salon.com? Are you crazy? Don't give those bastards any more hits than the ones they get from their desperately elitist SF readers. You might increase their advertising revenue. Concentrate on the colleges; hits don't help them at all.
A lot of people (including me) have lamented the name change from the cool-sounding Helix Code, but look at this from the FAQ:
We've changed our name to Ximian to provide trademark protection for our work. While our software is open source, and we encourage you to share and redistribute it, trademark protection means that you know where your software is coming from.
I guess since Helix Code is a scientific term, it's not trademarkable. Too bad, I liked it.
I'd like to say thanks a lot for that attitude - Age of Empires (2) is probably the only game I've played online and not been cheated on in. That's one of the factors that's made it the most enjoyable online game for me. Not having to worry every time you play, or think to yourself when you lose that you may not have lost fairly, makes playing online much more fun. Thanks again.
Yeah, no kidding. And the Bene Gesserit are a lot like the Aes Sedai, and Paul is a lot like Rand. That's because ROBERT JORDAN DOES NOT HAVE A SINGLE COGENT ORIGINAL THOUGHT in his overworked little brain. The Wheel of Time series is the most derivative piece of crap I've ever read.*
*Excludes Kevin J Anderson.
Not to bash him or anything, but he should really stick to his own work. His stuff with Dune is absolutely awful. Frank Herbert, above all was a writer who could weave complex themes through complex characters in a such a way that you were never aware that you were in the middle of an exposition. Anderson, on the other hand, wouldn't know subtlety if it hit him over the head with a sledgehammer. Herbert lets you figure things out for yourself over the course of the novel, Anderson tells you three times in the character's "thoughts."
On the other hand, I'm really looking forward to the Sci-Fi Channel's Dune miniseries in December. Looks like a good adaptation.
Damn, moderators, don't you see that little option for "redundant" right there? I've already seen at least 20 posts that say the EXACT SAME THING. Not that this is anybody's fault, though, except Roblimo's for actually appealing to/.ers' sense of humor. For God's sake, man, think before you post! None of these are funny, they all say the same thing, most of them along the lines of "I snort coke" and "I invented the internet" which were all blatantly repetitive and unfunny posts on prior political subjects. This whole article is stupid beyond imagination, so I refuse to post to it...oh, damn!
I also downloaded 7.2 before the/. effect took full force, and I'd like to comment on the PDF issue. While it's true that Netscape doesn't have a pdf plugin automatically installed (for license reasons others have noted), Konqueror does have it. And not only that, Konqueror is about 3 trillion times better than Netscape (about equal with the latest Mozilla). Just try it, it's great.
Points for the Grimey episode reference, but my point is that Gore is not exactly Richard Grimes, and therefore not in any sense a better choice than G.W. "Homer" Bush. He is no more articulate than Bush, or more intelligent. Any arguments to the contrary are based on the skewed vision of the candidates the media presents. And as far as the "hasn't worked for a damn thing in his life" reference to Bush, consider the difficult life of poor Albert Gore, who despite attempting to get through graduate school at a university in the state his father represented as senator, failed twice. Then he went straight into politics, using his father's name for recognition and consequently votes. I'm not suggesting Bush is the Abraham Lincoln of our generation, but please don't suggest the same about Gore.
First of all, he's not only really dim witted and stupid, he's woefully unqualified to hold the highest and most powerful office in the free world.
Most of this has been said before, but as long as media sheep like this poster keep repeating the "Bush is dumb; Gore is smart" mantra, I think it bears repeating. The intelligence difference between the candidates is HIGHLY exaggerated. Bush may not be Stephen Hawking, but neither is Gore. Every article to the contrary (as well as every article about how boring Gore is) is merely an example of the confirmation bias: The media prints stories that affirm their previous positions. Bush trips over his words in a speech? Print it. Bush makes an eloquent point? Ignore it. Gore babbles on for hours on end about lockboxes? Print it. Gore makes a succint, thruthful point? Ignore it. Let's not forget that Bush completed his MBA at Harvard, whereas Gore failed out of two postgraduate programs at Vanderbilt. If you want to disagree with Bush on the issues, fine. But not voting for him because the late-night talk show hosts told you he's stupid is no better than my not voting for Gore because I think his Presidential speeches will be boring.
How did this get modded up? This is not insightful. All he's doing is being argumentative. Whereas the first poster presented a list of evidence for his claim that Gore is a liar, this poster just says "take my word for it, those are wrong." Well, gee thanks. I'm sure if I post to a thread on a Microsoft topic saying, in effect, "Microsoft never acted as a monopoly. All those accusations are lies. I don't feel like presenting any evidence to the contrary, but I'm obviously of a superior intellect, so all of you should just believe me," I will find myself at -1 before I hit the submit button. Next time, if you're going to post, do 5 minutes of research and submit some evidence.
Asking a politician to legislate morality is like asking a fox to guard the henhouse.
Big corporations got the hurt on you? Vote Nader
And please, folks, don't forget to see the numerous posts above which quote Nader as quite often coming out in favor of legislating morality, specifically in terms of the entertainment industry.
The economic recession of the early 90's was caused by a lack of capital in our economic system, the result of Greenspan and the Fed raising interest rates, not the result of Republican tax-cuts. Let's not forget who makes the budget: Congress, not the President. So not only was trickle-down not responsible for the recession, it wasn't even in effect.
Wow, I can't believe someone is actually taking the time to type out twenty year old conserative dogma.
Well, yes, I suppose I could have just scanned in some pages from Smith's Wealth of Nations, but I would expect intelligent people would have already read it. Apparently not, though, since you think this "dogma" is only twenty years old.
It really bothers me when people say 'trickle-down' economics doesn't work just because some bastardized version of it in the 80's didn't make every person in this country fantastically rich.
So, if you want your tax refund to be $100-$200 more this year (about 4-5 dinners + movies"), then vote for Bush and feel better in the short term. But if you want interest rates to go down and for your money to work harder for less, then vote for Gore.
Or, alternatively, if you want your money wasted on an inefficient bureaucracy, vote for Gore. If you want a healthy economy with a healthy amount of liquid capital flowing through it, providing jobs for you and your children, vote for Bush.
1. Rich man dies. Passes equity, property to son, who promptly spends the rest of his life partying and frittering away the wealth his father acquired.
This money, of course, disappears into the ether, never to seen by society again. What people do not, unfortunately, realize, is that morality has nothing to do with economics. When the son is "frittering away the wealth his father acquired," that is A Good Thing. Who is getting this wealth he "fritters away"? The poorer people he has to pay for products and services. Thus, more people are gainfully employed, rather than recipients of the largesse of a charitable foundation.
So, in response to your question, society benefits more from the first scenario.
When it comes to matters of technology, programming, etc., I trust the/. editors in their decision making, just like I trust my favorite musicians' and actors' creative decisions. But for the love of God, stay out of politics! You clearly have no idea what on earth you're talking about.
First off, in Bush's tax plan, when you look at the entire thing instead of the tiny little bit Gore harps on in his overbearing debates, the top 1% pay MORE of the tax burden than they do now. MORE. MORE. MORE. Are you listening, or do I have to say it again? Now, they pay 62% of the tax burden, under Bush's plan, 67%. 67 > 62.
Also, if you're worried about the rich having more money, please read some Adam Smith, people. What do you think they're going to do with it? Keep it locked up in a chest under their bed? No! They spend it! On buying things from the lower 99%, which gives us the money.
I am begging the/. editors now, before I lose any more faith in them, please stop posting this drivel.
Here's my idea. Hire some old women about the age of your grandmother. Have them sit next to you while you're on the net. Would you go to sexwithmidgets.com with your grandmother sitting next to you? Neither would I.
No, but you might no go to find information about something like sexually transmitted diseases, either, which is of significantly greater importance than sexwithmidgets.com. The problem with censorware is not just the random blocking of completely innocuous sites, but its inability to distinguish sex for sex's sake and explicit images and text for health's sake. A page might have 'penis' and 'vagina' and 'sex' all over it, but it might also be a very important source of information.
As if Al Gore stood up in the Senate in 1991 and said, "Let's stop spending money on weapons and instead use it for this new-fangled 'internet'!" Right. Billions upon billions of dollars were spent on defense that year (and every other year for that matter), numbers that dwarf the spending on developing the internet. I'm sure Al Gore does not want to be thought of as the creator of our 1990's defense arsenal, but that spending went through during his tenure too.
So one of the things Gore blew tons of money on while he was in the Senate turned out to be good thing? Good for him. Getting money for something does not mean creating it, anymore than we would say Roosevelt created the H-Bomb or Agrippa built the Pantheon.
For great, easy-to-use, scalable open-source web application delivery, check out Enhydra by Lutris Technologies. It uses Java for easily programmable web applications, and comes with Director, which allows you to automatically connect servers for failover at the software level. Not only that, but it's free, or for a nominal fee, buy it and get support from Lutris. Also great is XMLC, which lets you take HTML (or other XML) pages, insert tags, and add in dynamic content very easily. Definitely worth at least downloading and trying out, it only takes about half an hour to learn the basics (assuming you know Java).
This is the worst part of the current H1B - we bring in lots of talented people, train them up in our stuff so we can make use of them, then send them back to their home country, full of knowledge on how we do business. Dumb! The U.S.'s major competative advantage is it's brainpower - if we don't try to keep our brainpower, then where does that leave us?
When will people learn that mercantilism is dead? Other countries are not like competing corporations, they're like customers. If we (and we don't) had all the smart people, who would we sell all that technology to?
Global economics IS NOT a zero-sum game. We don't get richer when other countries get poorer. We get richer when other countries get richer, because they buy our stuff, or they mass-manufacture things for us to buy at a lower cost.
For the love of God, people, read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. I know all you Nader people might not want to hear it, but without rich people, we'd all be screwed. Not that they're better than everyone and we need them to lead us, but we need them to buy our stuff and give us money (anti-competitive monopolizing notwithstanding).
Sorry, didn't mean to turn this into a rant about capitalism, but it seems like so many people on/. don't know how things work.
Slashdot Mirror
Note to netrat: when instulting others' intelligence, spell check your work. (he's to stupid)
salon.com? Are you crazy? Don't give those bastards any more hits than the ones they get from their desperately elitist SF readers. You might increase their advertising revenue. Concentrate on the colleges; hits don't help them at all.
A lot of people (including me) have lamented the name change from the cool-sounding Helix Code, but look at this from the FAQ:
I guess since Helix Code is a scientific term, it's not trademarkable. Too bad, I liked it.
...my Helix Code monkey?!
Signed,
Miffed Gnome User
I'd like to say thanks a lot for that attitude - Age of Empires (2) is probably the only game I've played online and not been cheated on in. That's one of the factors that's made it the most enjoyable online game for me. Not having to worry every time you play, or think to yourself when you lose that you may not have lost fairly, makes playing online much more fun. Thanks again.
Yeah, no kidding. And the Bene Gesserit are a lot like the Aes Sedai, and Paul is a lot like Rand. That's because ROBERT JORDAN DOES NOT HAVE A SINGLE COGENT ORIGINAL THOUGHT in his overworked little brain. The Wheel of Time series is the most derivative piece of crap I've ever read.* *Excludes Kevin J Anderson.
Can people please stop posting this in every single thread related to either the US or the rest of the world? I've seen it way too many times now.
Unless, of course, you want to vote Democrat. Contact your local Democratic Committee to learn more.
Not to bash him or anything, but he should really stick to his own work. His stuff with Dune is absolutely awful. Frank Herbert, above all was a writer who could weave complex themes through complex characters in a such a way that you were never aware that you were in the middle of an exposition. Anderson, on the other hand, wouldn't know subtlety if it hit him over the head with a sledgehammer. Herbert lets you figure things out for yourself over the course of the novel, Anderson tells you three times in the character's "thoughts."
On the other hand, I'm really looking forward to the Sci-Fi Channel's Dune miniseries in December. Looks like a good adaptation.
Damn, moderators, don't you see that little option for "redundant" right there? I've already seen at least 20 posts that say the EXACT SAME THING. Not that this is anybody's fault, though, except Roblimo's for actually appealing to /.ers' sense of humor. For God's sake, man, think before you post! None of these are funny, they all say the same thing, most of them along the lines of "I snort coke" and "I invented the internet" which were all blatantly repetitive and unfunny posts on prior political subjects. This whole article is stupid beyond imagination, so I refuse to post to it...oh, damn!
I also downloaded 7.2 before the /. effect took full force, and I'd like to comment on the PDF issue. While it's true that Netscape doesn't have a pdf plugin automatically installed (for license reasons others have noted), Konqueror does have it. And not only that, Konqueror is about 3 trillion times better than Netscape (about equal with the latest Mozilla). Just try it, it's great.
Points for the Grimey episode reference, but my point is that Gore is not exactly Richard Grimes, and therefore not in any sense a better choice than G.W. "Homer" Bush. He is no more articulate than Bush, or more intelligent. Any arguments to the contrary are based on the skewed vision of the candidates the media presents. And as far as the "hasn't worked for a damn thing in his life" reference to Bush, consider the difficult life of poor Albert Gore, who despite attempting to get through graduate school at a university in the state his father represented as senator, failed twice. Then he went straight into politics, using his father's name for recognition and consequently votes. I'm not suggesting Bush is the Abraham Lincoln of our generation, but please don't suggest the same about Gore.
Most of this has been said before, but as long as media sheep like this poster keep repeating the "Bush is dumb; Gore is smart" mantra, I think it bears repeating. The intelligence difference between the candidates is HIGHLY exaggerated. Bush may not be Stephen Hawking, but neither is Gore. Every article to the contrary (as well as every article about how boring Gore is) is merely an example of the confirmation bias: The media prints stories that affirm their previous positions. Bush trips over his words in a speech? Print it. Bush makes an eloquent point? Ignore it. Gore babbles on for hours on end about lockboxes? Print it. Gore makes a succint, thruthful point? Ignore it. Let's not forget that Bush completed his MBA at Harvard, whereas Gore failed out of two postgraduate programs at Vanderbilt. If you want to disagree with Bush on the issues, fine. But not voting for him because the late-night talk show hosts told you he's stupid is no better than my not voting for Gore because I think his Presidential speeches will be boring.
How did this get modded up? This is not insightful. All he's doing is being argumentative. Whereas the first poster presented a list of evidence for his claim that Gore is a liar, this poster just says "take my word for it, those are wrong." Well, gee thanks. I'm sure if I post to a thread on a Microsoft topic saying, in effect, "Microsoft never acted as a monopoly. All those accusations are lies. I don't feel like presenting any evidence to the contrary, but I'm obviously of a superior intellect, so all of you should just believe me," I will find myself at -1 before I hit the submit button. Next time, if you're going to post, do 5 minutes of research and submit some evidence.
And please, folks, don't forget to see the numerous posts above which quote Nader as quite often coming out in favor of legislating morality, specifically in terms of the entertainment industry.
The economic recession of the early 90's was caused by a lack of capital in our economic system, the result of Greenspan and the Fed raising interest rates, not the result of Republican tax-cuts. Let's not forget who makes the budget: Congress, not the President. So not only was trickle-down not responsible for the recession, it wasn't even in effect.
Well, yes, I suppose I could have just scanned in some pages from Smith's Wealth of Nations, but I would expect intelligent people would have already read it. Apparently not, though, since you think this "dogma" is only twenty years old.
It really bothers me when people say 'trickle-down' economics doesn't work just because some bastardized version of it in the 80's didn't make every person in this country fantastically rich.
Or, alternatively, if you want your money wasted on an inefficient bureaucracy, vote for Gore. If you want a healthy economy with a healthy amount of liquid capital flowing through it, providing jobs for you and your children, vote for Bush.
This money, of course, disappears into the ether, never to seen by society again. What people do not, unfortunately, realize, is that morality has nothing to do with economics. When the son is "frittering away the wealth his father acquired," that is A Good Thing. Who is getting this wealth he "fritters away"? The poorer people he has to pay for products and services. Thus, more people are gainfully employed, rather than recipients of the largesse of a charitable foundation.
So, in response to your question, society benefits more from the first scenario.
When it comes to matters of technology, programming, etc., I trust the /. editors in their decision making, just like I trust my favorite musicians' and actors' creative decisions. But for the love of God, stay out of politics! You clearly have no idea what on earth you're talking about.
First off, in Bush's tax plan, when you look at the entire thing instead of the tiny little bit Gore harps on in his overbearing debates, the top 1% pay MORE of the tax burden than they do now. MORE. MORE. MORE. Are you listening, or do I have to say it again? Now, they pay 62% of the tax burden, under Bush's plan, 67%. 67 > 62.
Also, if you're worried about the rich having more money, please read some Adam Smith, people. What do you think they're going to do with it? Keep it locked up in a chest under their bed? No! They spend it! On buying things from the lower 99%, which gives us the money.
I am begging the /. editors now, before I lose any more faith in them, please stop posting this drivel.
No, but you might no go to find information about something like sexually transmitted diseases, either, which is of significantly greater importance than sexwithmidgets.com. The problem with censorware is not just the random blocking of completely innocuous sites, but its inability to distinguish sex for sex's sake and explicit images and text for health's sake. A page might have 'penis' and 'vagina' and 'sex' all over it, but it might also be a very important source of information.
As if Al Gore stood up in the Senate in 1991 and said, "Let's stop spending money on weapons and instead use it for this new-fangled 'internet'!" Right. Billions upon billions of dollars were spent on defense that year (and every other year for that matter), numbers that dwarf the spending on developing the internet. I'm sure Al Gore does not want to be thought of as the creator of our 1990's defense arsenal, but that spending went through during his tenure too.
So one of the things Gore blew tons of money on while he was in the Senate turned out to be good thing? Good for him. Getting money for something does not mean creating it, anymore than we would say Roosevelt created the H-Bomb or Agrippa built the Pantheon.
For great, easy-to-use, scalable open-source web application delivery, check out Enhydra by Lutris Technologies. It uses Java for easily programmable web applications, and comes with Director, which allows you to automatically connect servers for failover at the software level. Not only that, but it's free, or for a nominal fee, buy it and get support from Lutris. Also great is XMLC, which lets you take HTML (or other XML) pages, insert tags, and add in dynamic content very easily. Definitely worth at least downloading and trying out, it only takes about half an hour to learn the basics (assuming you know Java).
When will people learn that mercantilism is dead? Other countries are not like competing corporations, they're like customers. If we (and we don't) had all the smart people, who would we sell all that technology to?
Global economics IS NOT a zero-sum game. We don't get richer when other countries get poorer. We get richer when other countries get richer, because they buy our stuff, or they mass-manufacture things for us to buy at a lower cost.
For the love of God, people, read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. I know all you Nader people might not want to hear it, but without rich people, we'd all be screwed. Not that they're better than everyone and we need them to lead us, but we need them to buy our stuff and give us money (anti-competitive monopolizing notwithstanding).
Sorry, didn't mean to turn this into a rant about capitalism, but it seems like so many people on /. don't know how things work.