Libertarianism in the tradition of Ann Rand is about promoting the value of competence by allowing the competent to benefit from their work. Regulations that prevent competition should be regarded as destructive and unnecessary. A libertarian viewpoint should generally be unfavorable towards anti-competitive collusion within an industry in addition to anti-competitive government regulation. I would argue that net neutrality seeks to prevent exactly that.
The developers of OSS are developing for their own enjoyment and advancement. They don't ask for special consideration or subsidies. They meet whiny neediness on the part of users with disdain (RTFM!) and usually come across as selfish and competent in the finest tradition of the Rand libertarian ideal. Net neutrality isn't an artificial way to restrict the success of corporate developers by preventing competition; it promotes competition by preventing anti-competitive dealings between the content creation and content distribution sides of the internet.
A company should care exclusively for it's well being. It just isn't doing a very good job if it fails to recognize the creative aspect of the developers.
I am very eager to work with you in your effort. Thank you for recognizing your error and I gratefully accept your compensation. Please e-mail me further details.
Sincerely Interoperable,
Reply to: abuse@127.0.0.1
Feel free to distribute my e-mail to any of your colleagues that may wish to do business with me in the future.
we're damn tired of seeing that lose/loose error, in particular
So am I, but I am very familiar with the correct way to spell lose but now and then we all make typos. I don't actually mind being called out on it because it bugs me too, but I don't appreciate the "read a book" comment.
You loose your energy savings to having to pay employees away from home pay and "-60C, are you fucking kidding me?" pay. That said...I'd work in Antarctica if I had the chance:-)
Unattractive for whom? I would love to have this model, as long as the price was reasonable (even 60 cents per GB would be an improvement to what I have now). The trouble is that ISPs love to give you a fixed amount of transfer and fine you if you go over. Use more than our 20GB/month plan, well then you have to buy our 60GB/per month plan to download 22GB this month. Same thing with cell phones rates.
It's almost on par with a scam as far as I'm concerned. Of course, I always download as many movies as I need on the last day of each billing period to bring my usage to within 200MB of my cap.
I only researched Bell myself and, as I mentioned a post ago, I found that it was a government supported monopoly but not subsidized. Rogers purchased CNCP's infrastructure but did it with private money, so it's a stretch to say it's taxpayer money. You're right about Telus, it's privatized public infrastructure. (I always forget about Telus, probably repressed memories due to hours and hours spent on the phone trying to find out why they arbitrarily disconnected my internet).
The ruling is a big fat nothing. No seriously CRTC, could you have made any ruling that said less than this one? "Do what you want, but we reserve the right to not like it. Just give your customers warning so that they can also not like it and not do anything about it."
At least they could have said, "we don't give a flying fuck about net neutrality one way or the other so we're not going to regulate," but they didn't. They simply tried to come as close as possible to not actually making a decision. Even if you choose wrong at least have the balls to decide something.
the canadian taxpayer subsidized the development of the networks involved
Can anyone provide a source for this. I said it in a previous thread and someone called me on it. The two of us couldn't find any real evidence that this is the case. Bell was a government sanctioned monopoly with complex ties to the (publicly funded) railways throughout it's history; but no direct subsidies. I think Rogers may have purchased some formerly public infrastructure but, so far as I can tell, it purchased it with straight up private funds and never got subsidies. Some of the smaller ISPs (eg. Sasktel) certainly do have publicly subsidized infrastructure but they buy bandwidth from the big guys for backbone connections and they're opposed to throttling.
If anyone has a source for the "public subsidy" argument, post it! I'd love to read it.
You continue to confuse high-energy physics as being the only domain of fundamental physics. It isn't.
Compare this to the history of theoretical physics since Newton.
That's 330 years of history. How many "major" advances (by your definition) have occurred since then in total? You don't seem to understand the manner in which science progresses and you seem to want to hold it (or at least particle physics) to a different standard than the rest of intellectual progress.
There can be good work in a field that doesn't change the paradigm; it doesn't imply a "drought". No one has done anything since the 70s. My computer still uses transistors, there is no moon colony, cancer still sucks, my car has an internal combustion engine and seriously, where the hell is my jet pack? It's pointless to use changes in paradigm as a benchmark for advance.
...that the arXiv is not a peer-reviewed journal. The article that started this has not survived peer-review and is not reflective of the opinions of every physicist on the planet. If you read the article it's also clear that the author is only being half-serious about the whole thing and his collaborators have left their names off the paper.
Which physicists and who are they talking to? What makes it into the news isn't an accurate representation of the work that's being done by those who work in the field. The small, interesting discoveries don't get reported on by the media; it's the crazy theories and cool ideas that get coverage. I can guarantee you that most of the work work being done at CERN is mind-numbingly boring as far as the general population is concerned, but it's very good work.
Don't mistake entertaining musings and fun thought experiments as being the opinion of the lead researchers. It may be the musings that are reported on but it's the research that runs the accelerator.
Theoretical physics has produced essentially no results for 40 years.
That's @#$%ing bull@#$&! That's like saying that medicine hasn't advanced since the 1952 development of a polio vaccine just because we haven't cured cancer or the common cold. Theoretical physics in the field of high-energy certainly has advanced considerably. Beyond that, physics consists of an awful lot more than just the Standard Model and many significant advances have been made. It's simply a huge misconception that physics only advances through paradigm changing "eureka!" moments. It doesn't. It advances through a lot of hard work towards incremental gains that are essential to working out the intricacies of the theories.
It always has been a hallmark of armchair physicists to prattle on about what they don't understand.
Just give execute permissions to the relevant user group and don't give anyone else execute. Use symlinks in the relevant users' binary search path if you want it to be invisible for some and not others. You can probably do some magic with the symlinks so that you don't need to make them individually for each user but have it controlled for a group.
As for dialogs in programs, that would need special support in the app in either OS, but most programs are sufficiently modular that you can gain some control.
This is both redundant to other posts and can probably be construed as a troll, but have you used Linux? You can control *everything* completely.
I may be missing your question a bit because I don't have a specific program to suggest for access control but that's because the entire structure of a Linux operating system is built with easy access control. Just put program binaries in the correct folders and configure permissions and executable paths to give particular groups of users the access you want. Linux file systems are built to have this kind of control by default.
I agree, Elections Canada is far from perfect but it generally does it's job well. I like voting with a pencil and paper, it's satisfying and concrete. I simply like putting an unambiguous X on my choice and leaving the paper slip to remain as hard evidence of my choice. It also provides the option of spoiling the ballot in entertaining ways if all choices are too unpalatable to actually vote for (I'd vote NDP as a protest vote but Jack Layton is a dinosaur of a politician). We may even have a respite from voting now that the Liberals are being trounced in the polls.
Another factor to consider is how often Windows users download drivers repeatedly. It may not be a large percentage of the market, but gamers will download drivers every time a new one is released (and I don't mean the people playing Frozen-Bubble).
It really wasn't supposed to be. I actually think the Mac's are by far the best looking computers that are commonly available. I'll even admit that they have very impressive engineering to be crammed into very tight form factors. At the end of the day, however, you do pay a huge premium for the mac brand, and that doesn't go very well with usual applications for a server. If you really need a dedicated server it can be located somewhere behind the scenes, and if you need an HTPC media server then you probably don't need a dedicated server OS..
Slashdot Mirror
Libertarianism in the tradition of Ann Rand is about promoting the value of competence by allowing the competent to benefit from their work. Regulations that prevent competition should be regarded as destructive and unnecessary. A libertarian viewpoint should generally be unfavorable towards anti-competitive collusion within an industry in addition to anti-competitive government regulation. I would argue that net neutrality seeks to prevent exactly that.
The developers of OSS are developing for their own enjoyment and advancement. They don't ask for special consideration or subsidies. They meet whiny neediness on the part of users with disdain (RTFM!) and usually come across as selfish and competent in the finest tradition of the Rand libertarian ideal. Net neutrality isn't an artificial way to restrict the success of corporate developers by preventing competition; it promotes competition by preventing anti-competitive dealings between the content creation and content distribution sides of the internet.
A company should care exclusively for it's well being. It just isn't doing a very good job if it fails to recognize the creative aspect of the developers.
Dear Mr Mubugashs,
I am very eager to work with you in your effort. Thank you for recognizing your error and I gratefully accept your compensation. Please e-mail me further details.
Sincerely Interoperable,
Reply to: abuse@127.0.0.1
Feel free to distribute my e-mail to any of your colleagues that may wish to do business with me in the future.
a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers
Also, 1 millimeter, a giga-picometer, a tera-femtometer, a....
we're damn tired of seeing that lose/loose error, in particular
So am I, but I am very familiar with the correct way to spell lose but now and then we all make typos. I don't actually mind being called out on it because it bugs me too, but I don't appreciate the "read a book" comment.
I was actually thinking that the spelling/grammar Nazi tag might come with a Karma bonus ;-)
The "rubbing frozen dirt in my crotch" post get modded "Funny" and I get called out "loose". Not fair ;-)
Pffff... /. needs an speling Nazi mod cattegory :-)
You loose your energy savings to having to pay employees away from home pay and "-60C, are you fucking kidding me?" pay. That said...I'd work in Antarctica if I had the chance :-)
Problem is, this is an unattractive pricing model
Unattractive for whom? I would love to have this model, as long as the price was reasonable (even 60 cents per GB would be an improvement to what I have now). The trouble is that ISPs love to give you a fixed amount of transfer and fine you if you go over. Use more than our 20GB/month plan, well then you have to buy our 60GB/per month plan to download 22GB this month. Same thing with cell phones rates.
It's almost on par with a scam as far as I'm concerned. Of course, I always download as many movies as I need on the last day of each billing period to bring my usage to within 200MB of my cap.
I only researched Bell myself and, as I mentioned a post ago, I found that it was a government supported monopoly but not subsidized. Rogers purchased CNCP's infrastructure but did it with private money, so it's a stretch to say it's taxpayer money. You're right about Telus, it's privatized public infrastructure. (I always forget about Telus, probably repressed memories due to hours and hours spent on the phone trying to find out why they arbitrarily disconnected my internet).
The ruling is a big fat nothing. No seriously CRTC, could you have made any ruling that said less than this one? "Do what you want, but we reserve the right to not like it. Just give your customers warning so that they can also not like it and not do anything about it."
At least they could have said, "we don't give a flying fuck about net neutrality one way or the other so we're not going to regulate," but they didn't. They simply tried to come as close as possible to not actually making a decision. Even if you choose wrong at least have the balls to decide something.
Ah, I just posted exactly this question so my other post is redundant. Mod up the parent of this one and let us know if anyone has a source.
the canadian taxpayer subsidized the development of the networks involved
Can anyone provide a source for this. I said it in a previous thread and someone called me on it. The two of us couldn't find any real evidence that this is the case. Bell was a government sanctioned monopoly with complex ties to the (publicly funded) railways throughout it's history; but no direct subsidies. I think Rogers may have purchased some formerly public infrastructure but, so far as I can tell, it purchased it with straight up private funds and never got subsidies. Some of the smaller ISPs (eg. Sasktel) certainly do have publicly subsidized infrastructure but they buy bandwidth from the big guys for backbone connections and they're opposed to throttling.
If anyone has a source for the "public subsidy" argument, post it! I'd love to read it.
I mean theoretical results fundamental physics
You continue to confuse high-energy physics as being the only domain of fundamental physics. It isn't.
Compare this to the history of theoretical physics since Newton.
That's 330 years of history. How many "major" advances (by your definition) have occurred since then in total? You don't seem to understand the manner in which science progresses and you seem to want to hold it (or at least particle physics) to a different standard than the rest of intellectual progress.
There can be good work in a field that doesn't change the paradigm; it doesn't imply a "drought". No one has done anything since the 70s. My computer still uses transistors, there is no moon colony, cancer still sucks, my car has an internal combustion engine and seriously, where the hell is my jet pack? It's pointless to use changes in paradigm as a benchmark for advance.
...that the arXiv is not a peer-reviewed journal. The article that started this has not survived peer-review and is not reflective of the opinions of every physicist on the planet. If you read the article it's also clear that the author is only being half-serious about the whole thing and his collaborators have left their names off the paper.
Surprisingly many respectable physicists talking
Which physicists and who are they talking to? What makes it into the news isn't an accurate representation of the work that's being done by those who work in the field. The small, interesting discoveries don't get reported on by the media; it's the crazy theories and cool ideas that get coverage. I can guarantee you that most of the work work being done at CERN is mind-numbingly boring as far as the general population is concerned, but it's very good work.
Don't mistake entertaining musings and fun thought experiments as being the opinion of the lead researchers. It may be the musings that are reported on but it's the research that runs the accelerator.
Theoretical physics has produced essentially no results for 40 years.
That's @#$%ing bull@#$&! That's like saying that medicine hasn't advanced since the 1952 development of a polio vaccine just because we haven't cured cancer or the common cold. Theoretical physics in the field of high-energy certainly has advanced considerably. Beyond that, physics consists of an awful lot more than just the Standard Model and many significant advances have been made. It's simply a huge misconception that physics only advances through paradigm changing "eureka!" moments. It doesn't. It advances through a lot of hard work towards incremental gains that are essential to working out the intricacies of the theories.
It always has been a hallmark of armchair physicists to prattle on about what they don't understand.
Just give execute permissions to the relevant user group and don't give anyone else execute. Use symlinks in the relevant users' binary search path if you want it to be invisible for some and not others. You can probably do some magic with the symlinks so that you don't need to make them individually for each user but have it controlled for a group.
As for dialogs in programs, that would need special support in the app in either OS, but most programs are sufficiently modular that you can gain some control.
This is both redundant to other posts and can probably be construed as a troll, but have you used Linux? You can control *everything* completely.
I may be missing your question a bit because I don't have a specific program to suggest for access control but that's because the entire structure of a Linux operating system is built with easy access control. Just put program binaries in the correct folders and configure permissions and executable paths to give particular groups of users the access you want. Linux file systems are built to have this kind of control by default.
I agree, Elections Canada is far from perfect but it generally does it's job well. I like voting with a pencil and paper, it's satisfying and concrete. I simply like putting an unambiguous X on my choice and leaving the paper slip to remain as hard evidence of my choice. It also provides the option of spoiling the ballot in entertaining ways if all choices are too unpalatable to actually vote for (I'd vote NDP as a protest vote but Jack Layton is a dinosaur of a politician). We may even have a respite from voting now that the Liberals are being trounced in the polls.
Another factor to consider is how often Windows users download drivers repeatedly. It may not be a large percentage of the market, but gamers will download drivers every time a new one is released (and I don't mean the people playing Frozen-Bubble).
Well is that really fair?
It really wasn't supposed to be. I actually think the Mac's are by far the best looking computers that are commonly available. I'll even admit that they have very impressive engineering to be crammed into very tight form factors. At the end of the day, however, you do pay a huge premium for the mac brand, and that doesn't go very well with usual applications for a server. If you really need a dedicated server it can be located somewhere behind the scenes, and if you need an HTPC media server then you probably don't need a dedicated server OS..
that focuses primarily on the visual aesthetics of the physical box that it's housed in.
The crawler is going to get seriously depressed if it crawls YouTube conversations.