Their complaint regarding government is often that the wrong level is addressing an issue, that state or local levels should be handling a particular issue rather than the federal (national) level;
I assert you are wrong. The material I've seen from Libertarians running for local offices proves you wrong. They don't object to federal programs. They object to the programs...
I think you are confusing those who run for office under the libertarian banner with the typical libertarian. Those willing to engage in a purely symbolic and bound for defeat campaign will tend to be the more extreme zealots. Most libertarians don't support libertarian candidates and are often embarrassed by them.
You mean like civil rights? Apparently the two Pauls are awfully big opponents of that sort of legislation.
The error being made is assuming the two Pauls represent the typical libertarian. The libertarians I've met seem quite different. Don't assume what you see on TV or read on the web represents the typical.
They often believe in regulation to the extent that it creates a level playing field and ensures safe products and services. Their complaint regarding regulations is often targeted against overregulation where the goal is societal engineering (for example: more people should own houses rather than rent) or political grandstanding (violent video games for example).
They say they're against regulation, but then they say they want some government interference.
No, they are against overregulation. From a libertarian perspective desired regulation would be something like transparency in banking and finance. Undesired regulation and interference might be regulations engineering a greater level of home ownership rather than renting.
The grown-ups have already decided that more government intervention is better than less government intervention.
Really, how did that intervention to increase home ownership and decrease renting work out?
You seem quite misinformed regarding Libertarians. Most libertarians do believe in government, regulations, police, fire departments etc. Their complaint regarding government is often that the wrong level is addressing an issue, that state or local levels should be handling a particular issue rather than the federal (national) level; that the causes of various problems vary from region to region and are better addressed at a more local level. They often believe in regulation to the extent that it creates a level playing field and ensures safe products and services. Their complaint regarding regulations is often targeted against overregulation where the goal is societal engineering (for example: more people should own houses rather than rent) or political grandstanding (violent video games for example). They believe law enforcement should prevent one person from harming another (smoking pot while driving ?), but if a person is engaging in some activity that harms no one else they should be left alone (smoking pot at home ?). They also believe that some things are best handled at the national level. For example national defense and interstate regulation and infrastructure. The typical libertarian doesn't seem very deluded.
Keep in mind that the folks you see on TV are not there because they represent the typical. They are usually there because they represent the most entertaining, or if you prefer the cynical then because they represent the stereotype the producer wishes to portray.
You must not many fundies then. The words in the bible means exactly what they say, except for jesus turning water to wine. There the fundies claim the wine means fruit juice.
Those who believe that each day in genesis is a 24 hour period are a minority. Those who believe that such literalists are the typical christian are either misinformed or practicing their own religion-like article of faith.
Even in literalist churches not all members agree. I've known people who have attended pretty fundamentalist churches and they had no problem with the universe being many billions of years old, the speed of light, radioactive half-life, etc.
Keep in mind that the folks you see on TV are not there because they represent the typical, they are usually there because they represent the most entertaining, or if you prefer the cynical because they represent the stereotype the producer wishes to portray.
The bible states a direct male lineage with names and ages from Adam (at Creation) to King Solomon. From there, it names kings and the lengths of their reigns. After that, events in the bible can be corroborated with records of other cultures, such as the death of the Chaldean King Nebuchadnezzar.
Perhaps the Vatican Observatory is a better source of information regarding the age of the universe according to religious folk? I'm sure the priest who developed the big bang theory would disagree with the flawed Ussher chronology you offer. The Ussher chronology is considered flawed even amongst religious communities.
The primary flaw with the Ussher chronology is that it requires a *literal* interpretation of genesis, that "day" is the literal 24 hour period that we all know and love. My understanding is that most christian faiths believe that "day" was used in a figurative manner and describes steps of undetermined length not 24 hour periods. Man was "created" on "day" 6, so events that occurred on "day" 3 and 4 can not be measured chronologically. To be generous, Ussher could at most date man but not the universe; only after man's arrival are "days" observable events.
However I'm no biblical scholar so I'll leave further arguments to the "experts". I'm just a guy who does not believe that religious people are necessarily scientifically illiterate. Holders of such a belief seem to be ironically clinging to a religious-like article of faith, a dogma of their own.
The FOSS nature of Android is probably irrelevant. Android may achieve a greater number of users merely because iOS is *unavailable* to all traditional handset manufacturers. We have never had the test case where manufactures had a choice between the closed iOS and the FOSS Android; the only choice was Android for free of write your own OS. Android could have been just as closed as iOS and handset manufacturers would probably still have chosen it.
Didn't China announce a similar plan - create a national OS based upon linux, in order to end their dependance upon a major American corporation for computing?
No. It seems they created their own Linux distribution, Red Flag Linux, as their "best alternative" for when they sat down with a major American corporation to renegotiate pricing, source access, etc.
TFA mentions the factory will produce:
- three white-knight IIs
- five SpaceshipTwos
so, what will happen after these 8 builds?
My first guess is that they will then renegotiate tax breaks and subsidies with the state of California before deciding where to do additional production. California is a pretty hostile place to to production/manufacturing unless you are high profile enough to get a deal and or/waivers from the state.
A friend found Windows 1 (or was it 2?) useful. He used it to run and switch between multiple DOS sessions. One session to edit source, a second session to compile and run. Occasionally there was a third session being used to work on documentation. Not quite what Microsoft had in mind but useful none the less.
I know I can only truly speak for myself, but I've spoken with lots of other people who at least agree with me to my face regarding Blizzard and their recent bullshit tactics. Whether they vote with their wallets once the game is released, I dunno...
Yes you do. You know they will buy. The truth is that there are many testimonials like yours right before every every one of Blizzard's "recent" best sellers. This is becoming a slashdot tradition. Long threads extolling the righteousness of a ban or boycott before external beta testing. Followed by long threads explaining that trying the beta is OK since no money goes to Blizzard and that the game looks pretty awesome. Which in turn is followed by long threads explaining how this is the greatest game ever after it is finally released, and that the authorization and anti-cheat stuff isn't that bad and if it does curtail cheating its probably a net positive. This slashdot tradition then ends with a brief article announcing some new industry sales record has been broken by the game.;-)
...but Blizzard knows what we are waiting for: a release date. Get on that, Bliz!
You can't have a release date until you've had an open beta. Open betas add an unknown amount of time to a project. Or in other words, its not "done" until the open beta shakes out the balance problems that only tens of thousands of external testers can expose.
Doesn't really matter to the investors. They are interested in returns rather than the interests of the average Joe, whether he is in Bangladesh or Dearborn, Michigan.
The important thing is that the enterprise starts and succeeds in California rather than elsewhere, because that is what keeps the bulk of the cash flowing back to predominantly California investors.
The above does not seem to make sense. If investors are interested in returns they don't care where manufacturing takes place. Also where manufacturing takes place, in the US at least, does not impede profits flowing back to California investors. As for the "Hollywood" influence, with film production increasingly leaving California I don't think Hollywood's involvement suggests manufacturing in California.
Like the fine print on Apple and other hi tech company product packaging tells us: Designed in California. Made in [not California].
Regarding the electric cars companies currently in California. Maybe some cars will be built in California while the company is still in a start up and "prototyping" mode (this can be years after starting to sell to early adopters). However when the company matures and the company perspective evolves from development to manufacturing the factories will move out of state. Especially if viable competitors appear.
Silicon Valley may be a hub for design but other parts of the country have far more expertise in nuts-and-bolts manufacturing. The components of a car may be incredibly hi tech but auto manufacturing will largely remain bolting and welding components together.
... how can a vacuum, with no physical or chemical properties, go 'bang?'
There was no vacuum yet. There was a "point" of stuff/energy we can't really describe very well that expanded *very* quickly. Referring to this expansion as an "explosion" or "bang" is just a convenient analogy.
FWIW, the phrase "big bang" was coined by opponents of the theory. It was an attempt to mock the theory.
And why isn't this galaxy backlit by the overwhelming brightness of the Big Bang itself? It would seem if you looked just a little bit further back in time everything ought to be one gigantnormous flash bulb.
By the time you find a publisher, and they sell to a distributor, who then sells it to a retail store... a developer is lucky to get 15% to 20%. Digital distribution is a game changer.
I agree, but I'm pretty sure I've been buying 90% of my software via digital distribution for the last 5 years. The game's been changed for a long time.
I don't know, I'd say you are part of the "early adopters". The only thing that even approaches mass market is Steam, and that is still a niche service. This Mac Store could be the point where the average consumer (within a platform) goes digital in general.
Digital software distribution has been around for a while now. Actually, it pre-dates brick and mortar.
Perhaps for those who wanted BSD to run on their VAX;-), but not for the "typical" consumer. For the later about as good as it got for developers was the early 80s when there were plenty of mom-and-pop computers stores. Developers could sell their ziplock baggies with a 5.25 diskette directly to them and get around 40-50% of the retail sale.
Apple gets a 30% chunk, but IMHO, it is a good thing to have long term.
Wow, and people talk about the "Microsoft tax".
Getting 70% is a developer fantasy. By the time you find a publisher, and they sell to a distributor, who then sells it to a retail store... a developer is lucky to get 15% to 20%. Digital distribution is a game changer. For a small developer implementing an online store with support and returns, paying for international payment processing, bandwidth, etc is non-trivial. If that adds up to less than 30% then the difference may easily be justified by the increased traffic and exposure of a high profile site like one provided by Apple. Unless you are a large corporation Apple's deal is not bad at all.
Correct. Judges have already thrown out the Copyright Act. Though the Copyright Act explicitly says that it does not apply to any copies necessary for the intended use of the product, the courts have declared that this clause is unfair to copyright giants, and ignore it.
But hacking/cheating does not constitute the intended use. It is not part of the "essential step of utilization" chain of events. Note that "intended use" is probably defined with respect to the copyright holder's perspective. If it were the user's perspective then it could mean anything, and thereby nothing. The exception to "intended use" would probably be "fair use", good luck getting a court to rule that hacking/cheating is "fair use".
Slashdot Mirror
Their complaint regarding government is often that the wrong level is addressing an issue, that state or local levels should be handling a particular issue rather than the federal (national) level; I assert you are wrong. The material I've seen from Libertarians running for local offices proves you wrong. They don't object to federal programs. They object to the programs ...
I think you are confusing those who run for office under the libertarian banner with the typical libertarian. Those willing to engage in a purely symbolic and bound for defeat campaign will tend to be the more extreme zealots. Most libertarians don't support libertarian candidates and are often embarrassed by them.
You mean like civil rights? Apparently the two Pauls are awfully big opponents of that sort of legislation.
The error being made is assuming the two Pauls represent the typical libertarian. The libertarians I've met seem quite different. Don't assume what you see on TV or read on the web represents the typical.
They often believe in regulation to the extent that it creates a level playing field and ensures safe products and services. Their complaint regarding regulations is often targeted against overregulation where the goal is societal engineering (for example: more people should own houses rather than rent) or political grandstanding (violent video games for example).
They say they're against regulation, but then they say they want some government interference.
No, they are against overregulation. From a libertarian perspective desired regulation would be something like transparency in banking and finance. Undesired regulation and interference might be regulations engineering a greater level of home ownership rather than renting.
The grown-ups have already decided that more government intervention is better than less government intervention.
Really, how did that intervention to increase home ownership and decrease renting work out?
You seem quite misinformed regarding Libertarians. Most libertarians do believe in government, regulations, police, fire departments etc. Their complaint regarding government is often that the wrong level is addressing an issue, that state or local levels should be handling a particular issue rather than the federal (national) level; that the causes of various problems vary from region to region and are better addressed at a more local level. They often believe in regulation to the extent that it creates a level playing field and ensures safe products and services. Their complaint regarding regulations is often targeted against overregulation where the goal is societal engineering (for example: more people should own houses rather than rent) or political grandstanding (violent video games for example). They believe law enforcement should prevent one person from harming another (smoking pot while driving ?), but if a person is engaging in some activity that harms no one else they should be left alone (smoking pot at home ?). They also believe that some things are best handled at the national level. For example national defense and interstate regulation and infrastructure. The typical libertarian doesn't seem very deluded.
Keep in mind that the folks you see on TV are not there because they represent the typical. They are usually there because they represent the most entertaining, or if you prefer the cynical then because they represent the stereotype the producer wishes to portray.
You must not many fundies then. The words in the bible means exactly what they say, except for jesus turning water to wine. There the fundies claim the wine means fruit juice.
Those who believe that each day in genesis is a 24 hour period are a minority. Those who believe that such literalists are the typical christian are either misinformed or practicing their own religion-like article of faith.
Even in literalist churches not all members agree. I've known people who have attended pretty fundamentalist churches and they had no problem with the universe being many billions of years old, the speed of light, radioactive half-life, etc.
Keep in mind that the folks you see on TV are not there because they represent the typical, they are usually there because they represent the most entertaining, or if you prefer the cynical because they represent the stereotype the producer wishes to portray.
The bible states a direct male lineage with names and ages from Adam (at Creation) to King Solomon. From there, it names kings and the lengths of their reigns. After that, events in the bible can be corroborated with records of other cultures, such as the death of the Chaldean King Nebuchadnezzar.
Perhaps the Vatican Observatory is a better source of information regarding the age of the universe according to religious folk? I'm sure the priest who developed the big bang theory would disagree with the flawed Ussher chronology you offer. The Ussher chronology is considered flawed even amongst religious communities.
The primary flaw with the Ussher chronology is that it requires a *literal* interpretation of genesis, that "day" is the literal 24 hour period that we all know and love. My understanding is that most christian faiths believe that "day" was used in a figurative manner and describes steps of undetermined length not 24 hour periods. Man was "created" on "day" 6, so events that occurred on "day" 3 and 4 can not be measured chronologically. To be generous, Ussher could at most date man but not the universe; only after man's arrival are "days" observable events.
However I'm no biblical scholar so I'll leave further arguments to the "experts". I'm just a guy who does not believe that religious people are necessarily scientifically illiterate. Holders of such a belief seem to be ironically clinging to a religious-like article of faith, a dogma of their own.
The FOSS nature of Android is probably irrelevant. Android may achieve a greater number of users merely because iOS is *unavailable* to all traditional handset manufacturers. We have never had the test case where manufactures had a choice between the closed iOS and the FOSS Android; the only choice was Android for free of write your own OS. Android could have been just as closed as iOS and handset manufacturers would probably still have chosen it.
Isn't it obvious? Open technology will always win over closed Just like Linux.... er, hmm, never mind.
He was probably thinking of FreeBSD not Linux. The UNIX(TM) certified Mac OS X does trace its ancestry to FreeBSD and NetBSD. ;-)
Didn't China announce a similar plan - create a national OS based upon linux, in order to end their dependance upon a major American corporation for computing?
No. It seems they created their own Linux distribution, Red Flag Linux, as their "best alternative" for when they sat down with a major American corporation to renegotiate pricing, source access, etc.
All open source projects evolve to the point where the current developers want to throw away all the code and start again.
I'm expecting Linux NT, an entirely new kernel using a microkernel architecture. :-)
He must be expecting *BSD to displace Linux in the *NIX world. :-)
TFA mentions the factory will produce: - three white-knight IIs - five SpaceshipTwos
so, what will happen after these 8 builds?
My first guess is that they will then renegotiate tax breaks and subsidies with the state of California before deciding where to do additional production. California is a pretty hostile place to to production/manufacturing unless you are high profile enough to get a deal and or/waivers from the state.
A friend found Windows 1 (or was it 2?) useful. He used it to run and switch between multiple DOS sessions. One session to edit source, a second session to compile and run. Occasionally there was a third session being used to work on documentation. Not quite what Microsoft had in mind but useful none the less.
... allow for the technical team to not have the servers crumble under the weight of a full-on stress test ...
But an important part of beta testing is to stress out the servers and make sure they can handle it.
I know I can only truly speak for myself, but I've spoken with lots of other people who at least agree with me to my face regarding Blizzard and their recent bullshit tactics. Whether they vote with their wallets once the game is released, I dunno ...
Yes you do. You know they will buy. The truth is that there are many testimonials like yours right before every every one of Blizzard's "recent" best sellers. This is becoming a slashdot tradition. Long threads extolling the righteousness of a ban or boycott before external beta testing. Followed by long threads explaining that trying the beta is OK since no money goes to Blizzard and that the game looks pretty awesome. Which in turn is followed by long threads explaining how this is the greatest game ever after it is finally released, and that the authorization and anti-cheat stuff isn't that bad and if it does curtail cheating its probably a net positive. This slashdot tradition then ends with a brief article announcing some new industry sales record has been broken by the game. ;-)
Strange, some acoustic guitar riff keeps repeating in my mind ... it seems very familiar.
...but Blizzard knows what we are waiting for: a release date. Get on that, Bliz!
You can't have a release date until you've had an open beta. Open betas add an unknown amount of time to a project. Or in other words, its not "done" until the open beta shakes out the balance problems that only tens of thousands of external testers can expose.
Doesn't really matter to the investors. They are interested in returns rather than the interests of the average Joe, whether he is in Bangladesh or Dearborn, Michigan.
The important thing is that the enterprise starts and succeeds in California rather than elsewhere, because that is what keeps the bulk of the cash flowing back to predominantly California investors.
The above does not seem to make sense. If investors are interested in returns they don't care where manufacturing takes place. Also where manufacturing takes place, in the US at least, does not impede profits flowing back to California investors. As for the "Hollywood" influence, with film production increasingly leaving California I don't think Hollywood's involvement suggests manufacturing in California.
Like the fine print on Apple and other hi tech company product packaging tells us: Designed in California. Made in [not California].
Regarding the electric cars companies currently in California. Maybe some cars will be built in California while the company is still in a start up and "prototyping" mode (this can be years after starting to sell to early adopters). However when the company matures and the company perspective evolves from development to manufacturing the factories will move out of state. Especially if viable competitors appear.
Silicon Valley may be a hub for design but other parts of the country have far more expertise in nuts-and-bolts manufacturing. The components of a car may be incredibly hi tech but auto manufacturing will largely remain bolting and welding components together.
... how can a vacuum, with no physical or chemical properties, go 'bang?'
There was no vacuum yet. There was a "point" of stuff/energy we can't really describe very well that expanded *very* quickly. Referring to this expansion as an "explosion" or "bang" is just a convenient analogy.
FWIW, the phrase "big bang" was coined by opponents of the theory. It was an attempt to mock the theory.
And why isn't this galaxy backlit by the overwhelming brightness of the Big Bang itself? It would seem if you looked just a little bit further back in time everything ought to be one gigantnormous flash bulb.
The galaxy is backlit, the "flash" is merely at microwave frequencies not visible light frequencies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_background_radiation.
By the time you find a publisher, and they sell to a distributor, who then sells it to a retail store ... a developer is lucky to get 15% to 20%. Digital distribution is a game changer.
I agree, but I'm pretty sure I've been buying 90% of my software via digital distribution for the last 5 years. The game's been changed for a long time.
I don't know, I'd say you are part of the "early adopters". The only thing that even approaches mass market is Steam, and that is still a niche service. This Mac Store could be the point where the average consumer (within a platform) goes digital in general.
Digital software distribution has been around for a while now. Actually, it pre-dates brick and mortar.
Perhaps for those who wanted BSD to run on their VAX ;-), but not for the "typical" consumer. For the later about as good as it got for developers was the early 80s when there were plenty of mom-and-pop computers stores. Developers could sell their ziplock baggies with a 5.25 diskette directly to them and get around 40-50% of the retail sale.
Apple gets a 30% chunk, but IMHO, it is a good thing to have long term.
Wow, and people talk about the "Microsoft tax".
Getting 70% is a developer fantasy. By the time you find a publisher, and they sell to a distributor, who then sells it to a retail store ... a developer is lucky to get 15% to 20%. Digital distribution is a game changer. For a small developer implementing an online store with support and returns, paying for international payment processing, bandwidth, etc is non-trivial. If that adds up to less than 30% then the difference may easily be justified by the increased traffic and exposure of a high profile site like one provided by Apple. Unless you are a large corporation Apple's deal is not bad at all.
Correct. Judges have already thrown out the Copyright Act. Though the Copyright Act explicitly says that it does not apply to any copies necessary for the intended use of the product, the courts have declared that this clause is unfair to copyright giants, and ignore it.
But hacking/cheating does not constitute the intended use. It is not part of the "essential step of utilization" chain of events. Note that "intended use" is probably defined with respect to the copyright holder's perspective. If it were the user's perspective then it could mean anything, and thereby nothing. The exception to "intended use" would probably be "fair use", good luck getting a court to rule that hacking/cheating is "fair use".