Being that we, as a civilization, do not know if it will be today, tomorrow, or many years from now when an asteroid hits us, plague overtakes us, or our resources deplete, I'm always suprised when people declare that space exploration should be anything other than our number one priority.
What good is feeding the starving, curing cancer or AIDS, and fighting the latest war when it all comes down to the fact that for the foreseeable future we, in fact, have no real "future" beyond what is here in front of us.
That's why you vote with your dollar and don't give in to the temptation to purchase products from companies who you don't want to "rule" the market.
The common opinion here seems to forget this rule or throw it aside saying "Consumers don't know whats good for them." This was the same thinking that you had, oh, in ancient theocracies, isn't it?
Situation A: Lonely midnight pasty white hacker codes up easy to use, secure, encryption software for the common user. This is something which can be used for good or evil, but should nonetheless be available for everyone to use. He publishes the code so people can ensure that there's nothing going on behind the scenes. He is praised on high and given verbal rimjobs by the "community."
Situation B: Same as A, except the hacker is now Microsoft. They are slammed, accused, and drilled by the "community," the only real difference being that their code will not be modifyable for distribution while the hacker above's will be. (They're releasing it under shared source remember.)
Shit, click on any crypto article and you will have people whining about how there is no easy to use, open source crypto software installed on everyone's computer. Now we're getting it by the only company who could actually get it on every computer, and you bitch and whine because of one facet of the implementation, DRM, which is inevitable and would happen regardless of who developed the cryptosystem. You either get crypto on every computer, and DRM, or no crypto and no DRM, you can't have one and not the other. Deal with it.
So finally, I can actually send a secret to Grandma via e-mail without anyone being able to snoop in on it. But sure, you can skip over mentioning that part (something rather incredible given it's been 30 years since RSA) because it obviously takes too much effort to actually boycott the RIAA or stop pirating music in order to get them to respect your "fair use" rights. String up Microsoft instead, right?
I'd have issues with it if we wouldn't be able to see the source code, but we will be able to. It doesn't matter that it's not GPLed in this situation.. if there is a bug you can be sure MS will fix it ASAP since their ass is riding on this software. This is not IE.
Also, if you end up not being able to install Linux on your computer because of the hardware, either blame yourself for buying the hardware knowing that Linux was not up to speed yet, or blame the Linux hackers for not supporting your hardware. Don't blame MS for getting crypto in every home -- that's been a something that everyone who knows anything has wanted since the 70's. Don't kid yourself -- without MS doing it, it would never happen.
If I have to physically murder the person, and have a serious possibility of getting caught: I dunno, depends on how much I need the money, and what I have to do. If I have to physically murder the person, and most likely won't get caught: Depends on my mood, and what I have to do. If I just have to hit a button, and have never seen or known the person before, and ave no way of getting caught, Chances are Yes.
This was past your "Probably" clause regarding your family and is the reason I think you are fucked up in the head.
Of course if given the choice between a family member and a stranger you would kill the stranger, by pointing out this obvious fact to make yourself seem like a Philosophical Giant doesn't exactly work and doesn't help brush over the fact that you claim to be willing to kill for money and not survival.
Fact: Running a shady business which unfairly makes a profit due to their manipulation of data to increase search engine hits and exploitation of affiliate programs is not morally equivalent as planning and executing a plan of flying two 777 airliners into two buildings and killing 3,000 people.
However, wanting to shoot and kill a "muscle bound baboon" in retaliation for said business is much closer.
Please begin attending psychological counselling. Thank you.
First off, that's not human nature, you fucking sick motherfucker.
Do onto others as you'd have them do on to you. And no, I'm an atheist. It's in your best interest to live by this moral code else you too could end up dead due to the actions of a person much like yourself. So yes, it is in your SELF INTEREST to not kill strangers.
Oh, and you scare the shit out of me, and should kill yourself.
Re:Leftist Propaganda **SPOILERS**
on
Minority Report
·
· Score: 2
Now you're a troll for expressing an opinion on Slashdot which doesn't toe the line. Keep fighting moderators, sooner or later you'll shut everyone up and we'll enter a state of mindless groupthinking bliss. Hook me up to the Matrix!
Re:Leftist Propaganda **SPOILERS**
on
Minority Report
·
· Score: 1
And you think that never seeing these magical beings who are responsible for the 99% drop of crime would actually get by the media?
Re:Leftist Propaganda **SPOILERS**
on
Minority Report
·
· Score: 2
Oh, and just to clear things up: if you're going to blow up downtown D.C. in the name of a foreign terrorist movement, you're an enemy combatant. This means you can be tried by a military tribunal as per history.
It was a well executed movie, but there was some obviously biased left-wing exaggerations. Anyone who says this movie was realistic or "could happen" is a paranoid alarmist.
** SPOILERS BELOW **
First off, it seems the department of precrime has done away with the entire judicial system. You're caught and then hauled off and put in your little halo/tube thing with no trial or investigation. Also, if you think the American public would be cool with prisoners being plugged into the Matrix and sealed off, you're a moron.
If there in fact was a department of precrime, those who were prevented from committing murder would not be arrested but most likely be put into counseling along with restraining orders placed from those who were going to be killed. They wouldn't go to jail as if they committed a crime, simply because they didn't. If you think they would, you too are a paranoid alarmist idiot.
The kicker for me was at the end when the entire precrime system was abolished.. and this was something we were supposed to feel good about. Nevermind the fact that D.C. would probably shoot back to the number 1 murder rate city in the country overnight. Nevermind the fact that precrime could have been used legitimately and usefully, preventing murders by intervention but without punishment (what an idea!)
I also love the fact that our precog friends decide to live on a farm at the end where they can read books. Because as every good bleeding heart liberal knows, technology and society are evil. Please.
Oh, and of course everyone would be cool with them immersing the precogs in a vat of goo for all their lives. Starting the movie with this premise, something which would never be legitimate, and then breaking it down at the end to help us feel good about the conclusion is the cinematic equivalent of a straw man.
I realize it was just a movie, but I want could curb some of the alarmist reaction to this wholly unrealistic depiction of what the world would be like if we could accurately predict murder. Putting this out now after 9/11 makes it all too easy for the lefties to jump on it and say "See???" Don't let them.
I want a program I can download from the record companies that will scan my MP3 directory and tell me how much I need to pay to legitimize my collection. They don't have to encode music for me, pay for the servers and pipe for me to get music, I can get my MP3s through my own means. I just want the license to legitimately listen to what I want on my computer, MP3 player, etc. I will even deal with the shitty quality.
There's no reason that they couldn't charge me $0.05 per song or less. Hell, it's resonable to expect that it's $0.99 for the first ten MP3s, $0.50 ea for up to 100, $0.05 for up to 1000, and a penny thereafter. No cost to them, no loss, it's basically free money. Now, if/when I ever get audited for my music I come up green and not red on their Good Boy/Bad Boy list. Everybody wins, except probably the artist, but then again, they're the ones who sold their rights to the music. It's a fucked up system, but this would at least appease two of the three parties in the tight spot.
Regardless, until then, CDs are too overpriced and inconvenient for me. Call me a bastard, I'll deal.
Two companies in competition build a better plane on their own than one megacorporation with a lump sum thrown at them with no consequences if they do a shitty job.
The article says that radio broadcasters will be charged on a per listener per song basis. Is this how normal radio stations are charged? If not, it seems a bit unfair. Hell, even if they are charged that way, it's pretty tough to estimate how many listeners their are to a normal station anyway.
Seems like the same logical fallicy in "per-click" advertising payment models.
Ok, I will never be able to make this, but if someone does I want a free one.
I want a laptop that has the touchpad actually on the surface of the keys. The keys would have to be relatively tightly spaced from each other and have flat surfaces (though they somewhat do now) and some algorithm would have to account for the space between them. But, with a key next to my shift key, when held down, the thing turns on and I can't type but it becomes a trackpad. Could only be a few keys, or perhaps even all of them. Clicking and all that would be through taps and gestures as is the case now.
No actually the device he proposes only goes off if there is a match. Ie, the hot girl's would only go off if there was a guy who matched HER preferences on the bus as well.
Miguel-ites are simply dumping their critical faculties and going into hero-worship mode to the detriment of GNOME and open source in general.
Not really, they are making the (justifiable) descision to rely upon billions of dollars and several years of Microsoft R&D to do the thinking for them.
I say it's a smart move, if they can get away with it.
Slashdot Mirror
You get my "You're Too Smart to be Reading Slashdot Award" for the day. Congratulations.
it seems that there are those in the
Noting your low UID, you act like this is something you've never seen before.
Being that we, as a civilization, do not know if it will be today, tomorrow, or many years from now when an asteroid hits us, plague overtakes us, or our resources deplete, I'm always suprised when people declare that space exploration should be anything other than our number one priority.
What good is feeding the starving, curing cancer or AIDS, and fighting the latest war when it all comes down to the fact that for the foreseeable future we, in fact, have no real "future" beyond what is here in front of us.
That's why you vote with your dollar and don't give in to the temptation to purchase products from companies who you don't want to "rule" the market.
The common opinion here seems to forget this rule or throw it aside saying "Consumers don't know whats good for them." This was the same thinking that you had, oh, in ancient theocracies, isn't it?
Situation A: Lonely midnight pasty white hacker codes up easy to use, secure, encryption software for the common user. This is something which can be used for good or evil, but should nonetheless be available for everyone to use. He publishes the code so people can ensure that there's nothing going on behind the scenes. He is praised on high and given verbal rimjobs by the "community."
Situation B: Same as A, except the hacker is now Microsoft. They are slammed, accused, and drilled by the "community," the only real difference being that their code will not be modifyable for distribution while the hacker above's will be. (They're releasing it under shared source remember.)
Shit, click on any crypto article and you will have people whining about how there is no easy to use, open source crypto software installed on everyone's computer. Now we're getting it by the only company who could actually get it on every computer, and you bitch and whine because of one facet of the implementation, DRM, which is inevitable and would happen regardless of who developed the cryptosystem. You either get crypto on every computer, and DRM, or no crypto and no DRM, you can't have one and not the other. Deal with it.
So finally, I can actually send a secret to Grandma via e-mail without anyone being able to snoop in on it. But sure, you can skip over mentioning that part (something rather incredible given it's been 30 years since RSA) because it obviously takes too much effort to actually boycott the RIAA or stop pirating music in order to get them to respect your "fair use" rights. String up Microsoft instead, right?
I'd have issues with it if we wouldn't be able to see the source code, but we will be able to. It doesn't matter that it's not GPLed in this situation.. if there is a bug you can be sure MS will fix it ASAP since their ass is riding on this software. This is not IE.
Also, if you end up not being able to install Linux on your computer because of the hardware, either blame yourself for buying the hardware knowing that Linux was not up to speed yet, or blame the Linux hackers for not supporting your hardware. Don't blame MS for getting crypto in every home -- that's been a something that everyone who knows anything has wanted since the 70's. Don't kid yourself -- without MS doing it, it would never happen.
I did have an idea once of getting eBooks on gameboys. That would be neat for people who can't afford PDA's and convinent - cartridge based.
Been done.
I believe the original poster wanted to shoot the guy due to his "exploit of others" which I assumed meant his search engine scam.
Now now now, lets not kill the messenger. Capitalism just brings the scum out of the woodwork, as does religion or anything similar.
If I have to physically murder the person, and have a serious possibility of getting caught: I dunno, depends on how much I need the money, and what I have to do.
If I have to physically murder the person, and most likely won't get caught: Depends on my mood, and what I have to do.
If I just have to hit a button, and have never seen or known the person before, and ave no way of getting caught, Chances are Yes.
This was past your "Probably" clause regarding your family and is the reason I think you are fucked up in the head.
Of course if given the choice between a family member and a stranger you would kill the stranger, by pointing out this obvious fact to make yourself seem like a Philosophical Giant doesn't exactly work and doesn't help brush over the fact that you claim to be willing to kill for money and not survival.
I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Also, please run away from Slashdot while you still can. Oh wait, you have a low UID. I am sorry.
Ahem.
Fact: Running a shady business which unfairly makes a profit due to their manipulation of data to increase search engine hits and exploitation of affiliate programs is not morally equivalent as planning and executing a plan of flying two 777 airliners into two buildings and killing 3,000 people.
However, wanting to shoot and kill a "muscle bound baboon" in retaliation for said business is much closer.
Please begin attending psychological counselling. Thank you.
First off, that's not human nature, you fucking sick motherfucker.
Do onto others as you'd have them do on to you. And no, I'm an atheist. It's in your best interest to live by this moral code else you too could end up dead due to the actions of a person much like yourself. So yes, it is in your SELF INTEREST to not kill strangers.
Oh, and you scare the shit out of me, and should kill yourself.
Now you're a troll for expressing an opinion on Slashdot which doesn't toe the line. Keep fighting moderators, sooner or later you'll shut everyone up and we'll enter a state of mindless groupthinking bliss. Hook me up to the Matrix!
And you think that never seeing these magical beings who are responsible for the 99% drop of crime would actually get by the media?
Oh, and just to clear things up: if you're going to blow up downtown D.C. in the name of a foreign terrorist movement, you're an enemy combatant. This means you can be tried by a military tribunal as per history.
It was a well executed movie, but there was some obviously biased left-wing exaggerations. Anyone who says this movie was realistic or "could happen" is a paranoid alarmist.
** SPOILERS BELOW **
First off, it seems the department of precrime has done away with the entire judicial system. You're caught and then hauled off and put in your little halo/tube thing with no trial or investigation. Also, if you think the American public would be cool with prisoners being plugged into the Matrix and sealed off, you're a moron.
If there in fact was a department of precrime, those who were prevented from committing murder would not be arrested but most likely be put into counseling along with restraining orders placed from those who were going to be killed. They wouldn't go to jail as if they committed a crime, simply because they didn't. If you think they would, you too are a paranoid alarmist idiot.
The kicker for me was at the end when the entire precrime system was abolished.. and this was something we were supposed to feel good about. Nevermind the fact that D.C. would probably shoot back to the number 1 murder rate city in the country overnight. Nevermind the fact that precrime could have been used legitimately and usefully, preventing murders by intervention but without punishment (what an idea!)
I also love the fact that our precog friends decide to live on a farm at the end where they can read books. Because as every good bleeding heart liberal knows, technology and society are evil. Please.
Oh, and of course everyone would be cool with them immersing the precogs in a vat of goo for all their lives. Starting the movie with this premise, something which would never be legitimate, and then breaking it down at the end to help us feel good about the conclusion is the cinematic equivalent of a straw man.
I realize it was just a movie, but I want could curb some of the alarmist reaction to this wholly unrealistic depiction of what the world would be like if we could accurately predict murder. Putting this out now after 9/11 makes it all too easy for the lefties to jump on it and say "See???" Don't let them.
I want a program I can download from the record companies that will scan my MP3 directory and tell me how much I need to pay to legitimize my collection. They don't have to encode music for me, pay for the servers and pipe for me to get music, I can get my MP3s through my own means. I just want the license to legitimately listen to what I want on my computer, MP3 player, etc. I will even deal with the shitty quality.
There's no reason that they couldn't charge me $0.05 per song or less. Hell, it's resonable to expect that it's $0.99 for the first ten MP3s, $0.50 ea for up to 100, $0.05 for up to 1000, and a penny thereafter. No cost to them, no loss, it's basically free money. Now, if/when I ever get audited for my music I come up green and not red on their Good Boy/Bad Boy list. Everybody wins, except probably the artist, but then again, they're the ones who sold their rights to the music. It's a fucked up system, but this would at least appease two of the three parties in the tight spot.
Regardless, until then, CDs are too overpriced and inconvenient for me. Call me a bastard, I'll deal.
Two companies in competition build a better plane on their own than one megacorporation with a lump sum thrown at them with no consequences if they do a shitty job.
The article says that radio broadcasters will be charged on a per listener per song basis. Is this how normal radio stations are charged? If not, it seems a bit unfair. Hell, even if they are charged that way, it's pretty tough to estimate how many listeners their are to a normal station anyway.
Seems like the same logical fallicy in "per-click" advertising payment models.
Well, their website got a facelift. Crazy or not, Greer is sure as hell dedicated.
You have no right to anonymity. That's the funniest April Fools Joke yet!
On the money.
Ok, I will never be able to make this, but if someone does I want a free one.
:)
I want a laptop that has the touchpad actually on the surface of the keys. The keys would have to be relatively tightly spaced from each other and have flat surfaces (though they somewhat do now) and some algorithm would have to account for the space between them. But, with a key next to my shift key, when held down, the thing turns on and I can't type but it becomes a trackpad. Could only be a few keys, or perhaps even all of them. Clicking and all that would be through taps and gestures as is the case now.
Make me one, pweeze?
No actually the device he proposes only goes off if there is a match. Ie, the hot girl's would only go off if there was a guy who matched HER preferences on the bus as well.
Miguel-ites are simply dumping their critical faculties and going into hero-worship mode to the detriment of GNOME and open source in general.
Not really, they are making the (justifiable) descision to rely upon billions of dollars and several years of Microsoft R&D to do the thinking for them.
I say it's a smart move, if they can get away with it.