Higher end houses (when you exceed a million dollars) already have all this equipment, and it is quite reliable. X10 is the dirt cheap knockoff end of the home automation market. The good stuff is very fault tolerant, ages well and is quite expensive. Rich people like their toys and don't tolerate things that don't work.
Depending on how he's planning on doing it, it will be very stable and reliable. (But given the way he's worded things, I don't think he's planning on doing it with experts).
I would imagine that this little gem would be more realistically informative. Especially considering that even with a very wired house, the actual laying of the wire is a small component of rebuilding.
Yup. Most laws are decent (don't kill somebody for their wallet), but there are quite a few that are either stupid or poorly thought out. I tend to stay inside of the law because of those pesky fines and jailtime things, but I have no problems with some activities. Most of the cops I know would roll their eyes and ignore it too (unless pressed to do something).
I believe the general complaint is one of publication of certain pieces of information, even if they are available. Honestly, the Eric Schmidt case is much more grey than I feel comfortable discussing. I'm not sure I am with Google on this one. I am, however, in general agreement that there is information available out there that should not be published by ethical writers, editors and publishers.
You use Britney Spears as an example. She has had several pictures of her in the tabloids when she was pregnant or married. I don't think those are ethical either. That's why we call those publications "tabloids". The respectable ones generally used a file photo and simply reported that she got married.
The point is, the information is out there, it is legal, and there should be a limit. It was clearly crossed when the address of the mother of the woman who runs Groklaw was published along with negative comments about her religion. The information was public, it was legal, and it was unethical. I don't think it has clearly been crossed in this case - it may have, but Google certainly thinks so.
I don't care if you're at their curb going through their garbage or on Google going through data that was thrown away. It's still a low form of journalism, and one that is seen as unethical. The National Enquirer hires people to sift through physical garbage, and there are plenty of people in the news who refuse to grant interviews with them. If a company hires people to sift through data garbage, it makes sense that there will be people in the news who will refuse to grant interviews with them.
I should have made it clear, as you're not the only person to think I was talking about FedEx - the comment I was replying to was the top of this thread, where the guy gets boxes from UPS to use them for moving, somebody said that it raised UPS prices, and somebody else said "It's a free country". My objection was to the assertion (implied by the "It's a free country") that "if it's legal, it's okay to do".
I like the morning walk, and a large coffee cup of half and half lasts me for several days and a few pots of coffee. The morning walk is an enjoyable passage of time. The grocery store is a drive away and much less of an enjoyable section of time. Even if they were the same price, I'd probably prefer the corner walk than a few miles of driving.
As for the moral question, I'm still mulling it over. I dislike the concept of "sticking it to The Man", as "The Man" that is thus stuck is usually a guy who took out a loan and/or morgaged his home to buy a franchise. "The Man" is also a dozen part time clerks and delivery guys who work there. I tend to see "screwing over a corporation" as screwing over the nice fellow who gave me directions when I was in his check out lane or the poor guy pushing carts in the parking lot.
I'm guessing that they are still turning a profit with my cup of half and half. It's a big bulk refrigerated unit, so they likely buy it at a cheaper cost than the packaged containers. Probably the best thing to do would be to ask, but I have a feeling that the answer would depend on who happened to be there at the time, and wouldn't necessarily be the same at a later date.
Actually, I was referring to the fellow who orders UPS boxes and then moves with them. Check the top of the thread. The site has been down, so I can't comment directly on the FedEx fellow. I'm guessing it's a stupid lawsuit over some art, but I'll reserve judgement until I see the site.
Yep, I'm pretty direct online. This is a forum of ideas and I tend to take positions with a firmness that strikes some as grating. I also yield to the occasional person who presents a better position. Speaking of which... reading back, you're right: I was likely too harsh. Good position.;)
That said, this isn't a restaurant, and what is seen as daily fare here would be totally out of bounds at, say, the corner diner. It's hard to argue that colonectomy talk is out of bounds in a forum that helped popularize goatse.cx. On the other hand, I hope never to see the fellow from *that* photo at a restaurant. At least not striking that particular pose next to my table.
Nope, I'm more of a crotchety old coot at this point. Not sure when it happened, but there ya go. Especially online.
I admire the idea and would likely do it myself. I have no problem with it. The only problem I have is when somebody defends something or someone with the "it's legal, so it is okay" argument.
Heck, I just started buying a large coffee cup full of half and half at the corner gas station the other day because I figured out it was cheaper than buying a container of half and half. That's pretty much along the same lines, and somebody could fault me the same way: "Gee, thanks... now coffee prices are going to go up". But I won't use the "hey, it's legal!" defense. I'll just say "hey, it's a nifty idea".
If they *do* ask me to stop, I will stop. I most certainly won't stand in the station and moan and bitch at them that it's legal because there aren't any signs telling me not to and that it's my "right" to do it. I most certainly won't shoot back with "it's a free country".
My objection is that the phrase "it's a free country" or "it's legal" is too often used in a kneejerk fashion to justify either impolite behavior or an unwillingness to accede to a polite request.
Yes. He's still behaving like a jackass. A perfectly legal jackass, but not the kind of person you want to invite to your home or go to lunch with.
It's remarkable how people seem to equate "legally allowed" with "ethical or friendly". He's allowed to talk loudly at a restaurant about his colonectomy and the resulting issues with fecal smearing. It's legal... and makes him a piss poor example of humanity.
I think you misunderstood *my* point. I agree that obeying robots.txt is not guaranteed. In fact, a company that *does* obey it can be called an ethical and/or "privacy friendly" company. Google obeys it.
My point is that there are standards, and Google chooses to follow them -- even if they don't have to technically, they are "good neighbors" in doing so.
As for Archive.org (aka the Wayback Machine), they will stop archiving *and* remove historical content via a robots.txt entry. See their FAQ.
Ironically, you cite only well behaved companies that do respect privacy and follow standards. There are archives and search engines that don't... because as I say, they don't have to for technical reasons. But then there are reporters who root through garbage or sit in a boat off the beach of a person's house with a high powered camera to take pictures. Most people call them unethical scum... even if they have the technical right to behave as they do. On the web, the same applies. CNet may well have the technical right to do this, but the end point of this behavior has them become the internet equivelent of paparazzi... unethical reporters rooting through data garbage on the net.
Tabloids exist and are perfectly legal, but just as most sane people won't deal with them, it makes sense that the same kind of unethical reporting done through improper data harvesting (like reporting a person's mother's address as happened recently) earns the same kind of disgust and refusal to do business with them. Reputable media tend to fire the writers and editors responsible for such activity, and the tabloids continue sorting through trash.
Doesn't mean you have to let the tabloids interview you.
Yes. You can easily opt out - don't put your information on the world wide web, especially on a publically linked website with an open robots.txt. If you don't want Google specifically indexing you (but you might want somebody else to), you can do that, too.
They are called standards, and they already exist.
Incidently, all the other databases of personal information that Google uses (phone numbers are the most obvious) have a clear opt-out method on their site. Of course, you are still in the original database available at a fee to all marketing groups, but that's a phone company issue that has been debated back and forth long before even Archie existed, let alone the web.
Corporations are not users or developers - they are a different category entirely. They have users inside and outside the company and hire developers inside and outside the company. Plus they do QA inside and outside the company and usually hire people to do second opinions on most critical infrastructure.
Most corporations have needs that are unique or are looking for an advantage and thus hire a large number of developers (either directly or through consulting firms). Those needs satisfy people who they hire to use the system they have built - the users are hired to the system as well as the system being built for the users.
In writing a GURPS module I did quite a bit of deconstruction of Firefly. In the end, I visualized it as being set in the rimworlds because they were balanced between the immoral Order of the Alliance and the immoral Chaos of the Reavers. Encounter the full brunt of either and you are eliminated. The vital people and lands lie in the narrowing band of existence between the two absolutes.
Of course, it is clearly also the Reconstruction in space; the Order/Chaos trough is just another way of looking at it when building new stories. A good source of material for ideas are the Heinlein stories about Lazarus Long. Like Mal, Laz is the bitter ex-soldier with a sense of humor who is utterly loyal to his shipmates.
It has nothing to do with Unix, it has to do with 32 bits. Most *nix style OSes store time as the number of seconds since 1970. If you store it as a 32 bit number, it runs out in 2038. Ironically, this is easy(ish) to fix in the actual OS (just use a 64 bit number)... it's the databases and such (which may run on some other OS like Windows) that *store* those numbers that will have the bigger problems, since they need to be converted. Filesystems will be the same way; there has been some talk about changing the time storage there (some may have already). All those USB keys and such that use FAT will run out in 2099.
Incidently, the 64 bit number will last until... uhh... somewhere around 280 billion AD? I could be off, but it's way out there.
I agree with him. I work with wood (just built a Saxon Lyre), do medieval encampments (the authentic kind, not the turkey leg kind), and bind my own books. Not only am I using old technologies, I am using old manufacturing methods, ignoring assembly line practices and other efficient ways to do what I do. I even play music and sing instead of owning an iPod and like to take walks. I enjoy these things quite a bit, while I don't like, say, video games.
It is not even an issue of "older or newer". What is *best* is not always most desired or preferred - new things just give a wider range of choices. Things getting "better" is a phrase loaded with subjective criteria. I don't think that "old is better" either - I enjoy the internet, programming, international relief funds, polymer molding and modern medicine. I'd even like to colonize the universe with mankind. But there are plenty of concepts and practices that are not new or even "better" by your criteria that are quite vital and enjoyable.
That said, I'll take your final two comments and point out that I spent several years as a Special Olympics volunteer, and the joy and determination from those people is inspiring. And thanks - I am having a good life.
Certainly there are plenty of people who dispute it exists. I was pointing to the term as a starting point for anybody interested in researching it; there are already 30 years worth of studies and proofs either way amassed about it. I spent a few hours a year or so ago skimming the subject.
I like it when people point to the canon or generally accepted terms about something so you can research it. It tends to be much more useful than formulating a theory about the current topic with no research, no background, about 10 seconds of consideration and then posting it.:)
I've also found that when I know the right term and little else, posting what I do know makes people who know what they are talking about pop out of the background and explain further.
There are more than a few people who would like KDE on OSX. I vastly prefer KDE over Aqua but quite like the laptop hardware that Apple makes.
I'm hoping that the new Apple intel based systems are better supported by distros and will run the same code compiled for PC compatibles. Being able to pull from the same Kubuntu repository that I do right now would be nice. (Not to mention being able to unison my $HOME/usr/bin and have my homecoded binaries run on all my systems).
--
Evan
Re:Yep, KDE is NOT READY for enterprise use
on
Preview of KDE 3.5
·
· Score: 1
That's not from KDE, that's a completely different Linux application from the popular xscreensavers collection. Some distros now block webcollage by default as a result (similar to how the "offensive" fortunes are often packaged separately from the rest). The ones that do this are the more enterprise oriented ones like SUSE. It is somewhat your own fault for not using a work oriented distro at work.
(For those unfamiliar - it performs random web searches and mixes the resulting images into a collage).
Kontact (i.e., KOrganizer, which can be run without the whole Kontact framework) is the "complete and easy to use" version.
KAlarm is pretty much what I like: small, easy to use and flexible. If you need more depth, KOrganizer is there, and if you need an entire contact solution, KOrganizer fits right into Kontact.
Of course, each of these applications can be manipulated by scripts in a variety of languages from python to bash through DCOP, or you can use classic commandline calls.
Small solutions that step up and aggregate to complete solutions - the Unix way.
You know who you're telling this to, right? I think he's semi-aware of the existence of indie music.
(I've just moved cross country, and I'll miss the hell out of No Kill I's shows... but my SO and I managed to be in Trekkies II because we were at that concert. She's the Orion Slave Girl, I'm Yet Another Klingon).
( Ever notice that when it got popular to be a geek, loads of "references" appeared in people's writings that made it utterly clear that they had never actually done, watched or read the thing they were referencing? )
Hunh? Live in Northern California in the valley (the *real* valley, not the silicon valley), and you'll see plenty of hydrogen vehicles. Living in Davis, California, I saw plenty of them on the road. It helps that the governor has pushed a string of filling stations so you can navigate without getting stranded... and that the hydrogen fuel initiative is one county over (where you can test drive hydrogen fuel cell vehicles).
Many are fleet and research vehicles, but some are privately owned. And they are on the road, doing real driving in regular traffic for normal people. Most have a pretty obvious label, but more and more simply have subtle logos on the back bumper - just like the early hybrids.
Slashdot Mirror
Depending on how he's planning on doing it, it will be very stable and reliable. (But given the way he's worded things, I don't think he's planning on doing it with experts).
--
Evan
Bah. Drywall. Tiling. I crave not these things.
--
Evan
Microsoft did clearly take it without compensation.
(Disclaimer: I make no legal or moral comment on whether compensation was due).
--
Evan
--
Evan
You use Britney Spears as an example. She has had several pictures of her in the tabloids when she was pregnant or married. I don't think those are ethical either. That's why we call those publications "tabloids". The respectable ones generally used a file photo and simply reported that she got married.
The point is, the information is out there, it is legal, and there should be a limit. It was clearly crossed when the address of the mother of the woman who runs Groklaw was published along with negative comments about her religion. The information was public, it was legal, and it was unethical. I don't think it has clearly been crossed in this case - it may have, but Google certainly thinks so.
I don't care if you're at their curb going through their garbage or on Google going through data that was thrown away. It's still a low form of journalism, and one that is seen as unethical. The National Enquirer hires people to sift through physical garbage, and there are plenty of people in the news who refuse to grant interviews with them. If a company hires people to sift through data garbage, it makes sense that there will be people in the news who will refuse to grant interviews with them.
It's still legal; it's just repugnant.
--
Evan
--
Evan
As for the moral question, I'm still mulling it over. I dislike the concept of "sticking it to The Man", as "The Man" that is thus stuck is usually a guy who took out a loan and/or morgaged his home to buy a franchise. "The Man" is also a dozen part time clerks and delivery guys who work there. I tend to see "screwing over a corporation" as screwing over the nice fellow who gave me directions when I was in his check out lane or the poor guy pushing carts in the parking lot.
I'm guessing that they are still turning a profit with my cup of half and half. It's a big bulk refrigerated unit, so they likely buy it at a cheaper cost than the packaged containers. Probably the best thing to do would be to ask, but I have a feeling that the answer would depend on who happened to be there at the time, and wouldn't necessarily be the same at a later date.
--
Evan
Yep, I'm pretty direct online. This is a forum of ideas and I tend to take positions with a firmness that strikes some as grating. I also yield to the occasional person who presents a better position. Speaking of which... reading back, you're right: I was likely too harsh. Good position. ;)
That said, this isn't a restaurant, and what is seen as daily fare here would be totally out of bounds at, say, the corner diner. It's hard to argue that colonectomy talk is out of bounds in a forum that helped popularize goatse.cx. On the other hand, I hope never to see the fellow from *that* photo at a restaurant. At least not striking that particular pose next to my table.
--
Evan
I admire the idea and would likely do it myself. I have no problem with it. The only problem I have is when somebody defends something or someone with the "it's legal, so it is okay" argument.
Heck, I just started buying a large coffee cup full of half and half at the corner gas station the other day because I figured out it was cheaper than buying a container of half and half. That's pretty much along the same lines, and somebody could fault me the same way: "Gee, thanks... now coffee prices are going to go up". But I won't use the "hey, it's legal!" defense. I'll just say "hey, it's a nifty idea".
If they *do* ask me to stop, I will stop. I most certainly won't stand in the station and moan and bitch at them that it's legal because there aren't any signs telling me not to and that it's my "right" to do it. I most certainly won't shoot back with "it's a free country".
My objection is that the phrase "it's a free country" or "it's legal" is too often used in a kneejerk fashion to justify either impolite behavior or an unwillingness to accede to a polite request.
--
Evan
It's remarkable how people seem to equate "legally allowed" with "ethical or friendly". He's allowed to talk loudly at a restaurant about his colonectomy and the resulting issues with fecal smearing. It's legal... and makes him a piss poor example of humanity.
--
Evan
My point is that there are standards, and Google chooses to follow them -- even if they don't have to technically, they are "good neighbors" in doing so.
As for Archive.org (aka the Wayback Machine), they will stop archiving *and* remove historical content via a robots.txt entry. See their FAQ.
Ironically, you cite only well behaved companies that do respect privacy and follow standards. There are archives and search engines that don't... because as I say, they don't have to for technical reasons. But then there are reporters who root through garbage or sit in a boat off the beach of a person's house with a high powered camera to take pictures. Most people call them unethical scum... even if they have the technical right to behave as they do. On the web, the same applies. CNet may well have the technical right to do this, but the end point of this behavior has them become the internet equivelent of paparazzi... unethical reporters rooting through data garbage on the net.
Tabloids exist and are perfectly legal, but just as most sane people won't deal with them, it makes sense that the same kind of unethical reporting done through improper data harvesting (like reporting a person's mother's address as happened recently) earns the same kind of disgust and refusal to do business with them. Reputable media tend to fire the writers and editors responsible for such activity, and the tabloids continue sorting through trash.
Doesn't mean you have to let the tabloids interview you.
--
Evan
They are called standards, and they already exist.
Incidently, all the other databases of personal information that Google uses (phone numbers are the most obvious) have a clear opt-out method on their site. Of course, you are still in the original database available at a fee to all marketing groups, but that's a phone company issue that has been debated back and forth long before even Archie existed, let alone the web.
--
Evan
Most corporations have needs that are unique or are looking for an advantage and thus hire a large number of developers (either directly or through consulting firms). Those needs satisfy people who they hire to use the system they have built - the users are hired to the system as well as the system being built for the users.
--
Evan
Of course, it is clearly also the Reconstruction in space; the Order/Chaos trough is just another way of looking at it when building new stories. A good source of material for ideas are the Heinlein stories about Lazarus Long. Like Mal, Laz is the bitter ex-soldier with a sense of humor who is utterly loyal to his shipmates.
--
Evan
Incidently, the 64 bit number will last until... uhh... somewhere around 280 billion AD? I could be off, but it's way out there.
--
Evan
It is not even an issue of "older or newer". What is *best* is not always most desired or preferred - new things just give a wider range of choices. Things getting "better" is a phrase loaded with subjective criteria. I don't think that "old is better" either - I enjoy the internet, programming, international relief funds, polymer molding and modern medicine. I'd even like to colonize the universe with mankind. But there are plenty of concepts and practices that are not new or even "better" by your criteria that are quite vital and enjoyable.
That said, I'll take your final two comments and point out that I spent several years as a Special Olympics volunteer, and the joy and determination from those people is inspiring. And thanks - I am having a good life.
--
Evan
I like it when people point to the canon or generally accepted terms about something so you can research it. It tends to be much more useful than formulating a theory about the current topic with no research, no background, about 10 seconds of consideration and then posting it. :)
I've also found that when I know the right term and little else, posting what I do know makes people who know what they are talking about pop out of the background and explain further.
--
Evan
Here's a wikipedia link. Check out the very easy to understand graph that presents the basic concept.
--
Evan
I'm hoping that the new Apple intel based systems are better supported by distros and will run the same code compiled for PC compatibles. Being able to pull from the same Kubuntu repository that I do right now would be nice. (Not to mention being able to unison my $HOME/usr/bin and have my homecoded binaries run on all my systems).
--
Evan
(For those unfamiliar - it performs random web searches and mixes the resulting images into a collage).
--
Evan
KAlarm is pretty much what I like: small, easy to use and flexible. If you need more depth, KOrganizer is there, and if you need an entire contact solution, KOrganizer fits right into Kontact.
Of course, each of these applications can be manipulated by scripts in a variety of languages from python to bash through DCOP, or you can use classic commandline calls.
Small solutions that step up and aggregate to complete solutions - the Unix way.
--
Evan
(I've just moved cross country, and I'll miss the hell out of No Kill I's shows... but my SO and I managed to be in Trekkies II because we were at that concert. She's the Orion Slave Girl, I'm Yet Another Klingon).
--
Evan
--
Evan
( Ever notice that when it got popular to be a geek, loads of "references" appeared in people's writings that made it utterly clear that they had never actually done, watched or read the thing they were referencing? )
--
Evan
Many are fleet and research vehicles, but some are privately owned. And they are on the road, doing real driving in regular traffic for normal people. Most have a pretty obvious label, but more and more simply have subtle logos on the back bumper - just like the early hybrids.
So how "far in the future" is it again?
--
Evan