With logic. Brutal, unforgiving logic. Delivered coolly and calmly, to the right people, in the right places, at the right times. Every mind at a time.
I believe that the legislature is in control over their own budget (eg: their own salaries), and they handle their own salaries much the same way CEOs commonly handle theirs: "Well, the country/company is tanking, but I tried really hard, and it really isn't my fault, so I'm just gonna get out of here with my millions of dollars. No harm, no foul, right?"
Believe you me, I am not altruistic, but I believe that throwing money at the problem does nothing to advance towards a solution. Quite the opposite, a system in which the politicians are given money regardless of what they do is exactly what they want!
That being said, I know stuff costs money. But if they say that they are doing a "service", especially when I, nor anybody else (save a few people) specifically wanted it (Sen. Ted Steven's bridge to nowhere, and Congress rejecting the funding for that project, but giving his state the money anyway and saying "You do what you want with it, we don't care" comes to mind), then I start to wonder just why they feel they should increase their salaries.
In addition, if people are required to give money in order to be heard, then it effectively shuts out the voices of the poor. Maybe that's how it should be, but I don't think so. That's not what I signed up for.
For you and prockcore, stuff like (somebody correct me if I am wrong):
FormatLikeWord95
AutospaceLikeWord97
Well, how DOES Word 95 format stuff? And how does Word97 format stuff? People outside of Microsoft don't know because Word 95 and 97 store their data in binary formats (not human readable), and so we are forced to reverse engineer the formats to achieve compatibility. A standard is supposed to eliminate the need for one segment of a market to reverse engineer another segment, by specifying EXACTLY how everything should work, down to the minutest detail (like formatting). If you do not have all these details, the standard is incomplete, and must therefore NOT be considered as "already in place in the Market", NOR "implementable by external parties (without reverse engineering)".
The ISO process that OOXML passed was for completely specified, already-in-place (de facto) market standards, NOT the proprietary whims of a single segment of the market.
In addition to being incompletely specified, there is not guarantee Microsoft will not sue anybody who implements the format, which is also against the purpose of a standard.
All in all, OOXML was passed NOT on technical merits, NOR the freedom from legal proceedings (from lawsuits), NOR being the de facto market standard. There was NO reason for OOXML to pass, and yet it did, with highly irregular (cue the jokesters) voting procedures from a suspicious number of countries. OOXML should not have passed, and, because it did, we are all now asking for it to be formally challenged for an ISO standard.
The solution is not to pool our money. Think about it: then they get money from the lobbyists AND us. Assuming that the elections are fair (some elections have been suspicious), the solution to the problem is for the stupid people to wake up and start thinking about the way they want their country.
Thought is the enemy of a non-free state, and the lobbyists are doing their hardest to make people as stupid as possible. Their plan is working, as those people who do think (./ers) are more or less outcast from the lobbyists/elitists in the country (although I'm sure you can find exceptions).
I like that quote: "Thought is the enemy of any non-free state."
A few years back, I read an article in Popular Science (I think) about a study of reaction times for different lights. One of the fastest reaction times happened when the lights blinked at about 40 Hz, and so I suspect that car manufacturers have done their own research and implemented the same thing. The study showed it saved you a few milliseconds, even though the people could not physically see the blinking. Though when you're in a rear-end collision, a few milliseconds can be the difference between car bumpers kissing and the driver kissing the bumper of the other car (as the article pointed out).
Not saying I agree with these quotes, but they are the typical ones trotted out when I say what you said. Please feel free to correct me on any misquotes.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -- Ghandi "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Ghandi "There is no spoon." -- Spoon Boy, The Matrix [1] "I'm going to show them a world without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you." -- Neo, The Matrix
To a certain extent, there is something to be said for bloodless coups, but at this point, I think Microsoft has drawn the first real [2] blood. Now that the first blood has been drawn, I think you will start to see companies like Dell and HP start to push Linux a bit more (and because Linux is free for the OEMs, and HP got screwed on Vista). Intel is already nice to Linux, and AMD is starting to play nice with Linux. Microsoft is essentially acting like (forgive the literary reference) Voldemort, gaining incredible power, losing it, driving their friends away, and eventually dying out. OSS is basically the friends that, while you get no "guarantees" (and there can be a bit of drama involved - see Debian vs. Mozilla on Firefox patches), your friends truly care for you and are dependable when you need them to be. Microsoft's death will not be quick, painless, or easy, but it will happen.
[1] Not a directly applicable quote (though still an awesome quote). I take it to mean that the only thing stopping us is ourselves. In this case, it is our own "nice guy" attitude, the attitude that we want things to "just work". [2] Real as in an offensive maneuver. Vendor lock-in is a defensive maneuver, effectively destroying an international standards body is an offensive maneuver that has terrible repercussions for Free Software (free as in liberty), and incredibly advantageous consequences for Microsoft. Illegally using their monopoly to influence other markets is defensive, and should have been expected.
Nice nick for one. But...at the risk of sounding stupid (I probably am)...those reasons are what?
It seems perfectly reasonable to me that they could/should request prototypes or at the very least a model ("Camelot!"). That way, ideas cannot be patented unless they are physically realizable.
I mean, I can understand that it has the potential to turn into a race to build a prototype, but that sounds better than "A method by which the life of the host is continued through an alternation of inhaling necessary gases and expelling byproducts of chemical processes that occur within the host" aka "breathing". And really, how difficult is it (for a corporation) to build a prototype? Furthermore, your average little-guy inventor is probably going to have a prototype of his own, or if it needs special equipment (like building a new transistor), he/she can go negotiate with aforementioned large corporation (except Microsoft). This has the potential for patent trolls that actually have a few decent patents, but that is what the courts are designed to deal with, the wheels of justice do "grind slowly" however.
It just seems to me that forcing people to build prototypes would cut out a lot of the crap (like business methods), and make it slightly blatantly obvious for the patent office to tell which should really be allowed and which shouldn't.
Just my humble, uninformed, probably slightly retarded opinion.
As a physics student taking a class/lab on subatomic particles/rays, this guy is 100% correct. "Interaction" is NOT the same as "annihilation". The only thing I can really think of trying is a Faraday cage, and I don't even know if that would work or not, or if there would be any unintended consequences from it. Funny thing is, one of my prof's that is a ham guy has what is basically a vault for fooling around with circuits that are very sensitive, as there are radio towers located nary a few miles away.
So, yeah, just because rays "interact" does not mean that the ray is "annihilated".
That makes too much sense for the average human to comprehend.
Warning: Reading Slashdot, include this post, may be addicting. Consult your physician before attempting any visual or mental exercise. Seek medical attention if you find yourself unable to concentrate on anything else. By reading this post, or any part of it, including, but not limited to this warning, you agree to hold blameless and without fault the creators, designers, and maintainers of Slashdot, as well as the author of this post.
Warning: Breathing may be addicting, consult a a medical professional before attempting any physical exercise, including, but not limited to, sitting, laying down, operating a computer, moving your eyes, or reading. Side effects may include death.
Seriously though. Cigarette companies had plenty of evidence from their studies that nicotene was addictive (as far as I know, the most addictive substance known to humans), yet they tried to hide this fact from everybody, and outright denied it to an investigative panel. Blackberries, as far as I know, contain no chemically addicting materials, and are therefore immune from prosecution, especially if the maker doesn't (really) know of any addictive side-effects.
I think I understand your post (and agree with it), so this is not a criticism against you.
It seems to me that a government worker should not have to violate a very controversial law to expose the people who's rights have been violated. This is exactly what the government is supposed to NOT do, the whole check and balances thing, etc.
Memory cards really aren't all that bad, IMHO. And their controller is really just a complete ripoff of the Playstation's and the Gamecube's. And the ability to play music from your console, I will admit, is pretty cool. But, by and large, the XBOX really wasn't anything special, as far as I'm concerned. XBOX Live is pretty cool, and Sony, last I heard has yet to do the same thing. Nintendo is kind of trying to do the same thing with their store, but it's probably going to be difficult to convince families to play other families online, especially when the games require balance, control, etc. I see very few people putting in a lot of effort to, say, box people a continent away. If they come out with some good FPS's though, that would be really cool if they were coupled with online gameplay. Time will tell, I suppose.
You do bring up some good points, though. I suppose on the XBOX they have innovated a little, with the major innovation being in (a) producing a product that, while it isn't built on Windows, interoperates with it, and (b) XBOX Live.
This is true, but I think the parent meant that the idea that Microsoft has innovated a lot is bullshit. Microsoft has rarely innovated, and while it may be standard practice, if the only thing that can do is buy other companies to look like they are visionaries, then that a fairly thin smoke screen to hide behind. Now that fewer companies are trying to innovate, Microsoft is simply stuck, leaving their marketers to create the next-big-thing (tm), Vista. As far as I know, the only thing Microsoft has done is stuff like the beginnings of AJAX (somebody please prove me wrong) and the XBOX (which was nice, but nothing more than the PS2 or Gamec...PS2). AJAX was fairly fundamental to the whole "Web 2.0" buzzword thing, but the XBOX really was nothing new.
At this point, the only thing Microsoft has gong for them is marketing, existing mindshare, "intellectual property", vendor lock-in, and proprietary protocols/formats. Except now that the Samba team has the documentation for Samba, it's just a matter of time before other operating systems (read: Linux/Ubuntu) start interoperating with Windows. OpenOffice.org is starting to read and write.doc's fairly well, and OpenOffice.org's price tag is low enough (snicker) to compete with Microsoft Office using a crappier GUI. This is why they are pushing OOXML so hard, because if they don't, that's yet another club that Microsoft cannot use against other vendors.
Back to the point, while it may be standard industry practice (please note that I am not refuting that claim), Microsoft's marketers are having a more difficult time preaching to the world about the innovations of Microsoft, simply because people are older and wiser than in the '90's.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the founder of Redhat would agree with you, as he is clearly penniless and on the streets. [/sarcasm]
Correction, should read: One mind at a time.
With logic. Brutal, unforgiving logic. Delivered coolly and calmly, to the right people, in the right places, at the right times. Every mind at a time.
I believe that the legislature is in control over their own budget (eg: their own salaries), and they handle their own salaries much the same way CEOs commonly handle theirs: "Well, the country/company is tanking, but I tried really hard, and it really isn't my fault, so I'm just gonna get out of here with my millions of dollars. No harm, no foul, right?"
Believe you me, I am not altruistic, but I believe that throwing money at the problem does nothing to advance towards a solution. Quite the opposite, a system in which the politicians are given money regardless of what they do is exactly what they want!
That being said, I know stuff costs money. But if they say that they are doing a "service", especially when I, nor anybody else (save a few people) specifically wanted it (Sen. Ted Steven's bridge to nowhere, and Congress rejecting the funding for that project, but giving his state the money anyway and saying "You do what you want with it, we don't care" comes to mind), then I start to wonder just why they feel they should increase their salaries.
In addition, if people are required to give money in order to be heard, then it effectively shuts out the voices of the poor. Maybe that's how it should be, but I don't think so. That's not what I signed up for.
And a bit offtopic: that is a great sig.
For you and prockcore, stuff like (somebody correct me if I am wrong):
FormatLikeWord95
AutospaceLikeWord97
Well, how DOES Word 95 format stuff? And how does Word97 format stuff? People outside of Microsoft don't know because Word 95 and 97 store their data in binary formats (not human readable), and so we are forced to reverse engineer the formats to achieve compatibility. A standard is supposed to eliminate the need for one segment of a market to reverse engineer another segment, by specifying EXACTLY how everything should work, down to the minutest detail (like formatting). If you do not have all these details, the standard is incomplete, and must therefore NOT be considered as "already in place in the Market", NOR "implementable by external parties (without reverse engineering)".
The ISO process that OOXML passed was for completely specified, already-in-place (de facto) market standards, NOT the proprietary whims of a single segment of the market.
In addition to being incompletely specified, there is not guarantee Microsoft will not sue anybody who implements the format, which is also against the purpose of a standard.
All in all, OOXML was passed NOT on technical merits, NOR the freedom from legal proceedings (from lawsuits), NOR being the de facto market standard. There was NO reason for OOXML to pass, and yet it did, with highly irregular (cue the jokesters) voting procedures from a suspicious number of countries. OOXML should not have passed, and, because it did, we are all now asking for it to be formally challenged for an ISO standard.
The solution is not to pool our money. Think about it: then they get money from the lobbyists AND us. Assuming that the elections are fair (some elections have been suspicious), the solution to the problem is for the stupid people to wake up and start thinking about the way they want their country.
Thought is the enemy of a non-free state, and the lobbyists are doing their hardest to make people as stupid as possible. Their plan is working, as those people who do think (./ers) are more or less outcast from the lobbyists/elitists in the country (although I'm sure you can find exceptions).
I like that quote: "Thought is the enemy of any non-free state."
Funny, I would have left for an easier job. Blogging about Vista? C'mon.
I've never had an easy time polishing a turd, I doubt this guy did either.
In the article at least, the talk was of placing them in brake lights, in an attempt to get drivers to pay attention faster. Sorry for any ambiguity.
A few years back, I read an article in Popular Science (I think) about a study of reaction times for different lights. One of the fastest reaction times happened when the lights blinked at about 40 Hz, and so I suspect that car manufacturers have done their own research and implemented the same thing. The study showed it saved you a few milliseconds, even though the people could not physically see the blinking. Though when you're in a rear-end collision, a few milliseconds can be the difference between car bumpers kissing and the driver kissing the bumper of the other car (as the article pointed out).
So yes, it is distracting, and its meant to be.
Not saying I agree with these quotes, but they are the typical ones trotted out when I say what you said. Please feel free to correct me on any misquotes.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -- Ghandi
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Ghandi
"There is no spoon." -- Spoon Boy, The Matrix [1]
"I'm going to show them a world without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you." -- Neo, The Matrix
To a certain extent, there is something to be said for bloodless coups, but at this point, I think Microsoft has drawn the first real [2] blood. Now that the first blood has been drawn, I think you will start to see companies like Dell and HP start to push Linux a bit more (and because Linux is free for the OEMs, and HP got screwed on Vista). Intel is already nice to Linux, and AMD is starting to play nice with Linux. Microsoft is essentially acting like (forgive the literary reference) Voldemort, gaining incredible power, losing it, driving their friends away, and eventually dying out. OSS is basically the friends that, while you get no "guarantees" (and there can be a bit of drama involved - see Debian vs. Mozilla on Firefox patches), your friends truly care for you and are dependable when you need them to be. Microsoft's death will not be quick, painless, or easy, but it will happen.
[1] Not a directly applicable quote (though still an awesome quote). I take it to mean that the only thing stopping us is ourselves. In this case, it is our own "nice guy" attitude, the attitude that we want things to "just work".
[2] Real as in an offensive maneuver. Vendor lock-in is a defensive maneuver, effectively destroying an international standards body is an offensive maneuver that has terrible repercussions for Free Software (free as in liberty), and incredibly advantageous consequences for Microsoft. Illegally using their monopoly to influence other markets is defensive, and should have been expected.
Especially if you have green eggs with the ham. Sam I am.
Only if you can tell where your database is, as knowing how fast its going is rather useless.
Huzzah Heisenberg!
Somebody start working on atomic DRM STAT!
and
Im n yur atomz.
Stealin yur NRGs.
Nice nick for one. But...at the risk of sounding stupid (I probably am)...those reasons are what?
It seems perfectly reasonable to me that they could/should request prototypes or at the very least a model ("Camelot!"). That way, ideas cannot be patented unless they are physically realizable.
I mean, I can understand that it has the potential to turn into a race to build a prototype, but that sounds better than "A method by which the life of the host is continued through an alternation of inhaling necessary gases and expelling byproducts of chemical processes that occur within the host" aka "breathing". And really, how difficult is it (for a corporation) to build a prototype? Furthermore, your average little-guy inventor is probably going to have a prototype of his own, or if it needs special equipment (like building a new transistor), he/she can go negotiate with aforementioned large corporation (except Microsoft). This has the potential for patent trolls that actually have a few decent patents, but that is what the courts are designed to deal with, the wheels of justice do "grind slowly" however.
It just seems to me that forcing people to build prototypes would cut out a lot of the crap (like business methods), and make it slightly blatantly obvious for the patent office to tell which should really be allowed and which shouldn't.
Just my humble, uninformed, probably slightly retarded opinion.
As a physics student taking a class/lab on subatomic particles/rays, this guy is 100% correct. "Interaction" is NOT the same as "annihilation". The only thing I can really think of trying is a Faraday cage, and I don't even know if that would work or not, or if there would be any unintended consequences from it. Funny thing is, one of my prof's that is a ham guy has what is basically a vault for fooling around with circuits that are very sensitive, as there are radio towers located nary a few miles away.
So, yeah, just because rays "interact" does not mean that the ray is "annihilated".
Nuh Uh.
TERRORISTS!
I mean, yes, of course, it's blatantly obvious, and if you don't agree, you are clearly a TERRORIST!
Evidently fear is a cascade phenomenon, which would explain its high popularity.
I feel stupid. I had to look up "vapid".
To save the rest of you 5 seconds of Googling:
"vapid: lacking liveliness, animation, or interest; lacking taste, zest, or flavor."
Here:
http://www.wmbp.org/news/000245.html?sid=GksgUcdnrGZuzSo9n9Gr8wbGlTmJAsqE
Only took ~1:30, too.
AFAIK there were no changes from Mindwipe 2003, that's just silly.
...what was I saying?
Everyone knows that Microsoft has good reasons for changing interfac...*bzzzt*
I give it a 1 in 5 chance that they'll cover it.
That makes too much sense for the average human to comprehend.
Warning: Reading Slashdot, include this post, may be addicting. Consult your physician before attempting any visual or mental exercise. Seek medical attention if you find yourself unable to concentrate on anything else. By reading this post, or any part of it, including, but not limited to this warning, you agree to hold blameless and without fault the creators, designers, and maintainers of Slashdot, as well as the author of this post.
Warning: Breathing may be addicting, consult a a medical professional before attempting any physical exercise, including, but not limited to, sitting, laying down, operating a computer, moving your eyes, or reading. Side effects may include death.
Seriously though. Cigarette companies had plenty of evidence from their studies that nicotene was addictive (as far as I know, the most addictive substance known to humans), yet they tried to hide this fact from everybody, and outright denied it to an investigative panel. Blackberries, as far as I know, contain no chemically addicting materials, and are therefore immune from prosecution, especially if the maker doesn't (really) know of any addictive side-effects.
What the hell do I know, though.
I think I understand your post (and agree with it), so this is not a criticism against you.
It seems to me that a government worker should not have to violate a very controversial law to expose the people who's rights have been violated. This is exactly what the government is supposed to NOT do, the whole check and balances thing, etc.
And 500 million to a small company is still making a lot of assholes rich.
The rest of your post still stands, though; perhaps this will prompt a good long look at the patent process and the way the US is being run.
Memory cards really aren't all that bad, IMHO. And their controller is really just a complete ripoff of the Playstation's and the Gamecube's. And the ability to play music from your console, I will admit, is pretty cool. But, by and large, the XBOX really wasn't anything special, as far as I'm concerned. XBOX Live is pretty cool, and Sony, last I heard has yet to do the same thing. Nintendo is kind of trying to do the same thing with their store, but it's probably going to be difficult to convince families to play other families online, especially when the games require balance, control, etc. I see very few people putting in a lot of effort to, say, box people a continent away. If they come out with some good FPS's though, that would be really cool if they were coupled with online gameplay. Time will tell, I suppose. You do bring up some good points, though. I suppose on the XBOX they have innovated a little, with the major innovation being in (a) producing a product that, while it isn't built on Windows, interoperates with it, and (b) XBOX Live.
This is true, but I think the parent meant that the idea that Microsoft has innovated a lot is bullshit. Microsoft has rarely innovated, and while it may be standard practice, if the only thing that can do is buy other companies to look like they are visionaries, then that a fairly thin smoke screen to hide behind. Now that fewer companies are trying to innovate, Microsoft is simply stuck, leaving their marketers to create the next-big-thing (tm), Vista. As far as I know, the only thing Microsoft has done is stuff like the beginnings of AJAX (somebody please prove me wrong) and the XBOX (which was nice, but nothing more than the PS2 or Gamec...PS2). AJAX was fairly fundamental to the whole "Web 2.0" buzzword thing, but the XBOX really was nothing new.
.doc's fairly well, and OpenOffice.org's price tag is low enough (snicker) to compete with Microsoft Office using a crappier GUI. This is why they are pushing OOXML so hard, because if they don't, that's yet another club that Microsoft cannot use against other vendors.
At this point, the only thing Microsoft has gong for them is marketing, existing mindshare, "intellectual property", vendor lock-in, and proprietary protocols/formats. Except now that the Samba team has the documentation for Samba, it's just a matter of time before other operating systems (read: Linux/Ubuntu) start interoperating with Windows. OpenOffice.org is starting to read and write
Back to the point, while it may be standard industry practice (please note that I am not refuting that claim), Microsoft's marketers are having a more difficult time preaching to the world about the innovations of Microsoft, simply because people are older and wiser than in the '90's.