So you think a media convert is worse off than a p0rn addict? Have you any idea what p0rn does to a person's interpersonal relationships? For example: as a general rule, it's good for a man to be faithful to his wife. (Anyone that contradicts this is lying to himself - and don't argue with me about this one. The disintegration of the family is the worst illness of our times - children do much better with two parents, and it's statistically proven.)
How does this man remain faithful to his wife if he's thinking about the breasts of every woman he talks to?
So the secret is this: once you get in, make sure you keep in contact with your friends, and with people who you've impressed - especially impressive or higher-up people who you've impressed. It's your personal network, and sometimes they even call you about job offers at the company they work for. Getting in on a personal recommendation from someone with good credentials is always easier.
But then, don't rely on just that. If all you've got are friends, they'll see through you within weeks, or days.
That's because people who understand know that you shouldn't use a Windows box as a server that has to handle a high load. It's using the wrong tool for the job. It's like, like...
...like taking a dump in a urinal.
I mean, the urinal does front-end services really well, but really doesn't work well doing back-end services.
Try telling someone sometime that urinals are better for taking dumps in. They'll look at you like you're crazy. But that's what Microsoft did, right? And then they tried to convert it - you know, give it a bigger bowl. Whoops. Didn't work as well as they'd hoped.
Small problem: you can't watch your children all of the time.
My wife doesn't have a career outside the house. She's decided to stay home with our children. I think it's a wonderful idea. She can teach them things that a day care center wouldn't bother, and make sure they get a good idea of what's appropriate and what's inappropriate.
There are still a few problems, which I think these blocking software makers are addressing in the wrong way: 1) you can't watch your children all of the time; 2) you can't trust your children all of the time (I know because I was a child once, and I remember it); 3) you can't make sure you or they don't get tricked into seeing something.
1 and 2: Sometimes, a parent has to enforce rules, not just make them. Sometimes, a parent has to make it nearly impossible to break the rules - especially if a child has broken a rule multiple times. As a punishment, the parent revokes certain priviliges, and sometimes the ability to break the rule that was broken. (Life naturally works that way, but on a longer time scale. Parents speed things up, because they don't want to wait for, say, the child to become a washed-out drug adict on dialysis before he knows it's not good for him.) Currently, you can't do that with the World Wide Web. The alternative is to revoke browsing privilidges completely, but you can't always enforce that, either.
3: I don't look at p0rn because that would potentially ruin my relationship with my wife. (And all you who think it wouldn't, please don't argue with me about this one. That would be off-topic.) What if I and my family have decided (yes, children can actually make these decisions themselves, and even if you help them, they still made it themselves) that p0rn doesn't belong in our home? I've been tricked before. I don't like that - not because it would ruin me to see it once, but because I don't want to look at it, and I don't enjoy being forced against my will to see something. I also don't want my children to have to deal with that, especially if they're trying to uphold a standard that they've set for themselves.
Currently, there's no answer. The censorware people are trying to come up with one, but it hasn't worked so far. And then, the majority of this community - which has characteristically shown an attitude of disdain for people who would like to have an easier time bringing their children up right - laugh at it. Hello? Would it kill you to show a measure of respect? They're not trying to censor the Internet! They're trying to provide a product to parents because they see a need for it. You can still log on to your ISP and surf for p0rn all you like.
I favor 1) parents actually spending time with their children (which isn't quite cool with too many people, it seems), helping them decide on moral issues and enforcing house rules; and 2) a TLD for.xxx that I can filter on my firewall at home.
I believe this is so funny because there's a lot of truth to it. Some of the smartest people I know that I grew up with would routinely spend most of our algebra class talking warp drive theory.
Most of us use linux not because of technical or moral reasons but because we like the interface better.
Actually, I use it because I like the control. Anything that lets me create a home made application server cluster using nothing but IP Masquerade, some command-line programs and my own shell scripts is very cool. I also like the customizability - I was converted when I wrote my first kernel patch. I'm sure I could never have solved the same problem if I were using Windows. (And yes, the problem would have existed in Windows, too.)
It means no competition which stagnates development.
Maybe that's why we haven't seen much new in the way of UI from Microsoft for a while? We do from Macintosh - and that's because it's got actual competition on the desktop market.
Does your First Amendment trump card allow you to proclaim the safety of smoking cigarettes, or show pornography to my children while they walk to school? Wouldn't the latter trample on my right as a parent to teach my children what I want them to learn, and the former trample on my right to learn the truth?
"Tyranny of the majority?" What is this oxymoronic nonsense? Isn't that, quite literally, democracy? What would you rather have? Anarchy? Is that more fair?
I think way too many people apply the First Amendment protections where they shouldn't belong. There's a man I know of that sets up p0rn shops just to make a statement. He claims First Amendment protection, and is expecting everyone in the cities where he puts his filthy shops to sit and take it. Is this man's business practice covered by the First Amendment? Does he have an inherent right to make money? NO! Should the people around him, who think that his wares are perverse and have a right to teach their children be allowed to kick him out? Does his corporation have the same self-evident rights that a person does?
Do gaming companies have an inherent right to sell games, no matter what kind? Does the MPAA have an inherent right to sell movies to everyone, without restriction?
In the first place, the First Amendment existed to ensure that every person was free to express his political views without fearing the State. At some point, we started applying it to too many other things, and started trampling on people's rights. This is where the delusion starts.
Take two doses of reality, and call me in the morning.
I don't know what the deal is these days, with Slashdotters and seemingly everyone else, but it seems like if someone doesn't get to do what he wants when he wants with no consequences or restrictions at all, this person starts to scream about the United States Constitution, and all the rights it gives him.
How about the right of the general public to see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear? That right (which, as far as I'm concerned, should be given equal footing with freedom of speech) is looked down upon as oppressive and shallow-minded. Hello?
What if somebody wanted to open a p0rn shop near a very religious suburban area, and the general consensus is that the people don't want it there? Do those citizens have a right to control what goes on around them? Should they be able to kick that (I'm sure) well-meaning business owner off, and get him away from their community? I hope so.
The problem is that people have lost touch with the central idea of government - that it's supposed to be an extension of the will of the people. (I don't know why we have to polarize ourselves against the government all the time.) If the people in general decide that they don't want their kids doing something, shouldn't they be able to enforce it?
The consequence of living in a governed society is that you have restrictions placed upon some of your actions to keep you from infringing upon other people's rights. This is the crux of the idea we call censorship. If you don't like it, find a desert island and live in your own little happy anarchy.
I think he's hit a really good point, here. Getting to the polling station has probably been a major deterrent for people who like to mess with things just because. (It's also a major deterrent for voting, period. I wouldn't have voted this year if my wife hadn't dragged me to the elementary school down the road.)
I don't think that Internet voting would encourage the people who would screw with the results anyway, though. This Internet voting thing just makes it easier for people who don't like to leave their houses...
2) Never own a cell phone that my employer has the number of
These were my dad's goals in life before mine, and I think he was absolutely correct. No, I don't want to be reachable at any time. What's in it for me? Unfortunately, it means that I have to be a little bit pickier when it comes to which job I take, but I think it's worth it not to have to think about work when I'm home.
No kidding. I'm sick of it myself. It's like the MCI "Friends and Family" deal all over again, which I also hated like mad. I've had at least four geek friends of mine approach me and ask if I'd like to run some alien program on my computer and get paid for it. When I realized I'd have to be a salesman just like them, I said, "No way!" (Or was that, "You suck!"?)
But then I gave in. But I'm sure as heck not soliciting anybody to be a Process Tree "partner" under me, no way no how.
</rant>
(By the way, my Process Tree partner number is 19291.)
There are already commercial entities that support Linux - like Red Hat, Caldera, and IBM. Maybe one of those companies could start selling certification? It could end up profitable, now that Linux is starting to become more "mainstream" - according to the media (not real life).
I wonder if Red Hat could come up with a certification program. I wish they would. Where I work, we bought a Dell 2400 that was supposed to work with Red Hat Linux. Guess what? Nope! Linux had no idea what the SCSI RAID array was. They supposedly had drivers that worked, but only on a certain hacked kernel with a certain configuration, and their tech support was way too underinformed to get us something like that.
If Red Hat had been certifying hardware (and gotten paid a wonderful fee for it), I'm sure that darned thing wouldn't have been advertized in the first place.
...all *standard* with their new macs (hopefully).
What does standard mean in the Mac world? That you have to live with it, period? I hope not. People already have a hard enough time figuring out how to use the mouse we all know and love. Heck, I bought an OEM PC once (I know, I know, and I never did it again - it's got Linux on it now) that had a friggin' mouse tutorial.
Now, to select an item from the drop-down menu, lovingly squeeeeeze your mouse, like this...
What I'm saying is this: I think it's been hard enough for some users to get used to the mouse in the first place. (You laugh? Try watching my mother-in-law use a mouse. After three years, she's not exactly deft yet.) It'll be even harder for them to get used to this wild new thing. If Macintosh does what it has in the past, it'll push it on everyone without giving them any idea that there's an alternative. Heck, they may throw out the old mouse altogether, when it wouldn't be any more difficult to keep it. INNOVATE!
Slashdot Mirror
So you think a media convert is worse off than a p0rn addict? Have you any idea what p0rn does to a person's interpersonal relationships? For example: as a general rule, it's good for a man to be faithful to his wife. (Anyone that contradicts this is lying to himself - and don't argue with me about this one. The disintegration of the family is the worst illness of our times - children do much better with two parents, and it's statistically proven.)
How does this man remain faithful to his wife if he's thinking about the breasts of every woman he talks to?
Please, rethink your priorities.
So the secret is this: once you get in, make sure you keep in contact with your friends, and with people who you've impressed - especially impressive or higher-up people who you've impressed. It's your personal network, and sometimes they even call you about job offers at the company they work for. Getting in on a personal recommendation from someone with good credentials is always easier.
But then, don't rely on just that. If all you've got are friends, they'll see through you within weeks, or days.
That's because people who understand know that you shouldn't use a Windows box as a server that has to handle a high load. It's using the wrong tool for the job. It's like, like...
...like taking a dump in a urinal.
I mean, the urinal does front-end services really well, but really doesn't work well doing back-end services.
Try telling someone sometime that urinals are better for taking dumps in. They'll look at you like you're crazy. But that's what Microsoft did, right? And then they tried to convert it - you know, give it a bigger bowl. Whoops. Didn't work as well as they'd hoped.
Don't mind me, I'm smoking something.
Why is this a troll?
I'm not saying that I agree with his statements, but he did contribute to the discussion with his viewpoint.
Maybe somebody ought to read the moderator guidelines again...
Can we mod this up, please?
WHAT?? You can't cheat on Slashdot!!
I think it's to get it on the front page of Slashdot. Gotta put the right spin on, you know. Everything's about spin, not truth.
Good point.
.xxx that I can filter on my firewall at home.
Small problem: you can't watch your children all of the time.
My wife doesn't have a career outside the house. She's decided to stay home with our children. I think it's a wonderful idea. She can teach them things that a day care center wouldn't bother, and make sure they get a good idea of what's appropriate and what's inappropriate.
There are still a few problems, which I think these blocking software makers are addressing in the wrong way: 1) you can't watch your children all of the time; 2) you can't trust your children all of the time (I know because I was a child once, and I remember it); 3) you can't make sure you or they don't get tricked into seeing something.
1 and 2: Sometimes, a parent has to enforce rules, not just make them. Sometimes, a parent has to make it nearly impossible to break the rules - especially if a child has broken a rule multiple times. As a punishment, the parent revokes certain priviliges, and sometimes the ability to break the rule that was broken. (Life naturally works that way, but on a longer time scale. Parents speed things up, because they don't want to wait for, say, the child to become a washed-out drug adict on dialysis before he knows it's not good for him.) Currently, you can't do that with the World Wide Web. The alternative is to revoke browsing privilidges completely, but you can't always enforce that, either.
3: I don't look at p0rn because that would potentially ruin my relationship with my wife. (And all you who think it wouldn't, please don't argue with me about this one. That would be off-topic.) What if I and my family have decided (yes, children can actually make these decisions themselves, and even if you help them, they still made it themselves) that p0rn doesn't belong in our home? I've been tricked before. I don't like that - not because it would ruin me to see it once, but because I don't want to look at it, and I don't enjoy being forced against my will to see something. I also don't want my children to have to deal with that, especially if they're trying to uphold a standard that they've set for themselves.
Currently, there's no answer. The censorware people are trying to come up with one, but it hasn't worked so far. And then, the majority of this community - which has characteristically shown an attitude of disdain for people who would like to have an easier time bringing their children up right - laugh at it. Hello? Would it kill you to show a measure of respect? They're not trying to censor the Internet! They're trying to provide a product to parents because they see a need for it. You can still log on to your ISP and surf for p0rn all you like.
I favor 1) parents actually spending time with their children (which isn't quite cool with too many people, it seems), helping them decide on moral issues and enforcing house rules; and 2) a TLD for
I believe this is so funny because there's a lot of truth to it. Some of the smartest people I know that I grew up with would routinely spend most of our algebra class talking warp drive theory.
Most of us use linux not because of technical or moral reasons but because we like the interface better.
Actually, I use it because I like the control. Anything that lets me create a home made application server cluster using nothing but IP Masquerade, some command-line programs and my own shell scripts is very cool. I also like the customizability - I was converted when I wrote my first kernel patch. I'm sure I could never have solved the same problem if I were using Windows. (And yes, the problem would have existed in Windows, too.)
It means no competition which stagnates development.
Maybe that's why we haven't seen much new in the way of UI from Microsoft for a while? We do from Macintosh - and that's because it's got actual competition on the desktop market.
Says the substitute Grammar Nazi: you are perfectly correct.
Well, on Slashdot, anyway, where all these things are reported. Anywhere else, it's still just a necessary evil - like taxes.
Does your First Amendment trump card allow you to proclaim the safety of smoking cigarettes, or show pornography to my children while they walk to school? Wouldn't the latter trample on my right as a parent to teach my children what I want them to learn, and the former trample on my right to learn the truth?
"Tyranny of the majority?" What is this oxymoronic nonsense? Isn't that, quite literally, democracy? What would you rather have? Anarchy? Is that more fair?
I think way too many people apply the First Amendment protections where they shouldn't belong. There's a man I know of that sets up p0rn shops just to make a statement. He claims First Amendment protection, and is expecting everyone in the cities where he puts his filthy shops to sit and take it. Is this man's business practice covered by the First Amendment? Does he have an inherent right to make money? NO! Should the people around him, who think that his wares are perverse and have a right to teach their children be allowed to kick him out? Does his corporation have the same self-evident rights that a person does?
Do gaming companies have an inherent right to sell games, no matter what kind? Does the MPAA have an inherent right to sell movies to everyone, without restriction?
In the first place, the First Amendment existed to ensure that every person was free to express his political views without fearing the State. At some point, we started applying it to too many other things, and started trampling on people's rights. This is where the delusion starts.
Take two doses of reality, and call me in the morning.
I wish to heck I had my mod points today.
Is there one for "Irony?"
I cannot imagine how this is constitutional.
Oh, get off it.
<rant>
I don't know what the deal is these days, with Slashdotters and seemingly everyone else, but it seems like if someone doesn't get to do what he wants when he wants with no consequences or restrictions at all, this person starts to scream about the United States Constitution, and all the rights it gives him.
How about the right of the general public to see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear? That right (which, as far as I'm concerned, should be given equal footing with freedom of speech) is looked down upon as oppressive and shallow-minded. Hello?
What if somebody wanted to open a p0rn shop near a very religious suburban area, and the general consensus is that the people don't want it there? Do those citizens have a right to control what goes on around them? Should they be able to kick that (I'm sure) well-meaning business owner off, and get him away from their community? I hope so.
The problem is that people have lost touch with the central idea of government - that it's supposed to be an extension of the will of the people. (I don't know why we have to polarize ourselves against the government all the time.) If the people in general decide that they don't want their kids doing something, shouldn't they be able to enforce it?
The consequence of living in a governed society is that you have restrictions placed upon some of your actions to keep you from infringing upon other people's rights. This is the crux of the idea we call censorship. If you don't like it, find a desert island and live in your own little happy anarchy.
</rant>
Currently the DVD-RW media's costs a LOT...
Yes, currently. Are you assuming the prices can't fall?
Great movie hits screen
JonKatz writes "post-Columbine"
All Slashdotters laugh
Moderate up? Where did I put my mod points?...
I think he's hit a really good point, here. Getting to the polling station has probably been a major deterrent for people who like to mess with things just because. (It's also a major deterrent for voting, period. I wouldn't have voted this year if my wife hadn't dragged me to the elementary school down the road.)
I don't think that Internet voting would encourage the people who would screw with the results anyway, though. This Internet voting thing just makes it easier for people who don't like to leave their houses...
I have two goals in life:
1) Never own a pager
2) Never own a cell phone that my employer has the number of
These were my dad's goals in life before mine, and I think he was absolutely correct. No, I don't want to be reachable at any time. What's in it for me? Unfortunately, it means that I have to be a little bit pickier when it comes to which job I take, but I think it's worth it not to have to think about work when I'm home.
This is _interesting_!
The only thing better then getting paid is getting paid from the government.
The only thing better than getting paid is getting to keep what you're paid.
Where's my mod points, dangit!!
<rant>
No kidding. I'm sick of it myself. It's like the MCI "Friends and Family" deal all over again, which I also hated like mad. I've had at least four geek friends of mine approach me and ask if I'd like to run some alien program on my computer and get paid for it. When I realized I'd have to be a salesman just like them, I said, "No way!" (Or was that, "You suck!"?)
But then I gave in. But I'm sure as heck not soliciting anybody to be a Process Tree "partner" under me, no way no how.
</rant>
(By the way, my Process Tree partner number is 19291.)
There are already commercial entities that support Linux - like Red Hat, Caldera, and IBM. Maybe one of those companies could start selling certification? It could end up profitable, now that Linux is starting to become more "mainstream" - according to the media (not real life).
I wonder if Red Hat could come up with a certification program. I wish they would. Where I work, we bought a Dell 2400 that was supposed to work with Red Hat Linux. Guess what? Nope! Linux had no idea what the SCSI RAID array was. They supposedly had drivers that worked, but only on a certain hacked kernel with a certain configuration, and their tech support was way too underinformed to get us something like that.
If Red Hat had been certifying hardware (and gotten paid a wonderful fee for it), I'm sure that darned thing wouldn't have been advertized in the first place.
...all *standard* with their new macs (hopefully).
What does standard mean in the Mac world? That you have to live with it, period? I hope not. People already have a hard enough time figuring out how to use the mouse we all know and love. Heck, I bought an OEM PC once (I know, I know, and I never did it again - it's got Linux on it now) that had a friggin' mouse tutorial.
Now, to select an item from the drop-down menu, lovingly squeeeeeze your mouse, like this...
What I'm saying is this: I think it's been hard enough for some users to get used to the mouse in the first place. (You laugh? Try watching my mother-in-law use a mouse. After three years, she's not exactly deft yet.) It'll be even harder for them to get used to this wild new thing. If Macintosh does what it has in the past, it'll push it on everyone without giving them any idea that there's an alternative. Heck, they may throw out the old mouse altogether, when it wouldn't be any more difficult to keep it. INNOVATE!