Actually, Japan wants IPv6 because they have a lot less IPs per citizen than the US does. I can't be bothered to look up the actual numbers right now, but I remember figures on the order of 100 IPs/US Citizen and 7 IPs/Japanese Citizen. China's most likely in the same boat.
P.S. If there was a US city with 30 million people, they'd have 3G damn fast. Wireless and high population density go together well.
Counterproductive. As others have mentioned, it'll spun as "just the action of some crazy."
LA County's not using electronic voting machines yet, so I haven't done this, but I'd suggest going and voting early, and then spending the rest of the day telling everyone who comes to vote about the problems with the system. It's illegal to advertise for candidates within X feet of a polling place in many if not all areas, so avoid partisan rhetoric. Don't even mention candidates or parties at all. Just lay out the facts about the security of voting machines and bring along literature for those who're interested.
Hmm. It's not like it's a plot or something, and it's less relevant in modern American society. The attitudes still carry over from earlier times. I mean, we do allow women to enter combat positions. There are other reasons, but I felt this was likely a factor, and so threw it out.
The US also doesn't push a high birth rate because it already has a very high birth rate for a 1st world country - 2.0, which when combined with immigration decently surpasses the replacement rate. Japan and many European countries are shrinking, and it's going to do some interesting things to their economies.
Main theories I've heard are that a)"our nation's daughters" coming home in body bags during a war would be political suicide, and b)"women aren't as [strong/smart/whatever] as men". Oh, then there's c)"women would use their feminine wiles to distract the men busy fighting!"
How about d) loosing women does far more damage to the population of a nation than a loss of an equivalent amount of men. Men don't have children, so they're far more expendable in a demographic sense. This may be enforced by societal norms, but there's a reason for those norms.
Hell, the only reason we don't have a sex ratio that greatly favors women is that evolution would then favor anyone who had a greater than average X/Y sperm ratio until the average reached near equilibrium. If genes weren't selfish that way, humanity would have a much greater birth rate.
I am glad to inform you that he has, in a way. Look up "The Atrocity Archives". Haven't read it yet, but I'm told it covers similar ground, although in a slightly more humorous manner.
That's funny, because I guarantee you, no matter how hard I tried I could not become professionally competitive in likely any athletic event. I don't have the natural genes for it. So it's just luck that the top people got the superior genes (for this task), but it's cheating if I engineer my children so they have them?
The real complaint (and the one I'd support for now) is that any gene therapy that will come around soon will be dangerous. Others have mentioned potential downsides of massively increased muscle production, and most potentially enhancing gene therapies would be best expressed through geneline engineering, where a developing embryo is genetically modified. The ethics of that aren't pretty, and its first uses are going to be therapeutic in nature. When it's safe to actually enhance though, there's going to have to be a new look at the old rulebooks banning genetically altered atheletes.
You do lose points due to the loss of functionality from a keyboard, be it a USB, PS2, or AT interface, to toggle switches. Couldn't you go for an older keyboard type?
I mean, what's next? "Where's my punch card-USB interface?" Naah.
True for creations past a certain date. Before that, creations had to be registered to be protected. Unlike bogus copyright extensions, this change is not retroactive. I suspect that this is exactly the case here.
Yes. At the beginning, when you have to clear the kobolds out of the kitchen, you can threaten them into surrendering. The people there then want to kill them, and if you make them let the kobolds go, it goes up. Might be others, but that's the one I remember.
Huh? I got the gold edition (sitting next to just Neverwinter Nights for the same price - who shelved that?), and it came with a 220 page ring bound manual, a map and the game discs with a spot left over in the case for Hordes. Considering the CD keys are on the inside of my manual, you got ripped off.
At least in the first expansion (Shadows of Unrentide?) they've added in a law/order axis to behavior. Steal someone else's possessions, and you become more chaotic. Hold your word against pressure, and become lawful. It's still linear, but it's a start.
What a mealy-mouthed defense of his flamebait. His claim that he was merely trying to point out that Linux's cost is too high and that this impedes its adoption falls flat in so many ways.
First off, he says that he's merely asking what's good for Linux. If this is true, why all the highly pejorative words in the original article. It's full of slurs like "Hit man", "dark side", and many others. With friends like him, who needs SCO? Has he ever written anything complimentary about Linux before? A quick look around shows that he has a habit of slamming it instead. This reminds me of political pundits who oh-so kindly give advice to other ideologies. And as for his goal of widening Linux adoption, his only solution is dropping any enforcement of the license it was created under. I bet Windows could be far more widely adopted if it was free, but he's not going to suggest that because MS doesn't want that. (Well, except when piracy can wipe out competitors, and you better expect enforcement once they lock up the market.) If we were only concerned with adoption and not with the continued freedom of code, we'd work on BSD.
Second, if he's trying to make corporations aware that Linux is not public domain, he's doing it in an incredibly deceitful manner. He's trying to paint Linux as a truly viral OS where merely using it in a product requires giving away all your IP. He completely ignores the fact that proprietary apps can run on Linux all day long without violating the GPL and Cisco got in trouble for modifying kernel code.
FUD, FUD and more FUD. What a jerk. Forbes is on my list of not-to-be-read publications now.
Bull. There is a strong current of discontent in Iran. Just because the US would like to see the Iran theocrats fall doesn't mean they're behind every action of the dissenters. It's an common tactic of third-world tyrants to associate the CIA or the US with those fighting. It's not like the students there are Chalabi or something.
As for Venezuela, the US didn't initiate the putsch. Chavez pissed off a lot of the elite and powerful institutions like the oil company, church and media there by himself. What happened is that a number of the Venezuelan military came to the US and asked whether they would support them if they overthrew Chavez, and the government said "Yes". The US was one of the few countries in the world to approach the temporary replacements and offer recognition, and it was well-deserved egg on the Bush administration's face when Chavez returned to power. That's outrageous enough, and the wimpy Democrats didn't even push them on it. But don't see CIA plots lurking behind every bush. The coup attempt was homegrown.
Not that I like Chavez or anything, but the rule of law and democracy needs to be established and followed, whether the leader was bad or not.
You disgust me. Iran is as stable as ever? The students rebelling there were backed by the CIA? Iran is a theocracy and the people born there since the Revolution know that the Ayatollahs' promises are crap. The students and others demonstrated because when they ask for freedom of speech or try to exercise it, they get arrested, beaten and sometimes murdered, and they want to do something about it. That is internal change.
So tyranny is fine except when it's done by the US? I don't think the US is perfect, and I strongly dislike its foreign policy, but it's sickening how many anti-American people think the US is pure evil while apologizing for states just as bad or even worse. The ayatollahs need to fall, just like the Shah.
I'd say I'm libertarian and I have an issue with the H1B program. They're specific to a certain company, which means the H1Ber is stuck at that company if they want to work in the US, no matter how poorly they're treated. This is indentured servitude, not the equitable trade of labor for salary. Make it so the H1Bers can move from company to company as easily as an American and this objection goes away.
There is a justifiable concern about the politics behind what industries get H1B exceptions and such, but that's more a systemic issue with government/corporate interactions.
Well, it'll land you in jail in Canada (http://www.indexonline.org/news/20020127_canada.s html ) - the moronic Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel was ordered to remove his website. No, not jailed, but considering if he ignores it the government will use force to remove it, and if people ignore them it'll escalate to jail, it's the same thing.
As for Europe, the EU is planning on making it a crime to speak ideas they don't like. (http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/11/09/1920226.shtm l?tid=153) So I think what I said was accurate.
You need to calm down and read exactly what I said. I stated that the US understood the "freedom of speech" idea better then other countries, including Canada, not that the US was the freest country in the world or that Canada was wrong and evil. And to be frank, considering you have that whole "not withstanding" clause that can be used to remove any of the promises of the Canadian charter, and considering Holocaust denial websites are shut down in Canada (http://www.indexonline.org/news/20020127_canada.s html) and "offensive" literature is stopped at the borders, it's true. Bad ideas are best dealt with better speech, not force.
I didn't address firearms (on which we'll just have to disagree), drug laws (on which we apparently do agree), legal age limits, or anything else. Hell, some of the above, I wish the US was more like Canada, and in some places, I think both countries are deeply flawed. But remove that chip from your shoulder - deal with what I said and not with what you wanted to rant about.
And using the term "USAmerican" doesn't really add anything to the discussion - there's a number of derisive terms I could have used, and didn't, because they don't do anything but annoy people. Consider returning the favor.
Your inability to see it does not mean it's not there. You do not have a right to go see a film in a theater, you do have the right to watch what you wish without the government using force against you as punishment for seeing a banned movie. There's a huge difference there.
I mean, if nothing else, there's this little thing called the Internet. Maybe you can see this movie you need so badly over it. Alternatively, maybe you should open up your own art house theater and show such things, if there's a demand that's going unmet.
Not that I agree with the "No NC-17" policy of these theatres, but one should be honest about what exactly's going on here.
The ones who demanded that the Parkers change the South Park subtitle were the MPAA Ratings committee, which is a private organization. The FCC didn't have fuck all to do with it. The Parkers caved because if they didn't get an R rating only art house theaters would show them, not because if they didn't they'd be arrested. There is a difference here that you're missing. Same thing with the movie scripts: they're made tamer than some wish because it makes more money, not because the government will ban it otherwise.
This breaks down somewhat with regards to the TV and radio, as they're publicly regulated, and the Republicans have tried to do the same thing with the Internet, but the Courts have been very clear: the First Amendment does not allow the kind of government censorship that is widespread almost everywhere else.
And you won't land in jail in the US for denying the Holocaust in an attempt to whitewash the Nazis: you're thinking of Europe and Canada, where they don't quite get the whole freedom of speech thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Japan wants IPv6 because they have a lot less IPs per citizen than the US does. I can't be bothered to look up the actual numbers right now, but I remember figures on the order of 100 IPs/US Citizen and 7 IPs/Japanese Citizen. China's most likely in the same boat.
P.S. If there was a US city with 30 million people, they'd have 3G damn fast. Wireless and high population density go together well.
Counterproductive. As others have mentioned, it'll spun as "just the action of some crazy."
LA County's not using electronic voting machines yet, so I haven't done this, but I'd suggest going and voting early, and then spending the rest of the day telling everyone who comes to vote about the problems with the system. It's illegal to advertise for candidates within X feet of a polling place in many if not all areas, so avoid partisan rhetoric. Don't even mention candidates or parties at all. Just lay out the facts about the security of voting machines and bring along literature for those who're interested.
Hmm. It's not like it's a plot or something, and it's less relevant in modern American society. The attitudes still carry over from earlier times. I mean, we do allow women to enter combat positions. There are other reasons, but I felt this was likely a factor, and so threw it out.
The US also doesn't push a high birth rate because it already has a very high birth rate for a 1st world country - 2.0, which when combined with immigration decently surpasses the replacement rate. Japan and many European countries are shrinking, and it's going to do some interesting things to their economies.
Main theories I've heard are that a)"our nation's daughters" coming home in body bags during a war would be political suicide, and b)"women aren't as [strong/smart/whatever] as men". Oh, then there's c)"women would use their feminine wiles to distract the men busy fighting!"
How about d) loosing women does far more damage to the population of a nation than a loss of an equivalent amount of men. Men don't have children, so they're far more expendable in a demographic sense. This may be enforced by societal norms, but there's a reason for those norms.
Hell, the only reason we don't have a sex ratio that greatly favors women is that evolution would then favor anyone who had a greater than average X/Y sperm ratio until the average reached near equilibrium. If genes weren't selfish that way, humanity would have a much greater birth rate.
I am glad to inform you that he has, in a way. Look up "The Atrocity Archives". Haven't read it yet, but I'm told it covers similar ground, although in a slightly more humorous manner.
That's funny, because I guarantee you, no matter how hard I tried I could not become professionally competitive in likely any athletic event. I don't have the natural genes for it. So it's just luck that the top people got the superior genes (for this task), but it's cheating if I engineer my children so they have them?
The real complaint (and the one I'd support for now) is that any gene therapy that will come around soon will be dangerous. Others have mentioned potential downsides of massively increased muscle production, and most potentially enhancing gene therapies would be best expressed through geneline engineering, where a developing embryo is genetically modified. The ethics of that aren't pretty, and its first uses are going to be therapeutic in nature. When it's safe to actually enhance though, there's going to have to be a new look at the old rulebooks banning genetically altered atheletes.
A single offworld website? Naah. Single offworld ISP, perhaps.
Oooh, nice outgeek.
You do lose points due to the loss of functionality from a keyboard, be it a USB, PS2, or AT interface, to toggle switches. Couldn't you go for an older keyboard type?
I mean, what's next? "Where's my punch card-USB interface?" Naah.
Hey, some of us are still using AT-style keyboards. Windows key? What's that? I hope a PS2-USB adapter can chain with a AT-PS2 adapter.
Gibson had this in Mona Lisa Overdrive. That man certainly thinks ahead.
"No, you're not getting your money back. Be happy anyways."
True for creations past a certain date. Before that, creations had to be registered to be protected. Unlike bogus copyright extensions, this change is not retroactive. I suspect that this is exactly the case here.
Yes. At the beginning, when you have to clear the kobolds out of the kitchen, you can threaten them into surrendering. The people there then want to kill them, and if you make them let the kobolds go, it goes up. Might be others, but that's the one I remember.
Huh? I got the gold edition (sitting next to just Neverwinter Nights for the same price - who shelved that?), and it came with a 220 page ring bound manual, a map and the game discs with a spot left over in the case for Hordes. Considering the CD keys are on the inside of my manual, you got ripped off.
At least in the first expansion (Shadows of Unrentide?) they've added in a law/order axis to behavior. Steal someone else's possessions, and you become more chaotic. Hold your word against pressure, and become lawful. It's still linear, but it's a start.
I think you mean, they won't be that blatant again. Anybody else remember their tricks with Windows 3.0 and DR-DOS?
A BitTorrent of the lists exists at http://www.emptylogic.com/suprnova/torrents/451/li sts.tgz.torrent.
Seeding's easy.
What a mealy-mouthed defense of his flamebait. His claim that he was merely trying to point out that Linux's cost is too high and that this impedes its adoption falls flat in so many ways.
First off, he says that he's merely asking what's good for Linux. If this is true, why all the highly pejorative words in the original article. It's full of slurs like "Hit man", "dark side", and many others. With friends like him, who needs SCO? Has he ever written anything complimentary about Linux before? A quick look around shows that he has a habit of slamming it instead. This reminds me of political pundits who oh-so kindly give advice to other ideologies. And as for his goal of widening Linux adoption, his only solution is dropping any enforcement of the license it was created under. I bet Windows could be far more widely adopted if it was free, but he's not going to suggest that because MS doesn't want that. (Well, except when piracy can wipe out competitors, and you better expect enforcement once they lock up the market.) If we were only concerned with adoption and not with the continued freedom of code, we'd work on BSD.
Second, if he's trying to make corporations aware that Linux is not public domain, he's doing it in an incredibly deceitful manner. He's trying to paint Linux as a truly viral OS where merely using it in a product requires giving away all your IP. He completely ignores the fact that proprietary apps can run on Linux all day long without violating the GPL and Cisco got in trouble for modifying kernel code.
FUD, FUD and more FUD. What a jerk. Forbes is on my list of not-to-be-read publications now.
Bull. There is a strong current of discontent in Iran. Just because the US would like to see the Iran theocrats fall doesn't mean they're behind every action of the dissenters. It's an common tactic of third-world tyrants to associate the CIA or the US with those fighting. It's not like the students there are Chalabi or something.
As for Venezuela, the US didn't initiate the putsch. Chavez pissed off a lot of the elite and powerful institutions like the oil company, church and media there by himself. What happened is that a number of the Venezuelan military came to the US and asked whether they would support them if they overthrew Chavez, and the government said "Yes". The US was one of the few countries in the world to approach the temporary replacements and offer recognition, and it was well-deserved egg on the Bush administration's face when Chavez returned to power. That's outrageous enough, and the wimpy Democrats didn't even push them on it. But don't see CIA plots lurking behind every bush. The coup attempt was homegrown.
Not that I like Chavez or anything, but the rule of law and democracy needs to be established and followed, whether the leader was bad or not.
You disgust me. Iran is as stable as ever? The students rebelling there were backed by the CIA? Iran is a theocracy and the people born there since the Revolution know that the Ayatollahs' promises are crap. The students and others demonstrated because when they ask for freedom of speech or try to exercise it, they get arrested, beaten and sometimes murdered, and they want to do something about it. That is internal change.
So tyranny is fine except when it's done by the US? I don't think the US is perfect, and I strongly dislike its foreign policy, but it's sickening how many anti-American people think the US is pure evil while apologizing for states just as bad or even worse. The ayatollahs need to fall, just like the Shah.
I'd say I'm libertarian and I have an issue with the H1B program. They're specific to a certain company, which means the H1Ber is stuck at that company if they want to work in the US, no matter how poorly they're treated. This is indentured servitude, not the equitable trade of labor for salary. Make it so the H1Bers can move from company to company as easily as an American and this objection goes away.
There is a justifiable concern about the politics behind what industries get H1B exceptions and such, but that's more a systemic issue with government/corporate interactions.
As for Europe, the EU is planning on making it a crime to speak ideas they don't like. (http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/11/09/1920226.sht
I didn't address firearms (on which we'll just have to disagree), drug laws (on which we apparently do agree), legal age limits, or anything else. Hell, some of the above, I wish the US was more like Canada, and in some places, I think both countries are deeply flawed. But remove that chip from your shoulder - deal with what I said and not with what you wanted to rant about.
And using the term "USAmerican" doesn't really add anything to the discussion - there's a number of derisive terms I could have used, and didn't, because they don't do anything but annoy people. Consider returning the favor.
I mean, if nothing else, there's this little thing called the Internet. Maybe you can see this movie you need so badly over it. Alternatively, maybe you should open up your own art house theater and show such things, if there's a demand that's going unmet.
Not that I agree with the "No NC-17" policy of these theatres, but one should be honest about what exactly's going on here.
This breaks down somewhat with regards to the TV and radio, as they're publicly regulated, and the Republicans have tried to do the same thing with the Internet, but the Courts have been very clear: the First Amendment does not allow the kind of government censorship that is widespread almost everywhere else.
And you won't land in jail in the US for denying the Holocaust in an attempt to whitewash the Nazis: you're thinking of Europe and Canada, where they don't quite get the whole freedom of speech thing.