I think Jobs' success is in spite of the fact that he dropped out of college, not because of it.
It may very well be that he would not have started a company had he finished college, especially through grad school. More likely, he would eventually have started thinking in terms of who he would work for and how he would fit into someone else's organization. College educates in many useful ways, but to a large extent it also socializes us to expect and accept hierarchy.
You will end up with 2560x1024 pixels of screen real estate, enough to increase productivity substantially
Exactly how many pixels does it take to increase productivity substantially? How much more productivity do you get with each additional pixel? Just wonderin'...
But recently 3 other countries have announced thier intentions of landing there: China, Russia and India.
Talk is cheap, and it wouldn't surpise me if the Bush administration actively urged them to announce such intentions to reignite a new space-race hysteria. After all, as a distraction issue gay marriage pretty much fizzled right after the 2004 election, and they probably can't use it again in 2006. So let's throw $xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx at the aerospace industry, some of which it will use to strand someone on Mars, and some to show its gratitude to the Party that threw it. A lot of this cash can come out of NASA's budget for doing actual science, which will please another big constituency to no end because most of this science is heretical anyway.
In the last 5 years of the P2p boom how many times have you see P2P used for a legitimate purpose?
Doesn't matter. What you're suggesting is that the right of citizens to communicate information of any kind should be denied in order to make the enforcement of of a narrow property right more convenient. Currently, it's true that most big media files are copyrighted material, and consequently most of the traffic will be as well. The rights to almost all of this material is held by a handful of large corporations that exercise an effective cartel through their industry associations. Until very recently, it was nearly impossible for an artist to be heard (or seen) except through the distribution channels controlled by this cartel, and on its terms. That's now changing, as more and more artists are choosing to distribute their works directly, thus bypassing the cartel. This is why it's not enough just to stem the flow of copyrighted works being traded; it's also necessary to destroy the "rogue" distribution channels themselves. That prevents them from ever becoming conduits for legitimate material, even if they aren't primarily that already.
On the contrary, civil disobedience is often a morally defensible way to bring about change, especially when the deck is strongly stacked the way it arguably is here. In fact, that's often the only way to achieve the momentum necessary for real change.
That said, though, I personally cannot condone the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted works; the creators of those works have rights, too, which includes the "right" to assign them to someone else for money. But the RIAA and MPAA have an agenda that goes beyond just defending the copyrights of their members; they are actively trying to quash even legitimate uses of this distribution channel because it poses a potentially large threat to their own monopoly over distribution. They dread the prospect of artists en masse by-passing the middlemen that they represent even more than they dread the downloaders.
Ah, but Mathematics is much more than simply a language in which physical ideas can be expressed. It's also a symbolic system through which truth can be derived and tested. So no, I don't think that you can thoroughly explain the workings of the Universe without it, regardless of how long you take doing it. That's why so many advances in modern physics had to await enabling advances in mathematics.
she and millions of others want to be able to grasp the more complex theories of physics while avoiding calculus
Mathematics pretty much is the language of Physics, unfortunately for many. Without it, you're pretty much limited to explaining concepts metaphorically through analogies to things from everyday life. You can't do that for very long without seriously misrepresenting what it is that you're trying to explain, and of course you'll never communicate any knowledge that can be successfully built upon that way.
This reminded me of another book that I liked for much the same reason: Inward Bound by Abraham Pais (1986). It's basically a history of modern physics, but unlike most such books does not shy away from the mathematics (without which the physics would make little sense). In fact, I just pulled it off of my shelf and see that one of the testimonials on the back is from none other than Roger Penrose...
Privatization in america means some rich guys get guranteed tax payer money while services and responsive action suffers.
Privatization means at least one other thing that may be even more important. When you privatize a service formerly performed publicly, you make a good portion of the taxpayers' money alloted to it available for campaign contributions and political lobbying. Getting rich in privatized public services means knowing what backs to scratch. So, in the end, everybody (e.g., business and cooperating politicians) wins except the taxpayers and, arguably, the public for whom the service is provided.
If you think this is something, just wait until they privatize Social Security!
That is not a fact but only a theory, and one with a lot of holes at that. Yet, it is taught as Truth to our school children in their science classes, despite the fact that there is no reference to a spherical earth in the Bible. This is yet another outrage from the conspiracy of the secular humanists and their liberal stooges to undermine the beliefs of People of Faith everywhere.
If you are spending less at eBay than elsewhere then you have indeed "won".
By that argument, we no longer need the word "buy", since you wouldn't willingly exchange money for anything if the terms weren't satisfactory compared to known alternatives. An auction is nothing but a sale at a competitively negotiated price. Hey, I just won a printer at Best Buy! Please, please, please don't let the marketeers catch wind of this...
Paying does have one advantage: It defers the problem, at least for a while, by allowing you to continue operating until some indefinite future when maybe you'll be less vulnerable or better able to respond. That screws everybody in the long run, but most of running a small business is just trying to survive the short run.
It's odd that we refer to "winning" an auction, when what we've really done is to prove that we're willing to pay more for an item than anyone else. How is that winning? Yet the psychic prize of having "won" something keeps many an auction going, I'm sure...
disproportionately high sentences for copyright infringers
In this hysterical era, I don't think you could produce an opinion poll suggesting that any penalty is too severe for anything. Gotta be "tough" on crime if you're in politics, and the only way to prove it is to stiffen penalties regardless of how severe they may be already. Excluding the crimes fashionable among your business cronies and big contributors, that is...
Firefox doesn't have a spyware problem because it hasn't had enough market share to make it really worthwhile.
That's not nearly the whole story. You mention popup blocking... Microsoft dragged their feet on that for a long time until they were forced (by Mozilla/Firefox, largely) to offer it. Why? Because they see their commercial website customers as more important than their end-users, access to whom can be sold profitably. Their IIS customers would howl loudly if they offered popup blocking without absolutely being forced to. Spyware works much the same way, and that's why Windows has been so vulnerable to it for so long.
That's also one reason that I'd choose FOSS even if the closed-source alternatives were free (as in beer). I know I can trust it to behave as advertised, because if anyone stuck any of the crap in there that most of us tolerate grudgingly, all hell would break loose and there'd be a fork to switch over to in short order.
(Disclaimer: I'm a FF user and love it, but playing devil's advocate with zealots is fun)
Damn. Just saw that. Well, I guess I'm a zealot then!
If I have a kick ass idea, do you think my first thought is "hmmm, I should give this away and get good Karma!" or "Hey, cool, I could sell this and make a million bucks!".
The problem is that there is a lot more software being written out there than there are viable market outlets for it (especially under monopoly), and most programmers would rather see their stuff used by other people (and maybe get some recognition for it) than let it rot on a disk somewhere. Musicians often play for free for precisely the same reason.
This sort of inane "spread the love, give away your work for free, and make the world a better place" is so unrealistic it is laughable. What color is the sky in your world?
Unrealistic? It's happening all over! It's rocking your world, whatever color it is!
Slashdot Mirror
It may very well be that he would not have started a company had he finished college, especially through grad school. More likely, he would eventually have started thinking in terms of who he would work for and how he would fit into someone else's organization. College educates in many useful ways, but to a large extent it also socializes us to expect and accept hierarchy.
Exactly how many pixels does it take to increase productivity substantially? How much more productivity do you get with each additional pixel? Just wonderin'...
Not to be pedantic or anything, but I'm pretty sure it's your scrotum that you're addicted to scratching...
Talk is cheap, and it wouldn't surpise me if the Bush administration actively urged them to announce such intentions to reignite a new space-race hysteria. After all, as a distraction issue gay marriage pretty much fizzled right after the 2004 election, and they probably can't use it again in 2006. So let's throw $xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx at the aerospace industry, some of which it will use to strand someone on Mars, and some to show its gratitude to the Party that threw it. A lot of this cash can come out of NASA's budget for doing actual science, which will please another big constituency to no end because most of this science is heretical anyway.
And, as we all should know by now, Morality is only about sex and the visibility of body parts. You're a Republican, aren't you?
Doesn't matter. What you're suggesting is that the right of citizens to communicate information of any kind should be denied in order to make the enforcement of of a narrow property right more convenient. Currently, it's true that most big media files are copyrighted material, and consequently most of the traffic will be as well. The rights to almost all of this material is held by a handful of large corporations that exercise an effective cartel through their industry associations. Until very recently, it was nearly impossible for an artist to be heard (or seen) except through the distribution channels controlled by this cartel, and on its terms. That's now changing, as more and more artists are choosing to distribute their works directly, thus bypassing the cartel. This is why it's not enough just to stem the flow of copyrighted works being traded; it's also necessary to destroy the "rogue" distribution channels themselves. That prevents them from ever becoming conduits for legitimate material, even if they aren't primarily that already.
That said, though, I personally cannot condone the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted works; the creators of those works have rights, too, which includes the "right" to assign them to someone else for money. But the RIAA and MPAA have an agenda that goes beyond just defending the copyrights of their members; they are actively trying to quash even legitimate uses of this distribution channel because it poses a potentially large threat to their own monopoly over distribution. They dread the prospect of artists en masse by-passing the middlemen that they represent even more than they dread the downloaders.
Didn't he write the New World Symphony?
Ah, but Mathematics is much more than simply a language in which physical ideas can be expressed. It's also a symbolic system through which truth can be derived and tested. So no, I don't think that you can thoroughly explain the workings of the Universe without it, regardless of how long you take doing it. That's why so many advances in modern physics had to await enabling advances in mathematics.
Maybe you thought that understanding Life, the Universe, and Everything was going to be easy?
Mathematics pretty much is the language of Physics, unfortunately for many. Without it, you're pretty much limited to explaining concepts metaphorically through analogies to things from everyday life. You can't do that for very long without seriously misrepresenting what it is that you're trying to explain, and of course you'll never communicate any knowledge that can be successfully built upon that way.
This reminded me of another book that I liked for much the same reason: Inward Bound by Abraham Pais (1986). It's basically a history of modern physics, but unlike most such books does not shy away from the mathematics (without which the physics would make little sense). In fact, I just pulled it off of my shelf and see that one of the testimonials on the back is from none other than Roger Penrose...
I like mine best around 9am or so, if the offer still stands...
Because God wants us to, apparently...
Privatization means at least one other thing that may be even more important. When you privatize a service formerly performed publicly, you make a good portion of the taxpayers' money alloted to it available for campaign contributions and political lobbying. Getting rich in privatized public services means knowing what backs to scratch. So, in the end, everybody (e.g., business and cooperating politicians) wins except the taxpayers and, arguably, the public for whom the service is provided.
If you think this is something, just wait until they privatize Social Security!
That is not a fact but only a theory, and one with a lot of holes at that. Yet, it is taught as Truth to our school children in their science classes, despite the fact that there is no reference to a spherical earth in the Bible. This is yet another outrage from the conspiracy of the secular humanists and their liberal stooges to undermine the beliefs of People of Faith everywhere.
By that argument, we no longer need the word "buy", since you wouldn't willingly exchange money for anything if the terms weren't satisfactory compared to known alternatives. An auction is nothing but a sale at a competitively negotiated price. Hey, I just won a printer at Best Buy! Please, please, please don't let the marketeers catch wind of this...
Paying does have one advantage: It defers the problem, at least for a while, by allowing you to continue operating until some indefinite future when maybe you'll be less vulnerable or better able to respond. That screws everybody in the long run, but most of running a small business is just trying to survive the short run.
Thank you for explaining this to me. I'm just a Cave Man. Your modern world frightens and confuses me.
no, the expression "winning auctions" wasn't invented by Ebay. Deal with it.
Perhaps now I can, with your kind encouragement!
It's odd that we refer to "winning" an auction, when what we've really done is to prove that we're willing to pay more for an item than anyone else. How is that winning? Yet the psychic prize of having "won" something keeps many an auction going, I'm sure...
anal shithole
-1, Redundant?
In this hysterical era, I don't think you could produce an opinion poll suggesting that any penalty is too severe for anything. Gotta be "tough" on crime if you're in politics, and the only way to prove it is to stiffen penalties regardless of how severe they may be already. Excluding the crimes fashionable among your business cronies and big contributors, that is...
Well, I'd like to give it a try. Where do I download the source code?
That's not nearly the whole story. You mention popup blocking... Microsoft dragged their feet on that for a long time until they were forced (by Mozilla/Firefox, largely) to offer it. Why? Because they see their commercial website customers as more important than their end-users, access to whom can be sold profitably. Their IIS customers would howl loudly if they offered popup blocking without absolutely being forced to. Spyware works much the same way, and that's why Windows has been so vulnerable to it for so long.
That's also one reason that I'd choose FOSS even if the closed-source alternatives were free (as in beer). I know I can trust it to behave as advertised, because if anyone stuck any of the crap in there that most of us tolerate grudgingly, all hell would break loose and there'd be a fork to switch over to in short order.
(Disclaimer: I'm a FF user and love it, but playing devil's advocate with zealots is fun)
Damn. Just saw that. Well, I guess I'm a zealot then!
The problem is that there is a lot more software being written out there than there are viable market outlets for it (especially under monopoly), and most programmers would rather see their stuff used by other people (and maybe get some recognition for it) than let it rot on a disk somewhere. Musicians often play for free for precisely the same reason.
This sort of inane "spread the love, give away your work for free, and make the world a better place" is so unrealistic it is laughable. What color is the sky in your world?
Unrealistic? It's happening all over! It's rocking your world, whatever color it is!