I recently put a site together for a ma'an'pop outfit. The owner didn't want his employees in the back room looking at p0rn, so he asked me to pay the host company the extra cash to block their flagged sites. He understands that there are ways around this, but just felt it was something he should do.
Don't flame me, but I did it. Why? Because he owns the place and it's his business. If his employees don't like it, they can leave. But I didn't feel that this guy's employees' internet access to p0rn was a big enough deal to lose the client.
If someone is saying something I don't like in my presence, I am free to walk away and live my life how I want. People should also be free to decide how they want to view the web. If customers don't like the censorship, they can and will go elsewhere.
I think anybody should have the right to put most anything on the internet, but also that you have no right to tell me how I view it on my own time (with, or without filters). In this Ask Slashdot Question, the owner has full right to designate how people view the internet on his equipment, and those who wish to see it otherwise can ues someone else's service.
I was disappointed when i saw the "Entirely PVC" box. I thought it would be some cool Fank Lloyd Wright-looking computer contained in a bunch of PVC pipes of various widths. Keeping this sort of thing cool would be a breeze with a couple of fans. Too bad I'd need a ten-inch pipe to hold my MoBo.
I cannot figure out why looks matter. It's like when Apple put a stripe on the mouse ball - who will ever see it? It's not worth the cost.
I own a sports car and a 4X4. The choice of which one I drive is made on which one fits the situation, not which one I will be seen in. Unless I'm some sort of egomaniac, why would I care what it looks like? You're computer typically goes under your desk, so what difference does it make if it's coordinated with your monitor?
As for the mouse. Say it's functional, easy to use, smooth, etc. But don't tell me it's georgeous. It's a mouse, for crying out loud! Not your girlfriend.
Are you an open source fan? If so, is it for the money?
The idea that money drives all is not always correct. I'll give you an example:
Which movies make more money, per movie? MPAA-rated R, or MPAA-rated G, PG, PG-13?
Answer: Not R
Although R-rated movies make up 65% of the output, they don't make as much money back (per movie). Look at the top grossing movies of all time:
$601M - Titanic - 1997
$461M - Star Wars - 1977
$431M - Star Wars: The Phantom Menace - 1999
$400M - E.T. - 1982
$357M - Jurassic Park - 1993
$330M - Forrest Gump - 1994
$313M - The Lion King - 1994
$307M - Return of the Jedi - 1983
$306M - Independence Day - 1996
$293M - The Sixth Sense - 1999
$290M - The Empire Strikes Back - 1980
$285M - Home Alone - 1990
$260M - Jaws - 1975
$251M - Batman - 1989
$250M - Men in Black - 1997
How many of these were R-rated?
So, looking at the top movies of all time, and at the average made per movie, Hollywood would be well advised to make more PG-13, and PG movies. However, money is not always the driving factor. There are other agendas for both the MPAA and the RIAA.
The RIAA wants to have complete control over what people hear. They don't want people to know there are mucisians who don't use their distribution channels. And anything that may threaten these efforts is deemed worthy of destruction. It's the same with MPAA
I was in my local Blockbuster Video last night and was appauled at the lack of selection. Even though most of their revenue is still from video tape rentals, they've converted half their store to DVD. Not just that, but there was no foreign section, and a very limited "Special Interests Section".
What does this have to do with Napster? Well, like the MPAA, the RIAA does not care what we, the public want, they only want to control what we're exposed to. When new distribution models and technology spring up, these two organizations either wish to make them proprietary (DVD) and take away the consumers' rights, or destroy them (Napster, VCR). This is why the RIAA doesn't care about the money-making potential of Napster (a centralized, controlable exchange medium, as opposed to client-to-client piracy), and why the MPAA thought DVD was so hot, but blew their top when De-CSS hit the scene.
....or at least pronounce it "OSIX"? It's true that it's more a *NIX than anything else, so why not start refecting that in the name. I say we steal this idea from Micro$oft and make other companies change their vocabulary (it's a DIRECTORY, not a FOLDER).
Anyway, my rant on the issue is that sites like MacInsider are touting the fact that the Mach kernel "Has been forged in the fire of open source peer review, etc.", but then they're ripping it out of the open source community and making it proprietary.
Should e-mail have the same privacy protections as phone conversations?
I voted no because email is not a telephone call - it's a letter. Email may be seen as traveling over a public network, but, in principle (and this is the principle that the FBI is violating) email is like the US Postal Service. And aren't there laws about opening people's mail?
(But then again), opening people's mail is what they do in other countries, isn't it?:|
One of the worst consequences of thi cheating, no matter what the reasoning, is the way the general public percieves it. Remember Colombine? The problem people had with the kids playing Doom was that they had turned on cheats so they could kill more.
I love playing Half-life, and I figure if I break even (Kill/Deaths) it's pretty good. You have to figure if there's 12 others trying to kill you, then that's REALLY good actually.
Some people just don't see it that way and/or are too egomaniacal to accept it, so they cheat. They look at the 3-Kills, 7-Deaths stat and can't live with it.
But, like I said, it doesn't matter why they do it. The fact that there is wide spread cheating in what is percieved to be a close-knit gamers' culture, makes outsiders seriously wonder if we aren't all screwed up.
I think this strategy is brilliant. It's sort of a "cliff-hanger" marketing scheme. You can bet that the second installment will end with an extremely tantalizing cliff-hanger.
It wasn't until the advent of the pocket book that people started to expect great novels to be published all at once. Have you ever seen the unabridged version of Les Misérables? It's around 1,500 pages (no relation to Battlefield Earth). You can sometimes find it in 3 volumes (usually in French), but the original was 9 books.
Many of the classic novels in history were published in this cliff-hanger marketing scheme (as you put it). Today, though, we think of it as more of a soap opera scheme, where writers create a story to keep people buying rather than write a cohesive plot in one book.
Kinda' like Micro$oft shipping software with bugs and then fixing them in the next release.
Theres an article in USAToday about IBM (amoung others) looking for young talent - Not easily found in the IPO-rich tech industry. Here's a tidbit:
Nearly 50 fresh-faced engineers and entrepreneurs in San Jose and Cambridge work alongside IBM's sharpest minds on newfangled products and services, such as Linux systems management and pervasive computing devices. IBM employees manage the youthful groups.
Okay, so we probably wouldn't call Linux "newfangled", but it's food for thought for all you college seniors who want to work on open-source, and get paid.
If some Karma Whore would like to go find this, there was a/. article not too long ago about NSI convincing a Virginian Judge that the domain name was a telephone number that they could give or take away.
Don't flame me - I'm just the messenger.
Anyway, the logic is quite interesting: They want it to be a phone # in that they can give and take away. However, I don't think telephone numbers are trademarks, so given that same reasoning, they would have no reason to take them away.
Buy.com - which was linked from Maxtor's site, didn't have these listed. How mych will they cost? It's probably not worth it.
I set up my box initially with a 27GB Western Dig. for $150. Last week Western Dig. 45GB went on sale for $190. So, for $340, I got 72GB of storage. which is cheaper than the IBM 75GB drive, and has a better seek time/is easier to keep cool, etc.
A while back a local reporter hired a bunch of kids to see which local vendors would sell them cigarettes. One girl, 13, tried to get some out of a vending maching in a bowling alley. The machine ate her money, so she got the manager. He proceeded to gripe about how she was too young, etc. But when he opened the machine, he gave her a pack of smokes instead of her money.
There are a lot more thing which are more harmful to children, for which we have unenforced laws, than video games. Why try to spread the umbrella instead of patching its holes?
At first I thought: "But these same kids are exposed to violent movies! Why don't we regulate... Ah!"
We have to accept the fact that there are some things that our society deems inappropriate for people under a certain age. Whether or not this is correct is not the subject here. We say that children can only see movies with extreme gore or sexual content with the consent of (meaning accompanied by) an adult. Video games fall into that same category.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this because Linux can be so easily manipulated for it's host environment, or because it's just powerful enough to run already on a 64-bit machine?
Don't flame me, but I did it. Why? Because he owns the place and it's his business. If his employees don't like it, they can leave. But I didn't feel that this guy's employees' internet access to p0rn was a big enough deal to lose the client.
If someone is saying something I don't like in my presence, I am free to walk away and live my life how I want. People should also be free to decide how they want to view the web. If customers don't like the censorship, they can and will go elsewhere.
I think anybody should have the right to put most anything on the internet, but also that you have no right to tell me how I view it on my own time (with, or without filters). In this Ask Slashdot Question, the owner has full right to designate how people view the internet on his equipment, and those who wish to see it otherwise can ues someone else's service.
I was disappointed when i saw the "Entirely PVC" box. I thought it would be some cool Fank Lloyd Wright-looking computer contained in a bunch of PVC pipes of various widths. Keeping this sort of thing cool would be a breeze with a couple of fans. Too bad I'd need a ten-inch pipe to hold my MoBo.
How nice it is to log onto Slashdot and be stereotyped and insulted for my choice of platform.
"Mac Freak" is equivalent to "Linux Zealot". People who buy stuff, or like it just because of the logo.
The door swings both ways on /, even if it is more one way than another. Go figure, a predominately Linux newsite would do that.
What about Atari Star Wars (also 1983) and Atari's Battle Zone Cabinet (1981). Didn't they use polygons?
Unless you're interviewing with the RIAA. :)
This is a design feature of a detection circuit and system BIOSes developed by Award/Unicore from 1997 on.
Notice how M$ uses Feature to describe bugs and easter eggs.
Put them to work on the Mozilla release. :)
Does this mean the US gov. could go after ThinkGeek for putting munition code on a teeshirt too?
I own a sports car and a 4X4. The choice of which one I drive is made on which one fits the situation, not which one I will be seen in. Unless I'm some sort of egomaniac, why would I care what it looks like? You're computer typically goes under your desk, so what difference does it make if it's coordinated with your monitor?
As for the mouse. Say it's functional, easy to use, smooth, etc. But don't tell me it's georgeous. It's a mouse, for crying out loud! Not your girlfriend.
Are you an open source fan? If so, is it for the money?
The idea that money drives all is not always correct. I'll give you an example:
Which movies make more money, per movie? MPAA-rated R, or MPAA-rated G, PG, PG-13?
Answer: Not R
Although R-rated movies make up 65% of the output, they don't make as much money back (per movie). Look at the top grossing movies of all time:
- $601M - Titanic - 1997
- $461M - Star Wars - 1977
- $431M - Star Wars: The Phantom Menace - 1999
- $400M - E.T. - 1982
- $357M - Jurassic Park - 1993
- $330M - Forrest Gump - 1994
- $313M - The Lion King - 1994
- $307M - Return of the Jedi - 1983
- $306M - Independence Day - 1996
- $293M - The Sixth Sense - 1999
- $290M - The Empire Strikes Back - 1980
- $285M - Home Alone - 1990
- $260M - Jaws - 1975
- $251M - Batman - 1989
- $250M - Men in Black - 1997
How many of these were R-rated?So, looking at the top movies of all time, and at the average made per movie, Hollywood would be well advised to make more PG-13, and PG movies. However, money is not always the driving factor. There are other agendas for both the MPAA and the RIAA.
I was in my local Blockbuster Video last night and was appauled at the lack of selection. Even though most of their revenue is still from video tape rentals, they've converted half their store to DVD. Not just that, but there was no foreign section, and a very limited "Special Interests Section".
What does this have to do with Napster? Well, like the MPAA, the RIAA does not care what we, the public want, they only want to control what we're exposed to. When new distribution models and technology spring up, these two organizations either wish to make them proprietary (DVD) and take away the consumers' rights, or destroy them (Napster, VCR). This is why the RIAA doesn't care about the money-making potential of Napster (a centralized, controlable exchange medium, as opposed to client-to-client piracy), and why the MPAA thought DVD was so hot, but blew their top when De-CSS hit the scene.
Anyway, my rant on the issue is that sites like MacInsider are touting the fact that the Mach kernel "Has been forged in the fire of open source peer review, etc.", but then they're ripping it out of the open source community and making it proprietary.
(But then again), opening people's mail is what they do in other countries, isn't it? :|
I love playing Half-life, and I figure if I break even (Kill/Deaths) it's pretty good. You have to figure if there's 12 others trying to kill you, then that's REALLY good actually.
Some people just don't see it that way and/or are too egomaniacal to accept it, so they cheat. They look at the 3-Kills, 7-Deaths stat and can't live with it.
But, like I said, it doesn't matter why they do it. The fact that there is wide spread cheating in what is percieved to be a close-knit gamers' culture, makes outsiders seriously wonder if we aren't all screwed up.
I guess the good part would be playing as Jar-Jar and then finding new ways to commit suicide.
It wasn't until the advent of the pocket book that people started to expect great novels to be published all at once. Have you ever seen the unabridged version of Les Misérables? It's around 1,500 pages (no relation to Battlefield Earth). You can sometimes find it in 3 volumes (usually in French), but the original was 9 books.
Many of the classic novels in history were published in this cliff-hanger marketing scheme (as you put it). Today, though, we think of it as more of a soap opera scheme, where writers create a story to keep people buying rather than write a cohesive plot in one book.
Kinda' like Micro$oft shipping software with bugs and then fixing them in the next release.
Does this recall to anyone else the big robot enforcer in robocop. He could tell that someone had a gun, but not that he had put it down.
I sure hope the feds are smart enough to not believe that AI is anywhere close to being able to police us.
....is whether these people would buy even MORE music if Napster wasn't there.
Nearly 50 fresh-faced engineers and entrepreneurs in San Jose and Cambridge work alongside IBM's sharpest minds on newfangled products and services, such as Linux systems management and pervasive computing devices. IBM employees manage the youthful groups.
Okay, so we probably wouldn't call Linux "newfangled", but it's food for thought for all you college seniors who want to work on open-source, and get paid.
Here's that article I guess I'm my own karma whore...
Don't flame me - I'm just the messenger.
Anyway, the logic is quite interesting: They want it to be a phone # in that they can give and take away. However, I don't think telephone numbers are trademarks, so given that same reasoning, they would have no reason to take them away.
I set up my box initially with a 27GB Western Dig. for $150. Last week Western Dig. 45GB went on sale for $190. So, for $340, I got 72GB of storage. which is cheaper than the IBM 75GB drive, and has a better seek time/is easier to keep cool, etc.
There are a lot more thing which are more harmful to children, for which we have unenforced laws, than video games. Why try to spread the umbrella instead of patching its holes?
We have to accept the fact that there are some things that our society deems inappropriate for people under a certain age. Whether or not this is correct is not the subject here. We say that children can only see movies with extreme gore or sexual content with the consent of (meaning accompanied by) an adult. Video games fall into that same category.