Correct. A lot of people on this thread are talking about history, but no one has mentioned the origin of monopolies - a document from the king decreeing that no one would be allowed to compete with the grantee in a given area. In other words, "we'll bust your head if you compete with our friend/contributor/supporter". The only thing that's different now is the subtlety level.
Re:It's not a real free market in action
on
Broadband Obstacles
·
· Score: 1
Free markets do not require that everyone is fully informed on everything. Information about products and competitors is another of the basket of goods each person manages according to his/her own values. For most people, it's not worth the investment of time and energy to read up in Consumer Reports, and Mother Jones, and Standard & Poor's (etc.) to learn about the product and the company when they're buying gum or toothpicks (an extreme example for demonstration purposes).
Econ textbooks describe free markets in terms of (a) "completely rational actors" possessing (b)"perfect information. Well, (a) means it doesn't apply to the lives of real people, and (b) assumes away the very problems economics is meant to solve. This implies that free markets are only effective for omniscient robots. Only reducing government controls (and subsidies) can make our system a "real free market in action", in which real, flawed people choose based on information baked into prices (reflecting the values and choices of everyone in terms of relative scarcities), plus whatever further research they believe is worth the time and effort involved.
Yes, Enterprise uses a "cold opening" - just like every one of the Star Trek series. Unless you think the episodes are 90 seconds long, though, you'll notice there's a theme song after that (before the commercials and the main body of the show). Enterprise's theme song includes vocals. Welcome to the actual conversation.
>>just taking a while to hit its pace
I'm sure that was another nail in its coffin. I found the Tick via the cartoon series, and just fscking love it. I had a hard time adjusting to the live-action version, but I found it funnier and funnier with time (especially Nestor Carbonell's Batmanuel). So, factor in the time slot, the Seinfeld curse, the cheapo budget, the Fox overkill-then-silence "promotion" policy, and twenty other factors listed elsewhere in this discussion - well, I'm disappointed but not surprised.
So, if the ban were upheld, that would make your kids safe? How about the violence in novels like Catcher in the Rye, or Moby Dick? Or the violence in the Bible? Is the government responsible for protecting your (and everyone else's) kids from that "filth"?
"Now, how am I going to keep my kids away from this filth? I can't watch them 24/7." What did your parents do? I presume that you have decent values (although liberty seems to be much further down on your priority list than on mine) - how did your parents manage it with all the filth the government failed to keep out of your hands?
I know parenting is tough - but you'll be doing them no favors by helping oppress the world in which they'll live.
This sort of freewheeling speculation is still (and always will be) possible - at least to bright young people who can't be browbeated, bribed, or otherwise made to respect received wisdom that strikes them as wrong. A few current examples - Linux coders, Stephen Hawking, K. Eric Drexler. Entrenched, and "self-evidently true" beliefs insisted nothing concrete (or interesting or possible) would come of their work - which added to their inspiration.
Certainty that that era is over has probably a big part of the "give up" status-quo indoctrination (I do not mean to attack you, but I think it's food for thought).
Entertainment Weekly review - "A"
on
The Hype of the Rings
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I didn't read the review myself (I hate when they give away the ending!;-) ), but Entertainment Weekly gave it a grade of "A". Click here for the full review.
It won't be long before/. gets a nastygram, especially when they see the traffic volume generated by links from here! I'm taking the under on 4 days...
Re:No luggage scanning here
on
Quantum Holography
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Don't dismiss it too hastily!
The specially constructed sphere is the easiest, and thus first, configuration to be tried in the lab.
All they need to do is require all interior luggage surfaces be built from these time-reporting light sensors (and maybe prevent travellers from putting anything else in the bag if they have a bomb), and voila! No time-and-cost-prohibitive bomb-sniffing machinery!
It'll turn out that the late lamented Doug Adams had it right:
"There is a theory which states that if anyone discovers just exactly what the universe is for and why we are here, that it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. Then there is a theory which states that this has already happened."
So, if we get it right, we'll have to start over again...
Well, almost - I think a significant part of the "wonderfulness of it all" is how much we do know, and how much more we continue to learn that's true (on top of which, as you said, there always is/will be more to learn).
This is all worthless intellectual masturbation if there's no real learning involved.
There are dozens - no, hundreds - of visions for the internet's future (just within SF - multiples more among us). But Stephenson didn't just write away the problems, or assume everything online has full verisimilitude. His Metaverse is an extension of our current online experience, shaped by technical limitations, market forces, and human imagination in a recognizably realistic way. It lives and breathes, and feels like a real near future state-of-the-art. And, because of that, it's influencing the people who'll be developing those technologies.
I've read (I believe here on/.) that many Silicon Valley companies gave that to employees and said "this is what we're aiming for", especially referring to his vision of the Metaverse. This was before the bubble popped, of course .
I've definitely been in shops that do that sort of stuff. We go to a bar after work (IT consultancy) every few weeks, for example. My last shop (in-house IT dept.) had poker parties, though I never took part.
A week ago, though, I did my first stand-up performance, and more than 20 coworkers and their significant others showed up to support me. I was honestly touched.
That's incorrect - consider the case of a 2x2 array of cells where the surrounding cells tell you there's only one bomb showing on each face. You could have this:
0 X
X 0
or this:
X 0
0 X
and there is NO way to determine which is correct without guessing. Even if everything else is solved, and you can deduce from the unmarked bombs counter that there are only two bombs left, that won't help you with this case. Actually, it's pretty rare to be able to solve an entire expert game without at least one guess like this involved.
My best score on Expert is 70 (that was a while ago, but I still get 80s routinely, and hit 76 again last night). I've always wished someone would throw a Minesweeper tournament...
Evidently the third section isn't written yet (it's certainly not posted, anyway). After being annoyed by the "missing" link, I used their search engine to list everything by this author.
Part one (and a separate post, a short poem) were posted 8/14.
The second part was posted 8/16.
Simple extrapolation says he'll post the third part no earlier than...today (damn it, after all that, it IS overdue after all!).
Slashdot Mirror
Monopoly is where no competition is allowed.
Correct. A lot of people on this thread are talking about history, but no one has mentioned the origin of monopolies - a document from the king decreeing that no one would be allowed to compete with the grantee in a given area. In other words, "we'll bust your head if you compete with our friend/contributor/supporter". The only thing that's different now is the subtlety level.
Econ textbooks describe free markets in terms of (a) "completely rational actors" possessing (b)"perfect information. Well, (a) means it doesn't apply to the lives of real people, and (b) assumes away the very problems economics is meant to solve. This implies that free markets are only effective for omniscient robots. Only reducing government controls (and subsidies) can make our system a "real free market in action", in which real, flawed people choose based on information baked into prices (reflecting the values and choices of everyone in terms of relative scarcities), plus whatever further research they believe is worth the time and effort involved.
Yes, Enterprise uses a "cold opening" - just like every one of the Star Trek series. Unless you think the episodes are 90 seconds long, though, you'll notice there's a theme song after that (before the commercials and the main body of the show). Enterprise's theme song includes vocals. Welcome to the actual conversation.
>>just taking a while to hit its pace I'm sure that was another nail in its coffin. I found the Tick via the cartoon series, and just fscking love it. I had a hard time adjusting to the live-action version, but I found it funnier and funnier with time (especially Nestor Carbonell's Batmanuel). So, factor in the time slot, the Seinfeld curse, the cheapo budget, the Fox overkill-then-silence "promotion" policy, and twenty other factors listed elsewhere in this discussion - well, I'm disappointed but not surprised.
"Now, how am I going to keep my kids away from this filth? I can't watch them 24/7." What did your parents do? I presume that you have decent values (although liberty seems to be much further down on your priority list than on mine) - how did your parents manage it with all the filth the government failed to keep out of your hands?
I know parenting is tough - but you'll be doing them no favors by helping oppress the world in which they'll live.
Just get a lot (A LOT) of 1.44MB floppy disks...
Certainty that that era is over has probably a big part of the "give up" status-quo indoctrination (I do not mean to attack you, but I think it's food for thought).
I didn't read the review myself (I hate when they give away the ending! ;-) ), but Entertainment Weekly gave it a grade of "A". Click here for the full review.
"How many companies would not like to have their website linked everywhere?"
Well, looks like KPMG is number 1!
It won't be long before /. gets a nastygram, especially when they see the traffic volume generated by links from here! I'm taking the under on 4 days...
Don't dismiss it too hastily!
The specially constructed sphere is the easiest, and thus first, configuration to be tried in the lab.
All they need to do is require all interior luggage surfaces be built from these time-reporting light sensors (and maybe prevent travellers from putting anything else in the bag if they have a bomb), and voila! No time-and-cost-prohibitive bomb-sniffing machinery!
It'll turn out that the late lamented Doug Adams had it right:
...
"There is a theory which states that if anyone discovers just exactly what the universe is for and why we are here, that it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. Then there is a theory which states that this has already happened."
So, if we get it right, we'll have to start over again
Well, almost - I think a significant part of the "wonderfulness of it all" is how much we do know, and how much more we continue to learn that's true (on top of which, as you said, there always is/will be more to learn).
This is all worthless intellectual masturbation if there's no real learning involved.
Yeah, that would be two points in its favor...
Thanks! And nice sig - grabbed my eye ("sumpin's weird!"), and it took a moment to realize that Klaatu'd been replaced...
C'mon - how can you not love a movie that kills off Steven Seagal 1/2 hour in? I almost dance a jig in the aisle...
See subject line.
If it has Troi doing that "empath" crap, maybe it should be Star Trek: Emetic.
There are dozens - no, hundreds - of visions for the internet's future (just within SF - multiples more among us). But Stephenson didn't just write away the problems, or assume everything online has full verisimilitude. His Metaverse is an extension of our current online experience, shaped by technical limitations, market forces, and human imagination in a recognizably realistic way. It lives and breathes, and feels like a real near future state-of-the-art. And, because of that, it's influencing the people who'll be developing those technologies.
Came up with the idea for the Orgasmatron and the Orb...wake me when someone's built them!!!!
I've read (I believe here on /.) that many Silicon Valley companies gave that to employees and said "this is what we're aiming for", especially referring to his vision of the Metaverse. This was before the bubble popped, of course .
I've definitely been in shops that do that sort of stuff. We go to a bar after work (IT consultancy) every few weeks, for example. My last shop (in-house IT dept.) had poker parties, though I never took part.
A week ago, though, I did my first stand-up performance, and more than 20 coworkers and their significant others showed up to support me. I was honestly touched.
That's incorrect - consider the case of a 2x2 array of cells where the surrounding cells tell you there's only one bomb showing on each face. You could have this:
0 X
X 0
or this:
X 0
0 X
and there is NO way to determine which is correct without guessing. Even if everything else is solved, and you can deduce from the unmarked bombs counter that there are only two bombs left, that won't help you with this case. Actually, it's pretty rare to be able to solve an entire expert game without at least one guess like this involved.
My best score on Expert is 70 (that was a while ago, but I still get 80s routinely, and hit 76 again last night). I've always wished someone would throw a Minesweeper tournament...
Part one (and a separate post, a short poem) were posted 8/14.
The second part was posted 8/16.
Simple extrapolation says he'll post the third part no earlier than...today (damn it, after all that, it IS overdue after all!).