I'm sorry,
Please look through my past comments, this is not intended to be a troll, but I feel I must say something. The fact that this got moderated up to a score of 4 is pathetic. This text is nothing short of immature, unfounded drivel. Can we please not let such rhetoric become the mouthpiece of our "movement"
The point is that moderation is needed in all things. I'll agree that the current situation is messed up, but that is simply because the pendulum has swung to far in one direction; that of favoring the corporations.
What the above rant states makes no sense... Who are "the evil corporations"? The ability for one to go into business for one's self, and charge whatever you desire for your services is central to the system known as Capitalism.
Furthermore, just where exactly did you pull out your ideas of scientists? There are no research scientists living "lordy lifestyles." There is no such thing as a rock-star scientist. You fail to address the fact that in order to cure cancer, you must spend a lot of money to pay a lot of people to use expensive equipment for a long time. Where would this come from in your "new world" where everyone does what they want for the sheer joy of it (who would clean the toilets in this world BTW)
I don't know which is sadder, the fact that the poster seems to believe that cures for diseases effortlessly appear to scientists who then withhold this information in order to live rock star lives, or the fact that this was modded up.
I think it would be great for subscribers to be able to see a list of advertisers. We could then select which advertisers we'd like to see ads from. This could of course, include all advertisers.
This would be better for advertisers, as there would be more people seeing their ads, and better for people such as myself, who like seeing the new ThinkGeek offerings.
This is actually pretty old.
I remember it being out for Be OS years ago. It was able to function, as I remember, becaus of Be OS's low audio latency.
Unfortunatly, even with the new 'leaked' release, Be OS doesn't run on many current systems, which keeps something cool like this out of many people's hands.
I remember hearing a while back, that Mac OS had a very low audio latency aswell. I wondered if something such as this could be written for Mac OS X. Who knows, if enough people ask, maybe these people will do it.
I hope that isn't the only thing keeping you from OS X. Remember, it is a Unix. Gnome can compile and run on OS X. It can run in two ways.
X windows can run along side Aqua, and thus you can switch between Gnome and Aqua with just a keyboard command (which is a pretty neat looking trick)
You can also shut down Aqua and log in with just a terminal. Then you can do the normal 'startx' and load Gnome using only the Open Source Darwin Kernel. Thus you have a fully Open Source OS.
Perhaps the most useful part about this is that it makes it really easy to configure hardware. Want to jump on a wireless network? Just configure it in Aqua and switch over to Gnome and use whatever app you like.. Gaim, Netscape, etc...
Wow, this is such crap.
Read about Sabra and Chatila, where the Israelis surrounded a camp of thousands of Palenstinan civilians, then didn't allow them to flee as militant Christians invaded and slaughtered them by the thousands.
By the way, the Israeli general leading this massacre was Sharon (the current Prime minister) and he had to resign over this.
I know this can start a flame war, and that was not my intention. The poster just displayed such ignorance of history (Crusades what?) that I had to mention it.
It is terrible that the poster can understand that the problem isn't a particular religion, but self-rigeousness. When someone believes "God want's this" they don't have to justify their actions to anyone. This is the dangerous part, and that is something any fundamentalist is capable of.
By the way, the USA was not "based on Christian principles" it was based on principles set out by enlightened philosophers. The LAWS are based on judeo christian laws believed by pretty much all religions (thou shalt not kills, etc..) You are confusing the Pilgrims with the founding fathers. The Puritans were no happier with freedom of speech or individual rights than anyone else. It was the founding fathers (who were often diests) who laid out these principles.
<i>and it may take 10 years to develop a fully operational quantum computer...</i>
<br><br>
Which means the NSA should be turning thiers on, rights..... about...... <b>now</b>
Even if you don't accept a little Apple FUD there is still one thing that can't be beat: These things are amazingly light, fast, and have a great screen. Besides that, they run many Open Source OSes (Linux, Darwin).
Keep in mind, I am not posting this from a "Mac zealot" perspective. I am posting this as someone who admires the aesthetics of a computer, and who realizes that one of the powers of Open Source is that you can compile anything to your hardware. What ever it is.
All I ask, is that you don't mod me down simply because you dislike macs, just keep it as an option for some people to consider
Great,
In my opinion, Microsoft control of the desktop was essential for our well being. It was the only thing keeping OEMs from trying to lure customers, and having a "race to the bottom"
Now it will we'll just see more computers ship with the only profitable digital information: porn. That's it, more and more will creep on without the watchfull moral eye of Microsoft there to protect us.
In studies of market share(or studies in general), we often hear quotes about who funded them. This seems to somehow imply that those who funded the study had some influence in how the data was gathered/interpreted.
My question is: Do those who fund a study influence how the study turns out (ie. Microsoft studies show higher MS market share). Or is it that these corperations only decide to fund groups who they know will most likely return results in thier favor.
Speaking as a student that was introduced to OOP through Eiffel, I must say that CS students at my school were very happy when they switched over to Java as the language of choice for introducing freshmen to CS.
I would be interested to see any comments by students from RIT who went through those trials.
I think one of the most important things about a CS education is not to get caught up in the "rapid change" of computers.
I think the most important element of a good CS education is the teaching of fundamentals of computers. Even though everyone says Computers are rapidly changing, there are certain underlying algorithms and theories that do not change. These are the bedrock of computer science, and once these are firmly grasped learning the modern concepts becomes and extension of this.
An example of this is languages. As one RITer has complained (all too commonly), we learned our first year of CS in Eiffel (now done in Java). Who uses that? No one. But the focus of the curriculum isn't to teach a language, it was to teach the ability to learn any language quickly. That is why in later courses, they teach you the underlying general types of languages, and their differences.
I feel this is the most important aspect of a CS education. When an education fails to stress these it becomes more like an IT education (another vaguely defined term) where you learn specific technologies and applications (VB, WYSIWYG web editors) without learning the "meat" of them underneath.
Not too long ago, on/. there was a story about a researcher getting particles to travel faster than the speed of light. The odd thing about this is that if we have some idea that this is possible and we are trying to talk to a civilization with greater intelligence than us, wouldn't they probably use this technology.
I mean really, isn't the speed of light just a little too slow for your average space faring cell phone.
So what does everyone think? Do I remember my stories correctly? Is my physics sound?
What I'm picturing is one day we build a receiver for these faster than light signals, and we suddenly start to pick up all the alien communication signals buzzing around.
Ok, this had to be said, so I and a few thousand others will:
This is a common misperception about the way the government spending works. It isn't as if there is a large pool of money, and the government takes a percentage of it for starving children (insert deserving cause, etc..)
The way it works, is that there are certain amounts that the US public feels is necessary to spend on certain things. These amounts are relatively independent of each other. In that, we will spend $X on starving children weather or not there is a budget surplus or not.
It is also incredibly ignorant to think NASA technology is all about "fucking up other planets." There is an incredible amount of NASA technology incorporated into everyone's daily life. In short: When engineers have to design systems for more hostile environments (space) they can incorporate that technology to make systems for less hostile environments (earth) better.
I lost a lot of faith in the Slashdot community when I saw this had been moded up!
I am a Mac user, and in my third year studying Computer Science. A contradiction? No!
As a Mac CS Major I have constantly been exposed to this elitism of the other geeks. It always amazes me when Linux users bash macs on things like software availability and quality.
Don't get me wrong. I really enjoy Linux. On my Powerbook G3 I currently run Mac OS 9, OS X, LinuxPPC, and (under emulation)Windows 98, Windows 2000, and QNX . I use each of these various OSes when appropriate.
I am just trying to point out that for many, Linux is an ideology, and not another tool. As history has taught, ideologies can be contradictory and still justified in the minds of their followers. That is why in the same paragraph Linux is being described as requiring tech-savvy skills and the ability to remember obscure command, and then seeing it described as the only choice for being able to get real work done.
It is that kind of elitism that makes people think that an OS is somehow superior for requiring one to edit a file instead of clicking a button.
I'll admit, this movie can be seen as pointing out the futility of the drug war.
Many people as well have also mentioned this to me. The problem is, so many people are saying "this is a failure" without saying what a viable alternative is. Being critical without an idea for a solution is the worst possible thing. Simply saying
"There's no realistic way drugs can be stopped by conventional law enforcement"
Does not mean we should do nothing, or that what we are doing isn't working. This is like running an experiment without a control group. It is akin to wearing a jacket in the arctic and still getting cold. You don't say "This jacket was supposed to keep me warm" and take it off.
Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the current drug policies are by any means sane or realistic. What I am posing is: What are the alternatives (Are there warmer jackets)? Would a drug-legal society be the option? Do any Slashdoters from regions with different policies care to comment?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry,
Please look through my past comments, this is not intended to be a troll, but I feel I must say something. The fact that this got moderated up to a score of 4 is pathetic. This text is nothing short of immature, unfounded drivel. Can we please not let such rhetoric become the mouthpiece of our "movement"
The point is that moderation is needed in all things. I'll agree that the current situation is messed up, but that is simply because the pendulum has swung to far in one direction; that of favoring the corporations.
What the above rant states makes no sense... Who are "the evil corporations"? The ability for one to go into business for one's self, and charge whatever you desire for your services is central to the system known as Capitalism.
Furthermore, just where exactly did you pull out your ideas of scientists? There are no research scientists living "lordy lifestyles." There is no such thing as a rock-star scientist. You fail to address the fact that in order to cure cancer, you must spend a lot of money to pay a lot of people to use expensive equipment for a long time. Where would this come from in your "new world" where everyone does what they want for the sheer joy of it (who would clean the toilets in this world BTW)
I don't know which is sadder, the fact that the poster seems to believe that cures for diseases effortlessly appear to scientists who then withhold this information in order to live rock star lives, or the fact that this was modded up.
---Lane
This is not meant to be argumentative, I am actualy curious...
If this is the case, then why can paralysis victems not regrow their nerve cells in order to walk again?
I think it would be great for subscribers to be able to see a list of advertisers. We could then select which advertisers we'd like to see ads from. This could of course, include all advertisers.
This would be better for advertisers, as there would be more people seeing their ads, and better for people such as myself, who like seeing the new ThinkGeek offerings.
This is actually pretty old. I remember it being out for Be OS years ago. It was able to function, as I remember, becaus of Be OS's low audio latency.
Unfortunatly, even with the new 'leaked' release, Be OS doesn't run on many current systems, which keeps something cool like this out of many people's hands.
I remember hearing a while back, that Mac OS had a very low audio latency aswell. I wondered if something such as this could be written for Mac OS X. Who knows, if enough people ask, maybe these people will do it.
That would be truely cool
I like my Gnome desktop
I hope that isn't the only thing keeping you from OS X. Remember, it is a Unix. Gnome can compile and run on OS X. It can run in two ways.
X windows can run along side Aqua, and thus you can switch between Gnome and Aqua with just a keyboard command (which is a pretty neat looking trick)
You can also shut down Aqua and log in with just a terminal. Then you can do the normal 'startx' and load Gnome using only the Open Source Darwin Kernel. Thus you have a fully Open Source OS.
Perhaps the most useful part about this is that it makes it really easy to configure hardware. Want to jump on a wireless network? Just configure it in Aqua and switch over to Gnome and use whatever app you like.. Gaim, Netscape, etc...
Just have one of those PA systems call out..
"You there, I see you, we know you are a terrorist... we know you have a bomb, we are coming to get you"
Anyone who's body temperature rises must be a terrorist and be getting nervous
Just repeat this before every flight leaves, bam 100% security
Wow, this is such crap. Read about Sabra and Chatila, where the Israelis surrounded a camp of thousands of Palenstinan civilians, then didn't allow them to flee as militant Christians invaded and slaughtered them by the thousands.
Read about it on K5
By the way, the Israeli general leading this massacre was Sharon (the current Prime minister) and he had to resign over this.
I know this can start a flame war, and that was not my intention. The poster just displayed such ignorance of history (Crusades what?) that I had to mention it.
It is terrible that the poster can understand that the problem isn't a particular religion, but self-rigeousness. When someone believes "God want's this" they don't have to justify their actions to anyone. This is the dangerous part, and that is something any fundamentalist is capable of.
By the way, the USA was not "based on Christian principles" it was based on principles set out by enlightened philosophers. The LAWS are based on judeo christian laws believed by pretty much all religions (thou shalt not kills, etc..) You are confusing the Pilgrims with the founding fathers. The Puritans were no happier with freedom of speech or individual rights than anyone else. It was the founding fathers (who were often diests) who laid out these principles.
---Lane
<i>and it may take 10 years to develop a fully operational quantum computer ...</i>
<br><br>
Which means the NSA should be turning thiers on, rights..... about...... <b>now</b>
And nobody outside the fan club notices.
I know, I was surprised too.
I must say, I'm surprised Think Geek doesn't carry Eco-Spheres
They don't require feeding, can get by on artificial light, and you can waste hours just watching one.
No, I don't work for the company, I just own one, they are cool
Prepare to loose all Karma
The PowerBook G4, and iBook are still impressive offerings.
Even if you don't accept a little Apple FUD there is still one thing that can't be beat: These things are amazingly light, fast, and have a great screen. Besides that, they run many Open Source OSes (Linux, Darwin).
Keep in mind, I am not posting this from a "Mac zealot" perspective. I am posting this as someone who admires the aesthetics of a computer, and who realizes that one of the powers of Open Source is that you can compile anything to your hardware. What ever it is.
All I ask, is that you don't mod me down simply because you dislike macs, just keep it as an option for some people to consider
Man, This /. title really scared me.
.com was going under
I thougt another
---Lane
Great, In my opinion, Microsoft control of the desktop was essential for our well being. It was the only thing keeping OEMs from trying to lure customers, and having a "race to the bottom"
Now it will we'll just see more computers ship with the only profitable digital information: porn. That's it, more and more will creep on without the watchfull moral eye of Microsoft there to protect us.
---Lane
I like fighting robots
---Lane
I always wondered about those "Internet for life" companies:
Did they mean the life of the subscriber or company?
---Lane
---Lane
First Compaq, now these guys.
Maybe one day the industry will evolve to the point that all companies only make software.
What a golden utopia that would bring.
---Lane
---Lane
In studies of market share(or studies in general), we often hear quotes about who funded them. This seems to somehow imply that those who funded the study had some influence in how the data was gathered/interpreted.
My question is: Do those who fund a study influence how the study turns out (ie. Microsoft studies show higher MS market share). Or is it that these corperations only decide to fund groups who they know will most likely return results in thier favor.
---Lane
Speaking as a student that was introduced to OOP through Eiffel, I must say that CS students at my school were very happy when they switched over to Java as the language of choice for introducing freshmen to CS.
I would be interested to see any comments by students from RIT who went through those trials.
---Lane
>I know plenty of painful typists complete with
>wrist guards and wincing who probably won't
>agree that their symptoms aren't genuine.
I don't think I haven't never seen double negatives that ain't that bad neither.
I'm sorry, I don't normally poke fun like this, as I am a terrible typist. Mod me down if you like, or up if you smiled.
---Lane
Wait... I'm confused...
There is something other than Red Hat?
---Lane
I think one of the most important things about a CS education is not to get caught up in the "rapid change" of computers.
I think the most important element of a good CS education is the teaching of fundamentals of computers. Even though everyone says Computers are rapidly changing, there are certain underlying algorithms and theories that do not change. These are the bedrock of computer science, and once these are firmly grasped learning the modern concepts becomes and extension of this.
An example of this is languages. As one RITer has complained (all too commonly), we learned our first year of CS in Eiffel (now done in Java). Who uses that? No one. But the focus of the curriculum isn't to teach a language, it was to teach the ability to learn any language quickly. That is why in later courses, they teach you the underlying general types of languages, and their differences.
I feel this is the most important aspect of a CS education. When an education fails to stress these it becomes more like an IT education (another vaguely defined term) where you learn specific technologies and applications (VB, WYSIWYG web editors) without learning the "meat" of them underneath.
---Lane Westlund
I don't like the sound of this.
I mean, suppose you were on a bus that could not drop below 55mph........
---Lane
Here is something I've always been curious about:
/. there was a story about a researcher getting particles to travel faster than the speed of light. The odd thing about this is that if we have some idea that this is possible and we are trying to talk to a civilization with greater intelligence than us, wouldn't they probably use this technology.
Not too long ago, on
I mean really, isn't the speed of light just a little too slow for your average space faring cell phone.
So what does everyone think? Do I remember my stories correctly? Is my physics sound?
What I'm picturing is one day we build a receiver for these faster than light signals, and we suddenly start to pick up all the alien communication signals buzzing around.
---Lane
Ok, this had to be said, so I and a few thousand others will:
e
:)
This is a common misperception about the way the government spending works. It isn't as if there is a large pool of money, and the government takes a percentage of it for starving children (insert deserving cause, etc..)
The way it works, is that there are certain amounts that the US public feels is necessary to spend on certain things. These amounts are relatively independent of each other. In that, we will spend $X on starving children weather or not there is a budget surplus or not.
It is also incredibly ignorant to think NASA technology is all about "fucking up other planets." There is an incredible amount of NASA technology incorporated into everyone's daily life. In short: When engineers have to design systems for more hostile environments (space) they can incorporate that technology to make systems for less hostile environments (earth) better.
for more information from NASA, click here
or type http://www.nasa.gov/qanda/why_nasa.html#whyexplor
---Lane
Did I just fall into a trap?
I lost a lot of faith in the Slashdot community when I saw this had been moded up!
I am a Mac user, and in my third year studying Computer Science. A contradiction? No!
As a Mac CS Major I have constantly been exposed to this elitism of the other geeks. It always amazes me when Linux users bash macs on things like software availability and quality.
Don't get me wrong. I really enjoy Linux. On my Powerbook G3 I currently run Mac OS 9, OS X, LinuxPPC, and (under emulation)Windows 98, Windows 2000, and QNX . I use each of these various OSes when appropriate.
I am just trying to point out that for many, Linux is an ideology, and not another tool. As history has taught, ideologies can be contradictory and still justified in the minds of their followers. That is why in the same paragraph Linux is being described as requiring tech-savvy skills and the ability to remember obscure command, and then seeing it described as the only choice for being able to get real work done.
It is that kind of elitism that makes people think that an OS is somehow superior for requiring one to edit a file instead of clicking a button.
---Lane
I'll admit, this movie can be seen as pointing out the futility of the drug war.
Many people as well have also mentioned this to me. The problem is, so many people are saying "this is a failure" without saying what a viable alternative is. Being critical without an idea for a solution is the worst possible thing. Simply saying
"There's no realistic way drugs can be stopped by conventional law enforcement"
Does not mean we should do nothing, or that what we are doing isn't working. This is like running an experiment without a control group. It is akin to wearing a jacket in the arctic and still getting cold. You don't say "This jacket was supposed to keep me warm" and take it off.
Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the current drug policies are by any means sane or realistic. What I am posing is: What are the alternatives (Are there warmer jackets)? Would a drug-legal society be the option? Do any Slashdoters from regions with different policies care to comment?
---Lane