I actually admin at a business where we use this so-called wireless DSL known as MMDS (Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service). And it really is just like DSL but wireless and with more latency. So you have the same amount of bandwidth but don't even try gaming with it. Our service is provieded by Worldcom in a trial for busnisess in the Memphis area. The center is on the highest building in the city and has a certain radius i believe of 10 miles. all it requires is a 20-30 foot antannae on your roof (depending on how high your building is). Things like masses of trees will apparently weaken the signal but it doesn't require line-of-sight. It's even raining right now and it works just grear. Like I said earlier, i can't see anyt donside using it other than the latency- but you still get all the bandwidth, and a tall antannae on your roof.:)
If the election were held today and Clinton were running he'd get my vote right away.. but alas, that would be a step towards monarchy- not a good thing. too bad for bill, he's the man.
i read recently that novell has halted development on any further netware releases and will begin to dissolve it's tech support for existing netware versions. apparently they realize they're headed for a dead end and are backtracking by restructuring themselve to offer software services for business (whatever the hell that means)
i really don't have time to argue about nonsense like the meaning of two similar words in meaning with someone who doesn't even have the courage to speak from their true identity. besides, you act as if the difference between nationalism and patriotism is like a canyon when it's really just a crack in the wall. furthermore, you obviously have nothing better to do than attempt to knock down legitimate facts because you're sorry you hadn't thought of them yourself. get a life, dude.
1) hey, if you want to say that webster is wrong then that's your beef. 2)additionally, you must realize which definition fits the context in which i am speaking. 3) what the heck is your source? hell, so far you haven't given ANY sources and have had no fact to back up your claims.
now i'm all for an intelligent exchange of different viewpoints but you've done nothing to make me believe you have any ounce of intelligence. furthermore, i'm not writing an essay here but i do follow the fundamental guidelines of persuasive writing. you? as i said, you have no facts to back up your arguments. perhaps you probably need to retake english. as for me, i already make a comfortable living as a syndicated technology columnist thank you very much. so when it comes to debating with someone as ignorant as you have proven yourself to be, there's no way one can have an intelligent discussion. perhaps you should move down here to the south, there's plenty of pig-headed republicans who sound just like yourself. have a nice life.
well i actually decided to stay up and work on a project but whatever. so okay mr. anonymous coward, let's talk about whether republicans are nationalistic or not.
fact being that republicans (particularly conservatives) have an unabashed for them it is often like being in an exclusive club. unless you've been living under a rock, chances are you've encountered the mentality of this in action. many are bravado in claiming (and spreading) their christian beliefs, flashing (and not necessarily spreading) their wealth, and of course there's the deep love for one's country they all claim to believe so fervently in. this behavior trancends onto others as sort of a "you don't believe in what i do? get out!" mentality.
how many times do u hear republicans calling on a moral resurgence in america and repeatedly using phrases such as, "from my heart", "i have a message/vision", and so on. these clips and phrases are sprinkled throughout most republicans' speeches and appeal to the human sense of nationalism- or patriotism as you like to call it.
i'll go ahead and say, too, that you are actually right on one thing. nationalism does occur at the local level you just got the definition wrong. now from mr. webster himself:
na-tion-al-ism (nash'uh nl iz uhm, nash'nuh liz -) n. 1. devotion and loyalty to one's own nation; patriotism.
as you can see, patriotism and nationalism are practically one and the same. furthermore, you should be informed that the only national interests placed above others are that of another country's. i believe you got definition 4 mixed-up.
4. the doctrine or policy of asserting the interests of a particular nation over the interests of other nations.
good observation! republicans are libertarian in their politics. but this isn't always true as i'll explain.
first off let it be said that libertarians are a different breed altogether. they don't fit on the political spectrum AT ALL. if they did, however, they'd end up in the direction of anarchy. what is also true is that dems and gop's take libertarian stances only on different sides of the table. democrats are libertarian on social issues while republicans are libertarian on economics. i don't think i need to explain that one. now to the fact that republicans are libertarian in their politics- this has only become true in certain cases. the reason gop's have begun to favor state control over such hot issues like teaching creationism and mandatory prayer in our public schools, posting the ten commandments in our courthouses, and outlawing explicit entertainment at the local level is because they know they could never get something so controversial passed at the national level so instead they try to play it off and claim that it is up to the states. remember the contract for america? they seem to have learned their lesson and are approching it from a different angle.
now, does this mean that republicans really are libertarian in there politics? hell no! if they had the chance to pass a supreme court decision outlawing abortion nationally you bet they'd pass a federal law along with others like it enforcing their viewpoints on social issues. like i said above, the only reason republicans have taken a different position regarding federalism in uor country than they have in the passed is because they think approaching the issues this way might actually work. in some cases it has, particularly in the southern states which i am from.
class dismissed.
the fact is, they're not. and likewise just b/c someone leans to the left does not make him/her a communist. i think it's amazing how the conservative republicans turned out in droves to denounce the post and cmdrtaco. i have to wonder if the same thing might happen if a post were made that was seemingly pro-bush. (although right now i can think of nothing he supports that we geeks do) getting back to the mccarthy-like tactics shown in this thread, it seems those of you doing so are guilty of the very thing this article is about: character assassination. do you people who said so seriously think rob and other dems are communists? labeling someone's ideology as extreme that is equally distant from the center of the political spectrum as your own only means you are just as extreme in your ideology. what does this mean? it means you either a) believe your ideology IS the center and is therefore the only right view to have; or b) are guilty of baseless character assasination as outlined in the article.
i've observed politics for a long time and i've come to notice that the differences are indeed rooted in their extreme counterparts. notice that most dems do believe it is up to the government to set things straight. they believe literally in government by the ppl, for the ppl. that is to say theory and logic is the way to a successful government.
republicans on the other hand are very passionate in their nationalism and believe that the blind faith of the ppl in their nation make it successful. that is to say it's nationalism plain and simple. that's not a bad thing either and it's no coincidence that the united states is the most prosperous nation right now and is practically in the middle of the political spectrum. in other words it take a bit of both to create a successful formula for government and furthermore despite how bad off we feel we may be in our policies, we still live in the most prosperous, free, and fair countries in the world. elements of both sides are needed for the best formula we can come up with. despite what both parties may tell you, there is no such thing as utopia no matter what policies or government you have. moderation is the key to the best solution anywhere.
so in that regard, the article is right on the mark, unless one are right-wing which more often than not means that you are right and everyone else is wrong and there is no other acceptable solution.
i'd also like to add that as far as the appropriateness of this article goes, in one way i don't mind because 1) it gets ppl talking, unlike some of the other usual threads; 2) no matter what you guys might say, politics is in itself a nerdy subject and a science at that (political science) so i think that it had everything to do with slashdot and it's "news for nerds" (just b/c u aren't into politics, doesn't mean i'm not); 3) it brings us into our government and makes us better informed. it's not like it's on the nightly news, this is stuff ppl rarely get to see that has firmness to it.
okay i'm tired now, i'm going to sleep. nite Zzzzzzzz
alfa
Exactly. Gore never claimed to have anything to do with the creation of ARPAnet it'self but in the transition from what it was then to what it is today. You should read things a little better.
did it occur to anyone that no one can believe anything coming out of mitnick's mouth from here on out. for right now he's the fed's puppet to sell their propaganda to the "hacker" community. trust me, he's finished.
anyone here seen gattaca?
Slashdot Mirror
But then if you were in this situation it wouldn't be a problem anymore would it?
"the Virtual Community survive adolescent flamers and the dotcom era?" case in point.
you diss dave barry, AND d&d? who's the real loser here? and does anyone here actually OWN a trenchcoat? if you can't find humour in this i pity you.
unfortunately mr. ac is right you know..
i live in tn and voted for him. he may not have won here but he at least won his home state- d.c.
that's it! i demand a recount!
yeah, thanks to daddy.
I actually admin at a business where we use this so-called wireless DSL known as MMDS (Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service). And it really is just like DSL but wireless and with more latency. So you have the same amount of bandwidth but don't even try gaming with it. Our service is provieded by Worldcom in a trial for busnisess in the Memphis area. The center is on the highest building in the city and has a certain radius i believe of 10 miles. all it requires is a 20-30 foot antannae on your roof (depending on how high your building is). Things like masses of trees will apparently weaken the signal but it doesn't require line-of-sight. It's even raining right now and it works just grear. Like I said earlier, i can't see anyt donside using it other than the latency- but you still get all the bandwidth, and a tall antannae on your roof. :)
okay everyone get your political bias, slant, sludge, and ideological crap out there! this is your last chance!
where in the hell did that nasty rumor come from?
what do you think?
and you'd get the award for "cowardness"
yep, that's why republicans could care less about a certain DWI.. hey, at least we know what the W stands for now.. :)
your statement oozes so much with republican bias that it pretty much discredits itself. sir, you have no idea what you're talking about.
If the election were held today and Clinton were running he'd get my vote right away.. but alas, that would be a step towards monarchy- not a good thing. too bad for bill, he's the man.
i read recently that novell has halted development on any further netware releases and will begin to dissolve it's tech support for existing netware versions. apparently they realize they're headed for a dead end and are backtracking by restructuring themselve to offer software services for business (whatever the hell that means)
i really don't have time to argue about nonsense like the meaning of two similar words in meaning with someone who doesn't even have the courage to speak from their true identity. besides, you act as if the difference between nationalism and patriotism is like a canyon when it's really just a crack in the wall. furthermore, you obviously have nothing better to do than attempt to knock down legitimate facts because you're sorry you hadn't thought of them yourself. get a life, dude.
it is the essence of debating something so subjective.
1) hey, if you want to say that webster is wrong then that's your beef. 2)additionally, you must realize which definition fits the context in which i am speaking. 3) what the heck is your source? hell, so far you haven't given ANY sources and have had no fact to back up your claims.
now i'm all for an intelligent exchange of different viewpoints but you've done nothing to make me believe you have any ounce of intelligence. furthermore, i'm not writing an essay here but i do follow the fundamental guidelines of persuasive writing. you? as i said, you have no facts to back up your arguments. perhaps you probably need to retake english. as for me, i already make a comfortable living as a syndicated technology columnist thank you very much. so when it comes to debating with someone as ignorant as you have proven yourself to be, there's no way one can have an intelligent discussion. perhaps you should move down here to the south, there's plenty of pig-headed republicans who sound just like yourself. have a nice life.
and that's why you have plenty of facts to support this- no wait, you have none.. poor, bitter anonymous coward.
the fact is, they're not. and likewise just b/c someone leans to the left does not make him/her a communist. i think it's amazing how the conservative republicans turned out in droves to denounce the post and cmdrtaco. i have to wonder if the same thing might happen if a post were made that was seemingly pro-bush. (although right now i can think of nothing he supports that we geeks do) getting back to the mccarthy-like tactics shown in this thread, it seems those of you doing so are guilty of the very thing this article is about: character assassination. do you people who said so seriously think rob and other dems are communists? labeling someone's ideology as extreme that is equally distant from the center of the political spectrum as your own only means you are just as extreme in your ideology. what does this mean? it means you either a) believe your ideology IS the center and is therefore the only right view to have; or b) are guilty of baseless character assasination as outlined in the article. i've observed politics for a long time and i've come to notice that the differences are indeed rooted in their extreme counterparts. notice that most dems do believe it is up to the government to set things straight. they believe literally in government by the ppl, for the ppl. that is to say theory and logic is the way to a successful government. republicans on the other hand are very passionate in their nationalism and believe that the blind faith of the ppl in their nation make it successful. that is to say it's nationalism plain and simple. that's not a bad thing either and it's no coincidence that the united states is the most prosperous nation right now and is practically in the middle of the political spectrum. in other words it take a bit of both to create a successful formula for government and furthermore despite how bad off we feel we may be in our policies, we still live in the most prosperous, free, and fair countries in the world. elements of both sides are needed for the best formula we can come up with. despite what both parties may tell you, there is no such thing as utopia no matter what policies or government you have. moderation is the key to the best solution anywhere. so in that regard, the article is right on the mark, unless one are right-wing which more often than not means that you are right and everyone else is wrong and there is no other acceptable solution. i'd also like to add that as far as the appropriateness of this article goes, in one way i don't mind because 1) it gets ppl talking, unlike some of the other usual threads; 2) no matter what you guys might say, politics is in itself a nerdy subject and a science at that (political science) so i think that it had everything to do with slashdot and it's "news for nerds" (just b/c u aren't into politics, doesn't mean i'm not); 3) it brings us into our government and makes us better informed. it's not like it's on the nightly news, this is stuff ppl rarely get to see that has firmness to it. okay i'm tired now, i'm going to sleep. nite Zzzzzzzz alfa
umm we specifically live in a representative democracy mr. ac.
Exactly. Gore never claimed to have anything to do with the creation of ARPAnet it'self but in the transition from what it was then to what it is today. You should read things a little better.
did it occur to anyone that no one can believe anything coming out of mitnick's mouth from here on out. for right now he's the fed's puppet to sell their propaganda to the "hacker" community. trust me, he's finished. anyone here seen gattaca?