But I can tell you, kids who spent a lot of time on the Net or playing computer games are prime suspects for evaluation and observation. Because we all know what they can get their hands on. Yeah, there's some nasty stuff out there. Anyone with a web connection can have their mind polluted by such pernicious crap as...
Thoreau's Walden
The complete works of Shakespeare
Pretty much all of the surviving philosophical writings of the ancient Greeks
Government legislation, bills being prepared, what congress has to say every day... I could go on all day, but I'm sure you get the point.
Intellectual property rights are the rights given to persons over the creations of their minds.
This is the very first line of the WTO's definition of intellectual property. It's also inconsistent with every attempt to patent, for example, cocoa chemicals.
The talk was highly entertaining, but most of the piece was from an interview with ESR rather than about his talk. He didn't spend much time talking about MS, for example, although the occasional, inevitable dig was appreciated by all. So, the good points: I knew linux and OSS were popular in Ireland, but I was surprised to be in a large auditorium where everyone laughed at a 'vi vs. emacs' joke. His talk was based on the stuff we've all read, but that didn't stop it being entertaining and informative. He went to the pub afterwards, and was charming and entertaining to all, especially my girlfriend. The bad point: He went to the pub afterwards, and was charming and entertaining to all, especially my girlfriend.
With all the universe present (latent?) at the initial singularity, why didn't it just remain the Mother of all Black Holes ? I've seen two plausible answers to this; one is what I like to call the 'just because' theory; a quantum flip made the big bang, well, bang. I'm not fond of this theory as I don't understand how something can change its state without time being present. The other, cooler theory involves time loops. Relativity tells us that time can go backwards as long as the loop is closed, so its effects are never noticed. But if one of these time loops tried to loop back to before the big bang, weirdness would happen. This time loop would not only start the big bang, it would be the big bang. So the universe cloned itself. However wrong that theory may eventually turn out to be, I think it's cool and I really hope it's right.
John Gribbin wrote about this in New Scientist last year; I can't find it in the online edition but the piece is recreated her e (scroll down to In the Beginning 24 Jan 98 New Scientist).
If gwbush.com uses photographs lifted directly from the official site, then Bush has a legitimate gripe. But as for this ridiculous claim that he should operate as a political committee: that's just a blatent attempt at making the decision to try and shut the site down more palatable. Is Gary Trudeau a political committee? What about the editor of Comic Relief? The nation's -- nay, the orld's -- stand-ups? As far as I'm concerned, I'd like to see the author of this site remove any photies that he's appropriated, and then tell Bush to go and shite.
I've read a few posts that seemed to imply that the big bang resulted in a big explosion, and that this somehow sent matter flying out in different directions. This is not the case. The big bang, rather than an explosion, was an expansion of space; every second, the distance between two points increases. The red shift noted by Hubble was not due to galaxies moving apart within space, but due to the space between galaxies increasing. The balloon analogy much beloved of popularisers is quite accurate in many ways; you just have to imagine that the ballon is the universe, and that there is no outside the balloon. Of course, that's not to say there aren't lots of other balloons; inflation theory suggests there are. But they're nothing to do with our universe.
One thing that amazed me about this piece was the precision that the scientists were capable of; the background ripples have a difference with the normal background of less than one part in ten thousand; it took the COBE satellite to detect them in the first place, and to have them detectable from inside the atmosphere was truly a monumental feat.
We've reached the stage where, while this news is good, it's no longer earth-shattering. We expect this sort of announcement. It's going to become the norm as more and more people get sick of rebooting every day. So I guess for now the only thing to do is... gloat. Bwahahahahahaha!
But a 2 MB executable, isn't that a bit bigger than anticipated? Yeah. But let's not worry about bloat until we actually see what they're giving us. I for one will download with a semi-open mind, and if it doesn't live up to expectations, well it's only a beta. They'll make it better. Let's face it, though, it'd have to be pretty bad to be worse than netscape. There's nothing worse than proselytising on the uncrashability of Linux if you're talking to someone who mainly uses the computer for surfing. A decent browser is vital to the success of Linux, and I'll happily shell out my credit card number for something good to use until Mozilla is fit for public consumption.
What do you mean when you say Microsoft can damage anyone they wish, including Linux? Okay, my thoughts on this are based on common sense rather than empirical evicence, so I'll happily retract anything that's proved wrong. Take the 'Linux Myths' page. This isn't a great example, as it was more widely circulated inside the linux community than outside, but it provides seemingly-compelling reasons to keep the hell away from Linux. As was mentioned earlier, name recognition counts for a lot, so 'microsoft says' carries a lot of weight amongst PHBs. As far as their monopoly position is concerned, it's only recently that PC makers have been able to bundle Linux with impunity. Who knows how many people would be using Linux -- and how far along development would be -- if Dell were shipping Linux three years ago?
In one of his excellent books (Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman, I think), Richard Feynman railed against the selection processes for schoolbooks; on the selection panel he was on (can't remember where), he was the only one to actually read the books that were submitted for approval. First and foremost, what's needed is to ensure that the teachers are using the right books. Volunteers would seem to be the ideal way of doing this, but there's the significant danger that this would result in -- amongst others -- the creationists filling as many selection panels as possible.
Okay, I don't have a solution. But I do know that the percentage of teachers that goes outside the designated books is very low. So the books have to be the best.
So he says, but he's pretty much ignoring everything that happened in the anti-trust trial. I don't want to go over the trial analysis that everyone here is sick to death of, but MS do have the resourses -- both in terms of money and influence -- to damage whomever they wish, including Linux. However, Microsoft's high end is the desktop, and that's the last market Linux will take over. This is a telling point, and one that is rarely made in analyses of Linux. We'll get there in the end, but only after all the other markets have fallen.
In fact, the PTA would not necessarily linger on after peace in Northern Ireland True. But it's already been renewed unnecessarily (not just my opinion), and we can expect to see the spectre of 'dissident republicans' justifying its renewal again. If I'm wrong, I'll write to Jack Straw and apologise. But I don't think that's a letter I'll have to write.
Although the tories were blamed for introducing this reprehensible legislation, the current Home Secretary Jack Straw looks like he's trying to out-bastard the tories. And he seems to be succeeding. The Brits seem to be facing the same problems as the Americans in that there's no way a Tory (or Republican) government could get away with this sort of shit, but under Labour (or the Democrats), it becomes acceptable. I was happy to see Blair get in -- and there's no doubt that he's done wonders in Northern Ireland -- but the laws just keep getting worse and worse. Given the closeness of Britain and Ireland, and the (slight) tendency to follow the lead of neighbours, I fear for the laws of Ireland.
With the emphasis, of course, on 'jerk'. If they thought this through for a few minutes, they'd realise that while a lot of people use the internet, a physical presence is still required, and will be for years to come. Pissing off your tenants with probably-illegal actions is no way to to business, and they'll probably retract this edict within the week. This is the best example of luddism I've ever encountered. Ever.
This was inevitable, unless the NSA somehow managed to get about a decade ahead of the rest of us in information management. There are just too many ways of gathering information.
As for the problems presented: tapping fibre may be tougher, but once you've tapped it you've huge amounts of information; much more than tapping mere copper would produce.
Also: the NSA used to have only one country to keep track of? Bullshit. I doubt that China, North korea et al have been left alone except during the last decade.
I'm not sure whether it's stated explicitly in a definition, but a true hack should work; all due respect to our soviet chums, but when the result is a billion-rouble pancake on a distant world, it's... well it's not a hack. Anyway, I don't care who tried it first. I'm a bright-eyed, idealistic sort of chap who spends every day regretting the lack of an Irish space programme. You could tell me that Pathfinder was powered by ground-up dead babies, and that Sojourner runs on Windows. I'd still think it's great. Will I be watching the MPL on the internet, whatever godawful hour NASA decide to land at this time? Betcher ass.
You've hit upon my cunning plan. I'm thinking of setting up three or four Linux boxes, and including some manner of questionnaire that our beloved clients can fill out in return for a wee discount. All I have to do is convince the owners that it's necessary in the name of science and for the future of humanity.
Wow. Someone asking can they quote a/. post. By all means indulge yourself; if you append "this brilliantly pithy quote (C) the amazingly well-hung and erudite Robert Elliott 1999" I'd appreciate it, but it's not totally necessary.
The EU is a remarkably inconsistent body; in general they act in the best interests of the people (according to my definition of 'best interests', of course), but they do have a tendency to promote pretty oppressive legislation when the mood takes them; Enfopol for example. A trawl through Statewatch is worth a read if you've got a few minutes.
Forgive me, but do you really mean the Win98 machines suffer the 'Blue Screen of Death' under Linux?
I was unclear. If you're teaching someone how to use the computer you're going to have to answer a lot of questions. If you've a choice of OSs, you have to ask yourself which set of questions you prefer to answer: to you can listen to them asking why they can't play Tiberian Sun or use Microsoft Word, or you can explain why blue screens keep popping up and learn how to explain 'invalid page fault' in fifteen non-technical words.
The mars pathfinder was, IMHO, a truly elegant hack. It was, to coin a phrase, better, cheaper and faster than other Mars missions, it did everything it was supposed to (and more) and -- this is important -- it was cool. It landed on the planet in a big ball and bounced to a halt. Innovative technology and bouncing probes. Coolness epitomised.
I'm the sysadmin in a cybercafé, and consequently I regularly have to explain the use of the computers to people who've never used a computer before in their lives. This explanation can even be as basic as 'watch the arrow on the screen. when you move the mouse up...'
All the public machine use W9x (people need games and MS Word), and all the servers are Linux. I'm looking at putting a few Linux machines out for the masses to use becuase if you've never used a computer before Windows isn't easy to learn The web integration in 98 just makes things worse.
To be fair, Linux is almost as difficult. But for the absolute neophyte, I'd rather spend time showing them how to use Linux than have to go back time and again to explain what happens when the screen goes all blue.
Like pretty much everyone else, I've got to say that it depends on context. In nearly all cases, though, I'd be inclined to blame the user. I'd like to rephrase the question slightly, though.
Does the fact that a Virus Construction Kit can be used by sysadmins to aid in network defense justify its existence?
The slashdot header is a bit misleading; the page wasn't about a y2k riot; it was a blair-witch-type documentary on the army instigating a riot for the express purpose of beating the shit out of (pick a minority).
My question: if the feds did this without a warrant or subpoena or whatever legal piece of paper is appropriate for this sentence, then they just 'asked' the provider to take the page down. Given that they had no legal backing whatsoever, does this constitute abuse of power? If it does, is this illegal?
I'd be (for some reason that hasn't occured to me) inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case; after all, a rare-bookseller probably has little competition with someone like Amazon. However, an interesting line was
Alibris admits to the wrongdoing but said it gained no commercial advantage because it already knew what its customers were buying.
Hands up everyone out there who lets their email provider know what books they buy from Amazon.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, there's some nasty stuff out there. Anyone with a web connection can have their mind polluted by such pernicious crap as...
Thoreau's Walden
The complete works of Shakespeare
Pretty much all of the surviving philosophical writings of the ancient Greeks
Government legislation, bills being prepared, what congress has to say every day...
I could go on all day, but I'm sure you get the point.
Intellectual property rights are the rights given to persons over the creations of their minds.
This is the very first line of the WTO's definition of intellectual property. It's also inconsistent with every attempt to patent, for example, cocoa chemicals.
The talk was highly entertaining, but most of the piece was from an interview with ESR rather than about his talk. He didn't spend much time talking about MS, for example, although the occasional, inevitable dig was appreciated by all.
So, the good points:
I knew linux and OSS were popular in Ireland, but I was surprised to be in a large auditorium where everyone laughed at a 'vi vs. emacs' joke.
His talk was based on the stuff we've all read, but that didn't stop it being entertaining and informative.
He went to the pub afterwards, and was charming and entertaining to all, especially my girlfriend.
The bad point:
He went to the pub afterwards, and was charming and entertaining to all, especially my girlfriend.
With all the universe present (latent?) at the initial singularity, why didn't it just remain the Mother of all Black Holes ?
I've seen two plausible answers to this; one is what I like to call the 'just because' theory; a quantum flip made the big bang, well, bang. I'm not fond of this theory as I don't understand how something can change its state without time being present.
The other, cooler theory involves time loops. Relativity tells us that time can go backwards as long as the loop is closed, so its effects are never noticed. But if one of these time loops tried to loop back to before the big bang, weirdness would happen. This time loop would not only start the big bang, it would be the big bang.
So the universe cloned itself. However wrong that theory may eventually turn out to be, I think it's cool and I really hope it's right.
John Gribbin wrote about this in New Scientist last year; I can't find it in the online edition but the piece is recreated her e (scroll down to In the Beginning 24 Jan 98 New Scientist).
If gwbush.com uses photographs lifted directly from the official site, then Bush has a legitimate gripe. But as for this ridiculous claim that he should operate as a political committee: that's just a blatent attempt at making the decision to try and shut the site down more palatable. Is Gary Trudeau a political committee? What about the editor of Comic Relief? The nation's -- nay, the orld's -- stand-ups?
As far as I'm concerned, I'd like to see the author of this site remove any photies that he's appropriated, and then tell Bush to go and shite.
I've read a few posts that seemed to imply that the big bang resulted in a big explosion, and that this somehow sent matter flying out in different directions. This is not the case.
The big bang, rather than an explosion, was an expansion of space; every second, the distance between two points increases. The red shift noted by Hubble was not due to galaxies moving apart within space, but due to the space between galaxies increasing.
The balloon analogy much beloved of popularisers is quite accurate in many ways; you just have to imagine that the ballon is the universe, and that there is no outside the balloon. Of course, that's not to say there aren't lots of other balloons; inflation theory suggests there are. But they're nothing to do with our universe.
One thing that amazed me about this piece was the precision that the scientists were capable of; the background ripples have a difference with the normal background of less than one part in ten thousand; it took the COBE satellite to detect them in the first place, and to have them detectable from inside the atmosphere was truly a monumental feat.
We've reached the stage where, while this news is good, it's no longer earth-shattering. We expect this sort of announcement. It's going to become the norm as more and more people get sick of rebooting every day.
So I guess for now the only thing to do is... gloat.
Bwahahahahahaha!
But a 2 MB executable, isn't that a bit bigger than anticipated?
Yeah. But let's not worry about bloat until we actually see what they're giving us. I for one will download with a semi-open mind, and if it doesn't live up to expectations, well it's only a beta. They'll make it better.
Let's face it, though, it'd have to be pretty bad to be worse than netscape. There's nothing worse than proselytising on the uncrashability of Linux if you're talking to someone who mainly uses the computer for surfing. A decent browser is vital to the success of Linux, and I'll happily shell out my credit card number for something good to use until Mozilla is fit for public consumption.
What do you mean when you say Microsoft can damage anyone they wish, including Linux?
Okay, my thoughts on this are based on common sense rather than empirical evicence, so I'll happily retract anything that's proved wrong.
Take the 'Linux Myths' page. This isn't a great example, as it was more widely circulated inside the linux community than outside, but it provides seemingly-compelling reasons to keep the hell away from Linux. As was mentioned earlier, name recognition counts for a lot, so 'microsoft says' carries a lot of weight amongst PHBs.
As far as their monopoly position is concerned, it's only recently that PC makers have been able to bundle Linux with impunity. Who knows how many people would be using Linux -- and how far along development would be -- if Dell were shipping Linux three years ago?
In one of his excellent books (Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman, I think), Richard Feynman railed against the selection processes for schoolbooks; on the selection panel he was on (can't remember where), he was the only one to actually read the books that were submitted for approval.
First and foremost, what's needed is to ensure that the teachers are using the right books. Volunteers would seem to be the ideal way of doing this, but there's the significant danger that this would result in -- amongst others -- the creationists filling as many selection panels as possible.
Okay, I don't have a solution. But I do know that the percentage of teachers that goes outside the designated books is very low. So the books have to be the best.
So he says, but he's pretty much ignoring everything that happened in the anti-trust trial. I don't want to go over the trial analysis that everyone here is sick to death of, but MS do have the resourses -- both in terms of money and influence -- to damage whomever they wish, including Linux.
However,
Microsoft's high end is the desktop, and that's the last market Linux will take over.
This is a telling point, and one that is rarely made in analyses of Linux. We'll get there in the end, but only after all the other markets have fallen.
In fact, the PTA would not necessarily linger on after peace in Northern Ireland
True. But it's already been renewed unnecessarily (not just my opinion), and we can expect to see the spectre of 'dissident republicans' justifying its renewal again.
If I'm wrong, I'll write to Jack Straw and apologise. But I don't think that's a letter I'll have to write.
Although the tories were blamed for introducing this reprehensible legislation, the current Home Secretary Jack Straw looks like he's trying to out-bastard the tories. And he seems to be succeeding.
The Brits seem to be facing the same problems as the Americans in that there's no way a Tory (or Republican) government could get away with this sort of shit, but under Labour (or the Democrats), it becomes acceptable.
I was happy to see Blair get in -- and there's no doubt that he's done wonders in Northern Ireland -- but the laws just keep getting worse and worse. Given the closeness of Britain and Ireland, and the (slight) tendency to follow the lead of neighbours, I fear for the laws of Ireland.
With the emphasis, of course, on 'jerk'.
If they thought this through for a few minutes, they'd realise that while a lot of people use the internet, a physical presence is still required, and will be for years to come. Pissing off your tenants with probably-illegal actions is no way to to business, and they'll probably retract this edict within the week.
This is the best example of luddism I've ever encountered. Ever.
This was inevitable, unless the NSA somehow managed to get about a decade ahead of the rest of us in information management. There are just too many ways of gathering information.
As for the problems presented: tapping fibre may be tougher, but once you've tapped it you've huge amounts of information; much more than tapping mere copper would produce.
Also: the NSA used to have only one country to keep track of? Bullshit. I doubt that China, North korea et al have been left alone except during the last decade.
I'm not sure whether it's stated explicitly in a definition, but a true hack should work; all due respect to our soviet chums, but when the result is a billion-rouble pancake on a distant world, it's... well it's not a hack.
Anyway, I don't care who tried it first. I'm a bright-eyed, idealistic sort of chap who spends every day regretting the lack of an Irish space programme. You could tell me that Pathfinder was powered by ground-up dead babies, and that Sojourner runs on Windows. I'd still think it's great.
Will I be watching the MPL on the internet, whatever godawful hour NASA decide to land at this time? Betcher ass.
Oh. What sort of rovers? Any piccies? Specs?
You've hit upon my cunning plan. I'm thinking of setting up three or four Linux boxes, and including some manner of questionnaire that our beloved clients can fill out in return for a wee discount. All I have to do is convince the owners that it's necessary in the name of science and for the future of humanity.
Wow. Someone asking can they quote a /. post.
By all means indulge yourself; if you append "this brilliantly pithy quote (C) the amazingly well-hung and erudite Robert Elliott 1999" I'd appreciate it, but it's not totally necessary.
The EU is a remarkably inconsistent body; in general they act in the best interests of the people (according to my definition of 'best interests', of course), but they do have a tendency to promote pretty oppressive legislation when the mood takes them; Enfopol for example. A trawl through Statewatch is worth a read if you've got a few minutes.
Forgive me, but do you really mean the Win98 machines suffer the 'Blue Screen of Death' under Linux?
I was unclear. If you're teaching someone how to use the computer you're going to have to answer a lot of questions. If you've a choice of OSs, you have to ask yourself which set of questions you prefer to answer: to you can listen to them asking why they can't play Tiberian Sun or use Microsoft Word, or you can explain why blue screens keep popping up and learn how to explain 'invalid page fault' in fifteen non-technical words.
So in answer to your question: no I don't.
The mars pathfinder was, IMHO, a truly elegant hack. It was, to coin a phrase, better, cheaper and faster than other Mars missions, it did everything it was supposed to (and more) and -- this is important -- it was cool. It landed on the planet in a big ball and bounced to a halt.
Innovative technology and bouncing probes. Coolness epitomised.
I'm the sysadmin in a cybercafé, and consequently I regularly have to explain the use of the computers to people who've never used a computer before in their lives. This explanation can even be as basic as 'watch the arrow on the screen. when you move the mouse up...'
All the public machine use W9x (people need games and MS Word), and all the servers are Linux. I'm looking at putting a few Linux machines out for the masses to use becuase if you've never used a computer before Windows isn't easy to learn The web integration in 98 just makes things worse.
To be fair, Linux is almost as difficult. But for the absolute neophyte, I'd rather spend time showing them how to use Linux than have to go back time and again to explain what happens when the screen goes all blue.
Like pretty much everyone else, I've got to say that it depends on context. In nearly all cases, though, I'd be inclined to blame the user.
I'd like to rephrase the question slightly, though.
Does the fact that a Virus Construction Kit can be used by sysadmins to aid in network defense justify its existence?
The slashdot header is a bit misleading; the page wasn't about a y2k riot; it was a blair-witch-type documentary on the army instigating a riot for the express purpose of beating the shit out of (pick a minority).
My question: if the feds did this without a warrant or subpoena or whatever legal piece of paper is appropriate for this sentence, then they just 'asked' the provider to take the page down. Given that they had no legal backing whatsoever, does this constitute abuse of power? If it does, is this illegal?
I'd be (for some reason that hasn't occured to me) inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case; after all, a rare-bookseller probably has little competition with someone like Amazon. However, an interesting line was
Alibris admits to the wrongdoing but said it gained no commercial advantage because it already knew what its customers were buying.
Hands up everyone out there who lets their email provider know what books they buy from Amazon.