Seeing the wings do shit and look flimsy is also nice. Depending on the size of the plane, you can often see that shit from the back, too. "Luxury travel", especially on planes where very few journeys will last longer than 16 hours, never appealed to me at all.
Exactly. I make a point of always sitting at the back of a plane if possible, simply because it makes the takeoff feel way more awesome (and also because then I am under no obligation to get off the plane in any hurry so I can wander slowly through the terminal without having twitchy people rush past me) - it is an exciting experience that no longer excites people.
The difference is that we currently couldn't travel to either of those places even if we had the time, whereas the 18th century person could conceivably make the journeys to Turin or Tokyo. Good point though, hadn't thought of that.
Usually when I think about this, I imagine that the thing I'm showing them is the first thing they're seeing. But yeah, this is the fun of the exercise - we live in a world filled with remarkable things that would blow the minds of people in the past and we take them for granted. With this as evidence, I think whoever you were showing shit would get used to it quicker than you might suspect.
Yeah, but you'll struggle to get on one (at this point). The thing about flight that surprises me is that commercialisation has trivialised so much - hence the necessity of the presence of the imaginary time tourist.
Practically, yes, the car is more liberating to the individual. In terms of ideas, however, air travel is the more impressive. I guess maybe the fact that I do it a good two or three orders of magnitude less often probably helps too.
I enjoy flying simply because the idea is so absurd. I often try to imagine what it would be like to show someone from the 1700s or so around the world as it is today and modern flight is one of the more ridiculous things - you have these massive hunks of metal held in the air by the air itself that carry people at high speeds and high altitudes all over the world. In flying, I feel I have experienced something amazing the human race has achieved. Car travel, by contrast, is largely mundane.
So now everyone on last.fm who has a diverse music collection is a pirate? While I disagree with the handing over of information, I fail to see what the RIAA will be able to prove with it.
A blanket media boycott is really not the best idea. Buy shit from companies you feel are doing the right thing (which, in the case of record companies, is likely very few) and actually have a positive influence on decent business rather than a negative influence on all business. Unless, of course, ALL business is bad. In which case, go ahead.
CC is all about free sharing. Personally, I have no objection to people using my music in free projects. I do, however, have an objection to people using it to make money without cutting me in.
Slashdot Mirror
Or just give him a loonicks box with locked-down repos and no privelages to do anything. But that would be mean.
...and iphone users would lose out
By not being able to get the complete version of Ninjawords the developer had originally intended to sell?
+50 defence against lawsuits
Also: whether or not the patent is valid.
You're right, it does. What's your point?
And what exactly is wrong with variety in the market (and bulbs for which you don't have to wait five minutes to reach full brightness)?
The burden is on the asserter but only when challenged. Incidentally, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_Proof
Compiling from source takes all of three commands and a maximum of about five minutes. Why are you so desperate for executables?
Seeing the wings do shit and look flimsy is also nice. Depending on the size of the plane, you can often see that shit from the back, too. "Luxury travel", especially on planes where very few journeys will last longer than 16 hours, never appealed to me at all.
Exactly. I make a point of always sitting at the back of a plane if possible, simply because it makes the takeoff feel way more awesome (and also because then I am under no obligation to get off the plane in any hurry so I can wander slowly through the terminal without having twitchy people rush past me) - it is an exciting experience that no longer excites people.
The difference is that we currently couldn't travel to either of those places even if we had the time, whereas the 18th century person could conceivably make the journeys to Turin or Tokyo. Good point though, hadn't thought of that.
...or, for that matter, in a plane.
Usually when I think about this, I imagine that the thing I'm showing them is the first thing they're seeing. But yeah, this is the fun of the exercise - we live in a world filled with remarkable things that would blow the minds of people in the past and we take them for granted. With this as evidence, I think whoever you were showing shit would get used to it quicker than you might suspect.
Yeah, but you'll struggle to get on one (at this point). The thing about flight that surprises me is that commercialisation has trivialised so much - hence the necessity of the presence of the imaginary time tourist.
Practically, yes, the car is more liberating to the individual. In terms of ideas, however, air travel is the more impressive. I guess maybe the fact that I do it a good two or three orders of magnitude less often probably helps too.
True, but the concept of air travel shrinks the planet way more than cars, especially if both are revealed at the same time.
I enjoy flying simply because the idea is so absurd. I often try to imagine what it would be like to show someone from the 1700s or so around the world as it is today and modern flight is one of the more ridiculous things - you have these massive hunks of metal held in the air by the air itself that carry people at high speeds and high altitudes all over the world. In flying, I feel I have experienced something amazing the human race has achieved. Car travel, by contrast, is largely mundane.
So now everyone on last.fm who has a diverse music collection is a pirate? While I disagree with the handing over of information, I fail to see what the RIAA will be able to prove with it.
I approve. Blind pro-piracy is extremely childish. Oh wait, slashdot.
A blanket media boycott is really not the best idea. Buy shit from companies you feel are doing the right thing (which, in the case of record companies, is likely very few) and actually have a positive influence on decent business rather than a negative influence on all business. Unless, of course, ALL business is bad. In which case, go ahead.
This man is not the CEO of Sony. He is the CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment.
Music artists with copyright hahahahahahahahhahhahaa (i'm crying on the inside)
CC is all about free sharing. Personally, I have no objection to people using my music in free projects. I do, however, have an objection to people using it to make money without cutting me in.
Make something better then.