Is it really asking too much to insist that we not be bombarded with advertising everywhere we look, everywhere we listen?
why should the bombardment stop? don't demand advertising silence from the advertisers - they're making too much money to give it up - demand it from yourself.
for the last five years, i have been persuing a policy of personal advertising exposure reduction. my formula for it is simple:
kill your television. if you haven't figgured out that programming is just the coating to get you to swallow the ads... well, you're not paying attention then! donate yr tv to the women's shelter or something. if you must get the content (say, 6 pm buffy) nab it from bittorrent.
commit to ad-free radio there are ad-free and ad-reduced radio stations out there such as your state provider (cbc, bbc &c). your local university probably has a good radio station (the one in my town is awesome!)
don't be a billboard, eschew visible branding you pay $20 more for the shirt with the nike swoosh on it. why pay them to be their billboard? de-logo-ize your stuff and avoid purchasing items with large, visible logos. (you may argue about band tee shirts now, if you wish:>)
avoid points programs does every store have to have a points card now? don't play! the "savings" and bonuses you reap do not represent a decrease in the retailer's profit but, rather, an increase in the median price of services and products offered. the primary purpose of the campaigns is to gather data on you for future marketing and advertising campaigns. don't participate.
obviously those aren't hard "rules" (who the hell am i to tell you what to do?), but if you want to live with less advertising, it's a good way to start. the most important suggestion i can make is to spend a fair amount of time deciding how you classify different kinds of advertising and what you want to achieve. what do you think of classified ads? band tee shirts? the chrome logo on your car? think this stuff through early on!
dude. you're posting as an ac and you're asking why mandatory id is bad?
How is it any different from a damn driver's license in the states?
becasue a driver's license is for driving which is entirely optional. an id card is just for every day existing which is not. i don't know about in the us (you guys have gone a little "security" crazy recently) but in canada, if you're not driving you are not required to carry a driver's licence.
And how much easier it would be for you to have one number to remember?
They COULD put all their files on a 64k throttle except for subscribers, and meet the requirements of the GPL
or they could just follow the example of theo and co. from the openbsd site:
3.3 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image for download?
The OpenBSD project does not make the ISO images used to master the official CDs available for download. The reason is simply that we would like you to buy the CD sets, helping fund ongoing OpenBSD development. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de Raadt. Theo does not permit people to redistribute images of the official OpenBSD CDs. As an incentive for people to buy the CD set, some extras are included in the package as well (artwork, stickers etc).
Note that only the CD layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else from downloading OpenBSD and making their own CD.
i've always thought this was a good comporomise between letting the dedicated and the geeky get what they are entitled to (the source to play with) while encouraging the moms and pops to chip into the corporate kitty. note that the price of openbsd producst is low... i think i paid $30 for the last batch of cd's i bought (and it came with stickers).
Re:(OT)Re:Its the beginning of the end for MS
on
Windows 2003 Going Gold
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
good lord, did neither of you bother to read "today's isms" or whatever the heck yr grade 10 social studies textbook was called?
fascists are:
segregationist there is a two tiered legal system for "in-groups" and "out-groups". these groupings can be religious, racial, ethnic.
expansionist usually through direct force of state (viz. war). but also via economic imperialism.
ultranationalistic some sort of mystical, mythical or quasireligious importance is placed on the nation.
capitalist contrary to the nsadp's name, there ain't no socialism in national socialism.
reactionary makes policy based upon current circumstances rather than creating policies to prevent problems.
repressive all the secret police stuff that we associate with fascism.
so...
iraq wins (treatement of kurds worse than treatment of african americans. hands down)
u.s. wins (have you been listening to the "pax americana" stuff from pearle &co? that plus the habit of the u.s. running "proxy wars" to expand their influence (hussein was a pro-us proxy warrior to fight iran once) gives this to the u.s. hands down)
tie. maybe down in the states you don't see it, but from the outside american nationalism looks really scary! i can't speak for iraqi nationlism - but i am willing to wager it's pretty hefty
u.s. wins - although not socialist, iraq is not as ideologically committed to laissez faire capitalsim as the u.s. is.
tie - iraq has been struggling to avoid internal collapse for twelve years. survival struggles are by definition reactionary. the us has based it's entire foreign policy in response to s11 - a reactionary stance.
iraq wins - well, duh. in the united states the cops don't shoot you without trial... well sometimes but not very often... but homeland security may be looking to change that(
here,
here,
here)
fascism comes in 31 different flavours. feel free to oppose them all.
i worked in a shop once where "gold" just sorta became another intermediary milestone. a "gold" copy was released once only to be discovered to be full of holes... a "platinum" version was issued shortly thereafter.
i think we finally shipped the "ruby and emerald encrusted adamantium with oak leaves first class" version.
1. the names "solaris" and "sunos" overlap for solaris 1.x series. starting with sonos 4.1.1 sun renamed the os solaris 1.x... so, sunos 4.1.4 is really solaris 1.1.2. when you say "solaris" though you probably mean the 2.x (and above) series...
2. sunos 4.1.4 came out circa 1994/5. so that's about bang on.
Iraq did something wrong (started a war), and therefore the authority with jurisdiction over Iraq (the UN) decided that Iraq had to give up its weapons
ah, the american double standard at work. when un's "authority and jurisdiction" are convenient they are quoted. when they are inconveneint, they are ignored. the war which the u.s. is engaging in right now is not sanctioned by the u.n. your "baliff" is not a cop, enforcing the law, but just a guy with a gun taking the law into his own hands. in real democracies we have a word for people like that: criminals.
the bottom line is this. you do not know that iraq has these so-called weapons of mass destruction. the inspectors found some old and empty containers. that is the extent of the proof. on the pretext of this "proof" the united states is waging a war against the wishes of the united nations and without the support of many of your so-called allies.
here's the real analogy: you got a dui 12 years ago. yesterday you were pulled over at a checkstop and blew negative - so now some guy with a gun (not a baliff or a cop, just some guy with a gun) shoots you in the stomach.
the united states is not concerned about peace int he middle east... hell they propped up hussein in the eighties to wage proxy war on iran! they are not concerned about the "people of iraq" (except when convenient for public relations). you will notice that the "people of iraq" were never mentioned until two weeks ago and the people of myanmar, east timor and zaire are never mentioned (the afformentioned countries having no resources the u.s. wants, the people are worthless). the united states is only concerned about one thing: securing iraqi oil for american capitalism.
The US could simply lift sanctions against Iraq. That's a lot cheaper than sending in troops and replacing the govt.
i just realized that my previous post might have been mistaken as pro-war. definitely not my intention.
iraq controls one third of the world supply of oil. prior to '91 this was okay for american business intersts since hussein was an ally (propped up to fight iran who was the enemy-du-jour). the iraqi occupation of kuwait, however, put iraq in a position where it could hold the majority of world oil reserves. this was a Bad Thing for american interests both from a too-many-eggs-per-basket angle and because hussein was demonstrating that he was not the puppet washington was rather hoping for.
enter the sanctions. after the iraqi's were ousted from kuwait they still controlled one-third of the oil. this was bad because it meant that that percentage of the world oil was held by a hostile power. the solution was simple: take that oil off the market. with iraqi oil embargoed, the remaining available oil was produced exclusively by friendly or neutral nations. simple math! the total amount of available oil did not decrease since the other producing nations just picked up the slack (espescially russia).
the sanctions were implemented in order to keep the percentage of available oil produced by "friendly" nations as close to 100% as possible.
Seriously though the "This is a war for oil" argument is tired and weak. There are significantly easier and less expensive ways to get oil than this
like what? maybe you're forgetting that iraq accounts for about a third of worldwide oil production. if you have an easy way to increase total crude reserves by 34% i'm sure someone would like to talk to you.
OSX wouldn't run so well on my 333 Mhz lombard anyway, and linux is way better than OS 9.
bingo! last year i decided that the time had come to retire my 9600/233... this machine was a beast back in '97 (6 pci slots, 12 ram slots, scsi drives...) a shame to waste. enter yellowdog 2.2 and voila: a spiffy webserver!
the problem is the "default position". there are two potential options in any situation: 1) you are identified 2) you are anonymous. now, i accept that there are situations where it is desirable for both myself and "society at large" (or, more likely, it's representatives ie the government and its agents) for me to be identified. no problem. likewise, there are situations where anonymity and privacy are desirable. fair enough.
now given the above two options, we must establish what the default option is:
1. am i going to be identified all the time and only move to anonymous mode when it is required?
2. or am i going to remain anonymous by default and only identify myself when it is necessary?
if option 1 then any move into anonymous mode is going to be regarded with suspiscion. if you choose to be anonymous then you must be doing "something wrong" - with the definition of "wrong" being developed by the accuser and the presumption being of guilt in the absence of proof. i do not find this desireable.
ergo, i choose for option 1 - remaining anonymous be default. it does require some lifestyle choices that most people would consider extreme but , really, living a default anonymous life is quite easy for me.
re student id: in my life i have attended two universities and two colleges, so i am familiar with the situation. accept that you are institutionalized and that the administration regards students as product. you will graduate one day.
the problem with this is that carrying your id is now mandatory. i have a driver's license. it demonstrates to the authorities that i am qualified to drive. when i am not driving i do not carry my driver's license with me and i do not show it the police when i am not accused of a driving violation. i have a social insurance number. it is only to be used for taxation purposes. i give the number to no one else for no other reason. they have no need nor right to ask for it.
with iris recognition these two pieces of id are always on me.
Slashdot Mirror
% uptime
7:50PM up 113 days, 5:22, 2 users, load averages: 1.21, 1.06, 0.89
your point?
you forgot:
in soviet russia advertising commits to being you-free!
why should the bombardment stop? don't demand advertising silence from the advertisers - they're making too much money to give it up - demand it from yourself.
for the last five years, i have been persuing a policy of personal advertising exposure reduction. my formula for it is simple:
- kill your television. if you haven't figgured out that programming is just the coating to get you to swallow the ads... well, you're not paying attention then! donate yr tv to the women's shelter or something. if you must get the content (say, 6 pm buffy) nab it from bittorrent.
- commit to ad-free radio there are ad-free and ad-reduced radio stations out there such as your state provider (cbc, bbc &c). your local university probably has a good radio station (the one in my town is awesome!)
- don't be a billboard, eschew visible branding you pay $20 more for the shirt with the nike swoosh on it. why pay them to be their billboard? de-logo-ize your stuff and avoid purchasing items with large, visible logos. (you may argue about band tee shirts now, if you wish
:>)
- avoid points programs does every store have to have a points card now? don't play! the "savings" and bonuses you reap do not represent a decrease in the retailer's profit but, rather, an increase in the median price of services and products offered. the primary purpose of the campaigns is to gather data on you for future marketing and advertising campaigns. don't participate.
obviously those aren't hard "rules" (who the hell am i to tell you what to do?), but if you want to live with less advertising, it's a good way to start. the most important suggestion i can make is to spend a fair amount of time deciding how you classify different kinds of advertising and what you want to achieve. what do you think of classified ads? band tee shirts? the chrome logo on your car? think this stuff through early on!oh, about 6 months after the release of Xcocoa.
ie. never.
There's unlimited supply
and there is no reason why
I tell you it was all a frame
they onl1y did it 'cos of fame -
Who? EMI
Why is that bad?
dude. you're posting as an ac and you're asking why mandatory id is bad?
How is it any different from a damn driver's license in the states?
becasue a driver's license is for driving which is entirely optional. an id card is just for every day existing which is not. i don't know about in the us (you guys have gone a little "security" crazy recently) but in canada, if you're not driving you are not required to carry a driver's licence.
And how much easier it would be for you to have one number to remember?
more difficult than having none to remember.
Java sucks. Slow junk
people who have done actual research beg to differ
please, learn about the issue at hand before accusing people of having drug addictions.
or they could just follow the example of theo and co. from the openbsd site:
3.3 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image for download?
The OpenBSD project does not make the ISO images used to master the official CDs available for download. The reason is simply that we would like you to buy the CD sets, helping fund ongoing OpenBSD development. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de Raadt. Theo does not permit people to redistribute images of the official OpenBSD CDs. As an incentive for people to buy the CD set, some extras are included in the package as well (artwork, stickers etc).
Note that only the CD layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else from downloading OpenBSD and making their own CD.
i've always thought this was a good comporomise between letting the dedicated and the geeky get what they are entitled to (the source to play with) while encouraging the moms and pops to chip into the corporate kitty. note that the price of openbsd producst is low... i think i paid $30 for the last batch of cd's i bought (and it came with stickers).
so...
fascism comes in 31 different flavours. feel free to oppose them all.
i think we finally shipped the "ruby and emerald encrusted adamantium with oak leaves first class" version.
1. the names "solaris" and "sunos" overlap for solaris 1.x series. starting with sonos 4.1.1 sun renamed the os solaris 1.x... so, sunos 4.1.4 is really solaris 1.1.2. when you say "solaris" though you probably mean the 2.x (and above) series...
2. sunos 4.1.4 came out circa 1994/5. so that's about bang on.
advogato has a project page for it... which is odd since, obviously, the dog ain't no open-source puppy. there is no apparent attached project.
may i suggest the antique roadshow? that's where i got my copy of apple unix for the workgroup server 9150
oh, you are so forgetting microsoft bob.
call it: "unix, the musical"
ah, the american double standard at work. when un's "authority and jurisdiction" are convenient they are quoted. when they are inconveneint, they are ignored. the war which the u.s. is engaging in right now is not sanctioned by the u.n. your "baliff" is not a cop, enforcing the law, but just a guy with a gun taking the law into his own hands. in real democracies we have a word for people like that: criminals.
the bottom line is this. you do not know that iraq has these so-called weapons of mass destruction. the inspectors found some old and empty containers. that is the extent of the proof. on the pretext of this "proof" the united states is waging a war against the wishes of the united nations and without the support of many of your so-called allies.
here's the real analogy: you got a dui 12 years ago. yesterday you were pulled over at a checkstop and blew negative - so now some guy with a gun (not a baliff or a cop, just some guy with a gun) shoots you in the stomach.
the united states is not concerned about peace int he middle east... hell they propped up hussein in the eighties to wage proxy war on iran! they are not concerned about the "people of iraq" (except when convenient for public relations). you will notice that the "people of iraq" were never mentioned until two weeks ago and the people of myanmar, east timor and zaire are never mentioned (the afformentioned countries having no resources the u.s. wants, the people are worthless). the united states is only concerned about one thing: securing iraqi oil for american capitalism.
the u.s. actually has more chemical weapons than iraq. and more nukes.
we've seen this before.
when you outnumber your opponent 1000-to-1 just about any strategy is a "good one".
i just realized that my previous post might have been mistaken as pro-war. definitely not my intention.
iraq controls one third of the world supply of oil. prior to '91 this was okay for american business intersts since hussein was an ally (propped up to fight iran who was the enemy-du-jour). the iraqi occupation of kuwait, however, put iraq in a position where it could hold the majority of world oil reserves. this was a Bad Thing for american interests both from a too-many-eggs-per-basket angle and because hussein was demonstrating that he was not the puppet washington was rather hoping for.
enter the sanctions. after the iraqi's were ousted from kuwait they still controlled one-third of the oil. this was bad because it meant that that percentage of the world oil was held by a hostile power. the solution was simple: take that oil off the market. with iraqi oil embargoed, the remaining available oil was produced exclusively by friendly or neutral nations. simple math! the total amount of available oil did not decrease since the other producing nations just picked up the slack (espescially russia).
the sanctions were implemented in order to keep the percentage of available oil produced by "friendly" nations as close to 100% as possible.
like what? maybe you're forgetting that iraq accounts for about a third of worldwide oil production. if you have an easy way to increase total crude reserves by 34% i'm sure someone would like to talk to you.
that was the "slashdot effect"? pah! piece of cake!
bingo! last year i decided that the time had come to retire my 9600/233... this machine was a beast back in '97 (6 pci slots, 12 ram slots, scsi drives...) a shame to waste. enter yellowdog 2.2 and voila: a spiffy webserver!
then you're not doing enough. for instance, yesterday's reason for continuing to run linux was rdiff-backup (note: this "solution" doesn't work)
now given the above two options, we must establish what the default option is:
1. am i going to be identified all the time and only move to anonymous mode when it is required?
2. or am i going to remain anonymous by default and only identify myself when it is necessary?
if option 1 then any move into anonymous mode is going to be regarded with suspiscion. if you choose to be anonymous then you must be doing "something wrong" - with the definition of "wrong" being developed by the accuser and the presumption being of guilt in the absence of proof. i do not find this desireable.
ergo, i choose for option 1 - remaining anonymous be default. it does require some lifestyle choices that most people would consider extreme but , really, living a default anonymous life is quite easy for me.
re student id: in my life i have attended two universities and two colleges, so i am familiar with the situation. accept that you are institutionalized and that the administration regards students as product. you will graduate one day.
with iris recognition these two pieces of id are always on me.