They did actually catch on and was quite a business when it was shut down...and a profitable one.
The didn't sell as well as the palm did years later, but then, the palm has never sold as well as a $5 pocket calculator. (And compared to the newton, the palm is a pocket calculator.)
The newton I had was the original one with the original handwriting recognition. My hand writing is quite poor.
Still the newton was able to recognize my writing quite well.
I think the whole "newton handwriting sucks" concept is totally an urban legand. The newton didn't do %100 recognition therefore it sucked, and people (most of whom had never used one, or hadn't spent 10-15 minuts training a newton to read their handwriting)would spread this perception until it became another of the standard myths that "everyone knows".
Like "Macs are more expensive" "macs are not compatible", etc.
The newton's problem was that it was a bit too bulky. But the handwriting worked, the product WAS a success-- selling quite well, and the division was profitable at the time it was shut down (as was NeXT Inc. when it was bought.)
But since devices with less functionality were selling more (Eg the palm was selling more, but then the $5 pocket calculator was selling a whole lot more than the palm, so isn't the palm a failure by comparison?).... people called the newton a failure.
But the reality is, it wasn't.
Groupthink and knee-jerk religious animosity towards Apple has negatively impacted the countries productivity in a measurable way! Someone said that Episode 3 would result in 4 billions in less productivity for the US as people stayed out of work opening day to see it... by that measure, people's rejection of apple products without having actually evaluated them has probably caused hundreds of trillions in lost productivity.
Oh well, this irrationality only hurts the irrational.
And because you chose macs, you get superior performance and cost ratios.
I think its funny that both Microsoft and Sony are moving to PowerPC architecture chips for their next generation high-performance game boxes, but PC fans keep hoping Apple will switch to the IA for their desktops... I think these constant wishful stories are just proof that PC fans realize that the Power PC has better cost/perofrmance/power requirements than the Intel Architecture. (That is, more flops per wat, more flops per dollar, and more flops per square mm of die area, which is related to teh other two factors, resulting in higher performance for the computer.)
The powerPC has been superior to the intel architecutre since it was reduced to a single chip architecture... of course, ti has to be in order to compete, as Intel has an established base for its instruction set.
Choose the computer you like based on your personal criteria-- but its time for people who are insecure about their computer's to stop bashing the underdog in marketshare simply because it has better performance numbers.
Apparently you've never seen the show! They use statistics to predict specific events. Project trajectories back to the source without knowing where the bullet ended up, etc.
Capitalism has enslaved you? Jesus, you must have gone to public school.
If you think money is the root of all evil, have you ever asked yourself-- what is the root of all money?
The statements quoted above were apparently written by Ayn Rand, but they are inconsistent wiht her philosophy, and I think taken out of context.
IF not, she loved america so much she overlooked its flaws. I hope one day you understand the ideal she worshipped-- instead of the nationalist socialism that you are apparently taken with.
Pretty idiotic to not even know the definition of a cult. Sounds like they've heard of Ayn Rand, but never been exposed to anything she's ever written.
Or maybe they think its cool to accuse someone of holding exactly the opposite position that they do hold.
The problem is, too many idiots in this country hear that and think its true, and never bother to actually read what she did write.
I love the Anton Levay smear-- exactly the kind of idiotic irrelevant jab that passes for "discourse" in our adle-brained society.
Nations and society have no rights. Only individuals can have rights. Rand and Locke both recognize this, but Rand, unfortunately, forgets it a few sentences later.
Government is a disease masquarading as its own cure. It is no better than, in fact- it is just another name for- the mafia.
Nevermind that she's talking about a nation making a choice-- - she's talking about the rights of a collective, and confusing it with the rights of the individuals.
Nations can't make choices. Even democracies do not have the right to violate individual rights (Which she mentions, but doesn't seem to grasp.)
Our government is a criminal conspiracy that doesn't even follow its own laws-- and just because we are less enslaved than the people in the USSR, does not mean we are free.
As a reader and admirer of Ayn Rand, I do wish she, and other admirers of hers would apply her critical thinking towards this own country.
Individual rights are not subject to popular vote, thus taxation, the invasion of Iraq, and the mere existence of the government --- all of which require the violation of individual rights to carry out-- are all immoral.
Ayn Rand missed it, but the only logical conclusion of her philosophy is the support of anarchism.
At any rate, those leftist idiots have a good saying-- regime change begins at home.
Just because current entertainment is focused on instant gratification does not mean that it is necessary for it to be entertainment.
Summer popcorn movies are not the only kind of movie, and to say that those movies are dumb is legitimate-- how can you say that any other kind of movie would not be entertaining?
Intelligent drama is quite possible. It could also be quite profitable.
But too many people think that people are stupid and so they won't watch it.... the reality is-- people are stupid because its all they are fed.
Our society is oriented around breeding stupid sheep... and it is pretty successful at it.
But they being the majority does not make them any less stupid.
And there's real damage done here--- for instance, how many americans serving on jurors believe that fingerprints can be used to tie someone to a crime? Probably almost all of them-- and because they've seen a lot of BS TV shows where fingerprints are "proof" that the bad guy did it.
Hell, I bet most slashdot readers are under this misimpression.
But the reality is, fingerprints are not unique.
Hell, not even DNA is unique in the way that it is used. (To do an actual DNA match, you'd have to sequence the entire genome... which was only done finally within the last decade and they used a bunch of people's DNA, not one person's.)
Also the odds given for false matches are completely absurd, based on pseduo science.
But all this pseudo science presented in fiction is taken as reality.
Real people think that computers can be hacked really quickly and locks picked in 30 secons and fingerprints are unique. (And even more absurd, that you can tie a gun to a crime based on the markings on the bullets-- reading tea leaves is just as fruitful.)
Cause Numbers is full of blatent and subtle errors. Hell, they get everything wrong. I haven't seen an episode of that yet where they didn't make fundamental errors, as well, as lots of silly errors. Those scripts are just right out of someones head... I think this consultant is not being listened to, or is not being understood, or he really knows nothing about mathematics.
We still watch the show, though, because its hilarious-- you see these people make the most absurd statements with a straight face. IF ever you you think actors are cool, watch them make fools of themselves.
Its worse than it used to be too. It used to be TV shows and news programs had no clue about comptuers... and now they don't even try to pretend to be accurate.
Star Trek at least had some plausible theory for everything... Numbers has no excuse.
Especially since it trys to act like the point of the show is to show how useful math is (and then they run around chasing down hunches.)
You're confusing law with reality. Revealing trade secrets is clearly protected by the first ammendment-- just read it.
A law cannot repeal the constitution. A law that violates the constitution, like the one you mentioned, is not in effect the day it is written- its as if it doesn't exist (Marbry V Madison).
Furthermore, from a morality viewpoint, Its not clear that they are revealing secrets at all- most of their articles mention "secrets" taht are easily discerned from public information.
Ironically, you say this and then use benchmarks that effectively measure megahertz to say the raw processing power is not keeping up.
Frankly, the reality is, for any kind of serious work, there are no machines out there that are as fast as the PowerPC G5 series.
Apple has been ahead in performance since moving to the PowerPC. But people are in denial of it because they have some sort of machismo wrapped up in thinking their machine is faster (And there's more non-powerpc users out there than powerpc users.)
Re:document tracing technologies
on
New Mac System Specs
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've been in exactly this situation. I used to work for Compaq. I knew the product by one code name, my boss used a different one when talking to her boss. Her boss used a third when talking to his boss, and the board knew it by yet a fourth code name. Each variation of the product had its own code name as well. Furthermore, the hardware people and the software people on this product used different sets of code names- so when talking to my peers I had to use another term for it than when talking to my boss.
Granted, I pretty quickly learned all five code names because its damn hard to use two different names and keep straight which name to use with which person.
But this was in the early 90s. That QJ86 looks like an identifier that narrows the leak to a group... or it could be that the leaker made it up to avoid being discovered, and that's just a redherring and Apple has no product with a code name like that.
The fundamental problem is that you see government as the only solution to any problem. The economic analysis, as partially given by the post you're responding to- shows otherwise.
Government only makes problems worse, in this case by one-size-fits-all welfare subsidization of poverty.
Analysis of the welfare system shows that it increases poverty, it doesn't decrease it.
I believe they are not lazy, they are trapped in a situation where the government destroys jobs.
IF the government weren't paying all that money out in welfare, it wouldn't be collecting it in taxes... and those non-taxed dollars would be invigorating to the economy... creating more jobs, and thus providing more benefit to society than the welfare that is handed out.
Look at the social security system-- it takes a lot of from peopel their whole lives and then gives them a little back at retirement. IF they were able to keep that money, and invest it, the people who retired in 2002 after the crash would still be millionaires.... but the social security administration is certainly not paying them millions back in their ss checks.
People argue that Social security is important because it funds people who didn't pay into it-- well, the thing is, the cost of accidental death and disability is extremely cheap-- much less than social security takes in taxes-- even assuming everyone paying it is carrying two people who didn't pay into it.
ITs a total scam... but nobody ever does the math, they just believe that social security is a beneift and so they never look at the costs.
The reality is, private insurance is much more cost effective, and affordable by the poorest, -- and thats even with the social security program in place. GEt rid of social security, and private insurance would be even cheaper. (government subsidies undermine the market for a given service, thus causing prices to be higher for those who sell into this smaller market.)
Law and order existed in this very country before there were taxes, and when the federal government was not providing it via federal policing at the local level.
Remember, the federal income tax came in 1913 or so... the country experienced its greatest growth and greatest increases in the standard of living prior to the federal income taxes. (as a percentage basis, of course.)
Dark_requium nailed the points so very well, that he puts my original post to shame.
The basic reality is that most people aren't criminals. Those who are criminals-- those who want to exploit others-- are emboldened by being able to go to into government and pretend that their thievery has legitimacy.
They can do this because so many people in the population-- people who aren't criminals themselves-- endorse their criminality. They believe that the benefits of government outweight the cost-- and they believe this because that's what they've been told but they've never looked into it.
The judicial system is an excellent example: Where are the trials of government officials for the crimes that they have committed? You can say people who believe conspiracy theories about JFK are "tinfoil hat wearers" but Abu Grahaib is not a theory-- the laws were broken there. Waco is not a theory-- the proof is out there for anyone to see (now, many years later when most people are not looking into it, but just believing the falsehoods they were told at the time.)
Government schools do not teach logical thinking-- they don't teach a rational analysis of our current system. They glorify the founders and then glorify people who came after and undid all the things the founders warned against and fought (like income taxes, which did not exist prior to 1910, etc.)
Yes, some people are evil. IF you think these are the majority of people- you must regonize that government can't protect you from them. IF you think that they are the minority-- then what exactly is it about the nature of government that prevents the criminals from running it?
People are taught to worship government to the point that they think that anarchism means chaos.
That is a sad state of affairs, but it is considered canon much of the populace... to those who reject liberty, and libertarianism-- tell me exactly what it is that gives you the moral right to own people? (For socialism- as practiced by both the democrats and republicans is based on teh assumption that people are property- and the government has the right to control and tax its subjects.)
Drug laws are a great example- -they are not there to protect us from criminals, they are there to control the populace.
By what right? Certainly not the constitution, and certainly no logical/rational/scientific argument supports them. Yet both parties do, and the vast majority of american support one of those two major parties.
The TSA is just another agency who's sole purpose is to control the populace. Can anyone point to a major democrat or major republican who has called for its disbanding?
In the 60s people carried guns on planes. There were some hijackings, but the hijacking were NOT stopped by screening for guns (obviously proven by 9/11)... government can never do a good job here because its goal is not to protect people. On the other hand, the airlines, who would lose about a billion dollars every time a plane is hijacked, in the costs of the plane and in settlements with the victims, DO have an incentive to do a great job AND provide decent customer service.
So, why has government given itself yet another monopoly on a service-- in this case security at airports?
ITs obviously not to protect against hijackings (note 9/11 again-- which happened after government had control over airport security.)
Democracy is not an ideal to strive for-- there's a reason this country is not one.
In some ways a monarchy is better-- a king must always be in fear of an uprising that will topple him.
But a democracy works by getting %51 of the population to vote themselves a cut of the %49's income.
Its an advance auction on stolen goods.
Thus, democracy is not necessarily any more free.
A truely free society would be one where people are self governming, and liberty is protected.
Unfortunately, american (government) schools teach you that democracy is the best of all systems, and thus most people never consider that the "democratic republic" in this country is really quite oppressive.
Now you're starting to see it really happen-- with internal passports and an internal security police... etc.
The purpose of the government is not to clean the streets, and the purpose of taxes is not to help people-- the purpose of both of these things is to allow one group of people to live at the exepense of another.
Its often amusing how your political position can cause you to say things that go against what you'd normally say....
The "Ruling political class" is some amalgam of the democrats and the republicans, and both groups prevent debate about significant topics--espeically morality.
My basic morality is that people are not your property. This is a moral position that both democrats and republicans violate at will.
Both parties want people enslaved by taxes and absurd laws, and so they create this charade wher you are (like most americans) deluded into thinking its the other parties fault. And your republican counterparts are deluded into thinking its the democrats fault.
The reality is, the "Ruling Political Class" is both of these parties-- the socialist republic we have become (do you really think our elections are fair? Even if it were so, this is a republic.)
But your right-- the general public, including slashdot readers-- won't engage in debate. Who would consider the argument that taxes are immoral? (And yet, who can come up with a counter argument?)
We've all been trained to stop thinking about politics-- to reduce politics to a football game of hatred, whereby we blame everything on the "other party" and make them out to be evil.
I hate republicans as much as the next guy, but its amazing to me how my friends who are liberal will ascribe all evil to them, but never notice when democrats do the same exact things.
The reality is, the mafia is in control. Not the italian mafia, the political mafia. Our government is nothing more than a parasite and mechanism by which cowards use fools to enforce control over the populace-- and not for the populaces benefit.
If you actually think about politics for awhile, and look into economics, you quickly become an anarchist.
If government was worth paying for, taxes would be voluntary. But they aren't, and they aren't for a reason.
Government's role and purpose is to exercise exactly the kind of control you're wondering how they are exercising.
People don't debate politics? Could it be they were taught in *government* schools not to think about politics?
Hmm... I can think of no company in the computer space that has had more designs copied from apple. Hell, every Linux and windows GUI is a copy of the old Mac UI (and not a very good one at that.)
I can understand why Microsoft did it- they have little creativity and their culture stifles it.
But why did Linux GUI developers just copy the really poor Windows UI (which is a poor copy of the Mac UI)?
Sidebar-- if you're going to mention xerox in your response, don't bother. Apple licensed some ideas from xerox, paid them in Apple stock, and then created a user interface from them that went far beyond what xerox had in the lab, etc.
Yeah, anyone who looks into it can see the election is not fair-- there is no way to audit the electronic voting machines.
And yet peopel act as if this election is legitimate anyway.
Hell, excluding third party candidates from ballots, and debates, and from media coverage is so typical, that people never consider that it violates first ammendment rights (mc cain feingold, anyone?.. and using government money for "nonpartisan" debates like this one, is illegal)
This whole thing is rediculous-- Macs are CHEAPER AND FASTER THAN PCS. They have been for over a decade.
Slashdot became a joke when it was overrun with kids who think that macs are too expensive-- and all the real engineers left. (Notice I don't post here much anymore.)
You want a superior computer on a superior processor, switch. Don't expect apple to port to the x86-- its more expensive and less powerful than the PowerPC, so why should they port? Its not like they'd get windows compatibility in the deal.
Slashdot Mirror
The newton cost $399 or $499. Not a grand...
They did actually catch on and was quite a business when it was shut down..
The didn't sell as well as the palm did years later, but then, the palm has never sold as well as a $5 pocket calculator. (And compared to the newton, the palm is a pocket calculator.)
The newton I had was the original one with the original handwriting recognition. My hand writing is quite poor.
Still the newton was able to recognize my writing quite well.
I think the whole "newton handwriting sucks" concept is totally an urban legand. The newton didn't do %100 recognition therefore it sucked, and people (most of whom had never used one, or hadn't spent 10-15 minuts training a newton to read their handwriting)would spread this perception until it became another of the standard myths that "everyone knows".
Like "Macs are more expensive" "macs are not compatible", etc.
The newton's problem was that it was a bit too bulky. But the handwriting worked, the product WAS a success-- selling quite well, and the division was profitable at the time it was shut down (as was NeXT Inc. when it was bought.)
But since devices with less functionality were selling more (Eg the palm was selling more, but then the $5 pocket calculator was selling a whole lot more than the palm, so isn't the palm a failure by comparison?).... people called the newton a failure.
But the reality is, it wasn't.
Groupthink and knee-jerk religious animosity towards Apple has negatively impacted the countries productivity in a measurable way! Someone said that Episode 3 would result in 4 billions in less productivity for the US as people stayed out of work opening day to see it... by that measure, people's rejection of apple products without having actually evaluated them has probably caused hundreds of trillions in lost productivity.
Oh well, this irrationality only hurts the irrational.
And because you chose macs, you get superior performance and cost ratios.
I think its funny that both Microsoft and Sony are moving to PowerPC architecture chips for their next generation high-performance game boxes, but PC fans keep hoping Apple will switch to the IA for their desktops... I think these constant wishful stories are just proof that PC fans realize that the Power PC has better cost/perofrmance/power requirements than the Intel Architecture. (That is, more flops per wat, more flops per dollar, and more flops per square mm of die area, which is related to teh other two factors, resulting in higher performance for the computer.)
The powerPC has been superior to the intel architecutre since it was reduced to a single chip architecture... of course, ti has to be in order to compete, as Intel has an established base for its instruction set.
Choose the computer you like based on your personal criteria-- but its time for people who are insecure about their computer's to stop bashing the underdog in marketshare simply because it has better performance numbers.
Apparently you've never seen the show! They use statistics to predict specific events. Project trajectories back to the source without knowing where the bullet ended up, etc.
Its a bunch of jibberish.
Capitalism has enslaved you? Jesus, you must have gone to public school.
If you think money is the root of all evil, have you ever asked yourself-- what is the root of all money?
The statements quoted above were apparently written by Ayn Rand, but they are inconsistent wiht her philosophy, and I think taken out of context.
IF not, she loved america so much she overlooked its flaws. I hope one day you understand the ideal she worshipped-- instead of the nationalist socialism that you are apparently taken with.
Pretty idiotic to not even know the definition of a cult. Sounds like they've heard of Ayn Rand, but never been exposed to anything she's ever written.
Or maybe they think its cool to accuse someone of holding exactly the opposite position that they do hold.
The problem is, too many idiots in this country hear that and think its true, and never bother to actually read what she did write.
I love the Anton Levay smear-- exactly the kind of idiotic irrelevant jab that passes for "discourse" in our adle-brained society.
Yuck it up, sheep!
Nations and society have no rights. Only individuals can have rights. Rand and Locke both recognize this, but Rand, unfortunately, forgets it a few sentences later.
Government is a disease masquarading as its own cure. It is no better than, in fact- it is just another name for- the mafia.
Nevermind that she's talking about a nation making a choice-- - she's talking about the rights of a collective, and confusing it with the rights of the individuals.
Nations can't make choices. Even democracies do not have the right to violate individual rights (Which she mentions, but doesn't seem to grasp.)
Our government is a criminal conspiracy that doesn't even follow its own laws-- and just because we are less enslaved than the people in the USSR, does not mean we are free.
As a reader and admirer of Ayn Rand, I do wish she, and other admirers of hers would apply her critical thinking towards this own country.
Individual rights are not subject to popular vote, thus taxation, the invasion of Iraq, and the mere existence of the government --- all of which require the violation of individual rights to carry out-- are all immoral.
Ayn Rand missed it, but the only logical conclusion of her philosophy is the support of anarchism.
At any rate, those leftist idiots have a good saying-- regime change begins at home.
Just because current entertainment is focused on instant gratification does not mean that it is necessary for it to be entertainment.
Summer popcorn movies are not the only kind of movie, and to say that those movies are dumb is legitimate-- how can you say that any other kind of movie would not be entertaining?
Intelligent drama is quite possible. It could also be quite profitable.
But too many people think that people are stupid and so they won't watch it.
Our society is oriented around breeding stupid sheep... and it is pretty successful at it.
But they being the majority does not make them any less stupid.
And there's real damage done here--- for instance, how many americans serving on jurors believe that fingerprints can be used to tie someone to a crime? Probably almost all of them-- and because they've seen a lot of BS TV shows where fingerprints are "proof" that the bad guy did it.
Hell, I bet most slashdot readers are under this misimpression.
But the reality is, fingerprints are not unique.
Hell, not even DNA is unique in the way that it is used. (To do an actual DNA match, you'd have to sequence the entire genome... which was only done finally within the last decade and they used a bunch of people's DNA, not one person's.)
Also the odds given for false matches are completely absurd, based on pseduo science.
But all this pseudo science presented in fiction is taken as reality.
Real people think that computers can be hacked really quickly and locks picked in 30 secons and fingerprints are unique. (And even more absurd, that you can tie a gun to a crime based on the markings on the bullets-- reading tea leaves is just as fruitful.)
Cause Numbers is full of blatent and subtle errors. Hell, they get everything wrong. I haven't seen an episode of that yet where they didn't make fundamental errors, as well, as lots of silly errors. Those scripts are just right out of someones head... I think this consultant is not being listened to, or is not being understood, or he really knows nothing about mathematics.
We still watch the show, though, because its hilarious-- you see these people make the most absurd statements with a straight face. IF ever you you think actors are cool, watch them make fools of themselves.
Its worse than it used to be too. It used to be TV shows and news programs had no clue about comptuers... and now they don't even try to pretend to be accurate.
Star Trek at least had some plausible theory for everything... Numbers has no excuse.
Especially since it trys to act like the point of the show is to show how useful math is (and then they run around chasing down hunches.)
You're confusing law with reality. Revealing trade secrets is clearly protected by the first ammendment-- just read it.
A law cannot repeal the constitution. A law that violates the constitution, like the one you mentioned, is not in effect the day it is written- its as if it doesn't exist (Marbry V Madison).
Furthermore, from a morality viewpoint, Its not clear that they are revealing secrets at all- most of their articles mention "secrets" taht are easily discerned from public information.
Ironically, you say this and then use benchmarks that effectively measure megahertz to say the raw processing power is not keeping up.
Frankly, the reality is, for any kind of serious work, there are no machines out there that are as fast as the PowerPC G5 series.
Apple has been ahead in performance since moving to the PowerPC. But people are in denial of it because they have some sort of machismo wrapped up in thinking their machine is faster (And there's more non-powerpc users out there than powerpc users.)
I've been in exactly this situation. I used to work for Compaq. I knew the product by one code name, my boss used a different one when talking to her boss. Her boss used a third when talking to his boss, and the board knew it by yet a fourth code name. Each variation of the product had its own code name as well. Furthermore, the hardware people and the software people on this product used different sets of code names- so when talking to my peers I had to use another term for it than when talking to my boss.
Granted, I pretty quickly learned all five code names because its damn hard to use two different names and keep straight which name to use with which person.
But this was in the early 90s. That QJ86 looks like an identifier that narrows the leak to a group... or it could be that the leaker made it up to avoid being discovered, and that's just a redherring and Apple has no product with a code name like that.
The fundamental problem is that you see government as the only solution to any problem. The economic analysis, as partially given by the post you're responding to- shows otherwise.
Government only makes problems worse, in this case by one-size-fits-all welfare subsidization of poverty.
Analysis of the welfare system shows that it increases poverty, it doesn't decrease it.
I believe they are not lazy, they are trapped in a situation where the government destroys jobs.
IF the government weren't paying all that money out in welfare, it wouldn't be collecting it in taxes... and those non-taxed dollars would be invigorating to the economy... creating more jobs, and thus providing more benefit to society than the welfare that is handed out.
Look at the social security system-- it takes a lot of from peopel their whole lives and then gives them a little back at retirement. IF they were able to keep that money, and invest it, the people who retired in 2002 after the crash would still be millionaires.... but the social security administration is certainly not paying them millions back in their ss checks.
People argue that Social security is important because it funds people who didn't pay into it-- well, the thing is, the cost of accidental death and disability is extremely cheap-- much less than social security takes in taxes-- even assuming everyone paying it is carrying two people who didn't pay into it.
ITs a total scam... but nobody ever does the math, they just believe that social security is a beneift and so they never look at the costs.
The reality is, private insurance is much more cost effective, and affordable by the poorest, -- and thats even with the social security program in place. GEt rid of social security, and private insurance would be even cheaper. (government subsidies undermine the market for a given service, thus causing prices to be higher for those who sell into this smaller market.)
Law and order existed in this very country before there were taxes, and when the federal government was not providing it via federal policing at the local level.
Remember, the federal income tax came in 1913 or so... the country experienced its greatest growth and greatest increases in the standard of living prior to the federal income taxes. (as a percentage basis, of course.)
Dark_requium nailed the points so very well, that he puts my original post to shame.
The basic reality is that most people aren't criminals. Those who are criminals-- those who want to exploit others-- are emboldened by being able to go to into government and pretend that their thievery has legitimacy.
They can do this because so many people in the population-- people who aren't criminals themselves-- endorse their criminality. They believe that the benefits of government outweight the cost-- and they believe this because that's what they've been told but they've never looked into it.
The judicial system is an excellent example: Where are the trials of government officials for the crimes that they have committed? You can say people who believe conspiracy theories about JFK are "tinfoil hat wearers" but Abu Grahaib is not a theory-- the laws were broken there. Waco is not a theory-- the proof is out there for anyone to see (now, many years later when most people are not looking into it, but just believing the falsehoods they were told at the time.)
Government schools do not teach logical thinking-- they don't teach a rational analysis of our current system. They glorify the founders and then glorify people who came after and undid all the things the founders warned against and fought (like income taxes, which did not exist prior to 1910, etc.)
Yes, some people are evil. IF you think these are the majority of people- you must regonize that government can't protect you from them. IF you think that they are the minority-- then what exactly is it about the nature of government that prevents the criminals from running it?
People are taught to worship government to the point that they think that anarchism means chaos.
That is a sad state of affairs, but it is considered canon much of the populace... to those who reject liberty, and libertarianism-- tell me exactly what it is that gives you the moral right to own people? (For socialism- as practiced by both the democrats and republicans is based on teh assumption that people are property- and the government has the right to control and tax its subjects.)
Drug laws are a great example- -they are not there to protect us from criminals, they are there to control the populace.
By what right? Certainly not the constitution, and certainly no logical/rational/scientific argument supports them. Yet both parties do, and the vast majority of american support one of those two major parties.
The TSA is just another agency who's sole purpose is to control the populace. Can anyone point to a major democrat or major republican who has called for its disbanding?
In the 60s people carried guns on planes. There were some hijackings, but the hijacking were NOT stopped by screening for guns (obviously proven by 9/11)
So, why has government given itself yet another monopoly on a service-- in this case security at airports?
ITs obviously not to protect against hijackings (note 9/11 again-- which happened after government had control over airport security.)
Democracy is not an ideal to strive for-- there's a reason this country is not one.
In some ways a monarchy is better-- a king must always be in fear of an uprising that will topple him.
But a democracy works by getting %51 of the population to vote themselves a cut of the %49's income.
Its an advance auction on stolen goods.
Thus, democracy is not necessarily any more free.
A truely free society would be one where people are self governming, and liberty is protected.
Unfortunately, american (government) schools teach you that democracy is the best of all systems, and thus most people never consider that the "democratic republic" in this country is really quite oppressive.
Now you're starting to see it really happen-- with internal passports and an internal security police
The purpose of the government is not to clean the streets, and the purpose of taxes is not to help people-- the purpose of both of these things is to allow one group of people to live at the exepense of another.
Its often amusing how your political position can cause you to say things that go against what you'd normally say....
The "Ruling political class" is some amalgam of the democrats and the republicans, and both groups prevent debate about significant topics--espeically morality.
My basic morality is that people are not your property. This is a moral position that both democrats and republicans violate at will.
Both parties want people enslaved by taxes and absurd laws, and so they create this charade wher you are (like most americans) deluded into thinking its the other parties fault. And your republican counterparts are deluded into thinking its the democrats fault.
The reality is, the "Ruling Political Class" is both of these parties-- the socialist republic we have become (do you really think our elections are fair? Even if it were so, this is a republic.)
But your right-- the general public, including slashdot readers-- won't engage in debate. Who would consider the argument that taxes are immoral? (And yet, who can come up with a counter argument?)
We've all been trained to stop thinking about politics-- to reduce politics to a football game of hatred, whereby we blame everything on the "other party" and make them out to be evil.
I hate republicans as much as the next guy, but its amazing to me how my friends who are liberal will ascribe all evil to them, but never notice when democrats do the same exact things.
The reality is, the mafia is in control. Not the italian mafia, the political mafia. Our government is nothing more than a parasite and mechanism by which cowards use fools to enforce control over the populace-- and not for the populaces benefit.
If you actually think about politics for awhile, and look into economics, you quickly become an anarchist.
If government was worth paying for, taxes would be voluntary. But they aren't, and they aren't for a reason.
Government's role and purpose is to exercise exactly the kind of control you're wondering how they are exercising.
People don't debate politics? Could it be they were taught in *government* schools not to think about politics?
Hmm... I can think of no company in the computer space that has had more designs copied from apple. Hell, every Linux and windows GUI is a copy of the old Mac UI (and not a very good one at that.)
I can understand why Microsoft did it- they have little creativity and their culture stifles it.
But why did Linux GUI developers just copy the really poor Windows UI (which is a poor copy of the Mac UI)?
Sidebar-- if you're going to mention xerox in your response, don't bother. Apple licensed some ideas from xerox, paid them in Apple stock, and then created a user interface from them that went far beyond what xerox had in the lab, etc.
Wow, quite brilliant! I love that you think that an Apple G5 is "not an apple workstation", once Microsoft puts their software on it. LOL
So, once you put Linux on a PC or a Mac, they cease to be pcs or macs?
Yeah, anyone who looks into it can see the election is not fair-- there is no way to audit the electronic voting machines.
And yet peopel act as if this election is legitimate anyway.
Hell, excluding third party candidates from ballots, and debates, and from media coverage is so typical, that people never consider that it violates first ammendment rights (mc cain feingold, anyone?.. and using government money for "nonpartisan" debates like this one, is illegal)
This whole thing is rediculous-- Macs are CHEAPER AND FASTER THAN PCS. They have been for over a decade.
Slashdot became a joke when it was overrun with kids who think that macs are too expensive-- and all the real engineers left. (Notice I don't post here much anymore.)
You want a superior computer on a superior processor, switch. Don't expect apple to port to the x86-- its more expensive and less powerful than the PowerPC, so why should they port? Its not like they'd get windows compatibility in the deal.
The CPD is a private organization that is using PUBLIC MONEY and it is illegally using public money.
Thus it is violating property rights. Badnarik and others are trying to get them to stop.
They got that money from the federal government only because they agreed to run non-partisan debates. (not "bipartison"- non partisan)