Director x47: And while you're busy picturing running backs, I'll change those to Victoria Secret Models. Instead of charging the field, can we change that to running into the bedroom and tackling some otherVictoria Secret Models?
They spent millions of dollars doing it because PostDocs couldn't reliably access research material.
Man were they pissed when they figured out it wasn't enough, eh? I bet there is a solution coming to all this. Instead of a ban of P2P, maybe tighter priority constraints need to be maintained. Or better yet... maybe a company will get wise and offer a P2P service where you get top notch BW for your buck, while staying out of everyone else's way. RIAA would most likely try to shut that down, however.
We need a technology where we can quickly upload/download anywhere in the world at a relatively inexpensive rate, without any packet loss, blackouts, or slowdowns. Okay geeks: which one of you is going to create it and get rich?:)
At my university, P2P accounted for all major slow downs this year, even when taking into account a three day blackout. Yes, and that is because the hardware is slow to respond to the changes in software. Software changes will always be faster, because software is dynamic and hardware is static. We are already realizing how deprecated static forms of internet design can be; how long do you think it will take before we adapt our hardware to becomming more dynamic until there is a design balance between hardware and software? Okay geeks, now you can spooge.:)
The only reason you are suffering now is because when they designed the whole network at your school, they failed to account for music downloads. Once the rest of society catches up to P2P, they will adjust. Remember when BillG said, "640K ought to be enough for anybody."
Well the designers of your network said something similar.:)
So far it looks like the big corps in all aspects of our lives, have the upper hand. Well it would seem that according to Berman, the big corps are going the way of the dinosaurs IF they get in the way of progress. Supply and Demand. Should people see P2P as the answer, which they have, then anyone who is directing traffic against P2P could be in trouble. However I'm not suggestion that P2P is progress. What I'm suggesting is that should the world choose to embrace P2P as progress, then woe to anyone opposing it.
Why do you think the RIAA is putting so much force into their opposition of P2P? I think it's because they are aware of how hard it will be to fight P2P if the public embraces it fully. They are aware that if they can nip it in the bud, they can keep on trucking.
Marshall Berman said, in "All that is Solid Melts into Air", that you can't stop progress, and anyone that attempts to stop progress will be torn asunder by it. I'm paraphrasing with that statement, but you get the point. I find it ironic that the very elements the Bourgeois Elite employ seem to dethrone them, time and time again.
Agreed. Most un-geek people know there are dangers that go with the internet, and most of those people have a very superstition-based understanding of computers.
You should see how superstitious the people I know are when it comes to computers. I can't count the number of times someone has donned a panic-stricken look on their face when I told them something was wrong with their computer, the network or servers. They don't understand that it's my job to FIX the problem. Instead they panic, thinking the sky is falling.
You have to be soooo careful when you talk about computer problems with some people.
Who in their right mind would be able to read a site with that horrible tone of blue? And they aren't using PHP so we know the report is bogus, right guys?
Apparently when we speak, 80% of what is heard is how we say it, and the rest is a mix of everything else, with the actual message taking a thin piece of the pie. Maybe that's a factor?
It's the rattled M$-bashing tone that landed you on my foes list, but I browse at -1, so don't worry about it.
Okay. Fair enough. But I always cheer for David, not Goliath. You can cheer for whoever you want.:)
Mozilla can't do anything wrong as far as I'm concerned. They are playing catch-up to a giant who has zillion times the resource power and the will to use it to do harm to anyone that gets in the way. Microsoft represents everything evil in business and I don't think they could ever rectify themselves in my books.
To each their own, but I can't see how you would put me as a foe just because I have a different opinion than you about M$. Which post of mine put you over the edge?
The problem with MS's implementation is that it doesn't follow a sane policy, and uses some obscure combination of MIME-types, extensions, and magic bits sniffing. And that's what you get when you have a relatively large group of people making zillions of decisions about a product that is closed source without listening to the public or even examining the big picture first. M$ crams a whole pile of features into their products without really considering systems design and global impact, because no matter how negative the impact is, it only means that other software companies will suffer from the M$ gravity well through forced adaptation to M$ policy.
Because Mozilla is open source, it's better than any other closed source alternative. I have only three reasons why I use it:
1. Smart Features -- not bloat-ware.
2. Tab Surfing.
3. No spyware or ads.
The information exchange is one factor of why open source is better, however, consider this as well: every decision you make adds to the total inertia of a project. Therefore, when you base a product on open source, you are creating a momentum that is going to carry on through your whole project. By saying, "Yes, we will listen to our public", you are also saying that you will like your public, and your public will like you in the end.
Microsoft has never done that. They put you on hold, put you off, ignore you and they do what they want. How long can they continue to take that stance in the face of an angry public?
Marshall Berman said it best when he said you can't slow progress or stop it. You can only guide it. He goes on to say that anyone who tries to resist change is going to pay the price in the end. Well I can't think of any other company that has resisted change as much as Microsoft has - especially recently.
Yeah, unless there is some kind of governing body that has power over all countries, there is no way to ensure they will follow the rules. The only problem is that humanity is too childlike to govern themselves correctly. We all behave like idiots when we get a bit of power. So we are all pitted against eachother on this rock and we have no real way to get through it without sheer genius.
Why don't we let the computers govern us and make certain they are smart enough not to glitch out or start wearing humans link mink stoles. Alan Watts used to talk about this stuff all the time and people listened to him, or at least I thought they did. I think he had a number of good ideas.
The only impartial creature on earth is a computer.
The media companies should just give up these crappy pay alternatives to piracy.
You are so correct, IMO. The quality is what you should pay for. The problem is that big business is not currently designed to adapt to an economy where certain types of products are free. The only thing most companies know how to give away is spam and advertising and it's got to change anytime soon, without a catalyst. Companies will realize huge advantages to giving away certain products because of the rewards when customers buy other products or upgrades. I think it's all about your company's image these days and people will give you money if they know you're not a corporate dickhead. As the public's mind expands, the giant respects companies with integrity and ingenuity, and disdains companies that only want to take your money.
And since we're not talking about gun control, I won't bring up the ballistic fingerprinting that could also be used in software if you think about it. If we all had an identity on the web, companies could make it so that certain files are for your machine only. What's wrong with that? Sure there are risks but the gains are good, too. Establish the protections early and keep the open source community on your side because they are really smart cookies!
As an avid open source nut, I happen to think that we have a responsibility to show the idiots with big bank balances HOW to do it.... how to make money within an open source market. Why? Because if we don't they will keep fighting it and dragging it out until nobody profits (like what the RIAA keeps doing).
Someone needs to build the business model so that the rest will scramble to copy it and then this greed will be replaced with a bit of integrity and common sense.
Plus how does their financial situation now matter to an expo in 2004? Policy change can be slow. If they decide to stop attending these sort of events, they could save quite a bit in expenses, employee, travel, promotion... etc. It all adds up.
I just love Mozilla and I think this is a great way to help create some variety on the net. A little while ago, I started looking at rolling my own with Mozilla, and it looks pretty straightforward so I might try it when I can free up some time. The only question I have is about security. Is Mozilla safe after someone else has compiled their own version, or is this cautum dilato?
I certainly don't suggest installing a custom Mozilla browser from any porn sites!
Does anyone know if the spyware knuckleheads have exploited this feature yet, either?
Is it just me or was that National Geographic live broadcast about the pyramid chamber discovery a total waste of time and money? It's nice to have a show about the pyramids and the information contained within the show was fantastic, but they promoted it as being a great discovery show to try and lure a larger audience. They discovered pretty much nothing (for TV standards (skeleton & more passage)).
At one point I exclaimed to my wife that Osama Bin Laden was going to jump out at the end of the secret passage, but no such luck. The punch line is that at the end of the show, there was just another door, and they still hailed it as a great discovery.
The robot was COOL so I guess it wasn't a total waste of my time... but talk about lame endings.
I always figured this was because 3dfx was making inferior products. They had nothing at the time that could compare with Geforce. Are you saying that NVIDIA did something crooked? I mean... where it says "I think we all saw this one coming": for me that was because 3dfx was so far behind NVIDIA. Everyone was. I was surprised NVIDIA would want to buy them.
Slashdot Mirror
Director x47: And while you're busy picturing running backs, I'll change those to Victoria Secret Models. Instead of charging the field, can we change that to running into the bedroom and tackling some other Victoria Secret Models?
They spent millions of dollars doing it because PostDocs couldn't reliably access research material.
:)
Man were they pissed when they figured out it wasn't enough, eh? I bet there is a solution coming to all this. Instead of a ban of P2P, maybe tighter priority constraints need to be maintained. Or better yet... maybe a company will get wise and offer a P2P service where you get top notch BW for your buck, while staying out of everyone else's way. RIAA would most likely try to shut that down, however.
We need a technology where we can quickly upload/download anywhere in the world at a relatively inexpensive rate, without any packet loss, blackouts, or slowdowns. Okay geeks: which one of you is going to create it and get rich?
At my university, P2P accounted for all major slow downs this year, even when taking into account a three day blackout. :)
:)
Yes, and that is because the hardware is slow to respond to the changes in software. Software changes will always be faster, because software is dynamic and hardware is static. We are already realizing how deprecated static forms of internet design can be; how long do you think it will take before we adapt our hardware to becomming more dynamic until there is a design balance between hardware and software? Okay geeks, now you can spooge.
The only reason you are suffering now is because when they designed the whole network at your school, they failed to account for music downloads. Once the rest of society catches up to P2P, they will adjust. Remember when BillG said, "640K ought to be enough for anybody."
Well the designers of your network said something similar.
So far it looks like the big corps in all aspects of our lives, have the upper hand.
Well it would seem that according to Berman, the big corps are going the way of the dinosaurs IF they get in the way of progress. Supply and Demand. Should people see P2P as the answer, which they have, then anyone who is directing traffic against P2P could be in trouble. However I'm not suggestion that P2P is progress. What I'm suggesting is that should the world choose to embrace P2P as progress, then woe to anyone opposing it.
Why do you think the RIAA is putting so much force into their opposition of P2P? I think it's because they are aware of how hard it will be to fight P2P if the public embraces it fully. They are aware that if they can nip it in the bud, they can keep on trucking.
Is that what you want?
disable P2P uploads
:)
Marshall Berman said, in "All that is Solid Melts into Air", that you can't stop progress, and anyone that attempts to stop progress will be torn asunder by it. I'm paraphrasing with that statement, but you get the point. I find it ironic that the very elements the Bourgeois Elite employ seem to dethrone them, time and time again.
Supply and Demand will solve this problem.
Agreed. Most un-geek people know there are dangers that go with the internet, and most of those people have a very superstition-based understanding of computers.
You should see how superstitious the people I know are when it comes to computers. I can't count the number of times someone has donned a panic-stricken look on their face when I told them something was wrong with their computer, the network or servers. They don't understand that it's my job to FIX the problem. Instead they panic, thinking the sky is falling.
You have to be soooo careful when you talk about computer problems with some people.
There are some papers about P3P HERE.
I think that if it puts spammers, pr0n peddlers and other crooks on the ropes, I'm all for it.
Who in their right mind would be able to read a site with that horrible tone of blue? And they aren't using PHP so we know the report is bogus, right guys?
Apparently when we speak, 80% of what is heard is how we say it, and the rest is a mix of everything else, with the actual message taking a thin piece of the pie. Maybe that's a factor?
It's the rattled M$-bashing tone that landed you on my foes list, but I browse at -1, so don't worry about it.
:)
Okay. Fair enough. But I always cheer for David, not Goliath. You can cheer for whoever you want.
Mozilla can't do anything wrong as far as I'm concerned. They are playing catch-up to a giant who has zillion times the resource power and the will to use it to do harm to anyone that gets in the way. Microsoft represents everything evil in business and I don't think they could ever rectify themselves in my books.
To each their own, but I can't see how you would put me as a foe just because I have a different opinion than you about M$. Which post of mine put you over the edge?
The problem with MS's implementation is that it doesn't follow a sane policy, and uses some obscure combination of MIME-types, extensions, and magic bits sniffing.
And that's what you get when you have a relatively large group of people making zillions of decisions about a product that is closed source without listening to the public or even examining the big picture first. M$ crams a whole pile of features into their products without really considering systems design and global impact, because no matter how negative the impact is, it only means that other software companies will suffer from the M$ gravity well through forced adaptation to M$ policy.
With hive-mind intelligence permeating from geek herds, why has nobody come up with a clean solution to excess wiring and dust? My allergies!!!
Forget the silicon chips! What about the silicon left over from dead strippers?!
Because Mozilla is open source, it's better than any other closed source alternative. I have only three reasons why I use it:
1. Smart Features -- not bloat-ware.
2. Tab Surfing.
3. No spyware or ads.
The information exchange is one factor of why open source is better, however, consider this as well: every decision you make adds to the total inertia of a project. Therefore, when you base a product on open source, you are creating a momentum that is going to carry on through your whole project. By saying, "Yes, we will listen to our public", you are also saying that you will like your public, and your public will like you in the end.
Microsoft has never done that. They put you on hold, put you off, ignore you and they do what they want. How long can they continue to take that stance in the face of an angry public?
Marshall Berman said it best when he said you can't slow progress or stop it. You can only guide it. He goes on to say that anyone who tries to resist change is going to pay the price in the end. Well I can't think of any other company that has resisted change as much as Microsoft has - especially recently.
Yeah, unless there is some kind of governing body that has power over all countries, there is no way to ensure they will follow the rules. The only problem is that humanity is too childlike to govern themselves correctly. We all behave like idiots when we get a bit of power. So we are all pitted against eachother on this rock and we have no real way to get through it without sheer genius.
Why don't we let the computers govern us and make certain they are smart enough not to glitch out or start wearing humans link mink stoles. Alan Watts used to talk about this stuff all the time and people listened to him, or at least I thought they did. I think he had a number of good ideas.
The only impartial creature on earth is a computer.
Hands up!!! Hand over the bandwidth, punks. *snarl*
More kids on the block, the more M$ is kept in check, no?
The media companies should just give up these crappy pay alternatives to piracy.
You are so correct, IMO. The quality is what you should pay for. The problem is that big business is not currently designed to adapt to an economy where certain types of products are free. The only thing most companies know how to give away is spam and advertising and it's got to change anytime soon, without a catalyst. Companies will realize huge advantages to giving away certain products because of the rewards when customers buy other products or upgrades. I think it's all about your company's image these days and people will give you money if they know you're not a corporate dickhead. As the public's mind expands, the giant respects companies with integrity and ingenuity, and disdains companies that only want to take your money.
And since we're not talking about gun control, I won't bring up the ballistic fingerprinting that could also be used in software if you think about it. If we all had an identity on the web, companies could make it so that certain files are for your machine only. What's wrong with that? Sure there are risks but the gains are good, too. Establish the protections early and keep the open source community on your side because they are really smart cookies!
As an avid open source nut, I happen to think that we have a responsibility to show the idiots with big bank balances HOW to do it.... how to make money within an open source market. Why? Because if we don't they will keep fighting it and dragging it out until nobody profits (like what the RIAA keeps doing).
Someone needs to build the business model so that the rest will scramble to copy it and then this greed will be replaced with a bit of integrity and common sense.
That is exactly what I was going to say.
Now I can really get Spiderman by trapping him in another dimension! Mwhwhahahahha.
Plus how does their financial situation now matter to an expo in 2004?
Policy change can be slow. If they decide to stop attending these sort of events, they could save quite a bit in expenses, employee, travel, promotion... etc. It all adds up.
MacWorld reports:
I just love Mozilla and I think this is a great way to help create some variety on the net. A little while ago, I started looking at rolling my own with Mozilla, and it looks pretty straightforward so I might try it when I can free up some time. The only question I have is about security. Is Mozilla safe after someone else has compiled their own version, or is this cautum dilato?
I certainly don't suggest installing a custom Mozilla browser from any porn sites!
Does anyone know if the spyware knuckleheads have exploited this feature yet, either?
Hype or Tripe?
Is it just me or was that National Geographic live broadcast about the pyramid chamber discovery a total waste of time and money? It's nice to have a show about the pyramids and the information contained within the show was fantastic, but they promoted it as being a great discovery show to try and lure a larger audience. They discovered pretty much nothing (for TV standards (skeleton & more passage)).
At one point I exclaimed to my wife that Osama Bin Laden was going to jump out at the end of the secret passage, but no such luck. The punch line is that at the end of the show, there was just another door, and they still hailed it as a great discovery.
The robot was COOL so I guess it wasn't a total waste of my time... but talk about lame endings.
I always figured this was because 3dfx was making inferior products. They had nothing at the time that could compare with Geforce. Are you saying that NVIDIA did something crooked? I mean... where it says "I think we all saw this one coming": for me that was because 3dfx was so far behind NVIDIA. Everyone was. I was surprised NVIDIA would want to buy them.