Dream on. If there is a central idea that conventional media have willfully failed to grasp, it's that the future of information belongs to Open Media, even when AOL/Time-Warner gets its lawyers and lobbyists lined up.
Uhhh, I just seemed to remember that I read a Katz piece speculating about who was responsible for the LoveBug virus a few weeks ago in TIME MAGAZINE (the bastion of closed media).
I guess we should be happy that Katz is an equal opportunity "journalist", and doesn't discriminate against old media.
we've already run into problems with historically rising demands for electricity. During last summer's heat wave with temperatures running in the 90s for unheard of amount 17 or so days, we were subject to "power alerts" issued by some regional (NEW ENGLAND) power consortium.
Currently, Vermonters actually purchase the bulk of their electricity from HYDRO QUEBEC, which makes things worse. We're stuck in a contract written a few years ago that anticipated high electricity rates that never materialized. And, as evidenced by the severe ice storm that hit the area a few years ago, there have been some issues with the ability of Hydro Quebec to reliably supply electricity to the States.
Unfortunately, the movement to use alternative power sources are still nascent even for a place as environmentally aware as here. Quite recently, here was a case of a guy up here who bought a wind turbine to produce electricity for his house, but his neighbors in the neighborhood he lived in (houses go for $300K) complained that the wind turbine would be noisy and would mar their ($$$$$) views of Lake Champlain. He eventually won the right to put up the turbine, but the attitude of the neighbors is disturbing.
is how advertising reaches to the very young. Take my little two year old for example. She can't read yet, but she sure as heck lets it be known that we're driving by McDonalds in the car. "Ronald! Ronald!" She yells. (And this is a restaurant that she has been to perhaps a few times.)
Or consider the advertising that is on PBS (public television). Although it is cloaked in the concept of "sponsorships", the idea that you have to watch a Baby Gap or a Kellogg's or a Pfizer (antibiotics, in this case) commercial before a show designed for preschoolers is appalling.
It is disheartening to me that kids of such a young age are (in a way) being programmed to associate something FUN (watching Big Bird or Arthur) with the SPONSORSHIP of a large corporation.
I was wondering what prior political advocacy experience (on and off the net) you and your co-author posess.
By the way, I think your essay make a grave mistake in not analyzing the difference between a campaign website and the website of a present office holder.
The Kosovo conflict was not a war,
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 1
but an armed humanitarian mission.
I think the real issue is that the politicians are sending American soldiers, who are trained in warfare, to go and deal with humanitarian problems. These missions aren't war, but essentially peacekeeping missions and we're using warfare (of all things) to try to "keep the peace".
The goal in the Balkan "war" was to keep the various ethnic groups from killing each other. How did we try to achieve that? By fighting the Serbs, and attempting (in a few ways) to get rid of their leader.
I understand fully the arguement about how it is dangerous to fight a war without any risk, but what other methods are available when you're given an impossible mission by politicians? (By the way, we want you to solve a centries old conflict in a few weeks with no casualties. What?)
Personally, in the instance of the Balkan war, I think the military leaders made the right decision in trying to alleviate risk to soldiers. Now, if we could only get the troops that are still there back home....
Hey, you don't have THAT long to wait until the little guy gets on the computer!
An excellent game to teach mouse skills, keyboard keys, letter and number recognition is the JUMPSTART TODDLER game (for ages 18 months to 2 1/2 years). My little one loves it.
"...I do also see things about the Internet being something that people I think taking for granted, that they're becoming so comfortable with it that the feel they have a right to any piece of information that comes to them through the Internet. The Internet is changing our perception about a lot of things, it's changing our perception about almost everthing around them in society."
This is food for thought here. Is there a right to any piece of information through the Internet? Remember cphack and DeCSS.
It also helps to remember the fact that he/she was dealing with a population who knew they could get the lumps/bumps dealt with for free and with little hassle.
I wish that were the case.....you've obviously never had to deal with military doctors before.
Ummm.....If there are viable private solutions to this scourge, then why haven't we seen them already?
I am not sure if a private solution would work in this situation because of the "free speech" arguements and also of the multi-juristdictional nature of the problem.
The the bill addresses two issues in the fight against spam. 1)a legal definition of spam and 2)an incentive for others to hunt down spam.
For all those anti-government folks, I am surprised to see that a creation of a civilian anti-spam force is so distrubing to you.
Yes, this effort is a predictable offshoot of the recent ddos attacks, Iloveyou, etc. There's been a few bumps in the road when it deals with law enforcement actions in coutries other than the US. Just think about the following situations....
The reason why the kid from Montreal got picked up so fast was because the US has probably one of the strongest extradition/policing agreements with the RCMP.
On the other hand, think about the weekend long wait that authorities had in the Philippines to even get a search warrant for the de Guzman apartment. As many people were saying on/., anyone in their right mind would've destroyed their hard drive in a milisecond if they were responsible. Also, the authorities in the Philippines had to figure out what law they could even apply to the situation.
However, I think that US law enforcement/defense authorities would much rather have the opportunity to work unilaterally if they could in a matter like this. (I would not be surprized if they are already doing this covertly.) Getting involved with an international body could hamper US goals and be a problem if there's ever an international disagreement over enforcement actions.
"3. Individualism values a humane workplace. Workers are entitled to safe, creative and secure work environments, to freedom from continuous downsizings, re-structurings, layoffs and "re-engineerings." Though these practices unquestionably benefit the economy, they're rough on humanity." I heard workplaces like these exist already...in China, that is.
The main issue on spamming is not it's irritability factor, but that you, the recipient, has to pay to read the spam. You pay connect charges to your ISP, don't you? And some people still pay hourly rates to connect or have limits on their email inbox capacity.
Also, the point about free speech disregards the idea that the recipient should be able to ignore whatever free speech being said if they choose to. (I don't have to listen to the million moms in Washington this weekend, but THEY still have a right to march.) With spam, how can you ignore it?
For example, if someone called me on the phone today and started raving about black helicopters, I would have a very valid harassment complaint, wouldn't I? (Not about the message, but about it's means of delivery)
I think the law should reflect the spirit of the following statement. If the private individual did not ask for the spam, that private individual should not recieve it.
If voters feel that the tax cuts outweighs the local impact when they vote for Congress, why do they feel differently when they vote [sic-for] local representatives?
Because local representatives (on municipal to state levels) are responsible for everything from your trash collection to schooling to policing to property taxes, that's why.
When my property taxes rise because of Internet based sales taking eating away at the local tax base, those decisions, ultimately, are made by my local town government, NOT Leahy, Jeffords or Sanders (who happen to be my Congressmen).
Not many local reps (governor, state reps, municipal, etc.) criticize local Congressman X. It just doesn't happen too often because someday, somehow Congressman X will bring home the pork and the local rep won't be invited to the ribbon cutting ceremony for whatever battleship is being built in the district.
Also, many Congressmen try to cultivate the "elder statesman--working for America" image and rarely, if ever, get involved in local politics. Note the importance of committee assignments/chairmanships and investigations like Waco, Chinese spying, etc.
On a political level, no, this does not affect them because they are making *broad* taxation decisions for the *GOOD* of the nation, not just their district. There's little pork to bring home and get credit for. Normally, state/local taxes are not dealt with on the Congressional level and Congress is making a well placed bet that voters will look at the tax cut aspect not the local impact (if any). If I were in Congress, I'd place that bet too. (And if I had those chances in RENO, I'd certainly place that bet!)
Also, the bill in the House is not taking away PRESENTLY collected taxes in only a few (something around--if I remember correctly-- a few states and two cities, Washington DC being one of them). This present taxing system works like catalog sales--if you have a presence in a state, state residents have to pay local sales tax.
Local politicians are angry because 1) the moratorium wasn't set to expire until 2001 (and it is an election year THIS YEAR) and 2)the moratorium is set for 5 years, which is hobbling at best for those interests.
Before you go around thinking that Congress has become magically enlightened about tech issues and the Internet, here's some food for thought....
You wanna know the real deal on why the tax moratorium is getting a push in Congress? Because the taxes that are not getting collected are LOCAL taxes (as in state and municipality taxes--those taxes that fund local education and infrastructure needs) and not FEDERAL taxes.
As stated in the article the opponents of the bill are state legistlators and local merchants. Passing this bill DOES NOT AFFECT YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSPERSON politically and it makes them look "pro-business" and "pro-tech" at the same time. Notice that the Republicans are the majority in Congress, too.
Before complaining about how imcompetent people are, consider the fact that MOST PEOPLE out there in the real world have little or no computer know how.
I can tell that a good many of you have had the experience of explaining how, say, a hard drive works and seeing your co-worker's (or parents, great aunt, 3rd grade teacher, manager, etc.) eyes glaze over and their heads nod listlessly. To tell the truth, most people I have run into are scared of doing something wrong. Won't even open one up to put in a stick of RAM. "It's for the professionals to do" they say (and then they gladly pay someone at the local office supply store to do it for some ungodly sum.)
I think it is the job of the techies to be proactive and protect those "lusers" as much as possible. Go ahead, slam MS as much as you want, but if you're expecting for that lawyer or doctor or insurance adjuster whose computer you just worked on to be cognizant of the dangers of clicking on an attachment, don't hold your breath.
After all, how many of you know enough about your car to dispute your mechanic's diagnosis of that funny sound you hear when you put on the brakes? It's for the professionals to do, correct?
If anything there will be a push for a more technically inclined manager who can understand OSS software and the problems and delays and be able to talk to upper management in a clear semi-technical way to make them aware of realistic deadlines and release dates.
Right on! You've just outlined my career goals in just one sentence. Thank you!:-)
(I'm writing this as a Novell CNA book is on my shelf, gathering dust...)
Novell gained popularity because of the lack of networking capabilities within the Win 3.x OS. If, I remember the story correctly, MS didn't expect such a demand for networking capabilities when Win 3x first came out. If you think about it in a way, it was originally a 3rd party hack to get Windows users to network in the early 90s.
Nowadays, how many people use Novell for their networking needs? Not as many as a few years ago because of the "improved" networking capabilities found in the MS OS and Server packages.
An NOS for linux? How about making the client OS more robust.
Yay! HP and AT&T...my two most very favorite companies in the world banding together. Whoopee!
Folks, this "new strategic alliance" is about getting turning your TV into the prime Internet connection for the home. IN DIRECT COMPETITION WITH CABLE ACCESS. You might call this stupid, but they're going for the market that would use a set top box.
I wonder what's the current subscriber marketshare of cable over DSL (or whatever broadband technology AT&T plans to use for this)? I know in my area of the US, that it is about $40 a month for digital cable (cable and internet) and $50 for DSL + ISP Fees (additional $20 or so).
HP is getting involved just to gain additional marketshare. I honestly don't see super technological breakthroughs on the HP side.
AOLidiots = "multiyear, multi-million-dollar deal"
on
AOL & NSI To Team Up
·
· Score: 1
I think it is a method for AOL to be everything to everyone. If you've happened to *try* to work with the service (some customers made me do it), you'll notice that there's a few features that REALLY seem to push the buttons of the AOLidiots who use it.
1)That you can do almost everything you could ever imagine you wanted to on AOL WITHOUT GETTING ON THE INTERNET. I know that makes YOUR SKIN CRAWL, but to people who have little or no understanding of the net, this is an attractive feature (and please, don't get into the arguement of "if-you-don't-know-what-the-internet-is-you-should n't-own-a-modem" I know, I know, I know)
2)It is proprietary as hell. What a pain it is to try to configure third party software to work with AOL. And try telnetting, HAH! 3) One of their big selling points is the "free" 6MB of web space they offer their customers. I am sure that they are trying to integrate domain name registration and this service together. I also am wondering how much the registration fees will be (probably higher than most services?).
4) For some odd reason, the idea of domain name registration really resonates with AOLidiots. I wish I had a dime for the numbers of times I have been asked in the past few months if I "I thought it was a good idea to register my personal name with a.com". Apparently there's been a spate of newstories lately about people registering their name, registering grandchildren's names, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhhh, I just seemed to remember that I read a Katz piece speculating about who was responsible for the LoveBug virus a few weeks ago in TIME MAGAZINE (the bastion of closed media).
I guess we should be happy that Katz is an equal opportunity "journalist", and doesn't discriminate against old media.
that Jon had a bad day at the New Jersey DMV yesterday.
Currently, Vermonters actually purchase the bulk of their electricity from HYDRO QUEBEC, which makes things worse. We're stuck in a contract written a few years ago that anticipated high electricity rates that never materialized. And, as evidenced by the severe ice storm that hit the area a few years ago, there have been some issues with the ability of Hydro Quebec to reliably supply electricity to the States.
Unfortunately, the movement to use alternative power sources are still nascent even for a place as environmentally aware as here. Quite recently, here was a case of a guy up here who bought a wind turbine to produce electricity for his house, but his neighbors in the neighborhood he lived in (houses go for $300K) complained that the wind turbine would be noisy and would mar their ($$$$$) views of Lake Champlain. He eventually won the right to put up the turbine, but the attitude of the neighbors is disturbing.
You shoulda included IBM in that list too, since IBM fabs make Transmeta and PowerPC chips.
Or consider the advertising that is on PBS (public television). Although it is cloaked in the concept of "sponsorships", the idea that you have to watch a Baby Gap or a Kellogg's or a Pfizer (antibiotics, in this case) commercial before a show designed for preschoolers is appalling.
It is disheartening to me that kids of such a young age are (in a way) being programmed to associate something FUN (watching Big Bird or Arthur) with the SPONSORSHIP of a large corporation.
By the way, I think your essay make a grave mistake in not analyzing the difference between a campaign website and the website of a present office holder.
I think the real issue is that the politicians are sending American soldiers, who are trained in warfare, to go and deal with humanitarian problems. These missions aren't war, but essentially peacekeeping missions and we're using warfare (of all things) to try to "keep the peace".
The goal in the Balkan "war" was to keep the various ethnic groups from killing each other. How did we try to achieve that? By fighting the Serbs, and attempting (in a few ways) to get rid of their leader.
I understand fully the arguement about how it is dangerous to fight a war without any risk, but what other methods are available when you're given an impossible mission by politicians? (By the way, we want you to solve a centries old conflict in a few weeks with no casualties. What?)
Personally, in the instance of the Balkan war, I think the military leaders made the right decision in trying to alleviate risk to soldiers. Now, if we could only get the troops that are still there back home....
An excellent game to teach mouse skills, keyboard keys, letter and number recognition is the JUMPSTART TODDLER game (for ages 18 months to 2 1/2 years). My little one loves it.
This is food for thought here. Is there a right to any piece of information through the Internet? Remember cphack and DeCSS.
I wish that were the case.....you've obviously never had to deal with military doctors before.
I am not sure if a private solution would work in this situation because of the "free speech" arguements and also of the multi-juristdictional nature of the problem.
The the bill addresses two issues in the fight against spam. 1)a legal definition of spam and 2)an incentive for others to hunt down spam.
For all those anti-government folks, I am surprised to see that a creation of a civilian anti-spam force is so distrubing to you.
The reason why the kid from Montreal got picked up so fast was because the US has probably one of the strongest extradition/policing agreements with the RCMP.
On the other hand, think about the weekend long wait that authorities had in the Philippines to even get a search warrant for the de Guzman apartment. As many people were saying on /., anyone in their right mind would've destroyed their hard drive in a milisecond if they were responsible. Also, the authorities in the Philippines had to figure out what law they could even apply to the situation.
However, I think that US law enforcement/defense authorities would much rather have the opportunity to work unilaterally if they could in a matter like this. (I would not be surprized if they are already doing this covertly.) Getting involved with an international body could hamper US goals and be a problem if there's ever an international disagreement over enforcement actions.
"3. Individualism values a humane workplace. Workers are entitled to safe, creative and secure work environments, to freedom from continuous downsizings, re-structurings, layoffs and "re-engineerings." Though these practices unquestionably benefit the economy, they're rough on humanity." I heard workplaces like these exist already...in China, that is.
Also, the point about free speech disregards the idea that the recipient should be able to ignore whatever free speech being said if they choose to. (I don't have to listen to the million moms in Washington this weekend, but THEY still have a right to march.) With spam, how can you ignore it?
For example, if someone called me on the phone today and started raving about black helicopters, I would have a very valid harassment complaint, wouldn't I? (Not about the message, but about it's means of delivery)
I think the law should reflect the spirit of the following statement. If the private individual did not ask for the spam, that private individual should not recieve it.
Because local representatives (on municipal to state levels) are responsible for everything from your trash collection to schooling to policing to property taxes, that's why.
When my property taxes rise because of Internet based sales taking eating away at the local tax base, those decisions, ultimately, are made by my local town government, NOT Leahy, Jeffords or Sanders (who happen to be my Congressmen).
Not many local reps (governor, state reps, municipal, etc.) criticize local Congressman X. It just doesn't happen too often because someday, somehow Congressman X will bring home the pork and the local rep won't be invited to the ribbon cutting ceremony for whatever battleship is being built in the district.
Also, many Congressmen try to cultivate the "elder statesman--working for America" image and rarely, if ever, get involved in local politics. Note the importance of committee assignments/chairmanships and investigations like Waco, Chinese spying, etc.
Also, the bill in the House is not taking away PRESENTLY collected taxes in only a few (something around--if I remember correctly-- a few states and two cities, Washington DC being one of them). This present taxing system works like catalog sales--if you have a presence in a state, state residents have to pay local sales tax.
Local politicians are angry because 1) the moratorium wasn't set to expire until 2001 (and it is an election year THIS YEAR) and 2)the moratorium is set for 5 years, which is hobbling at best for those interests.
You wanna know the real deal on why the tax moratorium is getting a push in Congress? Because the taxes that are not getting collected are LOCAL taxes (as in state and municipality taxes--those taxes that fund local education and infrastructure needs) and not FEDERAL taxes.
As stated in the article the opponents of the bill are state legistlators and local merchants. Passing this bill DOES NOT AFFECT YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSPERSON politically and it makes them look "pro-business" and "pro-tech" at the same time. Notice that the Republicans are the majority in Congress, too.
Are your figures including sales tax and whatever else?
I can tell that a good many of you have had the experience of explaining how, say, a hard drive works and seeing your co-worker's (or parents, great aunt, 3rd grade teacher, manager, etc.) eyes glaze over and their heads nod listlessly. To tell the truth, most people I have run into are scared of doing something wrong. Won't even open one up to put in a stick of RAM. "It's for the professionals to do" they say (and then they gladly pay someone at the local office supply store to do it for some ungodly sum.)
I think it is the job of the techies to be proactive and protect those "lusers" as much as possible. Go ahead, slam MS as much as you want, but if you're expecting for that lawyer or doctor or insurance adjuster whose computer you just worked on to be cognizant of the dangers of clicking on an attachment, don't hold your breath.
After all, how many of you know enough about your car to dispute your mechanic's diagnosis of that funny sound you hear when you put on the brakes? It's for the professionals to do, correct?
Right on! You've just outlined my career goals in just one sentence. Thank you! :-)
Novell gained popularity because of the lack of networking capabilities within the Win 3.x OS. If, I remember the story correctly, MS didn't expect such a demand for networking capabilities when Win 3x first came out. If you think about it in a way, it was originally a 3rd party hack to get Windows users to network in the early 90s.
Nowadays, how many people use Novell for their networking needs? Not as many as a few years ago because of the "improved" networking capabilities found in the MS OS and Server packages.
An NOS for linux? How about making the client OS more robust.
Can't you already play "Who wants to be a millionaire?" interactively??? I thought Regis said we could.....on the GO NETWORK! ;-P
Folks, this "new strategic alliance" is about getting turning your TV into the prime Internet connection for the home. IN DIRECT COMPETITION WITH CABLE ACCESS. You might call this stupid, but they're going for the market that would use a set top box.
I wonder what's the current subscriber marketshare of cable over DSL (or whatever broadband technology AT&T plans to use for this)? I know in my area of the US, that it is about $40 a month for digital cable (cable and internet) and $50 for DSL + ISP Fees (additional $20 or so).
HP is getting involved just to gain additional marketshare. I honestly don't see super technological breakthroughs on the HP side.
1)That you can do almost everything you could ever imagine you wanted to on AOL WITHOUT GETTING ON THE INTERNET. I know that makes YOUR SKIN CRAWL, but to people who have little or no understanding of the net, this is an attractive feature (and please, don't get into the arguement of "if-you-don't-know-what-the-internet-is-you-should n't-own-a-modem" I know, I know, I know)
2)It is proprietary as hell. What a pain it is to try to configure third party software to work with AOL. And try telnetting, HAH! 3) One of their big selling points is the "free" 6MB of web space they offer their customers. I am sure that they are trying to integrate domain name registration and this service together. I also am wondering how much the registration fees will be (probably higher than most services?).
4) For some odd reason, the idea of domain name registration really resonates with AOLidiots. I wish I had a dime for the numbers of times I have been asked in the past few months if I "I thought it was a good idea to register my personal name with a .com". Apparently there's been a spate of newstories lately about people registering their name, registering grandchildren's names, etc.