The FCC is not proposing that the govt. actually become an ISP. All the FCC is proposing is that a band of spectrum be opened up for unlicensed wireless Internet access. What this means is that anyone could set up shop and become the ISP, such as municipalities, private corporations, or IT Bob providing access to his neighbors.
What this essentially does is reboot the current Internet access model and create a well-fertilized field in which something else can grow. This gives us more choice, not less. There are no guarantees that what grows there is Good, but what it is not going to be is an ISP run by the Federal Govt.
Their argument for not forcing companies to disclose is that those big companies would be better off spending the money they would use to inform everyone on the people who actually get victimized. What does that even mean exactly? Also, they don't want to needlessly freak people out.
Sounds like a pretty weak argument to me really. More corporate BS?
BTW, I beat/. to the story on my ID theft site: Identity Theft Risk Overhyped. Do I get extra points for that, or what?
I couldn't find your AdSense ads. Are they still on the site or have you taken them down since they were not producing much?
Anyways, after reading your comment I think maybe the subject matter has to do with how willing people will be to contribute content. On the home remedies site, for example, everyone has their own theories about how to cure the common cold or get rid of hiccups, and they're happy to get online and share that with everyone. Perhaps there aren't enough people knowledgeable enough (or who think they're knowledgeable enough) to post an article on Debian administration.
Truth be told, I don't know exactly what the difference is, but you make some interesting points worth consideration.
No one realizes just how much work goes into any "hobby project website" until they start doing it themselves.
Actually, I've found just the opposite to be true. I started a "hobby" site about 2 years ago dealing with home remedies (My Home Remedies). There is some initial work coding the site, but after that, assuming there are no huge bugs, it takes maybe 5 minutes a day for me to review submissions. Of course, the key to an easy, successful hobby site, unless you just love the sound of your fingers clicking on the keyboard, is to get the users to write the content for you.
Further, this hobby site now makes me an extra grand or so a month (and it continues to increase). I've been so impressed with how easy it is once the initial time investment is over that I've taken it up a level and created a new site (Bloomshare) where other people can create their own communities similar to the home remedies site but on any topic they like. They can write content if they want, or they can let their visitors write it for them. Plus they can put ads on their sites and get paid just like me!
Most serious webmasters know the phrase "Content is King." The real key is to have your visitors create the content for you, which, surprisingly enough, they are more than willing to do.
But with the ability of the customers to buy individual songs at their discretion, the labels can no longer force them to also pay for 10 crap songs that they don't want to hear. Ever.
However, perhaps with the added freedom customers would be a bit more agog in their music purchases, making up for the loss in revenue and perhaps then some.
My ADDled mind shakes off one habit only to pick up another. I try to build barriers, but as an earlier poster pointed out by example of Brian Eno, we simply bypass the artificial detours we construct. It would be better to retrain ourselves and eliminate those neural pathways that fire up upon familiar stimulus.
Meditation is the practice of making the mind become still. It takes a lot of work and is very difficult in the beginning (like most things worthwhile). Ultimately, though, there is no greater freedom than being released from the bonds of your own brain. We spend plenty of time trying to fend off boredom, but really we should be attacking the problem at its root. Stillness is quite enjoyable when you can do it without much effort.
In the article, this range comes from the fact that the data can be fitted to different curves, resulting in a different timescale. Some of the curve fitting I saw in the article used polynomials, exponentials, and linear functions.
The owners do make the money off the ad revenue, however, and I guess it'd be up to them on how they build their community and 'share the wealth.'
(begin shameless plug)
I just launched a site called Bloomshare that let's anybody create a web community (kind of like a public blog) free. I 'share the wealth' by letting the users give me their adsense account code and then putting ads on their post pages.
(end shameless plug)
Anyways, I think we've just begun to see the potential for revenue sharing models in blogs and in web communities.
P.S. with a little initial effort, one CAN make enough to live off of from these types of things.
a company that is responsible to noone but it's shareholders is responsible for increasing their stock value. fucking your customer base is a bad way of doing this. thus they are accountable to their shareholders, and we (their customers) get to vote whether or not the shareholders are happy. It's a check and a balance!
The only problem is that there are entirely way too many ways of fucking your customer without them knowing about it, and corporations have gotten way too good at figuring it out.
Do you pay taxes? (A rhetorical question is not meant to be answered out loud, but merely serves to provoke a certain line of thought in the questionee.)
The vast majority of the people who became the impetus of the "me" generation were not former hippies.
I'd have to say that, in my experiences, I agree. My dad was a full-blown hippie back in the day. Today you'd not be able to tell from the way he dresses, but talk to him for about 2 minutes and it's clear his ideas and beliefs are still the same ones he had from the 60s, although perhaps slightly evolved. Also, I've met many of his friends from those days and most of them live on acreages, grow their own food, have long hair with pony tails, do yoga, etc.
I think that for the most part, the "true" hippies from the 60s haven't really changed their attitudes, but they have become less vocal as the enthusiasm of youth wore off.
Welcome to reality, where criminals are real people and economic crime doesn't stop just because you say "Hey, wait, it's a free market! This isn't fair! Why don't you get a job?"
Exactly.
(I was going to write something else here to add to that sentiment, but really the parent said it all.)
Remember, the truth is not necessarily what happened but is instead an individual's perception of the facts.
That is certainly a definition of "truth" that I'm not familiar with. Here are some examples of how others define "truth":
the state of being the case
the body of real things, events, and facts
the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality
Now, there may be many different usages of "truth" not necessarily found in dictionaries and the like, but I would argue that the generally accepted definition of "truth" relates more to facts than to perception.
I suppose we could start discussing the philosophy of reality and truth and whether we can ever really know anything as a fact, or even whether anything really exists at all. In such a context perhaps your statement might be more acceptable.
I was assuming we were talking about a mythical cold fusion method with a positive net energy production, whereas I see you must be talking about one of the existing methods that do not have this feature.
See? We were both right, just about different things!
What do you think powers the generators that generate the electricity that powers the electric plug in the wall where you will be plugging your car into?
Well, um, don't you think if we had cold fusion cars we might have cold fusion power plants too?
How about this: energy storage devices require us to put the energy in them initially, whereas energy sources have energy that was put there by some natural process. Acceptable definitions?
How is it that they were brainwashed into there parents beliefs, while you weren't?
That's a very good point. The truth is that I'm sure I have been "brainwashed" and conditioned just like nearly everyone else. I'd bet that the vast majority of beliefs that humans hold are not of their own making but have been assimilated through their lives by the people that most influence them.
In reality, probably none of us have it all figured out. Sometimes I wonder why I participate in discussions about religion or politics at all. Isn't it really all just a bunch of intellectual masturbation anyways?
I will say this, however: While I believe I have been conditioned to be tolerant and accepting of all people, those I hypocritically accuse of being "brainwashed" have been conditioned to be tolerant and accepting of their own kind only. (Of course, here I am saying how tolerant I am when I am clearly intolerant of their intolerance. See why these discussions are pointless?)
Let me close with this: When you find the ultimate theory of the universe, you will know it because it will predict itself.
I don't really believe that ignorant people believe in Jesus. I only used that word because the poster did, and the bigger points I was trying to make were:
1) Gross generalizations are usually bad, as there are always exceptions.
2) Just because you don't agree with Christians doesn't mean Jesus can't still teach you something.
I'm sorry I didn't make this clear and I apologize if I offended you.
In the Amazon review of your father's book, it says: ``... Jesus is one of the ways, all religions are paths to God... '',
while in the bible we see that Jesus said: No one comes to the Father except through Me.
The book spends quite a good amount of time dealing with this exact topic. If you are open to the idea of alternative translations and interpretations, then you will probably find the argument against the interpretation you are putting forth pretty convincing.
If, on the other hand, you have been overly conditioned by your parents, pastor, community, etc. and only believe what they have told you to believe, then this book will certainly shake the bedrock of your belief system. If this sounds unpleasant, then I recommend you don't read the book.
Jesus, Guns, and Bigotry. All staples of an ignorant society.
Being a liberal, non-Christian Oklahoman I must agree, for the most part. However, we need to remember that even in "ignorant societies" there are many exceptions. Also, just because most people who are "ignorant" believe in Jesus, we shouldn't dismiss Jesus as a valid spiritual figure altogether (atheists and agnostics, just ignore this, because I'm not trying to convince you, only those who have spiritual inklings but have been put off of Christianity by the ridiculous fundamentalism and dogma that it has come to represent).
Here's a book that will radically change your view of Jesus and his teachings, and will be a welcome relief for the many disillusioned Christians out there. Disclaimer: the author is my father.
I find it hard to believe that Google, (or any other competent company implementing something like this,) hasn't had the forethought to avoid these pitfalls.
I don't know, it seems like making an assumption like that is not really a good idea. I think a company like Google certainly has shown competent decision making in the past, but we should never accept something at face value just because of an apparent pattern of competence. Question everything!
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC is not proposing that the govt. actually become an ISP. All the FCC is proposing is that a band of spectrum be opened up for unlicensed wireless Internet access. What this means is that anyone could set up shop and become the ISP, such as municipalities, private corporations, or IT Bob providing access to his neighbors.
What this essentially does is reboot the current Internet access model and create a well-fertilized field in which something else can grow. This gives us more choice, not less. There are no guarantees that what grows there is Good, but what it is not going to be is an ISP run by the Federal Govt.
Their argument for not forcing companies to disclose is that those big companies would be better off spending the money they would use to inform everyone on the people who actually get victimized. What does that even mean exactly? Also, they don't want to needlessly freak people out.
/. to the story on my ID theft site: Identity Theft Risk Overhyped. Do I get extra points for that, or what?
Sounds like a pretty weak argument to me really. More corporate BS?
BTW, I beat
I couldn't find your AdSense ads. Are they still on the site or have you taken them down since they were not producing much? Anyways, after reading your comment I think maybe the subject matter has to do with how willing people will be to contribute content. On the home remedies site, for example, everyone has their own theories about how to cure the common cold or get rid of hiccups, and they're happy to get online and share that with everyone. Perhaps there aren't enough people knowledgeable enough (or who think they're knowledgeable enough) to post an article on Debian administration. Truth be told, I don't know exactly what the difference is, but you make some interesting points worth consideration.
No one realizes just how much work goes into any "hobby project website" until they start doing it themselves.
Actually, I've found just the opposite to be true. I started a "hobby" site about 2 years ago dealing with home remedies (My Home Remedies). There is some initial work coding the site, but after that, assuming there are no huge bugs, it takes maybe 5 minutes a day for me to review submissions. Of course, the key to an easy, successful hobby site, unless you just love the sound of your fingers clicking on the keyboard, is to get the users to write the content for you.
Further, this hobby site now makes me an extra grand or so a month (and it continues to increase). I've been so impressed with how easy it is once the initial time investment is over that I've taken it up a level and created a new site (Bloomshare) where other people can create their own communities similar to the home remedies site but on any topic they like. They can write content if they want, or they can let their visitors write it for them. Plus they can put ads on their sites and get paid just like me!
Most serious webmasters know the phrase "Content is King." The real key is to have your visitors create the content for you, which, surprisingly enough, they are more than willing to do.
But with the ability of the customers to buy individual songs at their discretion, the labels can no longer force them to also pay for 10 crap songs that they don't want to hear. Ever.
However, perhaps with the added freedom customers would be a bit more agog in their music purchases, making up for the loss in revenue and perhaps then some.
Who can say? I am not an economist.
My ADDled mind shakes off one habit only to pick up another. I try to build barriers, but as an earlier poster pointed out by example of Brian Eno, we simply bypass the artificial detours we construct. It would be better to retrain ourselves and eliminate those neural pathways that fire up upon familiar stimulus.
Meditation is the practice of making the mind become still. It takes a lot of work and is very difficult in the beginning (like most things worthwhile). Ultimately, though, there is no greater freedom than being released from the bonds of your own brain. We spend plenty of time trying to fend off boredom, but really we should be attacking the problem at its root. Stillness is quite enjoyable when you can do it without much effort.
is 2 - 10 years as precise as they can be
In the article, this range comes from the fact that the data can be fitted to different curves, resulting in a different timescale. Some of the curve fitting I saw in the article used polynomials, exponentials, and linear functions.
The owners do make the money off the ad revenue, however, and I guess it'd be up to them on how they build their community and 'share the wealth.'
(begin shameless plug)
I just launched a site called Bloomshare that let's anybody create a web community (kind of like a public blog) free. I 'share the wealth' by letting the users give me their adsense account code and then putting ads on their post pages.
(end shameless plug)
Anyways, I think we've just begun to see the potential for revenue sharing models in blogs and in web communities.
P.S. with a little initial effort, one CAN make enough to live off of from these types of things.
a company that is responsible to noone but it's shareholders is responsible for increasing their stock value. fucking your customer base is a bad way of doing this. thus they are accountable to their shareholders, and we (their customers) get to vote whether or not the shareholders are happy. It's a check and a balance!
The only problem is that there are entirely way too many ways of fucking your customer without them knowing about it, and corporations have gotten way too good at figuring it out.
Do you pay taxes? (A rhetorical question is not meant to be answered out loud, but merely serves to provoke a certain line of thought in the questionee.)
The vast majority of the people who became the impetus of the "me" generation were not former hippies.
I'd have to say that, in my experiences, I agree. My dad was a full-blown hippie back in the day. Today you'd not be able to tell from the way he dresses, but talk to him for about 2 minutes and it's clear his ideas and beliefs are still the same ones he had from the 60s, although perhaps slightly evolved. Also, I've met many of his friends from those days and most of them live on acreages, grow their own food, have long hair with pony tails, do yoga, etc.
I think that for the most part, the "true" hippies from the 60s haven't really changed their attitudes, but they have become less vocal as the enthusiasm of youth wore off.
Welcome to reality, where criminals are real people and economic crime doesn't stop just because you say "Hey, wait, it's a free market! This isn't fair! Why don't you get a job?"
Exactly.
(I was going to write something else here to add to that sentiment, but really the parent said it all.)
That is certainly a definition of "truth" that I'm not familiar with. Here are some examples of how others define "truth":
- the state of being the case
- the body of real things, events, and facts
- the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality
Now, there may be many different usages of "truth" not necessarily found in dictionaries and the like, but I would argue that the generally accepted definition of "truth" relates more to facts than to perception.I suppose we could start discussing the philosophy of reality and truth and whether we can ever really know anything as a fact, or even whether anything really exists at all. In such a context perhaps your statement might be more acceptable.
Then again, maybe you were being sarcastic.
I was assuming we were talking about a mythical cold fusion method with a positive net energy production, whereas I see you must be talking about one of the existing methods that do not have this feature.
See? We were both right, just about different things!
What do you think powers the generators that generate the electricity that powers the electric plug in the wall where you will be plugging your car into?
Well, um, don't you think if we had cold fusion cars we might have cold fusion power plants too?
How about this: energy storage devices require us to put the energy in them initially, whereas energy sources have energy that was put there by some natural process. Acceptable definitions?
I just want to thank everyone contributing to this discussion for ruining my day.
I bought a diamond engagement ring last year, and now I'm more than a little ashamed. Oh, well. You can't change the past, you can only learn from it.
How is it that they were brainwashed into there parents beliefs, while you weren't?
That's a very good point. The truth is that I'm sure I have been "brainwashed" and conditioned just like nearly everyone else. I'd bet that the vast majority of beliefs that humans hold are not of their own making but have been assimilated through their lives by the people that most influence them.
In reality, probably none of us have it all figured out. Sometimes I wonder why I participate in discussions about religion or politics at all. Isn't it really all just a bunch of intellectual masturbation anyways?
I will say this, however: While I believe I have been conditioned to be tolerant and accepting of all people, those I hypocritically accuse of being "brainwashed" have been conditioned to be tolerant and accepting of their own kind only. (Of course, here I am saying how tolerant I am when I am clearly intolerant of their intolerance. See why these discussions are pointless?)
Let me close with this: When you find the ultimate theory of the universe, you will know it because it will predict itself.
This is one of the most lucid posts I've read in a long time. Or maybe it's just that I agree with it.
Is there a difference?
I would love to hear you qualify this statement
I don't really believe that ignorant people believe in Jesus. I only used that word because the poster did, and the bigger points I was trying to make were:
1) Gross generalizations are usually bad, as there are always exceptions.
2) Just because you don't agree with Christians doesn't mean Jesus can't still teach you something.
I'm sorry I didn't make this clear and I apologize if I offended you.
In the Amazon review of your father's book, it says: `` ... Jesus is one of the ways, all religions are paths to God ... '',
while in the bible we see that Jesus said: No one comes to the Father except through Me.
The book spends quite a good amount of time dealing with this exact topic. If you are open to the idea of alternative translations and interpretations, then you will probably find the argument against the interpretation you are putting forth pretty convincing.
If, on the other hand, you have been overly conditioned by your parents, pastor, community, etc. and only believe what they have told you to believe, then this book will certainly shake the bedrock of your belief system. If this sounds unpleasant, then I recommend you don't read the book.
Question everything! (Especially yourself.)
Jesus, Guns, and Bigotry. All staples of an ignorant society.
Being a liberal, non-Christian Oklahoman I must agree, for the most part. However, we need to remember that even in "ignorant societies" there are many exceptions. Also, just because most people who are "ignorant" believe in Jesus, we shouldn't dismiss Jesus as a valid spiritual figure altogether (atheists and agnostics, just ignore this, because I'm not trying to convince you, only those who have spiritual inklings but have been put off of Christianity by the ridiculous fundamentalism and dogma that it has come to represent).
Here's a book that will radically change your view of Jesus and his teachings, and will be a welcome relief for the many disillusioned Christians out there. Disclaimer: the author is my father.
I certainly didn't think about this at first, but now that you mention it, I think you could be right. Someone mod up as insightful!
Here you are: http://dmoz.org/profiles/deadsea.html
:)
You're certainly a more prolific editor than I am. I apologize for my arrogance.
I find it hard to believe that Google, (or any other competent company implementing something like this,) hasn't had the forethought to avoid these pitfalls.
I don't know, it seems like making an assumption like that is not really a good idea. I think a company like Google certainly has shown competent decision making in the past, but we should never accept something at face value just because of an apparent pattern of competence. Question everything!