Thank you for the anecdotal evidence. It will go nicely with the straw man.
Just because you're giving the child some autonomy doesn't mean they get everything handed to them on a platter. Quite the contrary. It's possible to be a permissive parent, meanwhile instilling the value of hard work, owning up to social responsibility, etc, by doing things like simply not buying very many toys, etc. Work out an allowance program that allows the kid to be able to afford the "normal" amount of stuff, but expect them to participate in the household chores to earn that share of the household revenues. They *can* add value in the home, so why shouldn't they?
But those same kids might well be allowed to decide what they want to watch on TV... of course they might have to earn the right to watch mom & dad's TV at all. If they want to watch what mom & dad want, they can get that for free. But if they want unrestricted viewing perhaps they can be assessed a fee.
Ugh. I hate it when I sound like a libertarian.;)
In any cases, the trick is finding the sweet spot where the kid can break the rules without serious harm, but where the kid can also learn to take risks and set his or her own level. Protecting kids from stuff that scares parents but has not been demonstrated to actually harm children is premature optimization... and you know what they say about that.:)
Well, at least the intelligentsia hasn't outlawed poor spelling!:)
In this case, I think putting a requirement to consider or prefer open source software is a wise use of tax money. The collection and spending of taxes seems to be an inevitable activity, so why see if we can maximize the potential benefit for everyone? Supporting open code supports a code commons that all citizens can enjoy without spoiling it for others.
In fact, it is only pragmatism that suggests that unless national security is at stake that we insist the govenrnment use only public domain, BSD, or GPL software. If our tax dollars are being spent to install, maintain and use software, we ought to have as much right to inspection as possible to evaluate that spending.
Also, like many others, I believe the argument that says that TCO is lower in predominantly Free Software shops. And a large part of the fixed costs of Free Software-based systems is overcoming the inertia you mention.
This law, like all others, needs an expiration date. There are too many laws and rules on the books. I have to wonder if most of the people charged with creating laws, executing those laws, and determining the validity of the laws have even read them all.
Actually, the natural state of information is "free". However, because this can be potentially detrimental in some cases, there are laws to grant temporary monopolies over the use of that information to the person deemed to be the "creator" of that idea. Without those laws it would be more difficult for persons whose primary occupation is the creative act to sustain themselves.
Personally I don't see the advantage in getting the stories earlier unless it includes being able to post to the discussion thread earlier as well. It also sounds like the stories won't really go subscriber-live when they're actually posted, you'll only get a 20 minute jump on the Slashdot effect.
I agree with everything but the part about "first come, first serve" unless there is a limit to how many times an entity or individual can be first. Or maybe anyone can suggest a new TLD, but there is a six month waiting period, if anyone else tries to register that same TLD within that time, there is a lottery to determine who gets it. Otherwise, what's to stop me from just running through/usr/share/dict and being first for just about everything you might want?
But the internet isn't a private club. It's a large-- often anonymous/pseudonymous-- network. Different communities on the net have wildly different norms. Posting rules is a more efficient method for communicating those norms than trial and error. And even Joel doesn't really think written rules are a bad thing-- what do you think his article really is? It looks a lot like an attempt to justify certain decisions he's made for his forums as well as an attempt to clarify some of the rules.
That makes sense. I guess I wasn't thinking about it like that-- if you've got a fast network, using a netboot would be just as efficient as a disk-to-disk copy would (yes, I'd pull the drives, but I'd put them in the master machine with a removable tray I think).
Since the files they list as infringing are clearly OpenOffice as distributed by Mandrake, I'd say they are misrepresenting themselves-- as an organization with a clue, that is. Further, since when is a Cease & Desist actually admissable/enforceable/anything else when sent via email? Is this unique to Europe or did I sleep through that class? Don't C&Ds normally need to have some semblence of evidence of proof of delivery, like what is required for summons?
how is the hosting company supposed to pay its own bill for bandwidth and for buying drives?
How about by selling me a set amount of disk space and bandwidth and charging me for overages? Having a "no unliked files" policy prevents me from creating an unlinked directory and protecting it with.htaccess or simply relying on security through obscurity. I consider that an unnecessary constraint when a simple `du/home/username` will show disk usage, and server logs can be used to compute bandwidth consumption.
Obviously all of us have different needs and are willing to make different decisions about what type of service we'd like from our web hosting services. Of course, the constraints you mention are appropriate under some conditions (i.e. super-discounted or free hosting). You get what you pay for, I guess.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. It's true that only certain ports (0-1023) are reserved for privileged processes, but any user can start a background process that interfaces with the network, performs logging functions, etc. And even so, users can access some of this stuff via sudo.
A P2P system that really wanted to facilitate legal data transfer would have mandatory permanent pseudoanonymous tracking and feedback
Mechanisms for such tracking already exist and do not depend on Napster for implementation. All that's required is an accusation and evidence that satisfies the statutory requirements for a search warrant or wiretap. Then boom, you catch your file-sharer red-handed. It's a time-honored technique in law enforcement: you get the idea that someone is doing something illegal, you pay attention until you catch them at it, then you bust them.
Napster was a content neutral system insofar as it treated all mp3 files equally. There is no way to tell from an mp3 file whether the current file owner has a legal right to share that file. Only after a complaint was made was Napster able to discriminate against a file. New files, in order for the system to work at all, did not need to be "registered" or "proven" before they could be shared as long as they were seemingly valid mp3s (although they did need to be listed on the central server this is not the same thing). That's exacly what content neutral means.
We bomb camps that are known to have enemies in it.
And the military never makes mistakes like bombing Chinese embassies or Canadian allies? Who's uninformed?
I'm sorry, but I have a strong conviction against using violence to solve problems at any scale. So of course I'm basing my argument on this feeling. But for you to call me "uninformed" on that basis is ludicrous. Your own assertions about the efficacy and accuracy of military action clearly indicate that it is not I who wear that badge. If our military were competent to successfully wage these sorts of campaigns without significant harm to civilians, persons like Osama Bin Laden would not still be at large while hundreds of Afghani women and children lay dead and wounded.
Thank you for making this a case of "be a man". I never realized that steadfast opposition to using violence made a person a coward. In fact, I'd always considered it a sign of great personal strength, this desire to peacefully resolve conflicts even if it included the risk of grave personal harm. Your "we had to bomb the village to save it" logic has turned me around 180 degrees! I feel so much more courageous now.
Many web hosting providers prohibit such practices in their Acceptable Use Policy. They do? Seems like a pretty crappy AUP to me, then. Why should everything I'm hosting be accessible via links? It's not like my hosting service can't rifle through my directories at will. They also have complete control over the server itself and can see the log files. Which means that they can easily track just what I've uploaded and how much of it is going out over the wire. Any policy like this is just, well, silly. Either rent me the server space and bandwidth or don't.
Thank you for using the words "steal" and "theft" instead of the technically correct "unauthorized duplication". Information is a non-rivalous resource and except in the case of trade secrets cannot be "stolen" in any traditional sense of the word "stolen". Your choice to use inflammatory and misleading language simply makes this a more difficult discussion to have because you are simply appealing to emotion rather than making sound arguments.
This *is* about civil liberties because it has a chilling effect among other things. The unauthorized duplication has been and continues to be used to prevent legitimate filesharing on otherwise neutral systems (i.e. Napster). This is like closing down all the roads in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas because some persons are using them to transport drugs from Mexico to the United States.
Not that I'm anyone whose opinion is worth anything, but that sounds like the best advice I've seen in this thread.
As to the specific question at hand, I would probably list this as either "Related Experience" or "Professional Development" or any of 100 other euphemisms for "Stuff I didn't get paid much for, if at all, but makes me a better employee than I would be without it." Even if it's a "hobby" or "interest" I wouldn't call it that because that puts it in the same category as model railroading, teaching Sunday School, crochet, and jogging.
Fast. Easy computing. That's why I pay for my software...
As opposed to using unauthorized copies of it or what? Paying for software doesn't somehow make the software better-- for most of what I like to do (excluding high end graphics work) I've found that software that's been available to me at no charge has been as good or better than stuff I've paid for or which was bundled with devices.
FWIW, I think people complaining that some MS software does something seemingly insidious is just... redundant.
Actually, the verb "google" means "to look something up on google.com". I've never heard anyone say they were going to "google" for something from dmoz.org or yahoo.com. FWIW, the current definition of "to google" at WordSpy includes a reference to google.com and to the trademark status of the word. So it sounds like he's done the Right Thing (TM). This is pretty much how Merriam-Webster treats things like Kleenex and Xerox.
Actually, tracking at the register doesn't catch a major source of losses for stores: the back door. When your employees are stealing stuff (which they are, it's a bigger loser than 3rd party shoplifting), your shelves become empty. But if you monitor inventory via the register, you are going to understock because you won't know you also have to replace the stolen merchandise.
This could also assist in locating misplaced merchandise. It might also help track traffic patterns in the store.
Privacy? Seems to me we have very little left anyway. Maybe that's not a bad thing. So many of the things we think of as private are little more than open secrets anyway. Just a thought. I am not sure I see any huge privacy implications for this, as I'm assuming for many items the RFID device can be removed, if not disabled.
German and Latin don't have that much in common, except that they're not Chinese, Urdu, or Swahili. Learning Latin will help you learn lots of different languages, largely because the more time you spend in formal language learning the more practice you have learning languages-- which usually makes a person better at learning languages.:)
But learning Latin to help you learn German is like learning C to help you learn Fortran. Or learning Lisp to help you learn VB. The added exposure can't possibly be bad, but it's not a specific gateway.
And mostly I wanted to point out to the other poster that "one of these things was not like the others". His "biblio" example was a happy accident. In five years of German instruction in high school, I don't recall getting much cross-over benefit from the three years of Latin I took. Or vice versa.
Well, except that including German in this list is a mistake. It is not a Romance language like French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and other less well-known languages. German is a Germanic language (surprise!), like English and Swedish. English (much moreso German) have lots of words with roots in Latin because of the long-term occupation by the Roman Empire and later the influence of the Catholic Church.
Re:I didn't know liberals were so easy to alienate
on
Salon Asks for Help
·
· Score: 1
This is exactly why I've never subscribed. I am to the left of the American Left, but I enjoyed reading their articles by Camille Paglia because she was so clearly out of bounds. You couldn't put her in a category at all. Sometimes I couldn't understand her at all either, but at least when I could I found her writing engaging and thought-provoking. I do not have this same reaction to people like Horowitz.
Also, I think the guy they got to replace Keillor as an advice columnist is just plain boring. I would've much preferred another niche celebrity doing the gig in his/her own way.
Some of their feature articles are great, and their AP feed somehow managed to feel well-done. Unfortunate that their financial troubles started about the same time their reporting and op/ed stuff all seemed to go downhill as well. I would've subscribed if people like Paglia and Keillor were still on board. At this point it's obvious that people will subscribe to community type sites (or at least donate to help the cause), I'd subscribe to something like fark.com or/. or K5 if one of them had a more Salon-ish look/feel/slant to things.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for the anecdotal evidence. It will go nicely with the straw man.
;)
:)
Just because you're giving the child some autonomy doesn't mean they get everything handed to them on a platter. Quite the contrary. It's possible to be a permissive parent, meanwhile instilling the value of hard work, owning up to social responsibility, etc, by doing things like simply not buying very many toys, etc. Work out an allowance program that allows the kid to be able to afford the "normal" amount of stuff, but expect them to participate in the household chores to earn that share of the household revenues. They *can* add value in the home, so why shouldn't they?
But those same kids might well be allowed to decide what they want to watch on TV... of course they might have to earn the right to watch mom & dad's TV at all. If they want to watch what mom & dad want, they can get that for free. But if they want unrestricted viewing perhaps they can be assessed a fee.
Ugh. I hate it when I sound like a libertarian.
In any cases, the trick is finding the sweet spot where the kid can break the rules without serious harm, but where the kid can also learn to take risks and set his or her own level. Protecting kids from stuff that scares parents but has not been demonstrated to actually harm children is premature optimization... and you know what they say about that.
The problem you seem to fail to grasp is that this law will basically be on the books FOREVER.
... And I'm sorry that hastiness on your part compromises your ability to spell. :)
Did you even read what I wrote? I specifically stated that there are too many laws on the books and that they ought to include expiration dates.
Well, at least the intelligentsia hasn't outlawed poor spelling! :)
In this case, I think putting a requirement to consider or prefer open source software is a wise use of tax money. The collection and spending of taxes seems to be an inevitable activity, so why see if we can maximize the potential benefit for everyone? Supporting open code supports a code commons that all citizens can enjoy without spoiling it for others.
In fact, it is only pragmatism that suggests that unless national security is at stake that we insist the govenrnment use only public domain, BSD, or GPL software. If our tax dollars are being spent to install, maintain and use software, we ought to have as much right to inspection as possible to evaluate that spending.
Also, like many others, I believe the argument that says that TCO is lower in predominantly Free Software shops. And a large part of the fixed costs of Free Software-based systems is overcoming the inertia you mention.
This law, like all others, needs an expiration date. There are too many laws and rules on the books. I have to wonder if most of the people charged with creating laws, executing those laws, and determining the validity of the laws have even read them all.
Actually, the natural state of information is "free". However, because this can be potentially detrimental in some cases, there are laws to grant temporary monopolies over the use of that information to the person deemed to be the "creator" of that idea. Without those laws it would be more difficult for persons whose primary occupation is the creative act to sustain themselves.
Personally I don't see the advantage in getting the stories earlier unless it includes being able to post to the discussion thread earlier as well. It also sounds like the stories won't really go subscriber-live when they're actually posted, you'll only get a 20 minute jump on the Slashdot effect.
I agree with everything but the part about "first come, first serve" unless there is a limit to how many times an entity or individual can be first. Or maybe anyone can suggest a new TLD, but there is a six month waiting period, if anyone else tries to register that same TLD within that time, there is a lottery to determine who gets it. Otherwise, what's to stop me from just running through /usr/share/dict and being first for just about everything you might want?
But the internet isn't a private club. It's a large-- often anonymous/pseudonymous-- network. Different communities on the net have wildly different norms. Posting rules is a more efficient method for communicating those norms than trial and error. And even Joel doesn't really think written rules are a bad thing-- what do you think his article really is? It looks a lot like an attempt to justify certain decisions he's made for his forums as well as an attempt to clarify some of the rules.
Preview, preview!
But the main point of contention was not those utilities, rather GCC.
That makes sense. I guess I wasn't thinking about it like that-- if you've got a fast network, using a netboot would be just as efficient as a disk-to-disk copy would (yes, I'd pull the drives, but I'd put them in the master machine with a removable tray I think).
If you're going to go to the trouble of ripping open the machine, why not just image the hard drive?
Since the files they list as infringing are clearly OpenOffice as distributed by Mandrake, I'd say they are misrepresenting themselves-- as an organization with a clue, that is. Further, since when is a Cease & Desist actually admissable/enforceable/anything else when sent via email? Is this unique to Europe or did I sleep through that class? Don't C&Ds normally need to have some semblence of evidence of proof of delivery, like what is required for summons?
You missed the part where you actually get inside one of the baskets and hear a voice, "It is dark here. You may be eaten by a grue." :)
how is the hosting company supposed to pay its own bill for bandwidth and for buying drives?
.htaccess or simply relying on security through obscurity. I consider that an unnecessary constraint when a simple `du /home/username` will show disk usage, and server logs can be used to compute bandwidth consumption.
How about by selling me a set amount of disk space and bandwidth and charging me for overages? Having a "no unliked files" policy prevents me from creating an unlinked directory and protecting it with
Obviously all of us have different needs and are willing to make different decisions about what type of service we'd like from our web hosting services. Of course, the constraints you mention are appropriate under some conditions (i.e. super-discounted or free hosting). You get what you pay for, I guess.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. It's true that only certain ports (0-1023) are reserved for privileged processes, but any user can start a background process that interfaces with the network, performs logging functions, etc. And even so, users can access some of this stuff via sudo.
A P2P system that really wanted to facilitate legal data transfer would have mandatory permanent pseudoanonymous tracking and feedback
Mechanisms for such tracking already exist and do not depend on Napster for implementation. All that's required is an accusation and evidence that satisfies the statutory requirements for a search warrant or wiretap. Then boom, you catch your file-sharer red-handed. It's a time-honored technique in law enforcement: you get the idea that someone is doing something illegal, you pay attention until you catch them at it, then you bust them.
Napster was a content neutral system insofar as it treated all mp3 files equally. There is no way to tell from an mp3 file whether the current file owner has a legal right to share that file. Only after a complaint was made was Napster able to discriminate against a file. New files, in order for the system to work at all, did not need to be "registered" or "proven" before they could be shared as long as they were seemingly valid mp3s (although they did need to be listed on the central server this is not the same thing). That's exacly what content neutral means.
We bomb camps that are known to have enemies in it.
And the military never makes mistakes like bombing Chinese embassies or Canadian allies? Who's uninformed?
I'm sorry, but I have a strong conviction against using violence to solve problems at any scale. So of course I'm basing my argument on this feeling. But for you to call me "uninformed" on that basis is ludicrous. Your own assertions about the efficacy and accuracy of military action clearly indicate that it is not I who wear that badge. If our military were competent to successfully wage these sorts of campaigns without significant harm to civilians, persons like Osama Bin Laden would not still be at large while hundreds of Afghani women and children lay dead and wounded.
Thank you for making this a case of "be a man". I never realized that steadfast opposition to using violence made a person a coward. In fact, I'd always considered it a sign of great personal strength, this desire to peacefully resolve conflicts even if it included the risk of grave personal harm. Your "we had to bomb the village to save it" logic has turned me around 180 degrees! I feel so much more courageous now.
Many web hosting providers prohibit such practices in their Acceptable Use Policy. They do? Seems like a pretty crappy AUP to me, then. Why should everything I'm hosting be accessible via links? It's not like my hosting service can't rifle through my directories at will. They also have complete control over the server itself and can see the log files. Which means that they can easily track just what I've uploaded and how much of it is going out over the wire. Any policy like this is just, well, silly. Either rent me the server space and bandwidth or don't.
Thank you for using the words "steal" and "theft" instead of the technically correct "unauthorized duplication". Information is a non-rivalous resource and except in the case of trade secrets cannot be "stolen" in any traditional sense of the word "stolen". Your choice to use inflammatory and misleading language simply makes this a more difficult discussion to have because you are simply appealing to emotion rather than making sound arguments.
This *is* about civil liberties because it has a chilling effect among other things. The unauthorized duplication has been and continues to be used to prevent legitimate filesharing on otherwise neutral systems (i.e. Napster). This is like closing down all the roads in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas because some persons are using them to transport drugs from Mexico to the United States.
Not that I'm anyone whose opinion is worth anything, but that sounds like the best advice I've seen in this thread.
As to the specific question at hand, I would probably list this as either "Related Experience" or "Professional Development" or any of 100 other euphemisms for "Stuff I didn't get paid much for, if at all, but makes me a better employee than I would be without it." Even if it's a "hobby" or "interest" I wouldn't call it that because that puts it in the same category as model railroading, teaching Sunday School, crochet, and jogging.
Fast. Easy computing. That's why I pay for my software...
As opposed to using unauthorized copies of it or what? Paying for software doesn't somehow make the software better-- for most of what I like to do (excluding high end graphics work) I've found that software that's been available to me at no charge has been as good or better than stuff I've paid for or which was bundled with devices.
FWIW, I think people complaining that some MS software does something seemingly insidious is just... redundant.
Actually, the verb "google" means "to look something up on google.com". I've never heard anyone say they were going to "google" for something from dmoz.org or yahoo.com. FWIW, the current definition of "to google" at WordSpy includes a reference to google.com and to the trademark status of the word. So it sounds like he's done the Right Thing (TM). This is pretty much how Merriam-Webster treats things like Kleenex and Xerox.
Actually, tracking at the register doesn't catch a major source of losses for stores: the back door. When your employees are stealing stuff (which they are, it's a bigger loser than 3rd party shoplifting), your shelves become empty. But if you monitor inventory via the register, you are going to understock because you won't know you also have to replace the stolen merchandise.
This could also assist in locating misplaced merchandise. It might also help track traffic patterns in the store.
Privacy? Seems to me we have very little left anyway. Maybe that's not a bad thing. So many of the things we think of as private are little more than open secrets anyway. Just a thought. I am not sure I see any huge privacy implications for this, as I'm assuming for many items the RFID device can be removed, if not disabled.
German and Latin don't have that much in common, except that they're not Chinese, Urdu, or Swahili. Learning Latin will help you learn lots of different languages, largely because the more time you spend in formal language learning the more practice you have learning languages-- which usually makes a person better at learning languages. :)
But learning Latin to help you learn German is like learning C to help you learn Fortran. Or learning Lisp to help you learn VB. The added exposure can't possibly be bad, but it's not a specific gateway.
And mostly I wanted to point out to the other poster that "one of these things was not like the others". His "biblio" example was a happy accident. In five years of German instruction in high school, I don't recall getting much cross-over benefit from the three years of Latin I took. Or vice versa.
Well, except that including German in this list is a mistake. It is not a Romance language like French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and other less well-known languages. German is a Germanic language (surprise!), like English and Swedish. English (much moreso German) have lots of words with roots in Latin because of the long-term occupation by the Roman Empire and later the influence of the Catholic Church.
This is exactly why I've never subscribed. I am to the left of the American Left, but I enjoyed reading their articles by Camille Paglia because she was so clearly out of bounds. You couldn't put her in a category at all. Sometimes I couldn't understand her at all either, but at least when I could I found her writing engaging and thought-provoking. I do not have this same reaction to people like Horowitz.
/. or K5 if one of them had a more Salon-ish look/feel/slant to things.
Also, I think the guy they got to replace Keillor as an advice columnist is just plain boring. I would've much preferred another niche celebrity doing the gig in his/her own way.
Some of their feature articles are great, and their AP feed somehow managed to feel well-done. Unfortunate that their financial troubles started about the same time their reporting and op/ed stuff all seemed to go downhill as well. I would've subscribed if people like Paglia and Keillor were still on board. At this point it's obvious that people will subscribe to community type sites (or at least donate to help the cause), I'd subscribe to something like fark.com or