...when the big mouthed troublemakers lie and distort just as much as the State, is it really value added, or just divisive bullshit that hides real solutions in ideological fog?
And you've seen this movie right, so you are an authority on it and all of Moore's work?
You have to love big mouthed troublemakers who condemn things they haven't even seen.
I wonder if Michael Moore suddenly goes on the Atkins diet and loses weight what are you guys going to do? After all, he's not worth listening to because of his current obesity situation. If he was more slim would this actually prompt you to talk about his work instead of his belly?
I digress. Maybe there's an evil liberal supercomputer hiding in his belly that wants to destroy the American way of life. Ok, I understand why Moore's weight is such an issue now.
I think this just prove how truly corrupt Hollywood has become that a person like that could win an award for simply being a fat, hypocritical, low life, scum bag, with a camera. I'm guessing he has about 5 years left on that cholesterol train before his heart explodes like refried beans left in a microwave to long. I can't wait for Mr. Moore to be making those headlines.
CLASSIC ignorant, mean-spirited response.
Don't address the issues he raises. He's FAT, therefore his work has abstolutely no integrity or relevance.
If anything, Moore is a litmus test to identify the free thinkers from the brain dead. Thank you for so efficiently demonstrating this.
I'm not a flaming liberal that thinks Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky necessarily have their finger on the dynamics of our society by any means. But if anything, the unbridaled vitriol he elicits from factions of the populace should warrant careful consideration of his work.
I have seen all his movies and some parts I think are incredibly illuminating and others are obviously embellished or distorted, but one thing is for sure: Debate on these issues is productive and there aren't enough outlets for the types of messages he's promoting in our media today, and even if you don't like what he stands for, it's probably incredibly important, even if you disagree with him, that you support his right to express himself. That you recognize that he is passionate about what he believes in and shouldn't be cut down by pedantic, ignorant, sweeping judgements. Otherwise, you will inevitably find at some point, you'll be in his situation as well.
The fact of the matter is that Moore documents his work exponentially better than his ideological rivals in most cases. His underdog status necessitates this, and that's good for everybody. It's also worth noting that the majority of Moore's critics prefer to criticize Moore, the fallible, sometimes-inconsistent MAN (as if any of us are standards by which others should be judged), and completely disregard his work and the issues he raises.
To dismiss him is to bury your head in the sand whether you agree with his agenda or not.
These quizzes don't mean much when you take into account the practicality of the Libertarian philosophy as it relates to what people expect from the government nowadays.
The Libertarian agenda, from what I've gathered is ultimately unrealistic. In theory it sounds good: a minimalist government, but most people don't realize the Libertarian agenda is even less thought-out than GW's invasion of Iraq. There are too many government services that people take for granted each and every day that the Libertarians think should be privatized (or don't discuss because then things get complicated and they can't present their ideals as a bite-sized package that seems like a real "solution"). Everybody wants to be free, but at the same time they enjoy TV and technology, [somewhat] clean air and water and safety regulations, nice roads and other services... none of which the Libertarians can reconcile with their unrealistic, dream-world agenda.
See... we can never have a decent debate on Java because the Java sycophants mod anything critical to troll status. This wasn't meant as a troll. A few people brought up some really interesting things here. Just because I have my criticisms of the language and its practicality and integration in with something like Sun Java Desktop doesn't mean this is off topic or a troll.
Modding me down doesn't change the reality that corporate-controlled computer languages that don't really offer anything unique to the industry don't have a long term future. That's my opinion, but I guess if you disagree with me, then I'm a troll.
C and C++ seem too low-level for most applications
Ten plus years ago, I might have agreed with you.
But that was back when developers could count on a stable environment in which to deploy their apps. These days, the biggest fear of most developers is that the bloat of the OS, the constant intra-corporate battles over standards, and conflicts over devices, peripherals and plug-ins that endeavor to hook into everything running, have necessitated the need for developers who want solid apps to code in lower levels, hopefully bypassing as much of the crap in the OS as possible. It's a shame it's come to this, but at least I remember the days when a "bug" in an application was actually a "bug in an application."
My vote would be C/C++ with cross-platform libraries. This language has stood the test of time without the need to have a (tm) after it, or millions of dollars in advertising.
to all you CSCI students whose curriculum centered around Java (not unlike those who studied ADA), or those of you who jumped on that bandwagon because it was the hot new thing and you could charge three times more for app development, or you had goofy managers that insisted on the use of the technology, but please... can we put this puppy to rest?
I'm totally in support of an open applications suite to compete with Office for *nix, but something being Java-based might as well be written in Fortran or Cobol. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but as a developer that's written commercial software for 20+ years, I still have yet to see any great advantage to using Java. Yes, there are a few narrow, client-side applications where some of Java's abilities make it the most appropriate development environment, but in 95% of most scenarios, Java is not the most suitable development environment for applications.
There are plenty of more portable, higher performance languages to use. Java is dead, thanks in no small part to Microsoft, but even so, I believe it never really had much of a future. When a new language comes out and requires massive marketing efforts to make people recognize it as a viable platform, that's a bad sign.
Has every original idea already been thought of? We've moved from bad sitcoms, to bad animation, to bad videogames as cinematic plot devices? What's next? My Three Sons - The Movie? Burgertime?
At least there may be some creativity (or at least some intellect involved in playing the Hollywood game). There's a rumor of Free Enterprise 2 in development for Summer of 2005. Though I have a fear a sequel of this classic would destroy it.
when all the principals and their cronies have cashed out their stock, leaving a bunch of clueless mutual fund holders and low-level employees holding the bag.
Until then, expect SCO to grandstand some more until they can drain the last little bit of value out of the company before they retire to their homes in the Hamptons.
Meanwhile, the SEC and the Justice Dept. probably have armies of agents pouring over the finances of Oprah Winfrey and Cheech Marin.
All the other references are under the main domain. It's obvious AT&T wants to log the traffic to that page. It's none of their business. Yes, they may have access to the info anyway, but it's sleazy and unethical in my opinion.
I wouldn't sign up for the list regardless. It's not a question of paranoia. It's a question of common sense. There are as many loopholes in the DNC system as there are creative ways the government will probably use the information beyond its original intent.
I think more spam comes from Korea than China these days, but many of the APNIC networks are havens for spam, so if you have no business with China, Korea or other nearby areas, you can block the whole lot of them out and force legit systems in that IP space to contact you for whitelisting.
This is easy to do with Sendmail:/etc/access
connect:61 550 blacklisted IP - visit http://mysite.com for whitelist instructions connect:211 " etc connect:218 connect:219 connect:220 connec t:221
People freak out at the prospect of blacklisting an entire class A, but it works. Legit systems (if any, which are few and far between unless you're doing business with China) can visit a web page and specify their IP address to be whitelisted. In the meantime, you free up lots of resources and tell the spammers Buh-Bye before they even start their uploading of junk e-mail.
Eventually, the spam solution will come down to a smtp whitelist.
But this whitelist should ultimately be IP based, not key-based. The spammers will be much more easily able to circumvent this system when the database gets large enough. On top of that, this scheme probably adds more processing requirement at the MTA and will dramatically slow down mail delivery.
Of course, all this would be unnecessary if the authorities got off their butts and started prosecuting some of these spammers for the criminal violations they perpetrate on a daily basis.
1. Unused domain space is just that: unused, and un-owned by anyone. It's unethical to take over IP space that is un-allocated.
2. Verisign is providing a service that is very specific; they should not be allowed to change the terms of the services they provide without having to put the whole TLD system back up for bid. Since they could use this to profit, all other root servers and other companies who want to compete for this should have a chance. This is the same situation NSI/Verisign found themselves in in the 1990s when they started (illegally) charging for domain registration. The company has a history of "changing the rules" and exploiting others.
3. Redirecting unused IP space is a huge logistical problem for other systems online; it interferes with all services including ftp and mail - not just the web.
4. It's a big security problem. Who knows where mail for misspelled domain names ends up going?
5. The Internet is an International medium. We don't need another arrogant move on the part of US corporate America to further piss off the rest of the world and show that the Americans are hypocritics interested in exploiting resouces they don't have a right to.
6. If Verisign re-implements their unethical scheme, thousands of systems will modify their DNS to work around it. This could potentially undermine the design of the network to be able to effeciently route around problems and possibly spawn rogue root servers that would be embraced by the ISP community at the expense of the network's flexibility.
It's also worth mentioning that NSI/Internic changed the domain prices and stole millions of dollars from the community and had the courts strike down their fee as an illegal tax. Did they ever return any of the money they collected back to the proper people? Not that I know.
At this point, I'd gladly prefer my tax dollars going towards sending a team to the moon, as opposed to the invasion of another country, summer vacation homes for Halliburton and Gartner Group staff, tax cuts for the rich, faith-based organizations, or national biometrics databases.
It would be nice to have our nation rally around something which doesn't (intentionally) involve killing people.
It would be nice to have people talking about science that doesn't involve CGI in movie production, weight loss technology, or Onstar.
I really don't think Roddenberry would have minded as much as people claim relating to the new shows. There were so many continuity issues with TOS, they're not even worth counting.
Just the other night I was watching the TOS episode where Kahn shows up. I laughed aloud when they bring this stranger to the ship, and give him full access to the engineering schematics of the ship. It seems in every episode of TOS, they invite weird people on the ship and let them wander wherever they like. It's hard to take things seriously, when for example, they find "silicon nodules" deep in a mine and dance around the premise that they might be "eggs" until the very last minute. The dumbing down of the plot on TOS was as entertaining as running fingernails across a chalk board.
I think the main conflict is between those who locked in on the more cohesive universe created by TNG and are getting upset that the spin-offs are more-and-more pandering to some of the shallow ideals TOS originally played on.
Then again, I suspect even Roddenberry would have barfed upon hearing the theme song for Enterprise.
Slashdot Mirror
All the better! If you want to spew ignorant political generalizations, the least you can do is post under your real identity. Great idea editors!
...when the big mouthed troublemakers lie and distort just as much as the State, is it really value added, or just divisive bullshit that hides real solutions in ideological fog?
And you've seen this movie right, so you are an authority on it and all of Moore's work?
You have to love big mouthed troublemakers who condemn things they haven't even seen.
I wonder if Michael Moore suddenly goes on the Atkins diet and loses weight what are you guys going to do? After all, he's not worth listening to because of his current obesity situation. If he was more slim would this actually prompt you to talk about his work instead of his belly?
I digress. Maybe there's an evil liberal supercomputer hiding in his belly that wants to destroy the American way of life. Ok, I understand why Moore's weight is such an issue now.
I think this just prove how truly corrupt Hollywood has become that a person like that could win an award for simply being a fat, hypocritical, low life, scum bag, with a camera. I'm guessing he has about 5 years left on that cholesterol train before his heart explodes like refried beans left in a microwave to long. I can't wait for Mr. Moore to be making those headlines.
CLASSIC ignorant, mean-spirited response.
Don't address the issues he raises. He's FAT, therefore his work has abstolutely no integrity or relevance.
If anything, Moore is a litmus test to identify the free thinkers from the brain dead. Thank you for so efficiently demonstrating this.
I'm not a flaming liberal that thinks Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky necessarily have their finger on the dynamics of our society by any means. But if anything, the unbridaled vitriol he elicits from factions of the populace should warrant careful consideration of his work.
I have seen all his movies and some parts I think are incredibly illuminating and others are obviously embellished or distorted, but one thing is for sure: Debate on these issues is productive and there aren't enough outlets for the types of messages he's promoting in our media today, and even if you don't like what he stands for, it's probably incredibly important, even if you disagree with him, that you support his right to express himself. That you recognize that he is passionate about what he believes in and shouldn't be cut down by pedantic, ignorant, sweeping judgements. Otherwise, you will inevitably find at some point, you'll be in his situation as well.
The fact of the matter is that Moore documents his work exponentially better than his ideological rivals in most cases. His underdog status necessitates this, and that's good for everybody. It's also worth noting that the majority of Moore's critics prefer to criticize Moore, the fallible, sometimes-inconsistent MAN (as if any of us are standards by which others should be judged), and completely disregard his work and the issues he raises.
To dismiss him is to bury your head in the sand whether you agree with his agenda or not.
These quizzes don't mean much when you take into account the practicality of the Libertarian philosophy as it relates to what people expect from the government nowadays.
The Libertarian agenda, from what I've gathered is ultimately unrealistic. In theory it sounds good: a minimalist government, but most people don't realize the Libertarian agenda is even less thought-out than GW's invasion of Iraq. There are too many government services that people take for granted each and every day that the Libertarians think should be privatized (or don't discuss because then things get complicated and they can't present their ideals as a bite-sized package that seems like a real "solution"). Everybody wants to be free, but at the same time they enjoy TV and technology, [somewhat] clean air and water and safety regulations, nice roads and other services... none of which the Libertarians can reconcile with their unrealistic, dream-world agenda.
I give a rat's ass as well.
These days politics has more of an impact over technology than anything else.
If more people were politically active and aware, instead of playing computer games all day, maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.
See... we can never have a decent debate on Java because the Java sycophants mod anything critical to troll status. This wasn't meant as a troll. A few people brought up some really interesting things here. Just because I have my criticisms of the language and its practicality and integration in with something like Sun Java Desktop doesn't mean this is off topic or a troll.
Modding me down doesn't change the reality that corporate-controlled computer languages that don't really offer anything unique to the industry don't have a long term future. That's my opinion, but I guess if you disagree with me, then I'm a troll.
C and C++ seem too low-level for most applications
Ten plus years ago, I might have agreed with you.
But that was back when developers could count on a stable environment in which to deploy their apps. These days, the biggest fear of most developers is that the bloat of the OS, the constant intra-corporate battles over standards, and conflicts over devices, peripherals and plug-ins that endeavor to hook into everything running, have necessitated the need for developers who want solid apps to code in lower levels, hopefully bypassing as much of the crap in the OS as possible. It's a shame it's come to this, but at least I remember the days when a "bug" in an application was actually a "bug in an application."
BTW, You should probably let IBM know that Java is a dead language. I'm sure Big Blue would be interested in hearing about that.
Umm, yea, you're probably right. IBM's never made any mistakes before over their choice of technology. Why should they now?
My vote would be C/C++ with cross-platform libraries. This language has stood the test of time without the need to have a (tm) after it, or millions of dollars in advertising.
to all you CSCI students whose curriculum centered around Java (not unlike those who studied ADA), or those of you who jumped on that bandwagon because it was the hot new thing and you could charge three times more for app development, or you had goofy managers that insisted on the use of the technology, but please... can we put this puppy to rest?
I'm totally in support of an open applications suite to compete with Office for *nix, but something being Java-based might as well be written in Fortran or Cobol. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but as a developer that's written commercial software for 20+ years, I still have yet to see any great advantage to using Java. Yes, there are a few narrow, client-side applications where some of Java's abilities make it the most appropriate development environment, but in 95% of most scenarios, Java is not the most suitable development environment for applications.
There are plenty of more portable, higher performance languages to use. Java is dead, thanks in no small part to Microsoft, but even so, I believe it never really had much of a future.
When a new language comes out and requires massive marketing efforts to make people recognize it as a viable platform, that's a bad sign.
Has every original idea already been thought of? We've moved from bad sitcoms, to bad animation, to bad videogames as cinematic plot devices? What's next? My Three Sons - The Movie? Burgertime?
At least there may be some creativity (or at least some intellect involved in playing the Hollywood game). There's a rumor of Free Enterprise 2 in development for Summer of 2005. Though I have a fear a sequel of this classic would destroy it.
This one is better.
when all the principals and their cronies have cashed out their stock, leaving a bunch of clueless mutual fund holders and low-level employees holding the bag.
Until then, expect SCO to grandstand some more until they can drain the last little bit of value out of the company before they retire to their homes in the Hamptons.
Meanwhile, the SEC and the Justice Dept. probably have armies of agents pouring over the finances of Oprah Winfrey and Cheech Marin.
Name: g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net
Address: 63.240.16.174
Name: donotcall.gov
Address: 206.16.196.198
Aliases: www.donotcall.gov
No ethical reason for a webbot to be in that page, going to a completely separate network. Period.
All the other references are under the main domain. It's obvious AT&T wants to log the traffic to that page. It's none of their business. Yes, they may have access to the info anyway, but it's sleazy and unethical in my opinion.
I wouldn't sign up for the list regardless. It's not a question of paranoia. It's a question of common sense. There are as many loopholes in the DNC system as there are creative ways the government will probably use the information beyond its original intent.
I think more spam comes from Korea than China these days, but many of the APNIC networks are havens for spam, so if you have no business with China, Korea or other nearby areas, you can block the whole lot of them out and force legit systems in that IP space to contact you for whitelisting.
/etc/access
c t:221
This is easy to do with Sendmail:
connect:61 550 blacklisted IP - visit http://mysite.com for whitelist instructions
connect:211 " etc
connect:218
connect:219
connect:220
conne
People freak out at the prospect of blacklisting an entire class A, but it works. Legit systems (if any, which are few and far between unless you're doing business with China) can visit a web page and specify their IP address to be whitelisted. In the meantime, you free up lots of resources and tell the spammers Buh-Bye before they even start their uploading of junk e-mail.
a scan of the do-not-call registry page reveals this little tidbit:/ njs.gif?dcsuri=/nojavascript"
src="http://g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net/DCS000003_6D4Q
Nice of AT&T to be monitoring/logging all the traffic to that site.
I won't register because they have no business associating an IP or e-mail with a telephone number in an opt-out list.
The Google Booty-bar, which searches your address book late and night and lists womens' numbers that are interested in getting together.
Eventually, the spam solution will come down to a smtp whitelist.
But this whitelist should ultimately be IP based, not key-based. The spammers will be much more easily able to circumvent this system when the database gets large enough. On top of that, this scheme probably adds more processing requirement at the MTA and will dramatically slow down mail delivery.
Of course, all this would be unnecessary if the authorities got off their butts and started prosecuting some of these spammers for the criminal violations they perpetrate on a daily basis.
1. Unused domain space is just that: unused, and un-owned by anyone. It's unethical to take over IP space that is un-allocated.
2. Verisign is providing a service that is very specific; they should not be allowed to change the terms of the services they provide without having to put the whole TLD system back up for bid. Since they could use this to profit, all other root servers and other companies who want to compete for this should have a chance. This is the same situation NSI/Verisign found themselves in in the 1990s when they started (illegally) charging for domain registration. The company has a history of "changing the rules" and exploiting others.
3. Redirecting unused IP space is a huge logistical problem for other systems online; it interferes with all services including ftp and mail - not just the web.
4. It's a big security problem. Who knows where mail for misspelled domain names ends up going?
5. The Internet is an International medium. We don't need another arrogant move on the part of US corporate America to further piss off the rest of the world and show that the Americans are hypocritics interested in exploiting resouces they don't have a right to.
6. If Verisign re-implements their unethical scheme, thousands of systems will modify their DNS to work around it. This could potentially undermine the design of the network to be able to effeciently route around problems and possibly spawn rogue root servers that would be embraced by the ISP community at the expense of the network's flexibility.
It's also worth mentioning that NSI/Internic changed the domain prices and stole millions of dollars from the community and had the courts strike down their fee as an illegal tax. Did they ever return any of the money they collected back to the proper people? Not that I know.
At this point, I'd gladly prefer my tax dollars going towards sending a team to the moon, as opposed to the invasion of another country, summer vacation homes for Halliburton and Gartner Group staff, tax cuts for the rich, faith-based organizations, or national biometrics databases.
It would be nice to have our nation rally around something which doesn't (intentionally) involve killing people.
It would be nice to have people talking about science that doesn't involve CGI in movie production, weight loss technology, or Onstar.
I really don't think Roddenberry would have minded as much as people claim relating to the new shows. There were so many continuity issues with TOS, they're not even worth counting.
Just the other night I was watching the TOS episode where Kahn shows up. I laughed aloud when they bring this stranger to the ship, and give him full access to the engineering schematics of the ship. It seems in every episode of TOS, they invite weird people on the ship and let them wander wherever they like. It's hard to take things seriously, when for example, they find "silicon nodules" deep in a mine and dance around the premise that they might be "eggs" until the very last minute. The dumbing down of the plot on TOS was as entertaining as running fingernails across a chalk board.
I think the main conflict is between those who locked in on the more cohesive universe created by TNG and are getting upset that the spin-offs are more-and-more pandering to some of the shallow ideals TOS originally played on.
Then again, I suspect even Roddenberry would have barfed upon hearing the theme song for Enterprise.