It's actually much worse than that. I teach at a community college, and you should see the official textbook for the Survey of CIS class there. I've seen less advertising in the trade rags.
An example: there is, naturally, a section on printers. At the bottom of the page is a picture of a Hewlett-Packard inkjet that looks better than what you see in a four-color catalog. A half-dozen pages later is a focus on two innovators in technology, Mr. Hewlett and Mr. Packard. The facing page has a spotlight on a company on a cutting edge--Hewlett-Packard. Flip to the section on E-Commerce, and there's a screenshot of the Hewlett-Packard online store showing somebody about to buy--you guessed it--a Hewlett-Packard inkjet printer. There are also multiple pictures of Pavillions, etc., scattered throughout the rest of the book.
HP isn't the only offender, not by a long shot. AMD gets an "oh-by-the-way" mention in the body of the text, but all the pictures, charts, and examples show Intel processers, chipsets, etc. Office programs only come from Microsoft, period (and, yes the first technological innovator is Bill and the first cutting-edge company is Microsoft).
The sidebar on how voice recognition works is probably a direct quote from the side of the Via Voice box. It mentions all of the great things that voice recognition can do, and how Via Voice is the best program to do all that. Would you be surprised if I told you that a few pages later was a bio of Lou Gerstner and a puff piece on IBM?
Sun is only mentioned a couple times, and then only for Java. Java isn't even listed as a programming language, but instead as a two-paragraph description of multimedia enhancements to web pages, right after Shockwave.
Iomega is the only company that makes removeable mass storeage.
Oh--and I forgot: this textbook is "web-enhanced" by CNN. At the end of every chapter is instructions to go to a CNN web page where you can watch movie clips about the preceeding material. So, naturally, the chapter on processors has a movie bio of Andy Grove and another multimedia something-or-other about Intel.
I think I should shut up now before I break an O-ring....
Well, okay one last comment: I all but told the students to take the books back, and I'm supplying them with my own resources or pointers to web pages, etc.
Is it just me, or is it ironic that the linked post, to news.admin.net-abuse.sightings, first complains that the ``[s]pammer is knowinkgly and willfully disseminating the source code of illegal software so it will be stored on usenet archiving systems like deja.com,'' and then has the entire original post...complete with the ``illegal software''?
Not to mention, of course, that the copyright portion of the U.S. Code explicitely permits unrestricted digital copying for personal use. That was what Congress insisted upon in exchange for the DAT tax.
I haven't had any great personal desire--or time--to become a Napster, etc., patron, but I wouldn't have any moral qualms about it, either. It's not just a case of, ``If a cop don't see you, it ain't illegal,'' but rather, ``It don't matter if a cop sees you, 'cause it *is* legal.'' Even if the cop would rather you didn't do it.
Sir, you were obviously incompetent when you were a rep.
Our standard technique for dealing with recalcitrant ID10Ts was to get them to lick their fingers and simultaneously touch the power supply and CPU. The Real Men among us would achieve a perfect score--of 3, naturally--at least twice a week.
And I'll bet that you told lusers to use Windex to clean their mice. Real Men know that the only proper way for the uninitiated to clean their mice is with a body part, and I don't mean the tongue.
And, in a related and equally shocking development, other researchers discovered that 99% of people using the World Wide Web don't themselves create web pages but only view them. There can be only one result of this vast and tragically unballanced sucking of vital computer resources: the Imminent Death of the Internet.
(I'm being optimistic here and assuming that in 20 years more people have will have walked on the moon then currently drive a car)
Hmmm...let's take an estimate of a half-billion people currently driving cars. I won't tell you what part of my body I pulled that out of, but, for the sake of argument, we'll assume that it's the same one you used for your estimate. Suffice it to say that the U.S. has a quarter-billion residents and most of them drive cars.
I can't recall any missions which had more than a half-dozen people on board, but I'd guess you could fit at least twice that on the shuttle. Let's assume that commercial trips to the moon will be made in vehicles that can fit a hundred people, or something over half what you can fit in a regional airliner.
The back of my envelope now tells me that we'll need fifty million flights to get all those people there.
Nobody I know of is planning commercial space flights (not counting those who're building rockets in their back yards) of civilians in less than five years, and that's to low Earth orbit at best. Let's give them an extra five years to make it to the moon. Never mind that India is adept at putting up communications satelites but is agonizing over whether they can afford to put a probe in orbit around the moon, I'll grant you tourists on the moon by 2010.
So, now we're looking at fifty million moon launches in ten years. Let me consult my envelope again...that's five million a year, or a little under a half-million a month, almost a hundred thousand a week, thirteen thousand and change a day, five hundred and seventy an hour...nine and a half each minute.
Wow.
Tell me, what's there on the moon that, in twenty years, we'll need a spaceport as busy as our busiest airports just to take people there? And where are we going to put all these people once they get there? Who'se going to pay for it all? Or is Microsoft going to relocate to the Sea of Tranquility and require you to sign EULAs in person?
Then again, you did say that you were being optimistic.
No, not for the reasons cited by all those "but they're just shaping traffic" posts. Rather, if it takes off, it'll be that much more of a push towards encryption other real privacy- and security-enhancing techniques.
Heck, it's even easy to do now: use SSL on port 443, and nothing mentioned in that article could tell the difference between red-blooded consumerism and red-faced pr0n.
First, evolution takes place on a scale of tens of thousands of years. Humans have not been recording their observations of the world long enough to see the changes in ourselves or anything else around us.
Second, environment is critical to the definition of "fittest." Bill Gates wouldn't last a week in the savannas where australopithecine thrived; none of them would ever be able to live in a human city (except as an exhibit or experiment).
I personally doubt that bioengineering will do much in the way of human evolution. Rather, I expect either computer-based life, a blend of computers and humans, or corporate/political conglomerates to be the next stage. That is, of course, assuming that we don't off ourselves first. We still have too many problems with race for "bio-enhanced" people to be acceptable to society.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm still waiting for the phone that's nothing more than a small stud earring--it's about the only thing that could get me to pierce my ears.
b&
b&
An example: there is, naturally, a section on printers. At the bottom of the page is a picture of a Hewlett-Packard inkjet that looks better than what you see in a four-color catalog. A half-dozen pages later is a focus on two innovators in technology, Mr. Hewlett and Mr. Packard. The facing page has a spotlight on a company on a cutting edge--Hewlett-Packard. Flip to the section on E-Commerce, and there's a screenshot of the Hewlett-Packard online store showing somebody about to buy--you guessed it--a Hewlett-Packard inkjet printer. There are also multiple pictures of Pavillions, etc., scattered throughout the rest of the book.
HP isn't the only offender, not by a long shot. AMD gets an "oh-by-the-way" mention in the body of the text, but all the pictures, charts, and examples show Intel processers, chipsets, etc. Office programs only come from Microsoft, period (and, yes the first technological innovator is Bill and the first cutting-edge company is Microsoft).
The sidebar on how voice recognition works is probably a direct quote from the side of the Via Voice box. It mentions all of the great things that voice recognition can do, and how Via Voice is the best program to do all that. Would you be surprised if I told you that a few pages later was a bio of Lou Gerstner and a puff piece on IBM?
Sun is only mentioned a couple times, and then only for Java. Java isn't even listed as a programming language, but instead as a two-paragraph description of multimedia enhancements to web pages, right after Shockwave.
Iomega is the only company that makes removeable mass storeage.
Oh--and I forgot: this textbook is "web-enhanced" by CNN. At the end of every chapter is instructions to go to a CNN web page where you can watch movie clips about the preceeding material. So, naturally, the chapter on processors has a movie bio of Andy Grove and another multimedia something-or-other about Intel.
I think I should shut up now before I break an O-ring....
Well, okay one last comment: I all but told the students to take the books back, and I'm supplying them with my own resources or pointers to web pages, etc.
0-7895-5937-4
b&
b&
b&
Not to mention, of course, that the copyright portion of the U.S. Code explicitely permits unrestricted digital copying for personal use. That was what Congress insisted upon in exchange for the DAT tax.
I haven't had any great personal desire--or time--to become a Napster, etc., patron, but I wouldn't have any moral qualms about it, either. It's not just a case of, ``If a cop don't see you, it ain't illegal,'' but rather, ``It don't matter if a cop sees you, 'cause it *is* legal.'' Even if the cop would rather you didn't do it.
b&
The un-mangled URL for the screenshots is http://primates.helixcode.com/~vladimir /rc/.
$ cat glycerol > /dev/mouse
So that's what Joanie's been crying about all morning, chasing her tail, trying to get into the cupboards....
b&
Our standard technique for dealing with recalcitrant ID10Ts was to get them to lick their fingers and simultaneously touch the power supply and CPU. The Real Men among us would achieve a perfect score--of 3, naturally--at least twice a week.
And I'll bet that you told lusers to use Windex to clean their mice. Real Men know that the only proper way for the uninitiated to clean their mice is with a body part, and I don't mean the tongue.
b&
b&
Ah...hasn't anybody else noticed that the page with this announcement also has the announcement of the title of the second Star Wars movie?
Sheesh--maybe I should start selling Arizona beachfront property to Slashdotters....
b&
I already have my t-shirt.
b&
Aha! Now we know the real reason Slashdot has been so flaky the past day or so....
b7
Hmmm...let's take an estimate of a half-billion people currently driving cars. I won't tell you what part of my body I pulled that out of, but, for the sake of argument, we'll assume that it's the same one you used for your estimate. Suffice it to say that the U.S. has a quarter-billion residents and most of them drive cars.
I can't recall any missions which had more than a half-dozen people on board, but I'd guess you could fit at least twice that on the shuttle. Let's assume that commercial trips to the moon will be made in vehicles that can fit a hundred people, or something over half what you can fit in a regional airliner.
The back of my envelope now tells me that we'll need fifty million flights to get all those people there.
Nobody I know of is planning commercial space flights (not counting those who're building rockets in their back yards) of civilians in less than five years, and that's to low Earth orbit at best. Let's give them an extra five years to make it to the moon. Never mind that India is adept at putting up communications satelites but is agonizing over whether they can afford to put a probe in orbit around the moon, I'll grant you tourists on the moon by 2010.
So, now we're looking at fifty million moon launches in ten years. Let me consult my envelope again...that's five million a year, or a little under a half-million a month, almost a hundred thousand a week, thirteen thousand and change a day, five hundred and seventy an hour...nine and a half each minute.
Wow.
Tell me, what's there on the moon that, in twenty years, we'll need a spaceport as busy as our busiest airports just to take people there? And where are we going to put all these people once they get there? Who'se going to pay for it all? Or is Microsoft going to relocate to the Sea of Tranquility and require you to sign EULAs in person?
Then again, you did say that you were being optimistic.
b&
Hey, I actually *could* use a third arm. Two hands on the keyboard, one on the mouse. b&
No, not for the reasons cited by all those "but they're just shaping traffic" posts. Rather, if it takes off, it'll be that much more of a push towards encryption other real privacy- and security-enhancing techniques.
Heck, it's even easy to do now: use SSL on port 443, and nothing mentioned in that article could tell the difference between red-blooded consumerism and red-faced pr0n.
Ah...why should I shell out two C-notes for this when two Georges will get me a cable from RadioWhack that does the exact same thing?
b&
First, evolution takes place on a scale of tens of thousands of years. Humans have not been recording their observations of the world long enough to see the changes in ourselves or anything else around us.
Second, environment is critical to the definition of "fittest." Bill Gates wouldn't last a week in the savannas where australopithecine thrived; none of them would ever be able to live in a human city (except as an exhibit or experiment).
I personally doubt that bioengineering will do much in the way of human evolution. Rather, I expect either computer-based life, a blend of computers and humans, or corporate/political conglomerates to be the next stage. That is, of course, assuming that we don't off ourselves first. We still have too many problems with race for "bio-enhanced" people to be acceptable to society.
b&
Architecture wars, OS wars, language wars...algorithm wars.
b&
Quick, somebody patent spam, and then file a big class action suit against all spammers.
b&