No. Because you (greenpeace) put the environment above people.
The whole point of environmentalism is to preserve a sustainable habitat for OUR species. That includes protecting other species - it even probably includes limiting our own growth. But to an outsider, that sounds like "exterminate all humans and let the snowy plover live in peace".
That's not a meme that's going to gain wide acceptance among the sane and rational. But whatever floats your "Rainbow Warrior".
I swear, I think Greenpeace is more concerned about making sure nobody builds any new powerplants than they are about protecting the environment.
What's truly tragic, is that their position is represented by the Limbaughs and O'Reilly's of the world as "the mainstream Liberal position".
Frankly, I would much rather have seen the $300 Billion US we've spent in Iraq (so far) instead, spent on Fusion research in the US. If the Fusion research succeeds, then there's no fucking reason to go to Iraq or any other damn Middle Eastern country ever. I think THAT is closer to the mainstream Liberal position than the Greenpeace drivel.
It makes me sad to say this, but in the current political climate within the US, I don't think that any of this (what you're asking for) is going to happen.
Much of the late-90's dotcom boom was predicated on the 1996 PSLR Act. This act was Clinton's ONLY Veto, over a Republican Congress, and they overrode him on it. This law opened the floodgates for corporate accounting fraud and corruption on an unprecedented scale, and only a very few of the criminals were ever caught or punished, including Enron, Worldcom, Citibank, Krispy Kreme, Arthur Anderson, Veritas, AOL, etc. etc. ad nauseum. The ones who were punished were given very minor slaps on the wrist, as a token gesture during a very brief era of symbolic regulatory tightening that began in late 2001, and ended recently with the appointment of Cox as SEC head.
Cox was the criminal bastard who WROTE the PSLR Act. So the brief era of symbolic regulatory tightening on oversight of corporate accounting practices has ended. It is now open season on shareholders, and especially consumers. I predict that this AMD action will go about as far as Netscapes complaint against Microsoft. A long, drawn out, and profitably-entertaining courtroom drama, AMD will falter and die, somewhere along the way, and in the end, a slap on the wrist for Intel.
Some of the folks who support this kind of wild-west business climate simply have a loyalty to their rich crony-capitalist buddies. Others have a more nationalistic ideology (They're an American company, we have to protect them so they can compete internationally - look what's happened to Boeing, they're effectively a jumbo-jet monopoly, but they're getting their asses handed to them by Airbus). In the end, companies like Intel, or Boeing, end up with no competition - and of course, it makes them still weaker. You think the Chrysler bail-out by the government had nothing to do with their eventual buy-out by Daimler? Corporate Welfare, whether by direct bailout, deregulation, or preferential treatment, or even special tax breaks, breeds nothing but dependent Corporate Welfare Queens. ONLY competition, in a fair, intelligently regulated marketplace, will breed excellence.
. . . my knee-jerk reaction is to say: We should have NOT allowed the industry to consolidate the way it did. Too many competitors bought eachother out, and now there's no incentive for competition, and the field is littered with crappy offerings. Just absolute shit compared to what my first employer was working on 12 years ago.
On the other hand, tape backup hardware has lagged cost/performance-wise, to dasd technology. I'd say, just shell out some bucks on some external firewire hard drives, and clone your disk out every weekend or so.
If some of those 10's of thousands of pictures is (even though the categories do not include young or pedophile or even teen) is he a convictable pedophile?
You forget the whole point of a witch-hunt. The whole point is to cause a panic. In the panic, due-process is dropped as a "luxury" - and anyone who isn't a 'perfect Christian' (including political enemies, undesirables, liberals, etc.) is a potential witch. QED.
Generally, if something you own or that is under your control causes something that results in some form of law-breaking and/or civil problems, you are considered accountable.
However, if the army which is under your control, goes out of control, and bombs innocent civilians, or tortures detainees, or invades the wrong country based on false evidence, then of course, it's not your fault. It's just "one of those things" y'know, and hey, the world's better off without that evul dictator anyway.
Re:Can We Get Firefox Developers To Do This, Too?
on
Hackers, Meet Microsoft
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Make no mistake, this kind of event is exactly what a company that wants to get secure should be doing.
Exactly. Working for a major Systems Integrator, our customer actually has a special team of people who do nothing but hack systems, and recommend security changes to the products they buy.
We thought we had locked down our systems pretty well. They turned it out pretty good, and produced a 92-page report. (of course, some of it was gratuitous).
However, the end result: slapping security changes onto an already-developed product, results in a whole lot of breakage. This lesson will benefit our NEXT customer. And it will really, really hurt our current customer. The lesson? Security should be designed-into a system from the start.
For them to cancel it when they did, they probably ran across some VERY bad numbers.
. . . more likely, some upper-management types at Fox were offended by the show's "Social Message"; - The government are the bad guys. (not cool in the post-9/11 world) - One of the characters is a prostitute. - Another of the main characters, in one episode, "corrects" the Bible.
This sort of thing doesn't sit well with Rupert Murdoch, if you watch the popular outrageous fantasy show; FoxNews.
The REAL problem is in secret international finance.
Banks like the old BCCI of the 1980's, were brought down by a few crusading congressmen - but were replaced by other means. Drug profits are laundered, and funneled to terrorists. If these channels were open to international law enforcement scrutiny, (as was much ballyhooed after 9/11 - but didn't actually happen in any meaningful way) international terrorism, as we know it, would end. So would illegal arms dealing (including WMD), and drug cartels.
But since corrupt businessmen also sock their ill-gotten gains ($9 Billion missing in Iraq thanks to CPA incompetence, etc.) away through these same channels, not just to dodge taxes, but to cover bribes, and black market dealings, you can guarantee that the extent of fighting international terrorism will more likely trample on YOUR rights, not theirs.
There are several arguments against the weaponization of space. Foremost among them is not some irrational fear of orbital bombardment.
As previous poster pointed out, we already have ICBMs, we've had them since wwii, and there's no practical defense against them, except for pre-emptive strike. (which is not a practical defense).
The problem with the weaponization of space is really antisatellite warfare. The global economic shock of losing communication, weather, and GPS would be bad enough. But far worse would be the fact that we couldn't replace those resources, because their orbits will then be filled with thousands of bits of scrap metal, orbiting at 17,000 miles per hour.
Oribital debris would make any future efforts in space impossible. It's really a no-brainer.
The one thing that the PPC->x86 move shows is that Apple Is Not Serious About The Server Market.
For servers, anyone could just as easily run Darwin, or Linux, or BSD, on their favorite x86 server platform. The xServe was pretty cool, but there's really nothing compelling there from an OS X standpoint.
The x86 move was aimed at portables, and low end desktop machines. Bringing (or continuing to bring) the OS X user-experience to that market. A market where Linux has traditionally not made even a minor ding.
The only folks who will suffer are the Mac OS X users on high-end desktops. And it's the ISV's who will determine what happens with that market. I have no clue where that's going to go, but without hardware as a big differentiator there, it really depends on whether ISV's abandon the Mac platform, or how well they transition Alitvec code to SSE3, and how well they handle the transition by supporting legacy hardware, and at the same time also support new hardware without cutting either segment of the market out. It's going to be a tough, tricky game for the Adobe's of the world. For Microsoft though - my guess is that if Office OS X is too hard for them, they'll just bundle VPC with Windows office and be done with it.
It seems that some enterprising developers have already figured out how to run Windows on one of the devkit systems (xlr8yourmac.com).
If that is so.
And if Longhorn (some day in the far-flung future, when it finally ships) will have the rumored "virtual servers" (Virtual PC tech) built-in, then would it be possible to run OSXi as a virtual machine under Windows? (or vice-versa).
Generally, this is why I don't believe "bundling" or "dumping" laws should apply to software (or other IP). Weak antipiracy policies amount to covert dumping. So what's next? Antitrust prosecution based on not providing strong enough copy protection?
Look then, to the music industry. What started, in the 1970's as "promotional videos" basically, a cost center of marketing music, (look how cool this band is, please play their music on your radio station so we can sell more records) - became the major profit center of the MTV generation.
Applying real-world economic models to IP only exposes how flawed the analogy is. The two things are similar, but definately not the same. Different rules should apply.
I dropped out of college in 1990. I have found that it's a continual frustrating "glass ceiling" in the carreer path I have chosen. No matter how hot-shit you are technically, people look down on you, lowball you, and shield you from responsibility, if you don't have a degree. I just got to a certain point where I decided I was ready to be a "real" grown up - and if that means waving my "golden ticket" in their face in order to get professional respect, then so be it.
My current employer has made it plain, I'm prime material for moving up the ladder, but I'm going not one rung further, until I complete my degree.
As long as he's paying for it, I'm going, of course.
Apple did not initially use OF when they started with the first 601 PPC chips. Then, they used a crippled version of Open Firmware for the 604 generation, through the early G3's.
This semi-support of Open Firmware led to the reasoning behind a lot of legacy hardware deprecation. (SCSI support, sleep, video support, etc.) I'm wondering if early x86 adopters will be subject to the same evil fate.
I don't care though, I'm hanging on to my dual G5 power mac until they stop shipping PPC-compatible binaries, then I'll probably just run Linux PPC.
Seriously though, this is a reasonable move for Apple to ensure that the look, feel and reliability of the MacOS does not become corrupted for some users who may want to install OS X on "lower quality hardware". Apple prides itself on a quality user experience that approaches a luxury product.
That's bullshit.
The real story here is about how Apple will use Trusted Platform to lock purchased iTunes tracks to particular hardware.
...it seems that the ACLU is restricting the right of the people of Utah (in this case) to elect a government which is representative of their ideals and beliefs....
There is no such right. Read the Constitution. The Bill of Rights.
One of our rights is to Self Government, true. But there are other rights, like freedom of speech, right to a fair trial, right to privacy. None of these stands alone as a definition of "Freedom". But especially "Democracy". The Soviets had a Democracy. The Cubans have a Democracy. Hell, before we invaded, Saddam's Iraq had a Democracy. Democracy alone doesn't guarantee Freedom....but this rabid attack on how the "right" is bad and the "left" is good is really starting to get simply immature and sickening.
What's immature and sickening is when the folks on the right quote Ben Franklin, and they're the ones so happy to trade their Liberty for Security.
Slashdot Mirror
how do they propse that we handle the human population growth issue?
gas chambers?
mandated sterilization?
College education for all women. . . ?
(statistically speaking, it's by far, the most effective birth control known to man.)
No. Because you (greenpeace) put the environment above people.
The whole point of environmentalism is to preserve a sustainable habitat for OUR species. That includes protecting other species - it even probably includes limiting our own growth. But to an outsider, that sounds like "exterminate all humans and let the snowy plover live in peace".
That's not a meme that's going to gain wide acceptance among the sane and rational. But whatever floats your "Rainbow Warrior".
I swear, I think Greenpeace is more concerned about making sure nobody builds any new powerplants than they are about protecting the environment.
What's truly tragic, is that their position is represented by the Limbaughs and O'Reilly's of the world as "the mainstream Liberal position".
Frankly, I would much rather have seen the $300 Billion US we've spent in Iraq (so far) instead, spent on Fusion research in the US. If the Fusion research succeeds, then there's no fucking reason to go to Iraq or any other damn Middle Eastern country ever. I think THAT is closer to the mainstream Liberal position than the Greenpeace drivel.
Some of the most creative people in Hollywood are the accountants.
best.
quote.
EVAR.
This is what Cringley was trying to do with his PBS show.
Only this show turned out to be content people actually wanted to watch.
(ouch! sorry Robert - I love your column though!)
It makes me sad to say this, but in the current political climate within the US, I don't think that any of this (what you're asking for) is going to happen.
Much of the late-90's dotcom boom was predicated on the 1996 PSLR Act. This act was Clinton's ONLY Veto, over a Republican Congress, and they overrode him on it. This law opened the floodgates for corporate accounting fraud and corruption on an unprecedented scale, and only a very few of the criminals were ever caught or punished, including Enron, Worldcom, Citibank, Krispy Kreme, Arthur Anderson, Veritas, AOL, etc. etc. ad nauseum. The ones who were punished were given very minor slaps on the wrist, as a token gesture during a very brief era of symbolic regulatory tightening that began in late 2001, and ended recently with the appointment of Cox as SEC head.
Cox was the criminal bastard who WROTE the PSLR Act. So the brief era of symbolic regulatory tightening on oversight of corporate accounting practices has ended. It is now open season on shareholders, and especially consumers. I predict that this AMD action will go about as far as Netscapes complaint against Microsoft. A long, drawn out, and profitably-entertaining courtroom drama, AMD will falter and die, somewhere along the way, and in the end, a slap on the wrist for Intel.
Some of the folks who support this kind of wild-west business climate simply have a loyalty to their rich crony-capitalist buddies. Others have a more nationalistic ideology (They're an American company, we have to protect them so they can compete internationally - look what's happened to Boeing, they're effectively a jumbo-jet monopoly, but they're getting their asses handed to them by Airbus). In the end, companies like Intel, or Boeing, end up with no competition - and of course, it makes them still weaker. You think the Chrysler bail-out by the government had nothing to do with their eventual buy-out by Daimler? Corporate Welfare, whether by direct bailout, deregulation, or preferential treatment, or even special tax breaks, breeds nothing but dependent Corporate Welfare Queens. ONLY competition, in a fair, intelligently regulated marketplace, will breed excellence.
. . . my knee-jerk reaction is to say:
We should have NOT allowed the industry to consolidate the way it did. Too many competitors bought eachother out, and now there's no incentive for competition, and the field is littered with crappy offerings. Just absolute shit compared to what my first employer was working on 12 years ago.
On the other hand, tape backup hardware has lagged cost/performance-wise, to dasd technology. I'd say, just shell out some bucks on some external firewire hard drives, and clone your disk out every weekend or so.
let's see how fast the brand grows when it takes on all the legacy cruftiness that is Intel's product-line of CPUs.
If some of those 10's of thousands of pictures is (even though the categories do not include young or pedophile or even teen) is he a convictable pedophile?
You forget the whole point of a witch-hunt. The whole point is to cause a panic. In the panic, due-process is dropped as a "luxury" - and anyone who isn't a 'perfect Christian' (including political enemies, undesirables, liberals, etc.) is a potential witch. QED.
Generally, if something you own or that is under your control causes something that results in some form of law-breaking and/or civil problems, you are considered accountable.
However, if the army which is under your control, goes out of control, and bombs innocent civilians, or tortures detainees, or invades the wrong country based on false evidence, then of course, it's not your fault. It's just "one of those things" y'know, and hey, the world's better off without that evul dictator anyway.
Make no mistake, this kind of event is exactly what a company that wants to get secure should be doing.
Exactly. Working for a major Systems Integrator, our customer actually has a special team of people who do nothing but hack systems, and recommend security changes to the products they buy.
We thought we had locked down our systems pretty well. They turned it out pretty good, and produced a 92-page report. (of course, some of it was gratuitous).
However, the end result: slapping security changes onto an already-developed product, results in a whole lot of breakage. This lesson will benefit our NEXT customer. And it will really, really hurt our current customer. The lesson? Security should be designed-into a system from the start.
OpenOffice will never be an Office killer on OS X until it is a native app.
"Native"?
On Macintosh, what exactly the fuck does that even mean anymore?
For them to cancel it when they did, they probably ran across some VERY bad numbers.
. . . more likely, some upper-management types at Fox were offended by the show's "Social Message";
- The government are the bad guys. (not cool in the post-9/11 world)
- One of the characters is a prostitute.
- Another of the main characters, in one episode, "corrects" the Bible.
This sort of thing doesn't sit well with Rupert Murdoch, if you watch the popular outrageous fantasy show; FoxNews.
The REAL problem is in secret international finance.
Banks like the old BCCI of the 1980's, were brought down by a few crusading congressmen - but were replaced by other means. Drug profits are laundered, and funneled to terrorists. If these channels were open to international law enforcement scrutiny, (as was much ballyhooed after 9/11 - but didn't actually happen in any meaningful way) international terrorism, as we know it, would end. So would illegal arms dealing (including WMD), and drug cartels.
But since corrupt businessmen also sock their ill-gotten gains ($9 Billion missing in Iraq thanks to CPA incompetence, etc.) away through these same channels, not just to dodge taxes, but to cover bribes, and black market dealings, you can guarantee that the extent of fighting international terrorism will more likely trample on YOUR rights, not theirs.
I agree
is a "How the Slasdot effect Works"
There are several arguments against the weaponization of space. Foremost among them is not some irrational fear of orbital bombardment.
As previous poster pointed out, we already have ICBMs, we've had them since wwii, and there's no practical defense against them, except for pre-emptive strike. (which is not a practical defense).
The problem with the weaponization of space is really antisatellite warfare. The global economic shock of losing communication, weather, and GPS would be bad enough. But far worse would be the fact that we couldn't replace those resources, because their orbits will then be filled with thousands of bits of scrap metal, orbiting at 17,000 miles per hour.
Oribital debris would make any future efforts in space impossible. It's really a no-brainer.
The one thing that the PPC->x86 move shows is that Apple Is Not Serious About The Server Market.
For servers, anyone could just as easily run Darwin, or Linux, or BSD, on their favorite x86 server platform. The xServe was pretty cool, but there's really nothing compelling there from an OS X standpoint.
The x86 move was aimed at portables, and low end desktop machines. Bringing (or continuing to bring) the OS X user-experience to that market. A market where Linux has traditionally not made even a minor ding.
The only folks who will suffer are the Mac OS X users on high-end desktops. And it's the ISV's who will determine what happens with that market. I have no clue where that's going to go, but without hardware as a big differentiator there, it really depends on whether ISV's abandon the Mac platform, or how well they transition Alitvec code to SSE3, and how well they handle the transition by supporting legacy hardware, and at the same time also support new hardware without cutting either segment of the market out. It's going to be a tough, tricky game for the Adobe's of the world.
For Microsoft though - my guess is that if Office OS X is too hard for them, they'll just bundle VPC with Windows office and be done with it.
The real question is;
It seems that some enterprising developers have already figured out how to run Windows on one of the devkit systems (xlr8yourmac.com).
If that is so.
And if Longhorn (some day in the far-flung future, when it finally ships) will have the rumored "virtual servers" (Virtual PC tech) built-in, then would it be possible to run OSXi as a virtual machine under Windows? (or vice-versa).
Generally, this is why I don't believe "bundling" or "dumping" laws should apply to software (or other IP). Weak antipiracy policies amount to covert dumping. So what's next? Antitrust prosecution based on not providing strong enough copy protection?
Look then, to the music industry. What started, in the 1970's as "promotional videos" basically, a cost center of marketing music, (look how cool this band is, please play their music on your radio station so we can sell more records) - became the major profit center of the MTV generation.
Applying real-world economic models to IP only exposes how flawed the analogy is. The two things are similar, but definately not the same. Different rules should apply.
Agreed.
I dropped out of college in 1990. I have found that it's a continual frustrating "glass ceiling" in the carreer path I have chosen. No matter how hot-shit you are technically, people look down on you, lowball you, and shield you from responsibility, if you don't have a degree. I just got to a certain point where I decided I was ready to be a "real" grown up - and if that means waving my "golden ticket" in their face in order to get professional respect, then so be it.
My current employer has made it plain, I'm prime material for moving up the ladder, but I'm going not one rung further, until I complete my degree.
As long as he's paying for it, I'm going, of course.
That's what I'm afraid of.
Apple did not initially use OF when they started with the first 601 PPC chips. Then, they used a crippled version of Open Firmware for the 604 generation, through the early G3's.
This semi-support of Open Firmware led to the reasoning behind a lot of legacy hardware deprecation. (SCSI support, sleep, video support, etc.) I'm wondering if early x86 adopters will be subject to the same evil fate.
I don't care though, I'm hanging on to my dual G5 power mac until they stop shipping PPC-compatible binaries, then I'll probably just run Linux PPC.
Seriously though, this is a reasonable move for Apple to ensure that the look, feel and reliability of the MacOS does not become corrupted for some users who may want to install OS X on "lower quality hardware". Apple prides itself on a quality user experience that approaches a luxury product.
That's bullshit.
The real story here is about how Apple will use Trusted Platform to lock purchased iTunes tracks to particular hardware.
...it seems that the ACLU is restricting the right of the people of Utah (in this case) to elect a government which is representative of their ideals and beliefs....
...but this rabid attack on how the "right" is bad and the "left" is good is really starting to get simply immature and sickening.
There is no such right.
Read the Constitution. The Bill of Rights.
One of our rights is to Self Government, true. But there are other rights, like freedom of speech, right to a fair trial, right to privacy. None of these stands alone as a definition of "Freedom". But especially "Democracy". The Soviets had a Democracy. The Cubans have a Democracy. Hell, before we invaded, Saddam's Iraq had a Democracy. Democracy alone doesn't guarantee Freedom.
What's immature and sickening is when the folks on the right quote Ben Franklin, and they're the ones so happy to trade their Liberty for Security.
But this is not a good day.
The PPC->x86 move is about protecting the iTunes revenue stream by providing DRM that IBM wouldn't or couldn't do.