JonKatz wrote: Like "Toy Story 2," this movie has an absurd plot,...
Well, sure, I suppose, if you refuse to accept the basic premise that toys are actually animate objects that talk and move and feel, then yeah, the plot was absurd... but that doesn't make for a very enjoyable movie, then does it?
Unless, of course, he was referring to some other part of the plot which most every professional reviewer seemed to miss...
Hey, my P166 runs StarCraft and Baldur's Gate. What else do I need?
Okay, okay, so I'm currently looking at an upgrade. Probably a PIII-600 or 550, depending on price differentials.
The increases in MHz seem petty, that's true, but I see them as just more steps along the path charted by the processor-speed corrollary of Moore's Law.
What I'm really waiting for is the next big shift in computing technology. There's something out there analogous to the introduction of the microchip, although I don't know what it will be. What ever it will be, I can hardly wait! =)
Why on earth do people need these things? What is wrong with an email. If you need to contact someone really quickly, why not use that other piece of incredibly useful technology. We call it a phone.
Well, gee, let's see...
Telephone calls outside of your local calling area cost mucho dinero, particularly international calls.
Most people still use modems to access the Internet, and many of those don't have a second phone line.
Instant Messaging is often much quicker than e-mail. E-mail can often take a long time to arrive, mostly thanks to slow e-mail servers on one end or the other. That said, I will admit that e-mail remains a better solution for longer messages, but it's less appropriate for short conversations back-and-forth.
Wow, I didn't even realize there was a call for standards in the IM arena. I, for one, agree that standards are a great idea. The key is to make the standards expandable and flexible. There are several features in ICQ that I wouldn't want to give up.
Granted, ICQ is more than just a simple "IM" program. It's got a lot more than any of the others do, so I'm not sure but what it might be considered a different type of program. However, it does serve IM purposes, so it would be nice to see it included in the standards.
That's why the standards need to be extensible, so that programs like ICQ can conform to the standards, but keep their added functionality (like file transfers, game matching, multiple types of "away" messages, extensive user info, etc.).
I dunno... am I the only one not excited about Quake? Sure, I cut my teeth on Doom, like everyone else, but Quake just doesn't hold the attraction to me that other games do.
It's mostly because it's a FPS, but I do like the Dark Forces games. Then again, maybe that's just the Star Wars aspect.
Truthfully, I never noticed. Although now that I think about it, I think the newscasts do have a different flavor to them. I don't know whether I'd call it cheezy vs. bland, though. I think the differences simply reflect the slightly more blue-collar slant of Buffalo and the slightly more white-collar Rochester.
Sounds like a great idea. I assume you intend a company to market these cards? Would they be free, or would you have to pay an annual fee?
One potential drawback I see is theft of the actual card. That's a problem with anything you carry in your wallet, of course, but the problem is still there.
Of course, then there's the fact that I don't want to have to go fetch my wallet when I trudge out to the computer in my PJs every morning. =)
I usually find JonKatz's articles to be quite thought-provoking. Even if the details aren't perfect, he clearly wants to get people thinking about the issues he brings up (a point apparently missed by his many detractors).
This article is no exception. However, he seems to be excusing the violent and destructive behavior of some of the "protesters" ("rioters" is more accurate in their cases). I don't care how angry you are over what the WTO is doing -- that does not give you justification to destroy others' property.
Sure, there are rare cases when violence is necessary, but protesting against the WTO and what it seems to represent is not one of them! The individuals who will feel the pain from the damage that was caused have done little, if anything, to hurt the public -- and the corporate leaders who the protesters should be angry at won't feel a bit of pain.
Let's face it; in any large grouping of people -- particularly people who are there to protest -- there will be some who can't control their impulses and do some things that are just plain wrong. And because of them, the real protesters' views get obscured behind the poor behavior of the others.
The Mars Polar Lander is only the fourth item we've attempted to land on Mars. I'm excited, but I'm also scared to death. There are too many things that could go wrong. We have no idea what kind of terrain this thing might land on. It could land on a rock, on the edge of a cliff, in a hole, etc.
I'm worried about how much NASA is hyping this up (and they are hyping it!). Sure, if it goes well, it's great PR. But if something happens to it -- especially after losing the last satellite -- it's gonna be hard for NASA to maintain support. I guess maybe that's what scares me the most.
I grew up in a location where we could get Toronto, Hamilton, Buffalo, and Rochester TV stations. =) I grew up on Canadian Sesame Street because we didn't get good PBS reception. =) That's how I learned to count to 10 in French. =)
Anyhoo, I think the real disappointment is that Buffalo doesn't have a UPN station. No Voyager and no Dilbert! =(
Well, I certainly have to respect your point of view, since you stated it so clearly and civilly. However, I have to admit that I feel truly sorry for you. I'm sorry you have such a low opinion of your fellow humans' natures. It is my sincere hope that time will allow us as a species to prove you wrong.
An excellent point. I do indeed have faith in human nature. I can't really say I have faith in science and technology, for they are human endeavors. I have faith that humans will utilize the tools that are science and technology in productive ways that will improve our lot as a species.
Now, of course, comparing this kind of faith to faith in a Creator is specious. While there is plenty of evidence that human nature exists, there is no concrete, provable evidence that a Creator exists. The existence of the universe is not sufficient to prove the existence of a Creator.
That said, I do respect your point of view, although it is one I have heard several times before. Still, I had to respond to your insistence on making this a religious issue.
Thanks, JonKatz. You've reflected in your article a point of view that I've held for a while, but seems to be in the minority.
It's long been my firm belief that the world is becoming a better place -- overall. I've never bought into any of the myraid "doom-and-gloom" scenarios presented my many people. Technology is, of course, no magic bullet, but it is an incredibly useful tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good or evil, but there are more than enough "good" people around to balance the "evil" being done.
One of the few things that makes me truly sad is that someday, I will die and no longer be able to witness the incredible progress of Homo sapiens.
You're arguing semantics here. You know what I meant. Replace "democracies" with "republics governed by representative democracy" if you like.
You'll also note that I qualified "antiquated" in my original post with "a bit." Many of those things have been fixed by amendments (13, 14, 15, and 19, for example).
You are, of course, correct that the Consitution does not create our freedoms, but merely protects them. However, this is again simply a matter of semantics. A government that does not protect freedoms can be seen as not granting them, and a government that does protect freedoms can be seen as providing them. My point stands.
Powers&8^]
P.S. Our freedoms may be inherent, but that doesn't mean they come from a deity. =)
Well, well, well.. aren't you just the living embodiment of what's wrong with our country? In truth, it is you, not I, who fails to think on his/her own. You've succumbed to the prevailing attitude of despair without stopping to step back and look at the big picture.
First, the U.S. Constitution was highly unusual when it was initially drafted; further, it set a standard for other similar documents to come afterwards. Second, while it is still a good document, and still relevant, it is slightly antiquated. Other documents to come have improved upon the model. Amendments have helped somewhat, but there are a few major reforms I'd like to see happen.
However, the absence of such reforms in no way means that we're on the road to ruin.
You say that "People have come to see the internet as a commercial medium or a place for violent, pornographic, conspiracy nuts to hang out." So what? First, I think the number of people who actually do see it this way is rapidly decreasing in the face of increased and more accurate media exposure (it's still bad, but getting better). Second, so what if they do? That in no way affects the fact that the Internet remains the single most effective medium for the free exchange of ideas throughout the world. It is that exchange of ideas which will prevent the cataclysm you seem to predict.
Finally, I have a question for you, Mr. Anonymous Coward. You say, "We've already destroyed this nation." Well, what are you doing to fix it?
> and another thing, isn't America meant to be the land of the free? or was that Canada (one of the two). you don't sound very free, anyway. From reading Slashdot, one would certainly get the impression that this is the case. Compared to many other democracies in the world, perhaps we're not particularly free. These things must be taken in context, however. Two hundred years ago, the amount of freedom outlined in our Constitution was unusual. Now, perhaps it is a bit antiquated, but it's held up surprisingly well. I, for one, have faith in our existing governmental systems to prevent severe abuses from becoming too prevalent in our society. The influence of the Internet and the global exchange of ideas certainly helps to check any potential trends toward limiting freedom. Most people in America are glad for their freedom; most just don't care unless it affects them directly. And many of us take it for granted. But that doesn't mean we'd just stand by while all of our freedoms are taken away. Powers &8^]
Slashdot Mirror
Well, sure, I suppose, if you refuse to accept the basic premise that toys are actually animate objects that talk and move and feel, then yeah, the plot was absurd... but that doesn't make for a very enjoyable movie, then does it?
Unless, of course, he was referring to some other part of the plot which most every professional reviewer seemed to miss...
Okay, okay, so I'm currently looking at an upgrade. Probably a PIII-600 or 550, depending on price differentials.
The increases in MHz seem petty, that's true, but I see them as just more steps along the path charted by the processor-speed corrollary of Moore's Law.
What I'm really waiting for is the next big shift in computing technology. There's something out there analogous to the introduction of the microchip, although I don't know what it will be. What ever it will be, I can hardly wait! =)
Well, gee, let's see...
Granted, ICQ is more than just a simple "IM" program. It's got a lot more than any of the others do, so I'm not sure but what it might be considered a different type of program. However, it does serve IM purposes, so it would be nice to see it included in the standards.
That's why the standards need to be extensible, so that programs like ICQ can conform to the standards, but keep their added functionality (like file transfers, game matching, multiple types of "away" messages, extensive user info, etc.).
Powers&8^]
Now that's scary.
Powers&8^]
It's mostly because it's a FPS, but I do like the Dark Forces games. Then again, maybe that's just the Star Wars aspect.
Powers&8^]
*shrug*
Powers&8^]
One potential drawback I see is theft of the actual card. That's a problem with anything you carry in your wallet, of course, but the problem is still there.
Of course, then there's the fact that I don't want to have to go fetch my wallet when I trudge out to the computer in my PJs every morning. =)
Powers&8^]
Powers&8^]
Are you saying you disagree that property rights should be respected? Or perhaps you think that violent protests are the only way to get things done?
Powers&8^]
Not that I care; I'm a Rochestarian now. =)
Powers&8^]
This article is no exception. However, he seems to be excusing the violent and destructive behavior of some of the "protesters" ("rioters" is more accurate in their cases). I don't care how angry you are over what the WTO is doing -- that does not give you justification to destroy others' property.
Sure, there are rare cases when violence is necessary, but protesting against the WTO and what it seems to represent is not one of them! The individuals who will feel the pain from the damage that was caused have done little, if anything, to hurt the public -- and the corporate leaders who the protesters should be angry at won't feel a bit of pain.
Let's face it; in any large grouping of people -- particularly people who are there to protest -- there will be some who can't control their impulses and do some things that are just plain wrong. And because of them, the real protesters' views get obscured behind the poor behavior of the others.
That's the real tragedy.
Powers&8^]
I'm worried about how much NASA is hyping this up (and they are hyping it!). Sure, if it goes well, it's great PR. But if something happens to it -- especially after losing the last satellite -- it's gonna be hard for NASA to maintain support. I guess maybe that's what scares me the most.
Powers&8^]
Anyhoo, I think the real disappointment is that Buffalo doesn't have a UPN station. No Voyager and no Dilbert! =(
Powers&8^]
=)
Powers&8^]
Now, of course, comparing this kind of faith to faith in a Creator is specious. While there is plenty of evidence that human nature exists, there is no concrete, provable evidence that a Creator exists. The existence of the universe is not sufficient to prove the existence of a Creator.
That said, I do respect your point of view, although it is one I have heard several times before. Still, I had to respond to your insistence on making this a religious issue.
Powers&8^]
It's long been my firm belief that the world is becoming a better place -- overall. I've never bought into any of the myraid "doom-and-gloom" scenarios presented my many people. Technology is, of course, no magic bullet, but it is an incredibly useful tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good or evil, but there are more than enough "good" people around to balance the "evil" being done.
One of the few things that makes me truly sad is that someday, I will die and no longer be able to witness the incredible progress of Homo sapiens.
Powers&8^]
You'll also note that I qualified "antiquated" in my original post with "a bit." Many of those things have been fixed by amendments (13, 14, 15, and 19, for example).
You are, of course, correct that the Consitution does not create our freedoms, but merely protects them. However, this is again simply a matter of semantics. A government that does not protect freedoms can be seen as not granting them, and a government that does protect freedoms can be seen as providing them. My point stands.
Powers&8^]
P.S. Our freedoms may be inherent, but that doesn't mean they come from a deity. =)
Powers&8^]
First, the U.S. Constitution was highly unusual when it was initially drafted; further, it set a standard for other similar documents to come afterwards. Second, while it is still a good document, and still relevant, it is slightly antiquated. Other documents to come have improved upon the model. Amendments have helped somewhat, but there are a few major reforms I'd like to see happen.
However, the absence of such reforms in no way means that we're on the road to ruin.
You say that "People have come to see the internet as a commercial medium or a place for violent, pornographic, conspiracy nuts to hang out." So what? First, I think the number of people who actually do see it this way is rapidly decreasing in the face of increased and more accurate media exposure (it's still bad, but getting better). Second, so what if they do? That in no way affects the fact that the Internet remains the single most effective medium for the free exchange of ideas throughout the world. It is that exchange of ideas which will prevent the cataclysm you seem to predict.
Finally, I have a question for you, Mr. Anonymous Coward. You say, "We've already destroyed this nation." Well, what are you doing to fix it?
Powers&8^]