It is not their fault that the bank glitched out, and who knows what the other factors are causing problems (illness/unemployment/etc/etc)? Yet you blame the person rather than the computer/company. Welcome to your automated world that best suits beaurocratic nerds.
I am involved in organizing the Toronto GOSLING (getting open source into government). If you are interested in being involved, please email me at vid_goslingslashdot@zooid.org.
I would like to say all the stereotyping, particularly towards french people, is rather pathetic. I'm really quite saddened by this behavior, especially when I see it being rated upwardly. I have known many french people, and they are all different, but most have been great people. Certainly nicer than the close minded stereotyping nerds and other rednecks.
What anyone thinks this behavior achieves I don't know, but I am guessing they are very regressive people whose opinions are not worth very much in the first place.
It seems to me he is trying to help Gnome by criticizing it. Unless we are just supposed to look the other way with what I agree are terrible design decisions made by overly uptight and opinionted designers.
In fact, while I use Gnome, it's really starting to make me believe that it is becoming the interface of the facist hierarchy, with the users given little choice over how things look and work, unless you want to sink down to the registry/file editing level, which is probably going to be obsolete the next version. Windows is a happy chaos by comparison.
Since I got moderated -1 overrated, I should clarify I find it bizarre that someone is happy to be in a blissful state of having things work together when using only one vendor, as opposed to multi party standards. But that's too complicted to explain on slashdot.
You may be right, I was only commenting on the development of an open source codec. But it is being compared to the Windows Media codec. I would say a solution coded in Java should be about as fast as a C++ solution and perhaps useful for resolutions less than full HDTV on today's PC (which will morph into tomorrow's media centre).
(And when do we see commodity 1920x1080 projectors? Sigh.)
There are lots of great or just good enough codecs out there. Having an open source codec would be great, but the biggest problem today is not getting the best/freest codec but instead is making it available from the average browser. From a practical point of view, it might be more worthwhile resigning oneself and exerting effort to make common formats (Windows, Quicktime) work well from a Linux computer (from my understanding the Mplayer plugin won't stream Windows/Quicktime).
Not that this type of research should be discontinued, of course, but from the numerous projects I've been involved in that used streaming media, common availability was the biggest problem... we often had to produce video for Windows, Quicktime and Real. There are some environments (technophobes, corporations, and government) where you can't install a new plugin.
In fact I think a Java based media streaming applet might be a great solution, since Java has pretty good saturation (although *sigh* there is no entirely free software or open source Java implementation at this moment).
2. Don't get too crazy with lumens. The people who do installs say most projectors need between 600 and 800 lumens. The lower the lumens, the longer the bulb lasts.
I haven't seen any correlation between bulb life and lumen output. You do want to pay attention to contrast, though.
Certainly, I said that the money might do some good, somewhere, eventually, although no where the 1:1 it might be if it were truly dedicated and focused people. However, I do not think he deserves any sincere thanks for his efforts as it pretty plainly a publicity ploy, and it's debateable if he should have had the money in the first place.
Do you feel good if a gangster gives money to charity? The gangster secured the money by unlawful means. Gates is not exactly a gangster (his pressure on individuals and companies isn't at gunpoint), but by lawful measures he's no saint and I don't think he should be entitled to real thanks. Let him feel guilty about what's done and really think about how competition and working together might work from his position of high advantage, aside from pressuring and buying everyone off.
Admittedly, my statement is partially an idealized view, but that is something to strive for as much as curing other worldly ills.
He may think otherwise, but Gates is making a calculated decision that it's more advantageous for him to give money away to hoard it. After all, he currently owns the mainstream PC business.
I don't think BillG deserves any credit at all for his "charity" acts. Taking money he gained from convicted anti competitive practices and trying to buy good will is pretty sad. When you look at his initial fumbling attempts at "philanthropy" where he subsidized college students who were already going to be successfull, and makes donations of Microsoft products to third world countries, locking disadvantaged countries with no local expertise and no ability to buy upgrades in, basically creating a dependence, you know it's all a sad self-serving joke.
Sure, the pure "here's a billion dollars, go cure cancer" type projects might achieve something, but wouldn't it be better if individuals had those extra resources in the first place, instead of having god-king Bill Gates the III make their charity decisions for them? Gates is not going to be there on the ground actually doing the research and making sure the money gets to the right places, so its those individuals who are dedicating their lives to these pursuits who should be considered the "heroes" here. I doubt his money's impact on these problems is directly proportional by any means, as you can't just buy dedicated people and most would already be in the field, it's almost entirely a PR wash.
Absolutely. I've often thought it would be nice if non hegemony users would collectively buy hardware that was completely free & open. For maximum effect, "everyone" waits three months for their next purchase, and buys identified, free, open, performant and well supported hardware at the same time, hopefully causing a blip on screens somewhere. With the number of vendors that are out there, it could make some realize the advantages of opening up.
Of course, this is somewhat contrary to the hacker goal of supporting everything that has an (electrical) pulse.
This would be just great for disadvantaged countries, organizations and individuals trying to use email for communcation. It's really thoughtful to keep the less fortunate beholden to the wealthy. They can come begging to Microsoft when they need to rack up some more ability-to-speak credits. Glad to hear Gates is on the ball here.
Yawn. To you and the other people who said the same thing, that was last year's model. They don't use Crusoe any more. Pentium M 1 GHz and better. Totally different story.
Right on. I am trying to convince myself to buy a convertable pc for the reasons you outlined. It IS true that it is almost twice the price of a similar notebook, but it simply does things a regular notebook won't.
I previously had a Fujitsu Lifebook B series, which is nicer in one way than the current tablets; you don't HAVE to use the stylus (you can eg use your fingernail). This makes it even more natural to use. While the new B is also nice (and only three pounds, and not very expensive), it's also not as powerful (1ghz Pentium M, integrated graphics), and I promised myself my next notebook would be powerful (my current Fujitsu P2000 is very portable and complete, but it's slow).
Just to continue on since I'm tired and can't stop rambling, I want a more powerful PC so I can run both Linux and Windows on it at the same time, and I can't wait for system wide metadata markup on Gnome (or KDE, if Gnome is too slow).
Either that, or it is eventually going to make it incredibly accessible for anyone in the world to have a pocket computer/communications device.
You could not magically take the 'money' used to develop/buy these devices and turn it into food for third world countries, and that is not really the problem in the first place (hint: start with corruption, although I won't deny greed and lack of thoughtfulness pay a part in this).
Woops, I'm moderated a "troll" for speaking my mind. Welcome to geek-ville, where automated karma will be used to keep everyone in line. Remind you of any bad science fiction films?
Speaking of bombs.. I have little doubt that it is in the interests of Bush (and friends) to create a distraction during election year and a way to make himself "famous" (does he really care about any of this stuff?).. as well as part of a plan to enable military dominance in space for one country.
Just like the current Iraq campaign may be more about establishing the US as a "pro-active" military state, rather than primarily to do with oil (though a lot of Bush's friends are going to get incredibly rich if the dependency on oil is continued till the day the price HAS to go up).
It may be considered part of a gamble to provide certain people with a lot of power, all the while taking the rest of a country along without full disclosure, with truth distortion, and great risk.
Right. So if you spend two years creating a system of calculations that is "100% right," but find out that it is solving the wrong problem, or your techniques are outdated/there's a better way, or you were too much of a stubborn know-it-all nerd to take important external factors into acccount, are you "100% right?"
While I still think there is an assumption on your part that approaching someone rationally is always going to work, it might also be worth mentioning that the doctor's office could be criminally charged for not adequately protecting patient data.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not their fault that the bank glitched out, and who knows what the other factors are causing problems (illness/unemployment/etc/etc)? Yet you blame the person rather than the computer/company. Welcome to your automated world that best suits beaurocratic nerds.
I am involved in organizing the Toronto GOSLING (getting open source into government). If you are interested in being involved, please email me at vid_goslingslashdot@zooid.org.
I would like to say all the stereotyping, particularly towards french people, is rather pathetic. I'm really quite saddened by this behavior, especially when I see it being rated upwardly. I have known many french people, and they are all different, but most have been great people. Certainly nicer than the close minded stereotyping nerds and other rednecks.
What anyone thinks this behavior achieves I don't know, but I am guessing they are very regressive people whose opinions are not worth very much in the first place.
It seems to me he is trying to help Gnome by criticizing it. Unless we are just supposed to look the other way with what I agree are terrible design decisions made by overly uptight and opinionted designers.
In fact, while I use Gnome, it's really starting to make me believe that it is becoming the interface of the facist hierarchy, with the users given little choice over how things look and work, unless you want to sink down to the registry/file editing level, which is probably going to be obsolete the next version. Windows is a happy chaos by comparison.
Since I got moderated -1 overrated, I should clarify I find it bizarre that someone is happy to be in a blissful state of having things work together when using only one vendor, as opposed to multi party standards. But that's too complicted to explain on slashdot.
Gee, that sure sounds convenient. Almost as convenient as there not being 10 different flash memory formats on the market.
You may be right, I was only commenting on the development of an open source codec. But it is being compared to the Windows Media codec. I would say a solution coded in Java should be about as fast as a C++ solution and perhaps useful for resolutions less than full HDTV on today's PC (which will morph into tomorrow's media centre).
(And when do we see commodity 1920x1080 projectors? Sigh.)
There are lots of great or just good enough codecs out there. Having an open source codec would be great, but the biggest problem today is not getting the best/freest codec but instead is making it available from the average browser. From a practical point of view, it might be more worthwhile resigning oneself and exerting effort to make common formats (Windows, Quicktime) work well from a Linux computer (from my understanding the Mplayer plugin won't stream Windows/Quicktime).
Not that this type of research should be discontinued, of course, but from the numerous projects I've been involved in that used streaming media, common availability was the biggest problem... we often had to produce video for Windows, Quicktime and Real. There are some environments (technophobes, corporations, and government) where you can't install a new plugin.
In fact I think a Java based media streaming applet might be a great solution, since Java has pretty good saturation (although *sigh* there is no entirely free software or open source Java implementation at this moment).
Sheesh, its not the $10 I am complaining about (which is shared with neo-middlemen), it is the constant "reinvention" and artificial markets.
You are so right, and I applaud your cynicism. The only thing that will change this is savvy consumers, hackers, and the GPL.
I think this is incorrect:
2. Don't get too crazy with lumens. The people who do installs say most projectors need between 600 and 800 lumens. The lower the lumens, the longer the bulb lasts.
I haven't seen any correlation between bulb life and lumen output. You do want to pay attention to contrast, though.
Certainly, I said that the money might do some good, somewhere, eventually, although no where the 1:1 it might be if it were truly dedicated and focused people. However, I do not think he deserves any sincere thanks for his efforts as it pretty plainly a publicity ploy, and it's debateable if he should have had the money in the first place.
Do you feel good if a gangster gives money to charity? The gangster secured the money by unlawful means. Gates is not exactly a gangster (his pressure on individuals and companies isn't at gunpoint), but by lawful measures he's no saint and I don't think he should be entitled to real thanks. Let him feel guilty about what's done and really think about how competition and working together might work from his position of high advantage, aside from pressuring and buying everyone off.
Admittedly, my statement is partially an idealized view, but that is something to strive for as much as curing other worldly ills.
He may think otherwise, but Gates is making a calculated decision that it's more advantageous for him to give money away to hoard it. After all, he currently owns the mainstream PC business.
I don't think BillG deserves any credit at all for his "charity" acts. Taking money he gained from convicted anti competitive practices and trying to buy good will is pretty sad. When you look at his initial fumbling attempts at "philanthropy" where he subsidized college students who were already going to be successfull, and makes donations of Microsoft products to third world countries, locking disadvantaged countries with no local expertise and no ability to buy upgrades in, basically creating a dependence, you know it's all a sad self-serving joke.
Sure, the pure "here's a billion dollars, go cure cancer" type projects might achieve something, but wouldn't it be better if individuals had those extra resources in the first place, instead of having god-king Bill Gates the III make their charity decisions for them? Gates is not going to be there on the ground actually doing the research and making sure the money gets to the right places, so its those individuals who are dedicating their lives to these pursuits who should be considered the "heroes" here. I doubt his money's impact on these problems is directly proportional by any means, as you can't just buy dedicated people and most would already be in the field, it's almost entirely a PR wash.
Absolutely. I've often thought it would be nice if non hegemony users would collectively buy hardware that was completely free & open. For maximum effect, "everyone" waits three months for their next purchase, and buys identified, free, open, performant and well supported hardware at the same time, hopefully causing a blip on screens somewhere. With the number of vendors that are out there, it could make some realize the advantages of opening up.
Of course, this is somewhat contrary to the hacker goal of supporting everything that has an (electrical) pulse.
This would be just great for disadvantaged countries, organizations and individuals trying to use email for communcation. It's really thoughtful to keep the less fortunate beholden to the wealthy. They can come begging to Microsoft when they need to rack up some more ability-to-speak credits. Glad to hear Gates is on the ball here.
Yawn. To you and the other people who said the same thing, that was last year's model. They don't use Crusoe any more. Pentium M 1 GHz and better. Totally different story.
Right on. I am trying to convince myself to buy a convertable pc for the reasons you outlined. It IS true that it is almost twice the price of a similar notebook, but it simply does things a regular notebook won't.
I previously had a Fujitsu Lifebook B series, which is nicer in one way than the current tablets; you don't HAVE to use the stylus (you can eg use your fingernail). This makes it even more natural to use. While the new B is also nice (and only three pounds, and not very expensive), it's also not as powerful (1ghz Pentium M, integrated graphics), and I promised myself my next notebook would be powerful (my current Fujitsu P2000 is very portable and complete, but it's slow).
Just to continue on since I'm tired and can't stop rambling, I want a more powerful PC so I can run both Linux and Windows on it at the same time, and I can't wait for system wide metadata markup on Gnome (or KDE, if Gnome is too slow).
Either that, or it is eventually going to make it incredibly accessible for anyone in the world to have a pocket computer/communications device.
You could not magically take the 'money' used to develop/buy these devices and turn it into food for third world countries, and that is not really the problem in the first place (hint: start with corruption, although I won't deny greed and lack of thoughtfulness pay a part in this).
Woops, I'm moderated a "troll" for speaking my mind. Welcome to geek-ville, where automated karma will be used to keep everyone in line. Remind you of any bad science fiction films?
Do you mean conservative, self-important, and quick to put others down?
(That's the stereotype I have, anyway).
What are you? Completely lacking in a sense of humour?
Oh, I get it, you're a self important dweeb.
What do you mean? All I see is "Error. Flash 5 Needed. Download."
Although I don't get how this sells any products.
Speaking of bombs.. I have little doubt that it is in the interests of Bush (and friends) to create a distraction during election year and a way to make himself "famous" (does he really care about any of this stuff?) .. as well as part of a plan to enable military dominance in space for one country.
Just like the current Iraq campaign may be more about establishing the US as a "pro-active" military state, rather than primarily to do with oil (though a lot of Bush's friends are going to get incredibly rich if the dependency on oil is continued till the day the price HAS to go up).
It may be considered part of a gamble to provide certain people with a lot of power, all the while taking the rest of a country along without full disclosure, with truth distortion, and great risk.
Right. So if you spend two years creating a system of calculations that is "100% right," but find out that it is solving the wrong problem, or your techniques are outdated/there's a better way, or you were too much of a stubborn know-it-all nerd to take important external factors into acccount, are you "100% right?"
While I still think there is an assumption on your part that approaching someone rationally is always going to work, it might also be worth mentioning that the doctor's office could be criminally charged for not adequately protecting patient data.