I agree, I am simply using extremes. I have no problem with people wanting to be Vegans, Vegitarians, etc - but don't spraypaint "Meat is murder" onto a McDonalds, or destroying other peoples form of life to prove a point was not a valid excuse hundreds of years ago - and it is not now.
I usually am more than interested in a rather objective opinion of things. Unfortunately in this matter I have a subjective view. I live very near Seattle - and work in the World Trade Center in Seattle, needless to say I have had my fun getting to and fro work.
As much as I respect other peoples opinion on how "evil" or not corporations are. Unfortunately hurting jobs, and stopping 8.5 million dollars of commerce (as of yesterday) in Seattle doesn't help the situation any. If they want to make their voices heard they must, absolutely must try to convince people through nonviolent, easy, nonconfrontationist, means.
Listening and watching people who are, as I see "so-called" anarchists really irk me. Wearing their Nike shoes, Casio watches made in Taiwan - etc. If they were so damned Anti-corporation, and anti-order, and anti-civilization - then please go live like the amish.
I honestly believe that the WTO is a good thing for the most part. This is something that you will never hear any other time, I really do not like overbearing government etc. - but let's be honest. The WTO exsists to shatter trade barriers - thus improving the economies, the point of all of this is not "patent issues, and corp. rights" -- as one Seattle commercial downplays the meetings agenda. Let me make one thing perfectly clear, not many in America are poor. Those who are, or those who have been to the extent of a third world nation may understand that when you are poor _you do not care about certian things_ - you want to eat and drink. Animal rights, human rights, and the environment take a back seat to survival. If we improve the economies of third and second world nations - the rest will fall into place. And why are they so poor in the first place? Well because they owe other countries so much money, and the 30 - 50 odd year old debt is so inflated that they can't pay it... so first cancel the debt, open trade barriers, and then things will start to improve.
But back to the anarchists, and even the protesters... Please, you say that the wto is there to take away human, animal, and environmental rights? Get informed - look at the hard facts. I will leave my soapbox with a quote that I heard once "Your garbage cans are the gourmet of the world".. it's time that changed.
This part of the argument I do agree with - Corel is simply trying to protect it's interests. The problem is that they need a disclaimer and release of liability, instead of a prohibitive "unGPL" license. The GPL is a liscensing structure that has been imployed by the people who wrote the operating system, the basic code, etc. If Debian doesn't sue then someone else will. Corel may also simply be following the law of where they are... Corel is a canadian company and I do not know the scope of how Canadaian law works with situations of this matter.
Is this entirely a bad thing? I for one would say not. The "Open Source", GNU, Linux, and other such products have matured to having a user base. Even worse they are a fanatical user base. With a growing user base the self made 'leaders' of the open source movement must moderate themselves online, just as they do in real life. For instance - how many conferences does Linus attend a year? The answer is not many. It's a universal fact that anyone with influence needs to be more careful about their feelings, ideas, etc..
Personally I wish this wasn't so - that people wouldn't freak out when someone expresses an opinion. Unfortunately the sad fact is that human nature may automatically qualify someone that is a leader is right. This is not always the case, and people do not need to get as passionate about what someone else thinks or says. As I read in an earlier story "The first amendment has never been a popular one" -- which is true but thank goodness that we have it, or at least for the most part.
Censoring the bulk of what someone says is not the way slashdot should run, not with a members area or anything along these lines. Here's a good idea - before posting the story (if it is about someone) verify that the information is correct. This may add an extra check for/. but it will make it more credible in the end.
Free isn't a price - most people take the "open source" models version of free to simply encompass the actual monitary value of the product - this is however not the case. The application actually gains a freedom to evolve and be developed by many people -- we all know this model. It appears to work with many different products. This makes the services that the people provide very very valuable to the company because it weeds out the tinkerers from the real hard coders. People who can really get into the nitty gritty of the code will be paid more because they have evolved a piece of software so far - it's essentially democracy in the computer industry - we don't see it yet because Linux or another open source OS hasn't become the dominant player, or even a large one. Why would companies restructure in this model? For one because it's new ground, for two it does cut TCO and Total Cost of Development. It will, oddly enough I think it will be money that makes Linux the lead player in the future and not Windows.
Why pay for a browser? well that's how opera has always been - they create a small, fast browser that works. IE 5 is free Microsoft crap, pardon me for being blunt. The reason that it works so well is because it's interlinked with special MS libs that are apart of the OS. Another potential factor in how "fast" IE is would be the inherit security flaws of a single user operating system. Internet Explorer can directly take devices, etc. When and where it wants to. Netscape crashes because it uses (for the most part) it's own cross platform libraries - I find it funny that people bitch and bitch and bitch about how unstable netscape is on windows. I use windows at work as a terminal, and netscape. Works great, I've had it up for three weeks until someone cranked up IE on my computer and it BSODed...
Interesting, although until there is actual legislation that comes out and says this outright I do not think that I am going to make myself more susceptible to legal problems;-)
Yet another interesting take, the problem is that I am completely disillusioned with the programs that the government has. Not to mention that I do not believe that the government should be involved in most programs that they are. There are some that improve the quality of life for everyone and are so expensive that it's insane - such as roads, public transportation (which we pay for as we get on the bus, ferry or otherwise), the public education system, and justice system - there are more. Although these programs could be ran better and more effeciently they never will. Not until something truely revolutionary comes along. Let's be honest - government looks at anyone who makes more than 17 thousand dollars and declares them middle class - please give me a break. Hell - what about someone who makes 42 thousand dollars a year and sells his car for 1000 bucks and goes to buy a new one. If he takes standard deductions then he will probably still be bumped into a higher tax bracket because of a 1000 dollar sale. I'm afraid that it isn't my - nor everyone elses job to pay for programs, this is my opinion though... and I will say it over and over; if we want to turn the country into a socialist union then do it... the government shouldn't lie to us and say that we have a choice in the programs -- because we don't anymore.
Okay, if the government is not evil - is it good? It sure as hell isn't indifferent as it should be. How is my reasoning hypothetical? It states a propisition, and then a possible outcome to prove a point. You were bitching about my grammar, and now I am bitching about your last completed grade level of English.
Not entirely true, although I generally post just as you would hear in real life. Not like you would read a novel that is not the subject matter though - the subject matter is what I actually was talking about the meat of my argument. Anyone who reads it knows that I have a complaint, argument, or opinion --- even allowing for possible argument. That's what posting is all about, getting feedback etc.
Well, partially nice and honest because we worked in the same mall for 4 years, honest because I have met with him ouside of work and that environment.
As per the credibility of him handing me a card to go talk with someone, that was what he did. I am uninterested in the military however because of many personal reasons - not to mention I make over 40 grand a year at 20 years old.
That was how the story goes and I'm stickin' to it;-)
There is nothing wrong with teaching outdated subjects, but you need to emphasize the new subjects. This really works in history: have a database instead of a textbook because history changes so fast. Also books are subject to wear and tear, we need to be more centered on today instead of 50 years ago.
The reason that there is so much debate on this topic is what is legal to regulate and what is not legal to regulate. Why regulate at all? Why not ban them alltogether I am of the opinion that banning weapons is a very bad idea - personally I believe we should live in an armed society.
Well, it's not regulated - yet... Hell there's a tax on marriage... You must pay a 25 dollar "processing fee" when found "not guilty" in small claims court, sales tax to the state (depending on your state) and another 30-40 percent to the IRS... Unless the people speak up and ask what the hell is going on it will only get worse. That's why I have my Slashdot soapbox:)
As per the Microsoft thing - I actually am very impressed with the Attorney General office right now, sure Janet Reno may be rather odd - but she has made certian that the law is being upheld, especially in new and developing technologies. New things are easiest to corrupt, especially because of the appeal, awe, and misgivings that they hold.
Interesting take, I did actually go to the army at one time after getting called. The recruiter was nice, honest, and didn't bug me like the air force guy... however he said that I had the highest asvab scores he'd seen in a long time, and handed me a card for someone in the NSA -- said I would be "better used" there. I sort of said thanks but no thanks;) I wouldn't mind knowing just what we pay for - I mean the org. is living off of taxpayer money.
I totally agree - we no longer have a government representative of the people - regardless of our prosperity we should try to live up to what we expect of other countries, and practice what we preach.
The problem with this is not Teachers, it's education in general. The ppublic education system in the United states is substandard at best... a sad thing to think about when most people believe that it should be a free thing for every child. Something thet everyone should have - an equal right to make it in the world. I find it discouraging that I walk into classrooms and they still use Apple II's, or that they are teaching with textbooks that are 10 years old... it's disgusting. What needs to happen is the amazing backwash of information needs to be reprioritized, computers in the schools need to be a standard - use digital media for textbooks, and extend the school year. God, I don't know that many people who need to help in the farms over the Summer. The question of "where does the money come from" is an interesting idea - I like the idea of The Edison Project Better paid teachers, every student gets a computer - hell it's taxpayer funded private school! - Plus it's done with a commercial group that allows for huge spending cuts in overhead and administration.... Sounds like a winner to me. I know that teachers work relatively hard hours and get paid dick, but if we had a year round school couldn't they go out for paid training -- especially in a commercial education system?
The second ammendment of our most sacred document which does not do much anymore anyways - the constution gives the individual the right to bear arms. They (the us government) would probably love to repeal this, but a majority of US citizens (it's almost 50/50 nationwide on this issue) say that Gun control is bad, and banning guns is alltogether wrong.
And the mass media, government, and people who would rather have the government control everything say that the "militia movement" is such a bad thing -- there is FUD if I ever saw some. I agree that there is nothing wrong with a militia, but that the second ammendment talks about your individual rights - as in me -- I could own a gun and have it for personal defense that makes a lot of sense to me.
That is the theory - unfortunately as one can see those constutional rights can be usurped if it is an issue of "national security" - which is as Slashdot seems to indicate loosely defined. Not to mention when the people speak, government reacts -- not to plesantly either usually "punishing" us in some way or another. The unfortunate problem is that I do not see the US as a democratic nation in its current form - it's far more socialist then it ever has been.
Well it's really simple. In the US you were supposed to feel safe all the time, and in an armed society people tend not to be involved or have violent crimes happen to them all the time. The US is at least geographically much larger than the UK also - and in order for the approperiate authorities to show up, many times it is sadly too late. Guns are a good thing to have depending on how that society was brought up. The right to bear arms is actually something that natural selection proves to us, if we do not have a way to physically defend ourselves then we will be destroyed by those who do. For instance, look at Australias crime rate before gun control and after it, I agree it is a tragedy when things happen such as the columbine incident in the States - but is it alltogether a price that everyone should pay? Or if these people were educated in the use of guns in the first place would they have been so foolish?
Perhaps, perhaps not - it is all speculation. I simply know that most armed societies are happier and crime is waay lower than it is in places where the common person is not given the right to protect him/herself.
It's a sad thing to think about, but we are just animals still - we aren't so advanced as to be able to abolish weapons yet. I long for that day but - it is not yet.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, I am simply using extremes. I have no problem with people wanting to be Vegans, Vegitarians, etc - but don't spraypaint "Meat is murder" onto a McDonalds, or destroying other peoples form of life to prove a point was not a valid excuse hundreds of years ago - and it is not now.
I usually am more than interested in a rather objective opinion of things. Unfortunately in this matter I have a subjective view. I live very near Seattle - and work in the World Trade Center in Seattle, needless to say I have had my fun getting to and fro work.
.. it's time that changed.
As much as I respect other peoples opinion on how "evil" or not corporations are. Unfortunately hurting jobs, and stopping 8.5 million dollars of commerce (as of yesterday) in Seattle doesn't help the situation any. If they want to make their voices heard they must, absolutely must try to convince people through nonviolent, easy, nonconfrontationist, means.
Listening and watching people who are, as I see "so-called" anarchists really irk me. Wearing their Nike shoes, Casio watches made in Taiwan - etc. If they were so damned Anti-corporation, and anti-order, and anti-civilization - then please go live like the amish.
I honestly believe that the WTO is a good thing for the most part. This is something that you will never hear any other time, I really do not like overbearing government etc. - but let's be honest. The WTO exsists to shatter trade barriers - thus improving the economies, the point of all of this is not "patent issues, and corp. rights" -- as one Seattle commercial downplays the meetings agenda. Let me make one thing perfectly clear, not many in America are poor. Those who are, or those who have been to the extent of a third world nation may understand that when you are poor _you do not care about certian things_ - you want to eat and drink. Animal rights, human rights, and the environment take a back seat to survival. If we improve the economies of third and second world nations - the rest will fall into place. And why are they so poor in the first place? Well because they owe other countries so much money, and the 30 - 50 odd year old debt is so inflated that they can't pay it... so first cancel the debt, open trade barriers, and then things will start to improve.
But back to the anarchists, and even the protesters... Please, you say that the wto is there to take away human, animal, and environmental rights? Get informed - look at the hard facts. I will leave my soapbox with a quote that I heard once "Your garbage cans are the gourmet of the world"
This part of the argument I do agree with - Corel is simply trying to protect it's interests. The problem is that they need a disclaimer and release of liability, instead of a prohibitive "unGPL" license. The GPL is a liscensing structure that has been imployed by the people who wrote the operating system, the basic code, etc. If Debian doesn't sue then someone else will. Corel may also simply be following the law of where they are... Corel is a canadian company and I do not know the scope of how Canadaian law works with situations of this matter.
At any rate, what are your thoughts?
Is this entirely a bad thing? I for one would say not. The "Open Source", GNU, Linux, and other such products have matured to having a user base. Even worse they are a fanatical user base. With a growing user base the self made 'leaders' of the open source movement must moderate themselves online, just as they do in real life. For instance - how many conferences does Linus attend a year? The answer is not many. It's a universal fact that anyone with influence needs to be more careful about their feelings, ideas, etc..
/. but it will make it more credible in the end.
Personally I wish this wasn't so - that people wouldn't freak out when someone expresses an opinion. Unfortunately the sad fact is that human nature may automatically qualify someone that is a leader is right. This is not always the case, and people do not need to get as passionate about what someone else thinks or says. As I read in an earlier story "The first amendment has never been a popular one" -- which is true but thank goodness that we have it, or at least for the most part.
Censoring the bulk of what someone says is not the way slashdot should run, not with a members area or anything along these lines. Here's a good idea - before posting the story (if it is about someone) verify that the information is correct. This may add an extra check for
Free isn't a price - most people take the "open source" models version of free to simply encompass the actual monitary value of the product - this is however not the case. The application actually gains a freedom to evolve and be developed by many people -- we all know this model. It appears to work with many different products. This makes the services that the people provide very very valuable to the company because it weeds out the tinkerers from the real hard coders. People who can really get into the nitty gritty of the code will be paid more because they have evolved a piece of software so far - it's essentially democracy in the computer industry - we don't see it yet because Linux or another open source OS hasn't become the dominant player, or even a large one. Why would companies restructure in this model? For one because it's new ground, for two it does cut TCO and Total Cost of Development. It will, oddly enough I think it will be money that makes Linux the lead player in the future and not Windows.
;-)
At any rate, just my opinions
Why pay for a browser? well that's how opera has always been - they create a small, fast browser that works. IE 5 is free Microsoft crap, pardon me for being blunt. The reason that it works so well is because it's interlinked with special MS libs that are apart of the OS. Another potential factor in how "fast" IE is would be the inherit security flaws of a single user operating system. Internet Explorer can directly take devices, etc. When and where it wants to. Netscape crashes because it uses (for the most part) it's own cross platform libraries - I find it funny that people bitch and bitch and bitch about how unstable netscape is on windows. I use windows at work as a terminal, and netscape. Works great, I've had it up for three weeks until someone cranked up IE on my computer and it BSODed...
Interesting, although until there is actual legislation that comes out and says this outright I do not think that I am going to make myself more susceptible to legal problems ;-)
Yet another interesting take, the problem is that I am completely disillusioned with the programs that the government has. Not to mention that I do not believe that the government should be involved in most programs that they are. There are some that improve the quality of life for everyone and are so expensive that it's insane - such as roads, public transportation (which we pay for as we get on the bus, ferry or otherwise), the public education system, and justice system - there are more. Although these programs could be ran better and more effeciently they never will. Not until something truely revolutionary comes along. Let's be honest - government looks at anyone who makes more than 17 thousand dollars and declares them middle class - please give me a break. Hell - what about someone who makes 42 thousand dollars a year and sells his car for 1000 bucks and goes to buy a new one. If he takes standard deductions then he will probably still be bumped into a higher tax bracket because of a 1000 dollar sale. I'm afraid that it isn't my - nor everyone elses job to pay for programs, this is my opinion though ... and I will say it over and over; if we want to turn the country into a socialist union then do it ... the government shouldn't lie to us and say that we have a choice in the programs -- because we don't anymore.
.. :)
But
I will get off of my soapbox now
;)
Okay, if the government is not evil - is it good? It sure as hell isn't indifferent as it should be. How is my reasoning hypothetical? It states a propisition, and then a possible outcome to prove a point. You were bitching about my grammar, and now I am bitching about your last completed grade level of English.
Not entirely true, although I generally post just as you would hear in real life. Not like you would read a novel that is not the subject matter though - the subject matter is what I actually was talking about the meat of my argument. Anyone who reads it knows that I have a complaint, argument, or opinion --- even allowing for possible argument. That's what posting is all about, getting feedback etc.
My opinion...
several inconsequential problems combined make one large problem though
Well, partially nice and honest because we worked in the same mall for 4 years, honest because I have met with him ouside of work and that environment.
;-)
As per the credibility of him handing me a card to go talk with someone, that was what he did. I am uninterested in the military however because of many personal reasons - not to mention I make over 40 grand a year at 20 years old.
That was how the story goes and I'm stickin' to it
come - be a libetarian ;-)
There is nothing wrong with teaching outdated subjects, but you need to emphasize the new subjects. This really works in history: have a database instead of a textbook because history changes so fast. Also books are subject to wear and tear, we need to be more centered on today instead of 50 years ago.
The reason that there is so much debate on this topic is what is legal to regulate and what is not legal to regulate. Why regulate at all? Why not ban them alltogether I am of the opinion that banning weapons is a very bad idea - personally I believe we should live in an armed society.
But as always - this is just my opinion.
Well, it's not regulated - yet... Hell there's a tax on marriage... You must pay a 25 dollar "processing fee" when found "not guilty" in small claims court, sales tax to the state (depending on your state) and another 30-40 percent to the IRS... Unless the people speak up and ask what the hell is going on it will only get worse. That's why I have my Slashdot soapbox :)
As per the Microsoft thing - I actually am very impressed with the Attorney General office right now, sure Janet Reno may be rather odd - but she has made certian that the law is being upheld, especially in new and developing technologies. New things are easiest to corrupt, especially because of the appeal, awe, and misgivings that they hold.
Interesting take, I did actually go to the army at one time after getting called. The recruiter was nice, honest, and didn't bug me like the air force guy ... however he said that I had the highest asvab scores he'd seen in a long time, and handed me a card for someone in the NSA -- said I would be "better used" there. I sort of said thanks but no thanks ;) I wouldn't mind knowing just what we pay for - I mean the org. is living off of taxpayer money.
At any rate, alas tis time to return to work.
I totally agree - we no longer have a government representative of the people - regardless of our prosperity we should try to live up to what we expect of other countries, and practice what we preach.
Explain your take on it? Just saying that I'm a "...ignorant, spoiled sons of bitch..." doesn't help your point be made at all.
I am certian that people would love to hear you with an actual argument not just bitching about my opinion.
The problem with this is not Teachers, it's education in general. The ppublic education system in the United states is substandard at best... a sad thing to think about when most people believe that it should be a free thing for every child. Something thet everyone should have - an equal right to make it in the world. I find it discouraging that I walk into classrooms and they still use Apple II's, or that they are teaching with textbooks that are 10 years old ... it's disgusting. What needs to happen is the amazing backwash of information needs to be reprioritized, computers in the schools need to be a standard - use digital media for textbooks, and extend the school year. God, I don't know that many people who need to help in the farms over the Summer. The question of "where does the money come from" is an interesting idea - I like the idea of The Edison Project Better paid teachers, every student gets a computer - hell it's taxpayer funded private school! - Plus it's done with a commercial group that allows for huge spending cuts in overhead and administration.... Sounds like a winner to me. I know that teachers work relatively hard hours and get paid dick, but if we had a year round school couldn't they go out for paid training -- especially in a commercial education system?
Got any better ideas?
The second ammendment of our most sacred document which does not do much anymore anyways - the constution gives the individual the right to bear arms. They (the us government) would probably love to repeal this, but a majority of US citizens (it's almost 50/50 nationwide on this issue) say that Gun control is bad, and banning guns is alltogether wrong.
And the mass media, government, and people who would rather have the government control everything say that the "militia movement" is such a bad thing -- there is FUD if I ever saw some. I agree that there is nothing wrong with a militia, but that the second ammendment talks about your individual rights - as in me -- I could own a gun and have it for personal defense that makes a lot of sense to me.
At any rate, it's just my opinion.
That is the theory - unfortunately as one can see those constutional rights can be usurped if it is an issue of "national security" - which is as Slashdot seems to indicate loosely defined. Not to mention when the people speak, government reacts -- not to plesantly either usually "punishing" us in some way or another. The unfortunate problem is that I do not see the US as a democratic nation in its current form - it's far more socialist then it ever has been.
Well it's really simple. In the US you were supposed to feel safe all the time, and in an armed society people tend not to be involved or have violent crimes happen to them all the time. The US is at least geographically much larger than the UK also - and in order for the approperiate authorities to show up, many times it is sadly too late. Guns are a good thing to have depending on how that society was brought up. The right to bear arms is actually something that natural selection proves to us, if we do not have a way to physically defend ourselves then we will be destroyed by those who do. For instance, look at Australias crime rate before gun control and after it, I agree it is a tragedy when things happen such as the columbine incident in the States - but is it alltogether a price that everyone should pay? Or if these people were educated in the use of guns in the first place would they have been so foolish?
Perhaps, perhaps not - it is all speculation. I simply know that most armed societies are happier and crime is waay lower than it is in places where the common person is not given the right to protect him/herself.
It's a sad thing to think about, but we are just animals still - we aren't so advanced as to be able to abolish weapons yet. I long for that day but - it is not yet.