is ironically named. although capable and crafty, he exploited his superior (in terms of technical skill and knowledge) position in a way that was a fine hack but only to the eyes of those also in the same elite position. one could argue that the manifestation of the hack is more important than the details, but then, a hack that is not self-evident is always suspect, and always in risk of recidivism. nel is the new leader, ok, but is she a new hacker? a truly worthy hack begets another generation capable of ratcheting against the entropic constant.
why doesn't someone just release "Kleenex", the commodity, generic why-differentiate-its-just-nose-tissue operating system? all the trademark litigation has already been slogged through, to boot! (in fact, "slog" should combine lilo and grub: "system loader, oh great!".)
wow no wonder people go into marketing. it's fun in its own demented way.
these "to most people" kind of arguments are lame. they use quantitative reasoning (which is fine in limited context), but based on the wrong quantities. reality is: "most people" are either not yet born, have no connection to the internet, or have no computers, period.
thus, if you want to use quantitive reasoning based on "most people", your argument needs to take into account trends in the future to be self-consistent and complete, in this case touching upon the mechanisms of change (education, disenfranchisement, catharsis, inspiration) as well as simply underscoring the tired old mechnaisms of equilibrium (inertia basically).
you can gain self-consistency and completeness another way of course: drop the "most people" basis. your argument then would be along the lines of: "from the people i've seen (i.e. bounded by my experience, i.e. anecdotally)...", which would be enjoyable for raving critics to read about in its own respect, w/o their having to filter out the "most people" pseudo-authoritative b.s.
best wishes on your evolution of style whether you choose to pander to critics or not.
good points, on the dangers of editorializing, but don't forget florida has already been party to the "editorialization" of the election process for the U.S. presidency. why not extend this behavior and mindset to the precious university-bred children of the future?
but it is salieri's raging envy that is more in tune w/ the over-fulfilled times.
you smell only your putrescent misunderstanding, starting w/ the malodorous conflation of "free software" and "open source software", moving onto the fetid projection of belief systems onto the motivations of people you don't know, and topping it off w/ a plain-stinky dollop of puerile simplification and smugly blamecasting.
(of course, where there's shit there's flies, hence my response in kind... ;-)
it is only sad until you realize that what people enjoy is the act of creation, but only a few people understand creation in relation to synthesis. there is the romantic notion that what springs fully formed from the fingertips of the mad hacker has no relation to the thought patterns said programmer may be unconsciously emulating, patterns whose study was the conscious endeavor of mad programmers past.
more simply, joy of implementation is not joy of design, but one learns to allow for joy in others as best one can, for life is short.
the only degree you get if you don't pay attention
is a degree of stultification and culture too poor to mention!
mod me up down or sideways, it doesn't really matter;
better get your RSI on, baby, and indulge in mindless chatter!
that was well-written! i fully agree (hic!)
hehe, of course we know who wrote the virus: usloth! so which userf is going to get that early bonus this year for turning himself in?
sigh, what wombats.
what can hackers interested in economics read in the few minutes free from hacking they might have each day? (honest question. please provide beginner-purpose links.)
what people want, they will first tell their neighbors, next their spouses, next their kids, and only last some faceless "proprietary software concern".
proprietary software can never evolve a feature such that using that software brings you closer to understanding your neighbor. this is especially true if your neighbor is a vietnamese hacker (when was the last time you checked? ;-).
people will mod this down as cliche (it is, admittedly), but what other almost-universal symbol addresses the balance of the act of hacking? the project unmaintained rots until a new maintainer picks it up (balance). the interesting bits are explored until they are no longer interesting (balance). one hacker's romp on the net is another's security breach (balance). one anal admin's lockdown is another's challange (balance). and always, in the ashes of a {failed, successful} project is the inspiration for the next {success, failure}.
insurance companies using windows? snort. irony meter pegged.
here's a hint to those shopping for cheaper insurance (or any other service for that matter): ask the vendor if they use usloth servers. if so, that's maintenance overhead that you are paying too much for, overhead that could have been spent on you instead.
next time you get in an accident and the check doesn't come swiftly (enough) you now have a new question to ask. lucky you!