Speaking a sexual maturity here's a joke I heard (I think on rec.humor): A preacher spots the neighbor boy, who is 5 years old, mowing the lawn with a beer in hand. Absolutely incensed, he rushes over to reprimand the ruffian. The boy responds, "Oh that's nuthin'. I got laid when I was 3." The preacher inquires, "Well how did that happen?" To which the boy replies, "I don't remember. I was trashed."
I think the really disturbing part of it is the youtube video of the first part of it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCNGjKnTzaQ is probably the only youtube video ever with comments that are passable English and somewhat intelligent.
I have two problems with your post. First the assumption that democracy is the only just or moral type of government. (or whatever other manner of defining right and wrong you hold dear) It certainly isn't, it also isn't moral or just or fluffy and fuzzy forever just like all the other ones.
Secondly, the French Revolution? Really? So a revolution that murdered the ruling class, on principle not on proof of past infractions; the nobles that started the revolution itself (the middle aristocracy); and countless innocents and then wound up being governed by a psychotic dictator and warmonger is one of your shining examples of democracy? I don't really wonder why I don't visit this site more often any more. When bullshit like your post gets promoted as "interesting", surfing at +3 doesn't even help. But hey maybe if you repeat it enough times...
Whoah, slow down. I'm not saying that the unregulated, free market is always the best solution. For example: police, fire, prisons, national defense, postal service (as long as you don't care if the mail arrives, I kid:) etc. are all great examples of services that are and should be provided by the gov't.
The thing is, if the market system can provide a solution; 9 times out of ten it's better than the public one with one huge caveat. If you can provide a proper legal structure for that market to operate within. That doesn't mean a non-gov't solution is always going to be better. In my opinion it's more or less a toss-up when you have grotesque amounts of uber-onerous, stupid, wasteful regulation.
Here is an ok solution (but still realistic IMO) to our current problem of broadband:
Pass a decently well structured net-neutrality law and arm an agency (FCC) with the teeth to enforce it. Make telco's reinvest in their networks at the very least by the amount they receive in cash from the FCC tax on every cable/cell phone/telephone bill. Give telco's further incentive to reinvest in their networks and provide rural access by giving tax cuts, subsidies etc. Make telco's scared shitless by removing all monopoly favoritism and let any company or municipality roll out their own fiber to give the telco an incentive to compete. Further give them an incentive to compete by re-examining spectrum licensing. But keep in mind that's really only an ok solution. Innovation and high-speed rollouts will still be relatively slow.
How about this:
Suppose for a minute that this guy is right. Big cable/fiber/telephone networks could make more money by leasing out bulk access to any little ISP who then turns around and sells service to individual consumers/small business's (big business like google can fend for themselves, they're pretty damn good at it too) The question is why are companies then actively screwing themselves over? It's kinda goes without saying that large corps will at one point screw over their customers, but themselves? So let's say we find a way to restructure the outdated regs surrounding this industry (and the E&M spectrum) so these companies act like bloodsucking profit loving vampires again. Okay cool. Now if their leasing out their networks then consumers aren't really going to stand for a paywall to certain parts of the net; consumers will just move to a different little ISP on the same network. Also, if the competition is this effective, then high-speed lines will be being rolled out everywhere (possibly not rural, that's going to take some gov't incentive IMO) and telco's will be slashing prices and upping speeds to stay ahead: innovation. To top it all off, you managed to do it without any new fancy regulation. You did it by making the current regulations sensible and modern. You don't have the FCC having to enforce net-neutrality thus saving money. You don't have the gov't doling out quite as much cash for new lines (possibly except for rural areas) thus saving more money. And consumers get better cheaper options. This would be a great solution. Do not expect this to come anywhere near the real world anytime soon.
Read this
He explains that networks would make more cash by opening their networks to smaller individual ISPs. Markets work when they are unencumbered. I can't even begin to describe how the telecom situation in the US is so far from a free market it's not even funny.
No I'm not postulating de-regulation but simply regulation where it counts and none where we don't need it. Our current regulatory structure in the US is stuck in the 50's. As long as it stays there the only way to bring us forward is with a gov't solution. Otherwise we could always update the laws and see what happens but that would like, you know, be asking politicians to think like engineers (i.e. with their heads)
I mostly agree. However Linux (and Mac) are much more immune to what are strictly viruses. What they are not much more immune to are trojans*, which I think constitute ~80-90% of infected Windows desktops. Here's my theory to dispel the myth of how robust Linux is(when in the hands of a typical user): Write a malware program that is a variant on the dancing bunnies. Put it up for download. User must have dancing bunnies or else. User clicks to download, then selects Open with Package Manager. User enters root password to install then since security signature is missing must enter it again. Malware program now installed.
*I'm aware of least privilege. However with more and more of the total desktop market being in the home, most users will have their root passwords (i.e. not in a corporate environment) and see no difference between entering that and clicking continue on a bunch of UAC prompts. To make matters worse they will be conditioned to "Force install" since a decent amount of apps that are safe that they want don't provide security signatures either. E.G.: World of Goo, Hulu Desktop Client, commercial games if they ever come etc.
I've got Fedora on my laptop. It probably boots about as fast as windows without crapware would, which isn't terribly quick ~1 minute. But it comes back from suspend like lightning and uses virtually no power on suspend.
I really like it for homework, because I can look something up quick, then suspend, work for another hour, repeat. I rarely run low on battery that way. I can't really give a time (like 4-5 hours) because each time is a little bit different with my usage, but there is more of a lag in me figuring out what to type in google than there is in it coming back from suspend.
Free market theory, traditionally, is not about whether something is done by a private co. or by the public, for the sake of such a distinction, it's about giving people the correct incentive to do the right thing. Versus socialism (in all forms: communism, fascism, modern leftism) is about assuming people have the right incentive to do the right thing or trying to give them an incentive but it's a poor one (poor from the POV of the free market theorists anyways.)
What I mean by regardless of private or public, is a vast oversimplification (of course it matters...) but mostly for the above reason. A quote often attributed to Mussolini, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."
So even if a large portion of your economy was privatized it could be very hostile to western ideals like liberty and individualism if it was essentially a corporate economy. I realize and admit that I'm oversimplifying but if you'd like to discuss more, please do.
NB: Also the discussion between what is private vs. public hinges not just on incentive but on rights to property, work, do as one pleases etc. and also on what should be a justified expense on the taxpayers credit card. And after re-reading your post I'm not so sure you even disagree with me.
Except that they gave their tacit permission by using the system. If they don't like it they are free to roll their own, it's not like the US owns their fiber or copper.
As an analogy, consider the Anti-Social Behavior Order. It's a kind of order that a judge can issue to a UK that bans you from doing something. Anything. Right now it's generally used to stop people being douchebags to each other, but there's nothing to stop a judge issuing one banning you from writing anti-authority newsletters, or protesting somewhere, if those are considered "anti-social". That makes people nervous.
No, its nothing at all like that. In that scenario the judge can use the power of the gov't to enforce an arbitrary rule, and it's legally binding. If the US tries to enforce an arbitrary rule that others don't like, they can tell the US to screw off and run their own networks.
They really have problems with the whole concept of a Constituition and the Rule of Law thing, they prefer the Rule of Men... so long as it is them doing the Ruling.
This might sound very extremist and reactionary but they are going to have a problem doing that (instituting their bs rules over my and my family members' lives) and both me and them remaining alive. These two things are mutually exclusive.
Ok, so there is a problem with not being able to get a good handle on what the actual % is, right? Then companies (CAD software, games) will be shy about making linux ports. We can be pretty sure, being very liberal here, that it's between 1 and 10%, but that's not narrow enough of an estimate. But we'll probably never be able to narrow it down better than that.
So how about this, stop worrying about the exact number and do like you said (make good software + user experience) but also bother the living heck out of a some game devs we would really like to have on linux, buy those linux versions, and then other companies will see their competitors success there and do it too etc. I personally think decent linux ports of decent games would do suprisingly well given that there isn't jack squat for cool games on linux.
Once we got the snowball going it would take of itself in terms of users and dev support.
Sadly enough, he's right. Wisconsin is bad, and Milwaukee/Madison* are making a bad problem worse. If I ever start my business (after college) it sure as hell won't be in this state, which stinks because my family is here...
*At least Madison is able to pretend it has some semblance of a functional gov't. Milwaukee on the other hand,.... the police, schools, drugs, corrupt city officials, etc.
Considering the argument, I found the irony to be pretty amusing, even if the joke is on me.
What really ticked me off about his comment was by ripping on private/home-schooled people as being worse off then public school kids he's completely trivializing situations like the Milwaukee Public School system, where seniors in high school are barely literate according to national exams. Which, if I've heard correctly, are very watered down as of late. Whatever. /rant
Way to troll. First off, how about a citation. I don't have any evidence to the contrary but I wouldn't through allegations around like that without being able to back them up.
Secondly, I am a privately-educated (in high school) American and am doing just fine with an electrical engineering and computer science degree from a well known university, thank you very much. I don't know if that qualifies me as literate but I sure fucking hope so.
What's weird is Limbaugh exhibits both symptoms. Possibly it's the combination that produces the truly astounding results; not just the two acting in isolation.
Really, that actually sounds incredibly fun, (re: something I was bitching to my brother about, why the heck doesn't somebody make a game like that, it would be so cool...)
Couple quick questions:
-Does Eve work through WINE?
-What is the $/month rate
I've heard smarter people than myself say the same thing. Without getting into too long of a rant my basic argument is this: How do you learn how to do something? By doing it of course. Then we should go back to making/manufacturing things. An economy predicated on juggling finances (not that banks/financial groups are bad but...) and intellectual property just isn't sustainable in the long run. I think we are starting to see that now, with the current generation not going into engineering etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking a sexual maturity here's a joke I heard (I think on rec.humor):
A preacher spots the neighbor boy, who is 5 years old, mowing the lawn with a beer in hand. Absolutely incensed, he rushes over to reprimand the ruffian. The boy responds, "Oh that's nuthin'. I got laid when I was 3."
The preacher inquires, "Well how did that happen?"
To which the boy replies, "I don't remember. I was trashed."
Negating accidental 'Redundant' moderation. Sigh.
I think the really disturbing part of it is the youtube video of the first part of it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCNGjKnTzaQ is probably the only youtube video ever with comments that are passable English and somewhat intelligent.
I have two problems with your post. First the assumption that democracy is the only just or moral type of government. (or whatever other manner of defining right and wrong you hold dear) It certainly isn't, it also isn't moral or just or fluffy and fuzzy forever just like all the other ones.
Secondly, the French Revolution? Really? So a revolution that murdered the ruling class, on principle not on proof of past infractions; the nobles that started the revolution itself (the middle aristocracy); and countless innocents and then wound up being governed by a psychotic dictator and warmonger is one of your shining examples of democracy? I don't really wonder why I don't visit this site more often any more. When bullshit like your post gets promoted as "interesting", surfing at +3 doesn't even help. But hey maybe if you repeat it enough times...
Whoah, slow down. I'm not saying that the unregulated, free market is always the best solution. For example: police, fire, prisons, national defense, postal service (as long as you don't care if the mail arrives, I kid:) etc. are all great examples of services that are and should be provided by the gov't.
The thing is, if the market system can provide a solution; 9 times out of ten it's better than the public one with one huge caveat. If you can provide a proper legal structure for that market to operate within. That doesn't mean a non-gov't solution is always going to be better. In my opinion it's more or less a toss-up when you have grotesque amounts of uber-onerous, stupid, wasteful regulation.
Here is an ok solution (but still realistic IMO) to our current problem of broadband:
Pass a decently well structured net-neutrality law and arm an agency (FCC) with the teeth to enforce it. Make telco's reinvest in their networks at the very least by the amount they receive in cash from the FCC tax on every cable/cell phone/telephone bill. Give telco's further incentive to reinvest in their networks and provide rural access by giving tax cuts, subsidies etc. Make telco's scared shitless by removing all monopoly favoritism and let any company or municipality roll out their own fiber to give the telco an incentive to compete. Further give them an incentive to compete by re-examining spectrum licensing. But keep in mind that's really only an ok solution. Innovation and high-speed rollouts will still be relatively slow.
How about this:
Suppose for a minute that this guy is right. Big cable/fiber/telephone networks could make more money by leasing out bulk access to any little ISP who then turns around and sells service to individual consumers/small business's (big business like google can fend for themselves, they're pretty damn good at it too) The question is why are companies then actively screwing themselves over? It's kinda goes without saying that large corps will at one point screw over their customers, but themselves? So let's say we find a way to restructure the outdated regs surrounding this industry (and the E&M spectrum) so these companies act like bloodsucking profit loving vampires again. Okay cool. Now if their leasing out their networks then consumers aren't really going to stand for a paywall to certain parts of the net; consumers will just move to a different little ISP on the same network. Also, if the competition is this effective, then high-speed lines will be being rolled out everywhere (possibly not rural, that's going to take some gov't incentive IMO) and telco's will be slashing prices and upping speeds to stay ahead: innovation. To top it all off, you managed to do it without any new fancy regulation. You did it by making the current regulations sensible and modern. You don't have the FCC having to enforce net-neutrality thus saving money. You don't have the gov't doling out quite as much cash for new lines (possibly except for rural areas) thus saving more money. And consumers get better cheaper options. This would be a great solution. Do not expect this to come anywhere near the real world anytime soon.
Read this
He explains that networks would make more cash by opening their networks to smaller individual ISPs. Markets work when they are unencumbered. I can't even begin to describe how the telecom situation in the US is so far from a free market it's not even funny.
No I'm not postulating de-regulation but simply regulation where it counts and none where we don't need it. Our current regulatory structure in the US is stuck in the 50's. As long as it stays there the only way to bring us forward is with a gov't solution. Otherwise we could always update the laws and see what happens but that would like, you know, be asking politicians to think like engineers (i.e. with their heads)
I mostly agree. However Linux (and Mac) are much more immune to what are strictly viruses. What they are not much more immune to are trojans*, which I think constitute ~80-90% of infected Windows desktops. Here's my theory to dispel the myth of how robust Linux is(when in the hands of a typical user): Write a malware program that is a variant on the dancing bunnies. Put it up for download. User must have dancing bunnies or else. User clicks to download, then selects Open with Package Manager. User enters root password to install then since security signature is missing must enter it again. Malware program now installed.
*I'm aware of least privilege. However with more and more of the total desktop market being in the home, most users will have their root passwords (i.e. not in a corporate environment) and see no difference between entering that and clicking continue on a bunch of UAC prompts. To make matters worse they will be conditioned to "Force install" since a decent amount of apps that are safe that they want don't provide security signatures either. E.G.: World of Goo, Hulu Desktop Client, commercial games if they ever come etc.
I've got Fedora on my laptop. It probably boots about as fast as windows without crapware would, which isn't terribly quick ~1 minute. But it comes back from suspend like lightning and uses virtually no power on suspend.
I really like it for homework, because I can look something up quick, then suspend, work for another hour, repeat. I rarely run low on battery that way. I can't really give a time (like 4-5 hours) because each time is a little bit different with my usage, but there is more of a lag in me figuring out what to type in google than there is in it coming back from suspend.
Free market theory, traditionally, is not about whether something is done by a private co. or by the public, for the sake of such a distinction, it's about giving people the correct incentive to do the right thing. Versus socialism (in all forms: communism, fascism, modern leftism) is about assuming people have the right incentive to do the right thing or trying to give them an incentive but it's a poor one (poor from the POV of the free market theorists anyways.)
What I mean by regardless of private or public, is a vast oversimplification (of course it matters...) but mostly for the above reason. A quote often attributed to Mussolini, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."
So even if a large portion of your economy was privatized it could be very hostile to western ideals like liberty and individualism if it was essentially a corporate economy. I realize and admit that I'm oversimplifying but if you'd like to discuss more, please do.
NB: Also the discussion between what is private vs. public hinges not just on incentive but on rights to property, work, do as one pleases etc. and also on what should be a justified expense on the taxpayers credit card. And after re-reading your post I'm not so sure you even disagree with me.
As an analogy, consider the Anti-Social Behavior Order. It's a kind of order that a judge can issue to a UK that bans you from doing something. Anything. Right now it's generally used to stop people being douchebags to each other, but there's nothing to stop a judge issuing one banning you from writing anti-authority newsletters, or protesting somewhere, if those are considered "anti-social". That makes people nervous.
No, its nothing at all like that. In that scenario the judge can use the power of the gov't to enforce an arbitrary rule, and it's legally binding. If the US tries to enforce an arbitrary rule that others don't like, they can tell the US to screw off and run their own networks.
They really have problems with the whole concept of a Constituition and the Rule of Law thing, they prefer the Rule of Men... so long as it is them doing the Ruling.
This might sound very extremist and reactionary but they are going to have a problem doing that (instituting their bs rules over my and my family members' lives) and both me and them remaining alive. These two things are mutually exclusive.
I dunno, but I just purchased the "greatest airspeed-velocity swallows on the market." Anybody have an idea how I can verify this?
Ok, so there is a problem with not being able to get a good handle on what the actual % is, right? Then companies (CAD software, games) will be shy about making linux ports. We can be pretty sure, being very liberal here, that it's between 1 and 10%, but that's not narrow enough of an estimate. But we'll probably never be able to narrow it down better than that.
So how about this, stop worrying about the exact number and do like you said (make good software + user experience) but also bother the living heck out of a some game devs we would really like to have on linux, buy those linux versions, and then other companies will see their competitors success there and do it too etc. I personally think decent linux ports of decent games would do suprisingly well given that there isn't jack squat for cool games on linux.
Once we got the snowball going it would take of itself in terms of users and dev support.
Sadly enough, he's right. Wisconsin is bad, and Milwaukee/Madison* are making a bad problem worse. If I ever start my business (after college) it sure as hell won't be in this state, which stinks because my family is here...
.... the police, schools, drugs, corrupt city officials, etc.
*At least Madison is able to pretend it has some semblance of a functional gov't. Milwaukee on the other hand,
Considering the argument, I found the irony to be pretty amusing, even if the joke is on me.
/rant
What really ticked me off about his comment was by ripping on private/home-schooled people as being worse off then public school kids he's completely trivializing situations like the Milwaukee Public School system, where seniors in high school are barely literate according to national exams. Which, if I've heard correctly, are very watered down as of late. Whatever.
Way to troll. First off, how about a citation. I don't have any evidence to the contrary but I wouldn't through allegations around like that without being able to back them up.
Secondly, I am a privately-educated (in high school) American and am doing just fine with an electrical engineering and computer science degree from a well known university, thank you very much. I don't know if that qualifies me as literate but I sure fucking hope so.
Ya neither does e-links, I think it's a worldwide conspiracy against text only browsers. They're afraid of the superior ASCII rendering:)
How about Wilson, NC's Public Affairs Manager's blog It's got some decent posts, and some boring stuff. More about the push polling on the front page
What's weird is Limbaugh exhibits both symptoms. Possibly it's the combination that produces the truly astounding results; not just the two acting in isolation.
Really, that actually sounds incredibly fun, (re: something I was bitching to my brother about, why the heck doesn't somebody make a game like that, it would be so cool...)
Couple quick questions:
-Does Eve work through WINE?
-What is the $/month rate
-Jeff
Welcome to Colorado, 49th in funding for schools.
Way to rub it in #50's face. Completely insensitive.
I've heard smarter people than myself say the same thing. Without getting into too long of a rant my basic argument is this: How do you learn how to do something? By doing it of course. Then we should go back to making/manufacturing things. An economy predicated on juggling finances (not that banks/financial groups are bad but...) and intellectual property just isn't sustainable in the long run. I think we are starting to see that now, with the current generation not going into engineering etc.
Paying homage to Metal Gear Solid 4 how about Nets (Tubes?) of the Patriots?
while I browse fake porn/warez malware sites with unpatched IE6
I think I'm going to feel dirty for a week after reading that.
Sounds like the American politicians will be all for it then.
Now get back to work.