I suggest (and can only suggest, I just got a job woohoo! that's keeping me very busy but perhaps I can contribute financially once I pay off some overdue bills) that we create a community-based filtering program.
This would be open source/free software, and would grab its list from some designated source, perhaps www.fcc.gov/gplfilter or something. Make a deal with the government to create a list of all sites that the government deems unhealthy to children, and post them there.
If the government is going to mandate filtering software, they should have some responsibility in its implementation, not just tell the libraries to spend money on filtering software which may have some other agenda.
And by making it free software, we take the profit motive out of serving the public need, especially the "won't somebody please think of the children!" meme that always arises.
As I mentioned, I would gladly devote some resources to this.
PS I love the fortune, which is particularly apt: "Don't lose Your head To gain a minute You need your head Your brains are in it. -- Burma Shave"
Hmm, Google@Home (or Googol@Home to avoid copyright infringement;-) -- I wonder if it could work?
Seems like Google is themselves using a "distributed effort" (just that it's distributed only among their machines, and most likely with far less latency than an @Home arrangement would have). I bet, though, that given sufficient interest (an angel VC perhaps?) a good product could be made. One with moderation/meta-moderation and rankings of moderators so that chaos mods would dwindle to less than ambient noise, and excellent mods would be "louder" in the system.
Still, beating Google's response time with a distributed effort would be very difficult indeed.
I've had weird results from Google recently. Every time I search for some combination of words, there's already a page existing with that combination of words, the page being another search engine which has published a page with that combination of words.
Do these search engines publish that many pages, or are they generated "on-the-fly" with perhaps a deal with Google?
For instance, I'm converting some of my DVDs to VCDs (so I can store the DVDs in case they break -- little fingers and all), and searched for "software make vcd windows". The first three links were from newfreeware.com, and appear to be pages of collections of software in their database. The second and third link are the same, just capitalized differently. They are (/. inserted spaces before last letter on 2nd and 3rd):
http://www.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+vcd
http://audio.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+vc d
http://audio.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+VC D
Thanks for the link, my brother sent me a link to the same clip but it died a few weeks later.
Do you have any idea how to save the file? I tried saving the link target, but it was just a tiny.asx file (reproduced below). Using wget to try to get mms://wmt-od.stream.ne.jp/ntv/hkzkt/hkzkt10.wmv resulted in a "403: Forbidden" error.
Anyone know how? (Note:/. inserted some spaces in the below, most inappropriately the space before "wmv".)
I share your thoughts, but the biggest problem with our point of view is summed up in a joke my high school sweetheart told me: "The intelligence of the planet is a constant. The population is growing."
The worst part is that welfare mothers are "paid"[1] to have kids, whereas the more successful realize that they can't afford a large family and thus have no or few children. If the successful had large families, then they may end up on welfare due to the expense! So the result is that smarter people breed less than stupider people, and thanks to our safety net we're breeding stupidity.
I don't see a solution for this. I'm not advocating removing our safety net, because I think it is valuable to keep people alive when they're in dire straits. But to have entire generations living "on the dole" and their kids accepting that as a way of life for the new generation as well, I think something needs to change. And change it will; soon, we'll have nanotechnology and all our needs will be taken care of. The only issue left will be whether we really will overcrowd the earth, but we'll also have cheap space travel and we'll be able to inhabit the ocean and deserts and dig vast tunnels like ants, so we'll greatly increase the space available to live in.
There's still the problem that exponential growth is going to hit a wall someday, but I think intelligence will win out: we'll keep finding ways to live more efficiently, and thus our growth will lead to advancements and innovations. In fact, it's kinda neat to look at it that way: without population growth that constantly threatens to eliminate us, perhaps our technological growth would be much slower since we wouldn't need solutions to keep us viable.
This reminds me of a company I used to work for; we didn't have a lot of funding so we used slow machines and slow connections. We had to improve our protocol so that it worked well on the equipment we had -- and then, when it came time to sell it, our customers had better equipment so the thing flew on their systems and we cornered the market. Kinda neat, if we hadn't had to struggle so much we wouldn't have created as efficient a product. Sometimes the lack of resources leads to exponential improvements.
[1] - unfortunately many of them don't "do the math" to figure out that they're not getting paid more than the child costs; in fact, they're being paid significantly less than they'll be spending.
I wonder how far off is the day in which software will be available to auto-correct typos? In other words, people could write "their," "they're" and "there" incorrectly, but you'd have a plug-in in your browser so that it would (using similar technology to Word's grammar checker, I suppose) be able to determine the correct spelling and auto-correct it while your reading. (-;
Perhaps put it in a different color, so the above "your" would be "you're" in blue or with a border or different background, so that you could click on it and see the original in all its incorrect glory.
Wow man, chill. I wasn't attacking you; I was "making a funny." And apparently 3 moderators agreed.
I'm not a lazy, dumb kid. I don't make typos; I preview everything at least twice. As far as I'm concerned, a typo and a misspelling are exactly the same thing -- it's a sign of laziness and sloppiness, on the writer's part.
To catch you being lazy and sloppy in a post railing against laziness and sloppiness is hilarious, and I pointed it out and was "rewarded" for it. (I miss the days of numbered karma; I had 41 when it switched to "Excellent.")
Your posts remind me of Grandpa Simpson's picture in the paper, "Angry man yells at cloud." Do you really think you'll change anyone's mind with this vinegar? Honey catches more flies, y'know.
And yes, it's far easier to get a Funny mod than an Insightful or Interesting mod -- which is why/. is fun to read, because moderators give props to good jokes. Instead of boring people with "The pot is calling the kettle black" I modified it to reference Lost in Space as well as an image of physical violence instead of just a verbal attack. Read "Comedy Writing Secrets" for excellent insight into being humorous.
By the way, I like your writing in general (just checked your bio page and remember you from your Simpsons sig), so it's rather unfair of you to lash out personally against me. I never called you stupid or ignorant, merely pointed out some irony. And with that, I'll bid you adieu. Have a wonderful day!
There is also a system devised by the people at the Foresight Institute for marking up web pages called Crit.
Damn, after looking it appears they have let the domain expire. It was a great idea, don't know what happened to it, perhaps there's an explanation at the Foresight site.
The family summer camp we attended (jokingly) touted their rooms as "climate controlled". This meant that they had no A/C, and the temperature was controlled by the climate.
Florida rentals are famous for this too, with their "solar-heated pools." I initially thought they had solar panels which heated the water. Nope -- it's the sun that does the heating directly! LOL, kinda.
A/. will analyze adds different. He/She will:
1. See if they can use the product being advertise.
2. Check if there is a free alternative.
3. Check Google/Google groups for negative comments about the product.
4. Search Google/Google groups for competitive product.
5. Go to Kazaa or suprnova.org (or elsewhere) to see if they can obtain product without paying.
6. If not, wait until they can.
(Oh and your numbering is off, 6. follows 4. and then we get 5. and 6., but I'm just being anal (only one).)
Maybe we should give a bit more thought to changing our lifestyles rather than continue with our current wasteful ways.
I like your idea, but seriously I would not want to start a company with that as the business plan. You're much more likely to be successful if you can identify a trend and go with it, as opposed to trying to convince everyone to buck the trend.
Moving to hydrogen seems like a great idea, because (as someone else pointed out) it decouples energy generation from usage. Thus all the emissions are centralized, and they can put much more effective (and expensive) scrubbers on the exhaust chimneys than we can put on each individual car. And generation is more efficient, as well, when it's centralized.
I hope one day to be able to afford a Prius. Looks like a great car.
Are the guys at MS indirectly saying that Windows is not stable? Seems they could be finally saying it!
MS is constantly saying that Windows is not stable. They call every current-minus-one release the worst POS on the planet when they come out with the current release.
Well, Citrix seems to have done well as a Microsoft partner. Not with a complete lack of shakiness, though -- in February of 1997 Microsoft announced they would compete, driving Citrix's stock from 40 to 10 in a few weeks, but then they said they'd renew Citrix's source code contract and the stock came back. Scary time to be a stockholder (especially if on margin!) but Citrix is apparently still going strong 6 years later (and survived the dot-con crash as well).
Except it isn't your jig, now is it? It's their jig that you just broke and you'll probably have to buy them a new one.
And... if you can only lease the jig, you can't buy them a new one!
So the easiest answer is, once you get one, use it to duplicate itself, and then you've got a backup in case it breaks.
They won't be thrilled about people duplicating their efforts, but they'll have to deal with it. Once we achieve nanotechnology, any physical item will be easily copied. We're already halfway there, in a sense -- any digital item is easily copied, witness Kazaa and suprnova.org with music, movies, books, and software. Soon cars and desks and telephones will go the way of digital goods, you will be able to download plans and have your nano-box create it.
The site was working fine up until a few minutes ago; I tried to change the comment view so I could see them (Nested rather than Threaded) and it redisplayed the article, but has been hanging trying to get the comments for 10 minutes now. So I'm posting the text of the article here in case the whole thing goes down.
Use of Stots TemplateMaster Woodworking Tool Limited to One Shop
By Ed Foster, Section UnFairUse
Posted on Wed Oct 22nd, 2003 at 10:19:21 PM PDT
Usage Restrictions -- Nasty EULA Terms - Ban on Resale
A small woodworking tool manufacturer, Stots Corporation, includes a license agreement on its TemplateMaster jig tool. The tool is licensed, not sold, and customers cannot sell it or lend it to others. Nor can they sell or lend the jigs they make with it. (Click on "Full Story" link to see details.)
Sources: Company Website, Reader Reports
We're all familiar with license agreements on software tools that limit what you can with the product. But what about a license agreement on a real tool limiting what you can with the product and the things you make with it?
"Shrinkwrap licenses are showing up everywhere," a reader recently wrote. "I just bought a jig for making dovetailing jigs -- this is woodworker talk if it's unfamiliar to you. The master jig contained a license that says I've licensed the master jig, not bought it. The license says I can't lend or sell the master, and furthermore I can't lend or sell the jigs I make with the master."
The reader was referring to Stots Corporation of Harrods Creek, KY, and the user agreement for its TemplateMaster product. Sure enough, the Stots license says TemplateMaster may be used "in only one shop by the original purchaser only" and that "you may not allow individuals that did not purchase the original Product (to) use the Product or any templates produced using the Product..."
A FAQ document on the Stots website explains that the license is necessary because "the purpose of the TemplateMaster is to clone itself. Therefore we are verifying your honesty that only you will use the tool and you will not be passing it around to others to use for free. It is exactly the same as the 'shrink wrap' agreement that comes with almost all computer software. Please help us fight 'tool piracy'."
Challenged as I am to even hammer a nail, I certainly can't judge the uniqueness of the TemplateMaster product compared to other woodworking tools. The reader doubts it's particularly novel, in that the template or jig one creates with it will be virtually identical to "Keller" jigs that have been around for many years. "The key difference is that the instructions that came with the Keller jig said, in not so few words 'here, use this jig to make a dovetail joint'," the reader said. "The Stots jig, which is geometrically equivalent, comes with instructions that say 'use a duplicating router bit to copy this jig to make a jig that looks almost exactly the same as me -- and exactly the same as the Keller jig -- then use that jig to make a dovetail joint."
But even assuming the Stots tool is a wonderful innovation, does that give its inventor the right to restrict how you use the tool? The patent law doctrine of exhaustion would seen to overrule such restrictions, but that doctrine took a hit in one recent case. And then what about the idea of restricting how customers use the tools they make with the TemplateMaster? Don't let the software companies hear about that one, or next thing you know there will be usage restrictions on who we can share our data with.
The unemployable [...] will probably come up with fantastic artwork that would never have been created had they been spending 8 hours a day at McDonald's. That's a shame, because art is one of those of things robots can't build, and may never be able to build.
Computers create poetry,art, and music. (Scroll to the bottom, then go back up a couple pages for the sample MIDI links -- or search for "sample midi output".) There's also listenable Mandelbrot music.
Perhaps it's not Wordsworth, Dali, or Pink Floyd, but it can only get better.
(Some of the music from the first link reminds me of Ray Lynch's work.)
Slashdot Mirror
This would be open source/free software, and would grab its list from some designated source, perhaps www.fcc.gov/gplfilter or something. Make a deal with the government to create a list of all sites that the government deems unhealthy to children, and post them there.
If the government is going to mandate filtering software, they should have some responsibility in its implementation, not just tell the libraries to spend money on filtering software which may have some other agenda.
And by making it free software, we take the profit motive out of serving the public need, especially the "won't somebody please think of the children!" meme that always arises.
As I mentioned, I would gladly devote some resources to this.
PS I love the fortune, which is particularly apt: "Don't lose Your head To gain a minute You need your head Your brains are in it. -- Burma Shave"
Seems like Google is themselves using a "distributed effort" (just that it's distributed only among their machines, and most likely with far less latency than an @Home arrangement would have). I bet, though, that given sufficient interest (an angel VC perhaps?) a good product could be made. One with moderation/meta-moderation and rankings of moderators so that chaos mods would dwindle to less than ambient noise, and excellent mods would be "louder" in the system.
Still, beating Google's response time with a distributed effort would be very difficult indeed.
Do these search engines publish that many pages, or are they generated "on-the-fly" with perhaps a deal with Google?
For instance, I'm converting some of my DVDs to VCDs (so I can store the DVDs in case they break -- little fingers and all), and searched for "software make vcd windows". The first three links were from newfreeware.com, and appear to be pages of collections of software in their database. The second and third link are the same, just capitalized differently. They are (/. inserted spaces before last letter on 2nd and 3rd):
http://www.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+vcdc dC D
http://audio.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+v
http://audio.newfreeware.com/search.php3?q=make+V
Are the rest of you seeing similar things?
Do you have any idea how to save the file? I tried saving the link target, but it was just a tiny .asx file (reproduced below). Using wget to try to get mms://wmt-od.stream.ne.jp/ntv/hkzkt/hkzkt10.wmv resulted in a "403: Forbidden" error.
Anyone know how? (Note: /. inserted some spaces in the below, most inappropriately the space before "wmv".)
The worst part is that welfare mothers are "paid"[1] to have kids, whereas the more successful realize that they can't afford a large family and thus have no or few children. If the successful had large families, then they may end up on welfare due to the expense! So the result is that smarter people breed less than stupider people, and thanks to our safety net we're breeding stupidity.
I don't see a solution for this. I'm not advocating removing our safety net, because I think it is valuable to keep people alive when they're in dire straits. But to have entire generations living "on the dole" and their kids accepting that as a way of life for the new generation as well, I think something needs to change. And change it will; soon, we'll have nanotechnology and all our needs will be taken care of. The only issue left will be whether we really will overcrowd the earth, but we'll also have cheap space travel and we'll be able to inhabit the ocean and deserts and dig vast tunnels like ants, so we'll greatly increase the space available to live in.
There's still the problem that exponential growth is going to hit a wall someday, but I think intelligence will win out: we'll keep finding ways to live more efficiently, and thus our growth will lead to advancements and innovations. In fact, it's kinda neat to look at it that way: without population growth that constantly threatens to eliminate us, perhaps our technological growth would be much slower since we wouldn't need solutions to keep us viable.
This reminds me of a company I used to work for; we didn't have a lot of funding so we used slow machines and slow connections. We had to improve our protocol so that it worked well on the equipment we had -- and then, when it came time to sell it, our customers had better equipment so the thing flew on their systems and we cornered the market. Kinda neat, if we hadn't had to struggle so much we wouldn't have created as efficient a product. Sometimes the lack of resources leads to exponential improvements.
[1] - unfortunately many of them don't "do the math" to figure out that they're not getting paid more than the child costs; in fact, they're being paid significantly less than they'll be spending.
Perhaps put it in a different color, so the above "your" would be "you're" in blue or with a border or different background, so that you could click on it and see the original in all its incorrect glory.
Homer: You just lost yourself a customer!
Moe: I forced myself to what?
Homer: You just lost yourself a customer!
Moe: Yeah, you can use it!
Ah, yes, but the plan is to make it up in volume! Oh, wait, the 90s are over...
I'm not a lazy, dumb kid. I don't make typos; I preview everything at least twice. As far as I'm concerned, a typo and a misspelling are exactly the same thing -- it's a sign of laziness and sloppiness, on the writer's part.
To catch you being lazy and sloppy in a post railing against laziness and sloppiness is hilarious, and I pointed it out and was "rewarded" for it. (I miss the days of numbered karma; I had 41 when it switched to "Excellent.")
Your posts remind me of Grandpa Simpson's picture in the paper, "Angry man yells at cloud." Do you really think you'll change anyone's mind with this vinegar? Honey catches more flies, y'know.
And yes, it's far easier to get a Funny mod than an Insightful or Interesting mod -- which is why /. is fun to read, because moderators give props to good jokes. Instead of boring people with "The pot is calling the kettle black" I modified it to reference Lost in Space as well as an image of physical violence instead of just a verbal attack. Read "Comedy Writing Secrets" for excellent insight into being humorous.
By the way, I like your writing in general (just checked your bio page and remember you from your Simpsons sig), so it's rather unfair of you to lash out personally against me. I never called you stupid or ignorant, merely pointed out some irony. And with that, I'll bid you adieu. Have a wonderful day!
I think that was the joke: the factors of prime numbers are exactly the number, and 1. So, it's fairly trivial!
Damn, after looking it appears they have let the domain expire. It was a great idea, don't know what happened to it, perhaps there's an explanation at the Foresight site.
Danger, danger, pot attacking kettle!
It's a mouse-pox virus. So, ... they're building a better mouse trap.
Thanks, I'll be here all week.
Nothing could possib-lie go wrong. Huh, that's the first thing that's gone wrong.
Florida rentals are famous for this too, with their "solar-heated pools." I initially thought they had solar panels which heated the water. Nope -- it's the sun that does the heating directly! LOL, kinda.
5. Go to Kazaa or suprnova.org (or elsewhere) to see if they can obtain product without paying.
6. If not, wait until they can.
(Oh and your numbering is off, 6. follows 4. and then we get 5. and 6., but I'm just being anal (only one).)
I like your idea, but seriously I would not want to start a company with that as the business plan. You're much more likely to be successful if you can identify a trend and go with it, as opposed to trying to convince everyone to buck the trend.
Moving to hydrogen seems like a great idea, because (as someone else pointed out) it decouples energy generation from usage. Thus all the emissions are centralized, and they can put much more effective (and expensive) scrubbers on the exhaust chimneys than we can put on each individual car. And generation is more efficient, as well, when it's centralized.
I hope one day to be able to afford a Prius. Looks like a great car.
MS is constantly saying that Windows is not stable. They call every current-minus-one release the worst POS on the planet when they come out with the current release.
Well, Citrix seems to have done well as a Microsoft partner. Not with a complete lack of shakiness, though -- in February of 1997 Microsoft announced they would compete, driving Citrix's stock from 40 to 10 in a few weeks, but then they said they'd renew Citrix's source code contract and the stock came back. Scary time to be a stockholder (especially if on margin!) but Citrix is apparently still going strong 6 years later (and survived the dot-con crash as well).
And... if you can only lease the jig, you can't buy them a new one!
So the easiest answer is, once you get one, use it to duplicate itself, and then you've got a backup in case it breaks.
They won't be thrilled about people duplicating their efforts, but they'll have to deal with it. Once we achieve nanotechnology, any physical item will be easily copied. We're already halfway there, in a sense -- any digital item is easily copied, witness Kazaa and suprnova.org with music, movies, books, and software. Soon cars and desks and telephones will go the way of digital goods, you will be able to download plans and have your nano-box create it.
Use of Stots TemplateMaster Woodworking Tool Limited to One Shop
By Ed Foster, Section UnFairUse
Posted on Wed Oct 22nd, 2003 at 10:19:21 PM PDT
Usage Restrictions -- Nasty EULA Terms - Ban on Resale A small woodworking tool manufacturer, Stots Corporation, includes a license agreement on its TemplateMaster jig tool. The tool is licensed, not sold, and customers cannot sell it or lend it to others. Nor can they sell or lend the jigs they make with it. (Click on "Full Story" link to see details.) Sources: Company Website, Reader Reports
We're all familiar with license agreements on software tools that limit what you can with the product. But what about a license agreement on a real tool limiting what you can with the product and the things you make with it?
"Shrinkwrap licenses are showing up everywhere," a reader recently wrote. "I just bought a jig for making dovetailing jigs -- this is woodworker talk if it's unfamiliar to you. The master jig contained a license that says I've licensed the master jig, not bought it. The license says I can't lend or sell the master, and furthermore I can't lend or sell the jigs I make with the master."
The reader was referring to Stots Corporation of Harrods Creek, KY, and the user agreement for its TemplateMaster product. Sure enough, the Stots license says TemplateMaster may be used "in only one shop by the original purchaser only" and that "you may not allow individuals that did not purchase the original Product (to) use the Product or any templates produced using the Product..."
A FAQ document on the Stots website explains that the license is necessary because "the purpose of the TemplateMaster is to clone itself. Therefore we are verifying your honesty that only you will use the tool and you will not be passing it around to others to use for free. It is exactly the same as the 'shrink wrap' agreement that comes with almost all computer software. Please help us fight 'tool piracy'."
Challenged as I am to even hammer a nail, I certainly can't judge the uniqueness of the TemplateMaster product compared to other woodworking tools. The reader doubts it's particularly novel, in that the template or jig one creates with it will be virtually identical to "Keller" jigs that have been around for many years. "The key difference is that the instructions that came with the Keller jig said, in not so few words 'here, use this jig to make a dovetail joint'," the reader said. "The Stots jig, which is geometrically equivalent, comes with instructions that say 'use a duplicating router bit to copy this jig to make a jig that looks almost exactly the same as me -- and exactly the same as the Keller jig -- then use that jig to make a dovetail joint."
But even assuming the Stots tool is a wonderful innovation, does that give its inventor the right to restrict how you use the tool? The patent law doctrine of exhaustion would seen to overrule such restrictions, but that doctrine took a hit in one recent case. And then what about the idea of restricting how customers use the tools they make with the TemplateMaster? Don't let the software companies hear about that one, or next thing you know there will be usage restrictions on who we can share our data with.
Top that: eBay doing its IPO on eBay! (I know, I know, they're already public, don't let reality get in the way of a cool fantasy...)
Hemorrhoids?
Computers create poetry, art, and music. (Scroll to the bottom, then go back up a couple pages for the sample MIDI links -- or search for "sample midi output".) There's also listenable Mandelbrot music.
Perhaps it's not Wordsworth, Dali, or Pink Floyd, but it can only get better.
(Some of the music from the first link reminds me of Ray Lynch's work.)