A net-gf and I made a pair of sex suits when I was a teenager. Worked over our 2400 baud Net conenctions. Had a still pic and recorded sound effects. Might have been even lamer than this thing.. maybe. Was sort of fun though.
I've been looking for a good PDA that has a built-in GPS and allows users to write their own programs (without expensive tools) that can access the GPS. Sadly this PDA doesn't seem to work for that.
Cell is coming out soon in the PS3 and should be available to the market at large sometime thereafter. IBM of course has access now as they helped design them.
I think a Linux/Cell computer is likely and probably a really cool idea. They'd have to opensource the code changes though so RedHat and everyone else could release Cell distros too if they wanted to.
I think with Novell behind SuSE it's here for the longrun. Debian is the Linux distro for geeks so it's here for the longrun. RedHat I think is here for the longrun but would be a likely purchase target for some large company (IBM? Sony?). Linspire and similar easy desktop distros I think will either merge with bigger distros or fade away. None of them seem to really be that innovative and by the time enough desktop Linux interest grows the bigger distros will be in that space.
Maybe it's just me but I've always thought SuSE was a pain in the ass. It's fine for newbies that just want bulk (SuSE has the most games of any distro I've seen) or for people who want a simple, but lame, interface for configuring but it feels like a kludge to users that are actually experienced enough to know how to configure their own systems. RedHat is a little better in that it at least doesn't feel like it's fighting you. Debian is slightly better in that regard but IMO apt/dpkg isn't nearly as cleanly implemented as rug/rpm. Of course Fedora ships with yum which is a pretty retarded program. Or for the real geeks.. Gentoo rocks.;)
I wasn't crazy about SuSE before but Novell seems to be taking it in a direction even further from what I like.. as it is with Ximian. Try even finding the source for Red Carpet on Novell's website. It takes some work. Even their website is a huge bloated kludge.:(
Even, through nano or some other far flung sci-fi scheme, we change ourselves into a non-organic species evolution will still apply because we will still have to survive. We compete with other species. We compete with the cold harshness of the forces of nature that would end all life. We compete with others of our own species. All these factors require individuals and species to adapt if they wish to survive. Either we're dead or we're evolving. Sometimes, while we're organic, that may be on a genetic level and sometimes it may be on other levels. Who can tell what levels it will be on in the future.
Anyone who thinks evolution stops obviously doesn't understand the concept. Just because those of us caught in the middle of it can't see it working does not mean it isn't working. Evolution is simply the stuff that life is made of. If you're living or in any way having an effect on things that are living then you're being worked on by evolution.
Our technology is changing us and that is evolution. We communicate over much larger distances much more easily. We become attracted to people we otherwise could never have met and then we mate with them. Meet some chick from halfway across the world and then hook up and she gets pregnant? Well there you go.. you just created a small ripple in the way the human species is evolving. What that ripple does is hard to say.. but it is definately happening. Maybe people who are prone to spending long hours in front of a PC will evolve into a different sub-species than those who aren't. Maybe the shy, smart, geeky people will start having higher birthrates as the process of them mating is made easier and this could change the fact that for a long while (since death rates due to your own stupidity have gone down) that stupid but bold people have been outbreeding us. Again that is creating some change but it's hard to say what the outcome will be.
So to the point - evolution will never stop for humans until every single member of out species is dead.
It has to do with the argument of following the letter of the law versus following the spirit of the law. You can be totally compliant with the law while still being a total dickhead. No legal charges can be brought against you but people might still think you're being a dickhead.
I was defining a project goal more than describing the development process with that comment. Obviously if you don't make something a project goal then it may or may not get done as part of the project. Actually defining the goals for Firefox to be lightweight, easy to use, and secure has had a dramatic effect on how it's been made.
What other OSS browser were you thinking of using? You might try Lynx. It seems fairly secure to me. Most of my complaints with non-gecko OSS browsers is in their lack of proper rendering. I'd imagine they probably aren't as secure either just because they haven't got as big a user base but that isn't always a valid measurement as so many other things factor into the security of a program.
Again, my biggest complaint with Opera is it's lack of proper CSS support and it seems to have some issues with Javascript and various other things too. I'd also guess it's less secure, or will be, simply because it doesn't have as many people picking through it's source code looking for errors. My real complaints against Opera though is that it's extremely ugly - especially the free version that is plastered with ads and that it isn't opensource (which means I don't have the ability to use it any way I want to..).
Obviously they must not be very good employees if they have that many of them and have so many bugs persisting for such a long time.
I do believe I read something recently though that said that actually Microsoft had reassigned almost all of their IE employees to other projects after Netscape died. Which explains why IE has rotted so much. If anything the renewed competition from Firefox, Opera, and Safari is good for IE and IE fans.
Does Microsoft offer bounties to those who find, and alert them to, security problems? Not as far as I know. This, along with the opensource nature of Firefox will eventually make it mature into a more solid product than IE is likely to be unless Microsoft changes it's attitude. Security is, and always has been, a goal with Firefox. That just isn't true of IE. Also Firefox has the benefit of 20/20 hindsight with it's design as it was designed after many important types of exploits were discovered whereas IE's codebase is much older.
Overall, I think Firefox is more secure than IE and will just grow to be increasingly more secure with time. That doesn't mean it is flawless.:)
What does how many they've sold have to do with if it's a PC or not? It's big, it's ugly, it runs Windows.. it's a PC.
That has nothing to do with how many they sell or the quality of their games.
I'd probably argue with the idea that they've been a huge success though. So far the only XBox game I liked was that DoA Beach Babe game. Otherwise I mostly just stick to Playstation or a real PC for games. I'm mostly into RPG games though and XBox hasn't got near the number of those available that PS does. It seems XBox is more into sports games and shooters. I do think Sony and Microsoft are about to send Nintendo down the path that they already shoved Sega.. switching from a console company to a pure games company.
Still - if the PS3 is 1/10th of what it is rumored to be then I don't see even the PC market competing well with it let alone the XBox2. Of course they've still got to prove they can deliver on their promises. That's always the trick huh?:)
I hope the XBox2 looks a lot better than those pics though before it hits the stores. That thing is seriously even uglier than my PC and probably bigger. Microsoft keyboards and mice aren't bad so I don't know why they can't design a better looking console. Wouldn't XBox fans appreciate a better looking console? Sony sure sells enough of their slimmer sexier console reversions when they come out. Why not make a sexy little revision of the XBox that looks more like a Mac Mini?:)
It's still just a PC which seemingly runs some variant of Windows for most games. Microsoft could create PC hardware standards that games would adhere to just as well if they felt like it. Have the games marked as 'M$ WinGames 2005 Standard' or some such logo to show what year they are compliant to.
The last guy I worked for was psycho like that. We spent months of wasted time because he was sure someone was hacking him and wanted me to catch them. He went so far as to call the FBI. At the same time he didn'twant to pay me for my time spent monitoring system logs and going through all the steps of the insane paranoid security he wanted.
Finally he kept threatening to fire me because I was spending so much time on security, at his request, and I expected paid for that time. He didn't want me to spend less time on it either.
Finally he got to accussing all of his employees, including myself, of plotting against him and stopped paying us. He was mad that we weren't loyal enough to keep working for him after he stopping paying us.
I swear that I don't know how some of these pyscho jerks ever get into business let alone stay there. A couple of us tried to start a similar business after we all quit from him but we hadn't planned it before he stopped paying us. Without any start-up capital we haven't done that well but we did get a few clients. For the most part I've switched to working for a new company though. So far this new company seems cool and level headed. A good switch.
Even with designs printed on it that sucker will be ugly and bulky. But what else do you expect from a console that is just a glorified PC. Why not buy a PC of equal or greater specs and just play your games on that?
So how long before we see that new version of SCO Unix coming out? The new one that doesn't suck completely and oddly enough has many of the same features as AIX?
Or maybe they'll just accidently let the source slip out onto the Net after they go out of business. Surely somebody is willing to pay millions of dollars for a copy of that code.
Personally I'm sickened not only at the costs incured by IBM to deliver this code but also in the fact that such an extensive amount of code is required to be kept in some secure third party location while being searched. Is this really being kept in some lawyer's office somewhere? What is to keep someone from breaking in and stealing the whole machine? Surely SCO isn't making much effort at security.
Umm. If you work 1000 hours a month then you have bigger problems.:)
You can live off $1000 but it wouldn't make you wealthy. I was living off $250/month for a while and yes it did really suck. It's more than minimum wage in most places though. Once you proved yourself as a developer that was profitable for the sponsors then they could bump you up to a higher wage.
Getting to do what I want for a living is more important to me than getting paid well. I'd consider quitting my current job for it.
That is largely why I code OSS and write howto-articles when I'm between jobs because it keeps me sharp and fluffs out my resume.
It's great that doing this in Australia can get you a benefits check. I wish contributing to society could get you some sort of benefits here in the US.
Personally, I'd code OSS stuff all the time if I could make at least a living wage from it. I'm surprised that RedHat or some other big OSS company hasn't started an organization to fund such development. Pay experienced OSS developers US$1000/month to crank out code and documentation. Probably a lot of the expert (kernel hackers, etc) developers can do better than that but for a lot of us that work on smaller projects and tools that'd be a good offer. It might not pay as well as our current jobs but we could do what we love and still pay our rent. I think my personal interest in edutainment and tools for making Linux easier to manage/use would probably be worth $1000/month easily.
Anything can be cracked but it's reasonably easy to secure Linux at the machine level. I get 1000's of attempted attacks a day on my servers but they have yet to be penetrated. Just being attacked a lot is not a sign of weakness.
PHP isn't that insecure. That argument has been bunk for as long as I've been hearing it. It has problems, like any other bit of software, but they are certainly not as bad as ASP and the fixes are much more prompt than for ASP. Either way, if you have your webserver properly configured then even if PHP is penetrated there will be no access to your system or database. You shouldn't be running youe webserver, or any remote services, with permissions that'd allow your system to be compromised if that server was compromised.
On the other hand I've seen webhosts running Linux as bad as Windows as they never upgrade their software. Unfortunately a couple of my websites are still hosted on such third-party servers but thus far it hasn't been a problem.
Windows doesn't even have a real security model and serious bugs are often left open long after an exploit has been seen in the wild.
If annoying someone is infringing their rights then I could sue most everyone that is alive (including myself). I find above ground buildings annoying so can I sue everyone that has a building within eyesight of my house? I find cars even more annoying. Can I sue everyone that has a car? Of course not. People have their rights even if they sometimes annoy me.
I might have a lady next door that is ugly. Can I sue her into lossing weight and getting a face lift? Again, of course not. She has the right to be ugly all she wants within her own property. Having an ugly neighbor might make people less likely to buy my home than if I had a bunch of hot 20-something girls that liked to sunbath naked living next door. That still doesn't give me the right to complain that she is ugly and hurting my resale value.
If I don't put a cell tower in my yard because you don't want me to does that mean I can keep you from putting in a pool, fence, garage, or whatever else might annoy me? If we each have total power to veto the other over minor annoyances than I guess it's fair but then the veto power itself would probably become an annoyance as we each spitefully veto the other of anything and everything we might want to do.
Does something being there longer make it better? Would you be happier if I burned all the plants out of my yard because the natural rock and earth has been there longer and I enjoy looking at them? (Actually here in Vegas that is somewhat valid.. I hate people who are growing non-desert plants in their yards.)
Nature is fine. It's just not anything special. Nature is not a work of art or a fine piece of engineering. It's just the crap that was there before anyone ordered the chaos. Yes, it can be pretty but that doesn't mean it's the only thing worth admiring. If you want to complain that cell towers in general are ugly you might be right but I've seen some that were very clever in their disguises and that, to me, looked like a work of art. Again it might be reasonable to ask your neighbor to put a nice cell tower up if they are going to put one up but telling them they can't put one up is the same as me telling you not to water your grass.
Linux doesn't get rooted if it's managed by someone that knows what they are doing. I can't say the same for Windows. Windows is technically impossible to secure. Just look at the government's security ratings for the two.
Visual waste as in excessive light poluttion might be valid. Having your house painted the wrong color or a tower in your yard at a sat dish on your roof is really nobody elses business as it most likely is not 'infecting' their property. I guess solar panels might be questionable as they might reflect bright light into somebody elses bedroom window but I don't see why a tower would be doing any such thing.
Why should your resale value limit my right to do what I want on my own property? If I can't do what I want then I don't own the property. You may as well call it a rental property.
Everything is finding the limits of where your rights meet my rights. Annoying you doesn't mean I'm exceeding my rights. Directly endangering you definately is exceeding my rights. Extremely annoying you, such as with the lights shining in your bedroom window, is where the work on drawing the line has to be set. IMO a cell tower falls into the category of annoying but not greatly annoying. Unless it has bright lights on it, is making a lot of noise, or some other excessive behavior that is definately exiting my property.
It'd be nice if there was a way to cloak each of our properties such that all man made structures looked invisible from a distance but we don't have that kind of Star Trek tech yet. Until then we just have to try to treat each other like we'd like to be treated.
Random thought.. why is it that we think cell towers are ugly and trees aren't? Personally I think of both as similar and ignore both. Why should a cell tower effect your property value other than people are retards that think nature is beautiful and manmade stuff is ugly?
Slashdot Mirror
A net-gf and I made a pair of sex suits when I was a teenager. Worked over our 2400 baud Net conenctions. Had a still pic and recorded sound effects. Might have been even lamer than this thing.. maybe. Was sort of fun though.
Other than costing as much as a laptop?
I've been looking for a good PDA that has a built-in GPS and allows users to write their own programs (without expensive tools) that can access the GPS. Sadly this PDA doesn't seem to work for that.
Will future revisions use all 8 SPE's?
I only saw a small blurb about the shared processing power ability of the cell/PS3 when used in stacks. What happened to that?
Cell is coming out soon in the PS3 and should be available to the market at large sometime thereafter. IBM of course has access now as they helped design them.
I think a Linux/Cell computer is likely and probably a really cool idea. They'd have to opensource the code changes though so RedHat and everyone else could release Cell distros too if they wanted to.
I think with Novell behind SuSE it's here for the longrun. Debian is the Linux distro for geeks so it's here for the longrun. RedHat I think is here for the longrun but would be a likely purchase target for some large company (IBM? Sony?). Linspire and similar easy desktop distros I think will either merge with bigger distros or fade away. None of them seem to really be that innovative and by the time enough desktop Linux interest grows the bigger distros will be in that space.
Maybe it's just me but I've always thought SuSE was a pain in the ass. It's fine for newbies that just want bulk (SuSE has the most games of any distro I've seen) or for people who want a simple, but lame, interface for configuring but it feels like a kludge to users that are actually experienced enough to know how to configure their own systems. RedHat is a little better in that it at least doesn't feel like it's fighting you. Debian is slightly better in that regard but IMO apt/dpkg isn't nearly as cleanly implemented as rug/rpm. Of course Fedora ships with yum which is a pretty retarded program. Or for the real geeks.. Gentoo rocks. ;)
:(
I wasn't crazy about SuSE before but Novell seems to be taking it in a direction even further from what I like.. as it is with Ximian. Try even finding the source for Red Carpet on Novell's website. It takes some work. Even their website is a huge bloated kludge.
Even, through nano or some other far flung sci-fi scheme, we change ourselves into a non-organic species evolution will still apply because we will still have to survive. We compete with other species. We compete with the cold harshness of the forces of nature that would end all life. We compete with others of our own species. All these factors require individuals and species to adapt if they wish to survive. Either we're dead or we're evolving. Sometimes, while we're organic, that may be on a genetic level and sometimes it may be on other levels. Who can tell what levels it will be on in the future.
Anyone who thinks evolution stops obviously doesn't understand the concept. Just because those of us caught in the middle of it can't see it working does not mean it isn't working. Evolution is simply the stuff that life is made of. If you're living or in any way having an effect on things that are living then you're being worked on by evolution.
Our technology is changing us and that is evolution. We communicate over much larger distances much more easily. We become attracted to people we otherwise could never have met and then we mate with them. Meet some chick from halfway across the world and then hook up and she gets pregnant? Well there you go.. you just created a small ripple in the way the human species is evolving. What that ripple does is hard to say.. but it is definately happening. Maybe people who are prone to spending long hours in front of a PC will evolve into a different sub-species than those who aren't. Maybe the shy, smart, geeky people will start having higher birthrates as the process of them mating is made easier and this could change the fact that for a long while (since death rates due to your own stupidity have gone down) that stupid but bold people have been outbreeding us. Again that is creating some change but it's hard to say what the outcome will be.
So to the point - evolution will never stop for humans until every single member of out species is dead.
It has to do with the argument of following the letter of the law versus following the spirit of the law. You can be totally compliant with the law while still being a total dickhead. No legal charges can be brought against you but people might still think you're being a dickhead.
I was defining a project goal more than describing the development process with that comment. Obviously if you don't make something a project goal then it may or may not get done as part of the project. Actually defining the goals for Firefox to be lightweight, easy to use, and secure has had a dramatic effect on how it's been made.
What other OSS browser were you thinking of using? You might try Lynx. It seems fairly secure to me. Most of my complaints with non-gecko OSS browsers is in their lack of proper rendering. I'd imagine they probably aren't as secure either just because they haven't got as big a user base but that isn't always a valid measurement as so many other things factor into the security of a program.
Again, my biggest complaint with Opera is it's lack of proper CSS support and it seems to have some issues with Javascript and various other things too. I'd also guess it's less secure, or will be, simply because it doesn't have as many people picking through it's source code looking for errors. My real complaints against Opera though is that it's extremely ugly - especially the free version that is plastered with ads and that it isn't opensource (which means I don't have the ability to use it any way I want to..).
Obviously they must not be very good employees if they have that many of them and have so many bugs persisting for such a long time.
I do believe I read something recently though that said that actually Microsoft had reassigned almost all of their IE employees to other projects after Netscape died. Which explains why IE has rotted so much. If anything the renewed competition from Firefox, Opera, and Safari is good for IE and IE fans.
Does Microsoft offer bounties to those who find, and alert them to, security problems? Not as far as I know. This, along with the opensource nature of Firefox will eventually make it mature into a more solid product than IE is likely to be unless Microsoft changes it's attitude. Security is, and always has been, a goal with Firefox. That just isn't true of IE. Also Firefox has the benefit of 20/20 hindsight with it's design as it was designed after many important types of exploits were discovered whereas IE's codebase is much older.
:)
Overall, I think Firefox is more secure than IE and will just grow to be increasingly more secure with time. That doesn't mean it is flawless.
What does how many they've sold have to do with if it's a PC or not? It's big, it's ugly, it runs Windows.. it's a PC.
:)
:)
That has nothing to do with how many they sell or the quality of their games.
I'd probably argue with the idea that they've been a huge success though. So far the only XBox game I liked was that DoA Beach Babe game. Otherwise I mostly just stick to Playstation or a real PC for games. I'm mostly into RPG games though and XBox hasn't got near the number of those available that PS does. It seems XBox is more into sports games and shooters. I do think Sony and Microsoft are about to send Nintendo down the path that they already shoved Sega.. switching from a console company to a pure games company.
Still - if the PS3 is 1/10th of what it is rumored to be then I don't see even the PC market competing well with it let alone the XBox2. Of course they've still got to prove they can deliver on their promises. That's always the trick huh?
I hope the XBox2 looks a lot better than those pics though before it hits the stores. That thing is seriously even uglier than my PC and probably bigger. Microsoft keyboards and mice aren't bad so I don't know why they can't design a better looking console. Wouldn't XBox fans appreciate a better looking console? Sony sure sells enough of their slimmer sexier console reversions when they come out. Why not make a sexy little revision of the XBox that looks more like a Mac Mini?
It's still just a PC which seemingly runs some variant of Windows for most games. Microsoft could create PC hardware standards that games would adhere to just as well if they felt like it. Have the games marked as 'M$ WinGames 2005 Standard' or some such logo to show what year they are compliant to.
The last guy I worked for was psycho like that. We spent months of wasted time because he was sure someone was hacking him and wanted me to catch them. He went so far as to call the FBI. At the same time he didn'twant to pay me for my time spent monitoring system logs and going through all the steps of the insane paranoid security he wanted.
Finally he kept threatening to fire me because I was spending so much time on security, at his request, and I expected paid for that time. He didn't want me to spend less time on it either.
Finally he got to accussing all of his employees, including myself, of plotting against him and stopped paying us. He was mad that we weren't loyal enough to keep working for him after he stopping paying us.
I swear that I don't know how some of these pyscho jerks ever get into business let alone stay there. A couple of us tried to start a similar business after we all quit from him but we hadn't planned it before he stopped paying us. Without any start-up capital we haven't done that well but we did get a few clients. For the most part I've switched to working for a new company though. So far this new company seems cool and level headed. A good switch.
Even with designs printed on it that sucker will be ugly and bulky. But what else do you expect from a console that is just a glorified PC. Why not buy a PC of equal or greater specs and just play your games on that?
So how long before we see that new version of SCO Unix coming out? The new one that doesn't suck completely and oddly enough has many of the same features as AIX?
Or maybe they'll just accidently let the source slip out onto the Net after they go out of business. Surely somebody is willing to pay millions of dollars for a copy of that code.
Personally I'm sickened not only at the costs incured by IBM to deliver this code but also in the fact that such an extensive amount of code is required to be kept in some secure third party location while being searched. Is this really being kept in some lawyer's office somewhere? What is to keep someone from breaking in and stealing the whole machine? Surely SCO isn't making much effort at security.
Umm. If you work 1000 hours a month then you have bigger problems. :)
You can live off $1000 but it wouldn't make you wealthy. I was living off $250/month for a while and yes it did really suck. It's more than minimum wage in most places though. Once you proved yourself as a developer that was profitable for the sponsors then they could bump you up to a higher wage.
Getting to do what I want for a living is more important to me than getting paid well. I'd consider quitting my current job for it.
That is largely why I code OSS and write howto-articles when I'm between jobs because it keeps me sharp and fluffs out my resume.
It's great that doing this in Australia can get you a benefits check. I wish contributing to society could get you some sort of benefits here in the US.
Personally, I'd code OSS stuff all the time if I could make at least a living wage from it. I'm surprised that RedHat or some other big OSS company hasn't started an organization to fund such development. Pay experienced OSS developers US$1000/month to crank out code and documentation. Probably a lot of the expert (kernel hackers, etc) developers can do better than that but for a lot of us that work on smaller projects and tools that'd be a good offer. It might not pay as well as our current jobs but we could do what we love and still pay our rent. I think my personal interest in edutainment and tools for making Linux easier to manage/use would probably be worth $1000/month easily.
Anything can be cracked but it's reasonably easy to secure Linux at the machine level. I get 1000's of attempted attacks a day on my servers but they have yet to be penetrated. Just being attacked a lot is not a sign of weakness.
PHP isn't that insecure. That argument has been bunk for as long as I've been hearing it. It has problems, like any other bit of software, but they are certainly not as bad as ASP and the fixes are much more prompt than for ASP. Either way, if you have your webserver properly configured then even if PHP is penetrated there will be no access to your system or database. You shouldn't be running youe webserver, or any remote services, with permissions that'd allow your system to be compromised if that server was compromised.
On the other hand I've seen webhosts running Linux as bad as Windows as they never upgrade their software. Unfortunately a couple of my websites are still hosted on such third-party servers but thus far it hasn't been a problem.
Windows doesn't even have a real security model and serious bugs are often left open long after an exploit has been seen in the wild.
Maybe you could use it to power your USB devices?
If annoying someone is infringing their rights then I could sue most everyone that is alive (including myself). I find above ground buildings annoying so can I sue everyone that has a building within eyesight of my house? I find cars even more annoying. Can I sue everyone that has a car? Of course not. People have their rights even if they sometimes annoy me.
I might have a lady next door that is ugly. Can I sue her into lossing weight and getting a face lift? Again, of course not. She has the right to be ugly all she wants within her own property. Having an ugly neighbor might make people less likely to buy my home than if I had a bunch of hot 20-something girls that liked to sunbath naked living next door. That still doesn't give me the right to complain that she is ugly and hurting my resale value.
If I don't put a cell tower in my yard because you don't want me to does that mean I can keep you from putting in a pool, fence, garage, or whatever else might annoy me? If we each have total power to veto the other over minor annoyances than I guess it's fair but then the veto power itself would probably become an annoyance as we each spitefully veto the other of anything and everything we might want to do.
Does something being there longer make it better? Would you be happier if I burned all the plants out of my yard because the natural rock and earth has been there longer and I enjoy looking at them? (Actually here in Vegas that is somewhat valid.. I hate people who are growing non-desert plants in their yards.)
Nature is fine. It's just not anything special. Nature is not a work of art or a fine piece of engineering. It's just the crap that was there before anyone ordered the chaos. Yes, it can be pretty but that doesn't mean it's the only thing worth admiring. If you want to complain that cell towers in general are ugly you might be right but I've seen some that were very clever in their disguises and that, to me, looked like a work of art. Again it might be reasonable to ask your neighbor to put a nice cell tower up if they are going to put one up but telling them they can't put one up is the same as me telling you not to water your grass.
Linux doesn't get rooted if it's managed by someone that knows what they are doing. I can't say the same for Windows. Windows is technically impossible to secure. Just look at the government's security ratings for the two.
I'd suggest blacklisting any user found to be running Windows. That'd be a good start.
Visual waste as in excessive light poluttion might be valid. Having your house painted the wrong color or a tower in your yard at a sat dish on your roof is really nobody elses business as it most likely is not 'infecting' their property. I guess solar panels might be questionable as they might reflect bright light into somebody elses bedroom window but I don't see why a tower would be doing any such thing.
Why should your resale value limit my right to do what I want on my own property? If I can't do what I want then I don't own the property. You may as well call it a rental property.
Everything is finding the limits of where your rights meet my rights. Annoying you doesn't mean I'm exceeding my rights. Directly endangering you definately is exceeding my rights. Extremely annoying you, such as with the lights shining in your bedroom window, is where the work on drawing the line has to be set. IMO a cell tower falls into the category of annoying but not greatly annoying. Unless it has bright lights on it, is making a lot of noise, or some other excessive behavior that is definately exiting my property.
It'd be nice if there was a way to cloak each of our properties such that all man made structures looked invisible from a distance but we don't have that kind of Star Trek tech yet. Until then we just have to try to treat each other like we'd like to be treated.
Random thought.. why is it that we think cell towers are ugly and trees aren't? Personally I think of both as similar and ignore both. Why should a cell tower effect your property value other than people are retards that think nature is beautiful and manmade stuff is ugly?