I don't believe there is anything like quickbooks (heck, I have one windows machine around just so I can run Quicken) but there are certainly programs available that would make your life easier.
Has anyone here tried GnuCash? I don't have accounting complicated enough make it worthwhile using accounting software, but I do wonder how it stacks up compared to Quicken...
It seems as if the BBC's standards have fallen, as there are a number of errors in the "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" article. The most significant error is the absurd assumption that it was a "internet zealots who believe that code should be free to all". I say this because of the simple fact that the MyDoom virus opens its victim's machines to be used by spammers as "zombie" machines; that is, computers through which the spammer can send mail and thus retain his own anonymity. Additionally, the leaders of the Open Source and Free Software movements have frequently and specifically condemned actions such as this.
The MyDoom virus was quite likely written at the request of one or more of the larger spammers. Considering that members of the Open Source movement are some of spam's most implacable, and effective, enemies it seems incredibly unlikely that anyone involved with Open Source Software would write a virus designed to benefit the spammers.
Perhaps in the future the BBC's quality would be improved by keeping its business writers occupied with stories of chartered accountancy and letting those who actually understand the subject write about technology.
Slow economy? I'm seeing growth right now, what are you talking about? It was slow a year ago, times are changing...
Growth? I think that you are suffering from carpal tunnel vision, sir. It is difficult to tell *what* the economy is doing because statistics that measure true economic performance aren't gathered; but various indicators seem to be pointing down. Average hourly wage is decreasing, or at best holding steady. Massive layoffs continue at a rather horrifying rate. Most telling though is the sheer number of people applying for low paying jobs. This statistic, applicants per job offered, is not tracked by any agency. However, I do know for a fact that at least 30 people applied for a receptionist job paying $7/hour (I know this because I know the woman who got the job and her first assignment was to call the people who didn't and tell them.) My local Waffle House got 15 applicants for a single waitress position. When that many people are applying for jobs that don't pay very well it tells us something.
Economic news is always reported in the most cheerful and upbeat manner possible, and always has been. The day after the big stock market crash of 1929 (Black Tuesday) featured headlines reading "The Worst Is Over!", and "Stock Market Rallies!". Throughout the depression most major newspapers routinely printed articles about how great the economy was doing. Today we have an unemployment rate that is actually higher than it was during the so-called "Great Depression". More people are homeless per-capita today than in 1930. To me this does not indicate "growth" in the economy; it indicates that things are still very bad. Don't take my word for it, look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics I should mention that after a truly fascinating decision by President Bush, the BLS no longer collects information on mass layoffs. Its one way to deal with a problem I suppose...
BSD is free in all senses of the word...the only thing these guys ask for is for the credit given back to them
Which is why the BSD license isn't my favorite license. I give my source away and get *absolutely*nothing* in return. I'm not that nice, I guess. With the GPL I get more code back. That's what hackers want: code to play with; code to learn from; code to do whatever with. BSD is great if you want to simply give away your work. The GPL is great if you want something back.
WHY? Because they do this for the greater good.
Their programmers don't get all bitchy when someone takes their work and makes a product with it and gets rich while they are left holding a donation hat.
Ahem, not to be nasty but I've got to say that your pro BSD arguments sounded mighty religous to me. Face it, many (not all, but many) form religous attachments to all sorts of things. I see people driving trucks with bumper stickers that say "I'd rather walk than drive a [insert other truck brand here]" Religious attachemnt to things like OSes, trucks, *text*editors*, etc, are silly, but, well, humans are pretty silly sometimes. Your comments looked pretty attached to BSD. Mine may look attached to the GPL to you, I don't know.
Torvalds, now a 34-year-old tech superstar whom some see as the love child of Thomas Edison and Che Guevara,...
Ick. Why would anyone want to compare Linus to that looser Edison? I mean, he invented two bloody things in his entire life, the rest was invented by other people who had signed contracts that gave Edison all rights to their inventions and let him take the credit. I'd say Bill Gates is closer to Edison (remember, Bill didn't actually code anything for DOS or Windows, he hired it done). I suppose I should complain about the Linux/Che comparison too. I don't want this "Free Software == Communism" BS to spread either; but frankly the Edison comparison is more personally offensive to me.
Re:Finally!
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
What I want to know is how many people infected their computers on purpose and how man just didin't remove the virus after they found it? Most prople won't do a criminal act will but ignoring somebody elses?
Actually, as a private computer techie, I've been removing MyDoom from my client's computers for the past couple of days. It really is amazing how fast it's spread...
As a Linux geek I must admit to a small snicker at SCO's misfortune here, but it is definately not the right way to go about solving the SCO problem. All publicity is *NOT* good publicity, and the last thing we need is the world to think "Linux == Geeks spreading virii". I've been taking pains to point out the spam connection with the MyDoom virus, and I think that's the angle we should persue here. I can only hope that the next looser who DOSes SCO gives us as easy an "its not us" angle.
That was a 1984 reference. Eastasia and Eurasia were the mythic two other countries. Big Brothers government was allies with one and fought the other. However all three were really the same government and maintained the "war" as a method of keeping their populations under control. IIRC, Big Brother's country was "Oceania" and included both of the American contenents as well as the British isles.
The Palestinians, maybe? They're not all suicide bombers, but some people don't seem to make the distinction
Looking at PR failures is useful. The Palestinian movement is definately a PR failure, you say the word "Palestinian" and the general public thinks "Suicide Bomber"... [footnote] I don't think that Arafat is solely responsible for this PR failure, but who knows? So, back to the question at hand: what did they do wrong that we can do right?
Because if people say "Free Software" and the general public thinks "Virus writers" we're definately worse off. So far our "leaders" (if such a term can be used with regards to people like us) have done a pretty good job of condemning the nutbags on our side, even admitting that they are (theoretically at least) on our side. Is that all the Palestinians can teach us here? Condemn the bad guys quickly and unambigiously?
.
FOOTNOTE: To try and avoid derails: I'm not saying that its right for the general public to think "Suicide Bomber" when they hear the word Palestinian, I'm just saying that they do. The ethics and rightness of the Palestinian movement isn't the topic I'm trying to raise, the fact that its an enormous PR failure is.
This is going to be a serious blow to the moral credibility of the OSS community, not just Linux users.
It is only a threat to our credibility if we allow it to be. I'm *REALLY* not trying to derail into an abortion debate here, but its the best example I can think of. The anti-abortion movement, in general, doesn't support clinic bombers and assissins; but clinics still get bombed and doctors still get murdered. So far the anti-abortion movement has quite successfully managed to avoid the actions of this group becoming a blow to their own moral credibility.
I'd recommend that we on the side of Free Software study the anti-abortion tactics with dealing with such incidents. The first, and most obvious step, is one that was taken last time: immediate and honest sounding disavowel of the actions of the DOSer. Its going to get old for RMS, ESR, Linus, Perens, etc continuously getting out and saying the same thing ("We don't support this, its wrong. We're still right, but the virus writers aren't with us, etc, etc, etc"), but it needs to happen.
I honestly don't know what the other successfull tactics are. I need to study how the respectable majority in the anti-abortion movement deals with its nutbags. Can anyone think of other movements with similar problems that we should look into?
It was about money. It will cost a fortune, tax payer paid (as opposed to many inventions and discoveries which have been private/corporate sponsored or accidental), which I think could be used for a lot better things. Insane number of children die every day for lack of clean water and mosquito nets. I heard on an interview on NPR that the current Mars mission cost $3 per US citizen. That just seems like a huge waste to me.
I like new arguments! Seriously though, I do understand where you're coming from here. It is true that space travel, fusion power, etc all cost buckets of money. And that even a fraction of that money could make a direct impact on millions of people.
I think my main reason for disagreeing with you about priorities is fairly simple: NASA's budget accounts for less than.5% of the national budget. Its only a "huge fortune" when considered by itself, when taken in the context of the federal budget its nothing. GWB's cronies at Halliburton and Bechtel have, er, skimmed, more than NASA's entire budget out of the past five months budget for Iraq. If we're going to discuss ways in which money could be better spent, I'll say right now that I think the military budget can afford fairly large cuts. Not that we don' need a military, we do. I'm also not saying that we should cut military budegts without cutting military activity, we can't. But we *can* afford to scale back our military presence. We don't need bases in Germany and France, not now that the Soviet threat has vanished. We can afford to put several US military bases worldwide into mothballs. Cut the size of the infantry, focusing on highly trained long term soldiers (this means pay raises for the soldiers of course). Etc. Right now the military budget (once you factor in military foreign aid (almost always given to dictatorships) and suchlike) comes to around 35%-40% of the total national budget.
My point here is that R&D budgets and space budgets are not depriving children of mosqueto netting, clean water, etc. The military budget is the largest and best example of a budget which can be cut down (did you know that the Pentagon recently anounced that it lost several *billion* dollars, not spent wastefully, not spent on military needs, simply lost). Other bits of the budget are equally, or even more, foolishly spent. I live in Texas where a large chunk of federal money goes to mohair goats. I like mohair sweaters, and I certainly don't want to see the goat farmers starve. But I also tend to think that the "magic of the market" ought to be allowed to determine weather mohair goats get money, not government fiat. Tobacco subsidies don't really help tobacco farmers much, they just let the cigarette companies maintain profit margins more than twice what any other industry has. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
As for the space program its probably paid for itself in weather prediction alone. Its potential for future payoff is incredible. More personally, my father's life was extended by technology developed by the space program (specifically, the image enhancing algorithms specifically developed for images returned from various probes were the ones used to make his CAT scan usable).
Finally, you can't assume that simply because NASA isn't getting that money it'll automatically be put into social programs. Odds are it'll be given away in yet another tax cut for the elite instead.
Oh boy. OK, nearly all the launches by anyone other than the US are satellites, and most are by countries or groups of countries with big investments in oil & coal - Russia, France and company, China is on there once or twice. And the most ambitious programs look to be American.
Most launches are satelites, period. The US hasn't been doing a whole lot of ambitious stuff lately. What with every president since Nixon giving NASA an economic beating it isn't surprising that the US hasn't done much lately. Sure, we had a good space program once, then the idiots in Washington threw it away. At this point, unless Bush's space initiative actually goes somewhere, I'm having to bet on some other nation. I don't like that, as an American I would much rather the US was at the forefront, but that's the breaks. True no one else has put people on the moon, but the US hasn't put anyone on the moon in 40 years. Hardly a "proven ability to get into space and do anything there." A proven ability to go once and then throw the whole thing away, feh.
Yeah, thanks. I just was saying what it sounded like.
And you convenienly ignored my point that "moon whatever" sounds like a line from those cheesy 1950's movies. Moon-men, moon-steel, moon-industry, moon-dust. As I pointed out, "lunar" is a real word, used by real people, to describe real things. It isn't "warp factor 5" trekkie talk. Also, as I just said (again) it sure sounds less cheesy than putting "moon" in front of everything.
oh my. Well, hope you enjoy those fortunes. And don't get all "we're the dreamers that make dreams come true" on me. Because I'm not subscribing to your newsletter doesn't make me a luddite. How nice of you to put yourself in the camp of the geniuses and me on the idiot sideline. "People like you..." wow. Does this little speach have a soundtrack?
Well, I was thinking of the soundrack from "Patton" where he made the big speech:) OK, I got carried away there, sorry.
You have come off rather opposed to advance though. "I really am not very enthusastic about expensive space missions that don't really have a tangible purpose (upping morale might be a purpose, learning about other planets or peripheral advances in science because of the missions are not)." for example. Historically blue sky research has always paid off. Quite a few of the things we take for granted today are the direct result of expensive projects that didn't have a tangible purpose. I'll agree that at the moment a manned mission to Mars isn't really a great idea. We'd be much better off focusing on developing industry on the moon, and in orbit. In ten or fifteen years a Mars mission (possibly a one way trip, to set down the first wave of colonists) would be a good idea. Right now we need a) A big space station to use as a docking and refueling platform, and b) a perminant settlement on the moon.
As for geniuses, most of the people I listed weren't, in my book anyway, the geniuses. To me genius is the incredibly rare ability to come up with something genuinely new. Often the genius doesn't manage to build a really good working model. The Wright brothers weren't the first to try heavier than air flight, they weren't even the first to try it using non-stupid methods (ornothopters, etc). The genius had already happened, they were "merely" very clever men. Tesla counts as a genius (and a wacko to boot! Though a wacko who did manage to build working models of his genius).
I put myself in the category of people who have studied history, nothing more. Historically, betting on things to stay the same hasn't paid off; not in the long term. Which is where the "people like you" line came from. You sound quite certain that the current vested interests will prevent fusion from getting off the ground, that space travel is merely a fantasy of feavered science fiction freaks, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's certainly the impression you've given me in these posts, a cynical "grow up kid, that stuff'll never happen" seems to be the central pillar of your arguments. If I've misunderstood your point, please let me know. And I'll try to stay away from "people like you" speeches.
That's quite an absurd stretch.
There will ALWAYS be a market for commercial, closed software. In fact, if commercial software vendors went out of business, then people programming as a hobby and contributing to open source, would lose their jobs, and their means of support, and this would have a negative impact on the amount of man-hours dumped into open source, in general.
I didn't mean to imply that there wouldn't be. I'm just saying that as the OSS/Free Software movement matures several of the areas that have traditionally been profitable for propriatary software will loose their profitability. Operating System software is the first and most obvious fatality. Web browsers have long been the domain of free (at least as in beer). Other software is iffy, possibly commercial office software (word processors, spread sheets, etc) will be able to survive, possibly it won't. Those who make money selling office software are definately threatened by free software.
Other things won't be threatened much at all. Video games, for example, will probably continue being propriatary for a long time. It takes quite a bit of concentrated effort to make a game, and the easiest way to get that much effort concentrated is money. Office packages and suchlike don't change too much, word processors are word processors. Todays have more features, of course, but they're still word processors. Additonally there is the issue of content, you have to get it somehow, and again its quite easy to get game content by using money.
My point wasn't that free software would completely replace propriatary software, simply that it will replace several proporatary software producers. As you say, its symbiotic. We need both to make things happen.
True we're not the only nation out there. But there aren't a lot of other nations with the proven ability to get into space and do anything there.
Um, you need to stop using FOX as your sole newssource friend. The number of US launches is about the same as the number of launches worldwide. Look here and see for yourself. True, the US accounts for more launches than any other group (ESA, etc), but the others are hardly sitting around doing nothing. Pleanty of other nations going forth and doing things.
OK, so NASA uses the term Lunar. Then again, they are arguably the last holdout of the short sleeve dress shirt and tie look. I guess it sounds a little too sci-fi to me to use the term Lunar for anything not already on the moon.
Sneer not that the nerds, for they are the ones who make things happen. Name anything that has made life better and it invariably came from people who wore pocket protectors. Cars, TV, porn, air travel, refrigeration, you name it, a nerd started it. As for the term sounding "sci fi", I think you're kinda off. If I said "moon steel", to me that'd sound too much like those *BAD* 1950's movies where they tossed the word moon in front of everything ("Got your moon-suits on boys? The moon-men warned us that the moon-dust caused moon-sickness!"). Besides, its the accurate term, I don't call a radio a "wireless telegraph", and I don't call airplanes "heavier than air flying machines". When you make X on the moon, its "lunar X". The period of time between sunrise and sunset (roughly 14 days) on the moon is called the "bright semi-lunar", and the other period is called the "dark semi-lunar". And so forth, lunar is a real word meaning real things, not an indication of science ficiton addiction.
Comparing investment in the moon to investing in Columbus's voyage sure makes it seem way long term. Most people seem to like quarterly results, the patient will wait for yearly returns. This seems quite a bit longer.
Those of us with a bit of foresight will enjoy large rewards. People like you, those who sneered at the Wright brothers and assured us in confidant tones that heavier than air flight was impossible. Those who laughed and shouted "get a horse" to those who built early automobiles. Those who swore that rockets couldn't possibly work in a vacuum (where there is nothing to react against). Those who knew that smallpox would forever make us ill. Those who knew that the atomic bomb couldn't work. You are history's loosers. In the real world wild and wonderful things happen, and I often pity those who, like you, cannot concieve of a world different and better than the one you were born into.
We will go to the moon, and Mars, and the stars, for many of the same reasons that Colombus went to America. Out of greed, for one. There are riches for the taking out there. Out of lust for land and power, for another. Malcontents have always wanted to leave the confines of civilized areas and strike out on their own in a frontier. Out of a desire to see new things, and to be the first to reach a place. Those who bet on the frontier rarely lost. If most people aren't daring enough to invest early, well, more power and wealth will come to those who do dare.
I didn't know that Japan had been chosen for the reactor. Last I heard the French were crying that if they didn't get it, they were going to build their own.
Actually, so far as I know, the decision hasn't been made yet. I said that Japan was "set to get it", which is true, the smart money is on Japan. But who knows?
Personally, I wish the decision would be made on practical grounds, but that isn't happening. The US government is aggitating for Japan simply to spite the French; weather Japan is the best site for the reactor or not isn't important at all...
Second, don't hold your breath waiting for politicians to approve spending that will destroy the coal and oil industries. It may seem like a swell idea, but the collective worth of the coal and oil industries will be fighting it.
The USA isn't the only nation on Earth, don't forget that. Japan is set to be the site of the newest research fusion reactor, they have no fossil fuels of any sort and seriously dislike the vulnerarble position this puts them in (Japan's invasion of China during WWII was partially due to their need for Chinese coal and oil). As an American, I'd much rather see the US be at the forefront of this effort; its the future. As a human, I'm glad that *someone* is doing it, regardless of which nation.
First off, according to the linked articles (what? you read those?) the fusion reactors that would use this energy source don't work yet.
Keyword here is "yet". I know that for the past 40 years people have been saying "fusion is just 5 years away", but this time it really does look possible. The newest research fusion reactor is expected to be the last research fusion reactor. Because they believe that the next one will be commercial. Right now research reactors are getting 99% efficiency (meaning it takes only 1% more energy than they produce to keep the reaction going). The new research reactor is planned to be quite a bit larger than all the previous ones, there's a good chance that simply scaling up will push them over the edge to power surplus. Fusion will happen, and it will happen in our lifetimes. Weather the US is leading the way or not is a totally different question.
And finally, we need to keep a little perspective. Don't run out and buy your stock in Lunar Industries Inc. just yet. It's going to take a long time, especially until there's any profit.
I never said it'd be a short term investment, just that it'd be worthwhile. Invest early and your grandchildren will thank you. If Colombus had sold stock it wouldn't have paid off early, but the ultimate payoff would have been incredible.
And talking about Terran this and Lunar that is just going to make you look like a sci fi freak, and I don't think you'll be taken very seriously.
Ahem, I preseume this is because I said "Lunar Steel", then later mentioned that it would be chaper than "terran steel"? WTF? Personally I think saying "moon steel", and "Earth steel" sounds (simply due to the sounds of the words) dumb. More to the point, what did NASA call its *MOON* lander? If you said "LEM", you win the prize, and what did LEM stand for? Why *LUNAR* Exploration Module. Gee, those stupid sci fi freaks at NASA, no one will ever take them seriously. Sheesh...
Keep in mind that getting off the moon is no where near as difficult as getting off the Earth. And once you get part of the way back (don't recall exact distance offhand, something like a 1/3 of the way, I think), gravity will do the rest
Easier than that, even. It's a matter of energy, not distance. Since the moon's field is only 1/6th that of Earth it takes something like 1/10th of the energy to get something into lunar orbit. A bit more pushes it over the edge and into the Earth's gravity well. Then, as you point out, gravity does the rest. A paracute, or breaking rocket, to soften the landing and all is well. The lunar end could be done by a relatively small magnetic catapult, probably less than 10km long. Easily powered by solar energy, once its built the operational costs would be next to zero.
Which is nice because lunar aluminum, silicone, etc will be what we build virtually any big orbital structure out of. Why import steel from Earth? Foamed aluminum (simple to make on the moon) is almost as strong, and much cheaper to get than terran steel. If we can find some iron (possible, even if its just remnents of meteors) that's easy to mine, Lunar Steel stands to make a killing as well.
When I think of the moon's future I think of Detroit (in its hayday) or Osaka, the moon is going to be the hub of space construction. Everything from ships, to satelites, to space stations. Invest early people, it'll be worth it in the long run.
What I don't get, is why in the name of all that is holy, would Darl do this. It's so outrageous and so distracting from the issue at hand, that either this is a very stupid/insane man, or, he's up to something else and this is a funny distraction.
He's up to something. The simple fact is that free software/open source is, if successfull, going to be the death of quite a few software companies. Or, if not their death, at least seriously hit their profits. As MS demonstrated so successfully against Netscape (and numerous others) you can't outcompete free. Darl, as well as anyone else who makes money selling software that is seeing open source begin encroaching on its territory, wants it dead.
As has been pointed out earlier, SCO's position here is that any GPLed software, if the GPL is declared invalid, would be released to the public domain. They want "free as in we can grab it and sell it for money" software. Free as in, you do the work, they take the profit and give you zilch, software. Darl and company doesn't just want IBM to give them billions, and every Linux user worldwide to give them $699. They want Linux, the FSF, and every single free software project on Earth dead and ruined. The reason we hackers are so opposed, in viscrial and emotional ways, to SCO's attack is because they are attempting to destroy what we've spent 20 years building.
Too bad you're a stupid elitist asshole who only watches anime when his Mac crashes. Go buy a copy of Mobile Suit Gundam and maybe consider talking to a living human girl in person. (Girls in a coma don't count either smartass.)
I shouldn't bother replying, but... My post contained a tiney element called "humor", obviously something you missed. To put it in streight, non-humorous terms: what genre of anime you like is a matter of taste, just like the flavor of ice-cream you like. Personally, I don't much care for Giant Robot anime. You obviously do. There's nothing wrong with GR anime, I just happen to not like it.
I did think the girls in comas line was kinda funny (you *were* tyring to make a Shinji/Asuka joke there, right?) As for my computer, I'm afraid its a homebrew Athalon running Gentoo Linux. Macs are nice computers, but I can't afford to pay an extra %10-%20 for the "Apple Image" (TM).
As for MSG, I will simply add that it, like roughly 99% of all Giant Robot anime (and the game BattleTech) turns me off for the simple military reason that when I see something 20 meters tall I think "wow, what a huge *target*!!" then loose interest. Again, its a matter of taste, people like GR anime and that's fine; I just happen not to. Some people like Sailor Moon (some even like it for non-hentai reasons), again, I can't get into it.
Who then would you cast to play Ritsuko, then? There are no Japanese people that look like Ritsuko. I'd be more disapointed if Japanese actors were used over actors that actually "look" like the anime characters.
Just about anyone. Its irrational to expect Hollywood to go with a completel Asian cast, and it probably wouldn't be a good idea. I tend to agree with the people echoing the "invisible Asians" meme, Hollywood really does tend to avoid Asians in major roles, and it'd be nice to see at least a few of the main parts in NGE cast with Asians. But any particular character could be played by someone from just about any ethnic group.
I wasn't the original poster demanding an all Asian cast, I was just pointing out that the characters in the anime were, actually, supposed to be Japanese (except for Asuka). I was kinda dissapointed that we didn't see a cast list thread. I can't play that game because I have the wrost memory for face/name combinations I've ever run across, but I always like seeing the ideas people come up with for their ideal cast.
There is no way that this lady is supposed to be Japanese.
Maybe in some crazy alternate universe where Japanese people are indistinguishable from Europeans, but not this one.
Yup, she's supposed to be Japanese. She doesn't look European to me, kinda generic. The blonde hair could be seen as an European trait, but a) most anime characters have "different" hair color, and b) its mentioned in the series that she bleaches it. Asians don't see themselves as being "slant eyed" any more than Europeans see themselves as having "big noses"; which, in case you didn't know, is the Asian stereotype of European appearance. Ayanami Rei, from NGE, has pale blue hair and red eyes, which is hardly typical for any human group, again it is simply to distinguish the character, the fact that her name is Japanese is supposed to be read as meaning that the character is Japanese
Typically anime characters are drawn without any particular ethnic traits. Their nationality/ethnicity is shown in their name and almost nowhere else. See Bubblegum Crisis for an example of this. In BGC the characters are supposed to be of multiple nationalities, with only a few Japanese characters. They all look roughly the same. Only the fact that Nene Romonova has a Russian name shows that she is supposed to be Russian, for example. The major exception to this is that in anime and manga black characters are often depicted in a, to my eyes anyway, quite racist manner (exagerated huge lips, etc). This trend seems to be dying out, with artists such as Shirow Masamune leading the way.
So, basically, yes, Ritsuko is supposed to be Japanese, and no Japanese person would see the character and think she looks European. Its just supposed to look kinda generic.
Why? Most *anime* I've seen doesn't have very many Japanese characters. Sure, their *names* are Japanese, but that's about it.
In fact, Evangelion itself seems to have the standard mostly-caucasian cast.
Ummm, the cast (with the exception of Asuka who was half German) was supposed to be all Japanese.
Most Westerners misinterperate the "anime look" as "caucasian". Its simply the way they're drawn, big eyes make it easy to display emotion. Weird hair colors make it easy to tell the differences between characters. But, no, the majority of characters in anime and manga aren't supposed to be caucasian, and (to the Japanese) don't look caucasian (side note: since no human genotype actually has eyes the size of headlights, it can be argued that anime style characters don't look like any branch of humanity; but I'm not going to go there).
In Eva, specifically, not only were the characters supposed to be Japanese, but with many of them the accents and behavior steriotyping was supposed to be specific to a particular part of Japan (the tough talking, kinda jerkish Johji, is supposed to be from Osaka, for example).
Have you see any 'live acrion' Japanese TV shows? I'd have tro say that Americans do a better job.
Gotta disagree with you somewhat here. *In*general* American live action is better, but when we try to remake an anime as a live action things get bad really quickly. Guyver, for example. As an anime it was only mildly bad, but the American live action remake was so horribly bad it should be featured on MST3K. Likewise Fist of the North Star (which also wasn't very good as an anime, but after lots of money and old fashion American know how, was much worse as a live action).
Now, for quality entertainment the American game show industry should be trying to immitate the Japanese game show industry. For sheer sadistic entertainment nothing beats a Japanese game show.
How dare they spell a word which was written in JAPANESE originally differently from the way I've seen it written using latin characters before!!
Heh. Funny, and valid up to a point. I tend to agree with you in general (after all, the name was originally written in Kanji), but I also like to pick nits, so: There are a couple of standard ways to spell Japanese in Latin characters, none of them would spell her name "Ray". More importantly, when you spell it "Ray" I tend to think of a fat dude wearing a bowling shirt with his name embroidered on the pocket, which isn't quite the image I want:)
and with the best of luck it will bring the Giant Robot Genre into mainstream Hollywood.
Not to start a flamewar here, but I hope to all the gods that aren't that Hollywood never learns about the Giant Robot genre. Of all the bad ideas to come out of Japan, please let them choose another. I liked Eva *dispite* the presence of the damn Giant Robots, not because of them. Giant Robot anime is only worth watching when other elements (plot, character interaciton, etc) manage to trancend the generally lousyness of the Giant Robots. Eva and Gunbuster both managed it, most never do. Give Hollywood Giant Robots and they'll make movies that are *even*worse* than the drek they spew out today.
I realize that I'm obviously in a minority here. After the, IMO, wonderful last TV episodes there apparently came a great shout from the fanbase: [Luke Skywalker type whine]"What was all that plot for? We wanted to see giant robots fighting!"[/Luke Skywalker type whine] and thus was created "Death and Rebirth", which added nothing to the plot, but did have a bunch of giant robots fighting... Ick. And, yes, I do know that I'm arguing a matter of taste: I have taste, and the giant robot fans don't [heh heh heh]
The Linux/Unix community needs to discard the entire command line mentality and start paying serious attention to ease-of-use and interface issues before ordinary people will take seriously their claim that they and their computer environment is somehow actually better than Windows.
Um. No, I think you're completely wrong here. While it is definately true that Linux needs better GUI tools (Mandrake has a very nice, but not yet finished set, as does Redhat) the idea of giving up the command line is preposterous.
I certainly expect to see the day (maybe this year) when the average Linux user never sees a CLI, or even knows what one is. BUT, the CLI will remain an essential and critical part of Linux (and all Unixes) forever due to its inherent utility and power. In Windows the config files are hard to find, written in a format that is only machine readable, and if the GUI doesn't have an option for doing what you want, you're screwed. Compare to Linux where the config files are easy to find, human readable, and if the GUI doesn't have an option for doing what you want it isn't really much of a hassle. We need better GUIs, yes, absolutely. Joe User needs to be able to do pretty much everything from a GUI. But the CLI is indespensable to those who need to do real work, and will not dissapear.
If SCO wins and manages to keep the court evidence sealed, things are bad for Linux in general. They can simply go around and demand liscense fees from anybody using Linux, without ever telling anyone exactly what it is they're paying for, and the Linux community would be more or less helpless to remove the offending code short of re-writing anything in the kernal whose origin can't be totally nailed down.
Yup, and that's about the worst case scenario I can imagine. However we already know the modules they claim infringe, also there can't be that much code of uncertain origin. Even if we assume that the worst happens it isn't going to set us back more than six or eight months.
Remember, we (the geek community at large) raised $20k for Wikipedia in less than 24 hours. If my access to a free and open OS is threatened I'll gladly eat rice for a month to be able to donate a couple hundred to the "massive kernel hack project". I'm sure I'm not alone here. Of course, even if SCO managed to get Linus and company tossed in jail, and all rights to the entire Linux kernel transfered to them (unlikely to the point of being all but impossible) we'd still be able to run *BSD, the Hurd, etc. My point here is that the most likely worst case won't set us back more than a few months, and even in the ultimate extreme we've still got free OSes out there. No Linux geek will ever buy a SCO license, not today, not tomorrow, not ever.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Sir,
It seems as if the BBC's standards have fallen, as there are a number of errors in the "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" article.
The most significant error is the absurd assumption that it was a "internet zealots who believe that code should be free to all". I say this because of the simple fact that the MyDoom virus opens its victim's machines to be used by spammers as "zombie" machines; that is, computers through which the spammer can send mail and thus retain his own anonymity.
Additionally, the leaders of the Open Source and Free Software movements have frequently and specifically condemned actions such as this.
The MyDoom virus was quite likely written at the request of one or more of the larger spammers. Considering that members of the Open Source movement are some of spam's most implacable, and effective, enemies it seems incredibly unlikely that anyone involved with Open Source Software would write a virus designed to benefit the spammers.
Perhaps in the future the BBC's quality would be improved by keeping its business writers occupied with stories of chartered accountancy and letting those who actually understand the subject write about technology.
Economic news is always reported in the most cheerful and upbeat manner possible, and always has been. The day after the big stock market crash of 1929 (Black Tuesday) featured headlines reading "The Worst Is Over!", and "Stock Market Rallies!". Throughout the depression most major newspapers routinely printed articles about how great the economy was doing. Today we have an unemployment rate that is actually higher than it was during the so-called "Great Depression". More people are homeless per-capita today than in 1930. To me this does not indicate "growth" in the economy; it indicates that things are still very bad. Don't take my word for it, look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics I should mention that after a truly fascinating decision by President Bush, the BLS no longer collects information on mass layoffs. Its one way to deal with a problem I suppose...
Ahem, not to be nasty but I've got to say that your pro BSD arguments sounded mighty religous to me. Face it, many (not all, but many) form religous attachments to all sorts of things. I see people driving trucks with bumper stickers that say "I'd rather walk than drive a [insert other truck brand here]" Religious attachemnt to things like OSes, trucks, *text*editors*, etc, are silly, but, well, humans are pretty silly sometimes. Your comments looked pretty attached to BSD. Mine may look attached to the GPL to you, I don't know.
As a Linux geek I must admit to a small snicker at SCO's misfortune here, but it is definately not the right way to go about solving the SCO problem. All publicity is *NOT* good publicity, and the last thing we need is the world to think "Linux == Geeks spreading virii". I've been taking pains to point out the spam connection with the MyDoom virus, and I think that's the angle we should persue here. I can only hope that the next looser who DOSes SCO gives us as easy an "its not us" angle.
Because if people say "Free Software" and the general public thinks "Virus writers" we're definately worse off. So far our "leaders" (if such a term can be used with regards to people like us) have done a pretty good job of condemning the nutbags on our side, even admitting that they are (theoretically at least) on our side. Is that all the Palestinians can teach us here? Condemn the bad guys quickly and unambigiously?
.
FOOTNOTE: To try and avoid derails: I'm not saying that its right for the general public to think "Suicide Bomber" when they hear the word Palestinian, I'm just saying that they do. The ethics and rightness of the Palestinian movement isn't the topic I'm trying to raise, the fact that its an enormous PR failure is.
I'd recommend that we on the side of Free Software study the anti-abortion tactics with dealing with such incidents. The first, and most obvious step, is one that was taken last time: immediate and honest sounding disavowel of the actions of the DOSer. Its going to get old for RMS, ESR, Linus, Perens, etc continuously getting out and saying the same thing ("We don't support this, its wrong. We're still right, but the virus writers aren't with us, etc, etc, etc"), but it needs to happen.
I honestly don't know what the other successfull tactics are. I need to study how the respectable majority in the anti-abortion movement deals with its nutbags. Can anyone think of other movements with similar problems that we should look into?
I think my main reason for disagreeing with you about priorities is fairly simple: NASA's budget accounts for less than .5% of the national budget. Its only a "huge fortune" when considered by itself, when taken in the context of the federal budget its nothing. GWB's cronies at Halliburton and Bechtel have, er, skimmed, more than NASA's entire budget out of the past five months budget for Iraq. If we're going to discuss ways in which money could be better spent, I'll say right now that I think the military budget can afford fairly large cuts. Not that we don' need a military, we do. I'm also not saying that we should cut military budegts without cutting military activity, we can't. But we *can* afford to scale back our military presence. We don't need bases in Germany and France, not now that the Soviet threat has vanished. We can afford to put several US military bases worldwide into mothballs. Cut the size of the infantry, focusing on highly trained long term soldiers (this means pay raises for the soldiers of course). Etc. Right now the military budget (once you factor in military foreign aid (almost always given to dictatorships) and suchlike) comes to around 35%-40% of the total national budget.
My point here is that R&D budgets and space budgets are not depriving children of mosqueto netting, clean water, etc. The military budget is the largest and best example of a budget which can be cut down (did you know that the Pentagon recently anounced that it lost several *billion* dollars, not spent wastefully, not spent on military needs, simply lost). Other bits of the budget are equally, or even more, foolishly spent. I live in Texas where a large chunk of federal money goes to mohair goats. I like mohair sweaters, and I certainly don't want to see the goat farmers starve. But I also tend to think that the "magic of the market" ought to be allowed to determine weather mohair goats get money, not government fiat. Tobacco subsidies don't really help tobacco farmers much, they just let the cigarette companies maintain profit margins more than twice what any other industry has. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
As for the space program its probably paid for itself in weather prediction alone. Its potential for future payoff is incredible. More personally, my father's life was extended by technology developed by the space program (specifically, the image enhancing algorithms specifically developed for images returned from various probes were the ones used to make his CAT scan usable).
Finally, you can't assume that simply because NASA isn't getting that money it'll automatically be put into social programs. Odds are it'll be given away in yet another tax cut for the elite instead.
And you convenienly ignored my point that "moon whatever" sounds like a line from those cheesy 1950's movies. Moon-men, moon-steel, moon-industry, moon-dust. As I pointed out, "lunar" is a real word, used by real people, to describe real things. It isn't "warp factor 5" trekkie talk. Also, as I just said (again) it sure sounds less cheesy than putting "moon" in front of everything.
Well, I was thinking of the soundrack from "Patton" where he made the big speech
You have come off rather opposed to advance though. "I really am not very enthusastic about expensive space missions that don't really have a tangible purpose (upping morale might be a purpose, learning about other planets or peripheral advances in science because of the missions are not)." for example. Historically blue sky research has always paid off. Quite a few of the things we take for granted today are the direct result of expensive projects that didn't have a tangible purpose. I'll agree that at the moment a manned mission to Mars isn't really a great idea. We'd be much better off focusing on developing industry on the moon, and in orbit. In ten or fifteen years a Mars mission (possibly a one way trip, to set down the first wave of colonists) would be a good idea. Right now we need a) A big space station to use as a docking and refueling platform, and b) a perminant settlement on the moon.
As for geniuses, most of the people I listed weren't, in my book anyway, the geniuses. To me genius is the incredibly rare ability to come up with something genuinely new. Often the genius doesn't manage to build a really good working model. The Wright brothers weren't the first to try heavier than air flight, they weren't even the first to try it using non-stupid methods (ornothopters, etc). The genius had already happened, they were "merely" very clever men. Tesla counts as a genius (and a wacko to boot! Though a wacko who did manage to build working models of his genius).
I put myself in the category of people who have studied history, nothing more. Historically, betting on things to stay the same hasn't paid off; not in the long term. Which is where the "people like you" line came from. You sound quite certain that the current vested interests will prevent fusion from getting off the ground, that space travel is merely a fantasy of feavered science fiction freaks, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's certainly the impression you've given me in these posts, a cynical "grow up kid, that stuff'll never happen" seems to be the central pillar of your arguments. If I've misunderstood your point, please let me know. And I'll try to stay away from "people like you" speeches.
Other things won't be threatened much at all. Video games, for example, will probably continue being propriatary for a long time. It takes quite a bit of concentrated effort to make a game, and the easiest way to get that much effort concentrated is money. Office packages and suchlike don't change too much, word processors are word processors. Todays have more features, of course, but they're still word processors. Additonally there is the issue of content, you have to get it somehow, and again its quite easy to get game content by using money.
My point wasn't that free software would completely replace propriatary software, simply that it will replace several proporatary software producers. As you say, its symbiotic. We need both to make things happen.
Sneer not that the nerds, for they are the ones who make things happen. Name anything that has made life better and it invariably came from people who wore pocket protectors. Cars, TV, porn, air travel, refrigeration, you name it, a nerd started it. As for the term sounding "sci fi", I think you're kinda off. If I said "moon steel", to me that'd sound too much like those *BAD* 1950's movies where they tossed the word moon in front of everything ("Got your moon-suits on boys? The moon-men warned us that the moon-dust caused moon-sickness!"). Besides, its the accurate term, I don't call a radio a "wireless telegraph", and I don't call airplanes "heavier than air flying machines". When you make X on the moon, its "lunar X". The period of time between sunrise and sunset (roughly 14 days) on the moon is called the "bright semi-lunar", and the other period is called the "dark semi-lunar". And so forth, lunar is a real word meaning real things, not an indication of science ficiton addiction.
Those of us with a bit of foresight will enjoy large rewards. People like you, those who sneered at the Wright brothers and assured us in confidant tones that heavier than air flight was impossible. Those who laughed and shouted "get a horse" to those who built early automobiles. Those who swore that rockets couldn't possibly work in a vacuum (where there is nothing to react against). Those who knew that smallpox would forever make us ill. Those who knew that the atomic bomb couldn't work. You are history's loosers. In the real world wild and wonderful things happen, and I often pity those who, like you, cannot concieve of a world different and better than the one you were born into.
We will go to the moon, and Mars, and the stars, for many of the same reasons that Colombus went to America. Out of greed, for one. There are riches for the taking out there. Out of lust for land and power, for another. Malcontents have always wanted to leave the confines of civilized areas and strike out on their own in a frontier. Out of a desire to see new things, and to be the first to reach a place. Those who bet on the frontier rarely lost. If most people aren't daring enough to invest early, well, more power and wealth will come to those who do dare.
Personally, I wish the decision would be made on practical grounds, but that isn't happening. The US government is aggitating for Japan simply to spite the French; weather Japan is the best site for the reactor or not isn't important at all...
Keyword here is "yet". I know that for the past 40 years people have been saying "fusion is just 5 years away", but this time it really does look possible. The newest research fusion reactor is expected to be the last research fusion reactor. Because they believe that the next one will be commercial. Right now research reactors are getting 99% efficiency (meaning it takes only 1% more energy than they produce to keep the reaction going). The new research reactor is planned to be quite a bit larger than all the previous ones, there's a good chance that simply scaling up will push them over the edge to power surplus. Fusion will happen, and it will happen in our lifetimes. Weather the US is leading the way or not is a totally different question.
I never said it'd be a short term investment, just that it'd be worthwhile. Invest early and your grandchildren will thank you. If Colombus had sold stock it wouldn't have paid off early, but the ultimate payoff would have been incredible.
Ahem, I preseume this is because I said "Lunar Steel", then later mentioned that it would be chaper than "terran steel"? WTF? Personally I think saying "moon steel", and "Earth steel" sounds (simply due to the sounds of the words) dumb. More to the point, what did NASA call its *MOON* lander? If you said "LEM", you win the prize, and what did LEM stand for? Why *LUNAR* Exploration Module. Gee, those stupid sci fi freaks at NASA, no one will ever take them seriously. Sheesh...
Which is nice because lunar aluminum, silicone, etc will be what we build virtually any big orbital structure out of. Why import steel from Earth? Foamed aluminum (simple to make on the moon) is almost as strong, and much cheaper to get than terran steel. If we can find some iron (possible, even if its just remnents of meteors) that's easy to mine, Lunar Steel stands to make a killing as well.
When I think of the moon's future I think of Detroit (in its hayday) or Osaka, the moon is going to be the hub of space construction. Everything from ships, to satelites, to space stations. Invest early people, it'll be worth it in the long run.
As has been pointed out earlier, SCO's position here is that any GPLed software, if the GPL is declared invalid, would be released to the public domain. They want "free as in we can grab it and sell it for money" software. Free as in, you do the work, they take the profit and give you zilch, software. Darl and company doesn't just want IBM to give them billions, and every Linux user worldwide to give them $699. They want Linux, the FSF, and every single free software project on Earth dead and ruined. The reason we hackers are so opposed, in viscrial and emotional ways, to SCO's attack is because they are attempting to destroy what we've spent 20 years building.
I did think the girls in comas line was kinda funny (you *were* tyring to make a Shinji/Asuka joke there, right?) As for my computer, I'm afraid its a homebrew Athalon running Gentoo Linux. Macs are nice computers, but I can't afford to pay an extra %10-%20 for the "Apple Image" (TM).
As for MSG, I will simply add that it, like roughly 99% of all Giant Robot anime (and the game BattleTech) turns me off for the simple military reason that when I see something 20 meters tall I think "wow, what a huge *target*!!" then loose interest. Again, its a matter of taste, people like GR anime and that's fine; I just happen not to. Some people like Sailor Moon (some even like it for non-hentai reasons), again, I can't get into it.
I wasn't the original poster demanding an all Asian cast, I was just pointing out that the characters in the anime were, actually, supposed to be Japanese (except for Asuka). I was kinda dissapointed that we didn't see a cast list thread. I can't play that game because I have the wrost memory for face/name combinations I've ever run across, but I always like seeing the ideas people come up with for their ideal cast.
Typically anime characters are drawn without any particular ethnic traits. Their nationality/ethnicity is shown in their name and almost nowhere else. See Bubblegum Crisis for an example of this. In BGC the characters are supposed to be of multiple nationalities, with only a few Japanese characters. They all look roughly the same. Only the fact that Nene Romonova has a Russian name shows that she is supposed to be Russian, for example. The major exception to this is that in anime and manga black characters are often depicted in a, to my eyes anyway, quite racist manner (exagerated huge lips, etc). This trend seems to be dying out, with artists such as Shirow Masamune leading the way.
So, basically, yes, Ritsuko is supposed to be Japanese, and no Japanese person would see the character and think she looks European. Its just supposed to look kinda generic.
Most Westerners misinterperate the "anime look" as "caucasian". Its simply the way they're drawn, big eyes make it easy to display emotion. Weird hair colors make it easy to tell the differences between characters. But, no, the majority of characters in anime and manga aren't supposed to be caucasian, and (to the Japanese) don't look caucasian (side note: since no human genotype actually has eyes the size of headlights, it can be argued that anime style characters don't look like any branch of humanity; but I'm not going to go there).
In Eva, specifically, not only were the characters supposed to be Japanese, but with many of them the accents and behavior steriotyping was supposed to be specific to a particular part of Japan (the tough talking, kinda jerkish Johji, is supposed to be from Osaka, for example).
Now, for quality entertainment the American game show industry should be trying to immitate the Japanese game show industry. For sheer sadistic entertainment nothing beats a Japanese game show.
Not to start a flamewar here, but I hope to all the gods that aren't that Hollywood never learns about the Giant Robot genre. Of all the bad ideas to come out of Japan, please let them choose another. I liked Eva *dispite* the presence of the damn Giant Robots, not because of them. Giant Robot anime is only worth watching when other elements (plot, character interaciton, etc) manage to trancend the generally lousyness of the Giant Robots. Eva and Gunbuster both managed it, most never do. Give Hollywood Giant Robots and they'll make movies that are *even*worse* than the drek they spew out today.
I realize that I'm obviously in a minority here. After the, IMO, wonderful last TV episodes there apparently came a great shout from the fanbase: [Luke Skywalker type whine]"What was all that plot for? We wanted to see giant robots fighting!"[/Luke Skywalker type whine] and thus was created "Death and Rebirth", which added nothing to the plot, but did have a bunch of giant robots fighting... Ick. And, yes, I do know that I'm arguing a matter of taste: I have taste, and the giant robot fans don't [heh heh heh]
I certainly expect to see the day (maybe this year) when the average Linux user never sees a CLI, or even knows what one is. BUT, the CLI will remain an essential and critical part of Linux (and all Unixes) forever due to its inherent utility and power. In Windows the config files are hard to find, written in a format that is only machine readable, and if the GUI doesn't have an option for doing what you want, you're screwed. Compare to Linux where the config files are easy to find, human readable, and if the GUI doesn't have an option for doing what you want it isn't really much of a hassle. We need better GUIs, yes, absolutely. Joe User needs to be able to do pretty much everything from a GUI. But the CLI is indespensable to those who need to do real work, and will not dissapear.
Remember, we (the geek community at large) raised $20k for Wikipedia in less than 24 hours. If my access to a free and open OS is threatened I'll gladly eat rice for a month to be able to donate a couple hundred to the "massive kernel hack project". I'm sure I'm not alone here. Of course, even if SCO managed to get Linus and company tossed in jail, and all rights to the entire Linux kernel transfered to them (unlikely to the point of being all but impossible) we'd still be able to run *BSD, the Hurd, etc. My point here is that the most likely worst case won't set us back more than a few months, and even in the ultimate extreme we've still got free OSes out there. No Linux geek will ever buy a SCO license, not today, not tomorrow, not ever.