Didn't we used to call these people political philosophers?
Also, it seems to me that globalisation is too large a subject to be resolved in a few editorials. here are Oxfam's more considered views on the subject.
There's a new site, Gagpipe [gagpipe.com], that sifts through the best comedy sites around (e.g satirewire, the onion) and allows you to navigate them all. It's in beta now, but is shaping up to be this: rather good.
Anything by O'Reilly is good, especially Running Linux and Linux in a nutshell.
An excellent book aimed a competent users converting to unix is Jon Lassers' Think Unix.
>1.Sexually explicit images of children, which were even classified on-air as being "obscene" by a former head of the Obscene >Publications Branch, were shown to the >unsuspecting viewing public. Broadcasting this foul artwork must surely have provided >cheap titillation to any perverts watching the programme.
The FORMER head was giving snap judgements. This section was showing how the people who decide what's obscene simply pull arbitrary judgements from thin air (for instance, a barbie doll with a penis attached to it isn't unacceptable, a womens naked body with a childs head grafted on isn't unacceptable, but a barbie doll with a penis attached and a childs head is)
>* Mockery was made of last summer's anti-paedopile protests by concerned mothers. It is simply unacceptable to criticise the >genuine fears of honest law-abiding citizens in this >manner.
These protests were absolutely disgusting. They were made by ill-informed people (banners used often had peadophile spelt incorrectly), their fears were totally illegitimate, and the hysteria came to such heights that a peadiatritcian was chased from her home my a mob. It is perfectly acceptable to mock peoples fears if they are ill advised fears that harmed innocent people. (We do not still respect the fears of the German people during krystallnacht for instance)
>* The sickening music of the notorious American paedophile rap musician "JLb-8" was openly promoted on this programme.
Is this letter a joke? (If so I shall continue writing as I'm rather enjoying this). Anyhow, JLb-8 is entirely ficticious, and this section of the programme satirised both the tabloid media's sensationalist views of rappers, and how young, middle class children buy music by people like eminem, despite it not being to do with anything they have, or will ever, experience.
>Numerous celebrities, including members of parliament, newscasters and a musician were ridiculed by their unsuspecting >involvement with this programme.
Celebrities thrust themselves into the public eye deliberatly, and as such are liable to be ridiculed, if they wanted to avoid such ridicule, they could have done the tiniest bit of reaserch into what they were saying. This section also made a valid point; that celebrities will endorse anything, so we cannot trust them alone to 'sell' a charity.
> Worst of all, real children appeared in this programme. It is clearly wrong to expose them to this sinister subject matter at such a >tender age. The experiences of this programme may permanently damage these poor infants.
This is a disgusting attitude in my opinion. Surely we should expose children in order to educate them about peadophilla, sex and other taboo subjects, rather than keep them in the dark (to maintain the victorian notion of childhood innocence). Knowledge of peadophillia means the child is more likely to report this crime in the unlikely event that they expereince it.
Futhermore this 'crusade for innocence' has resulted in Britain having the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in europe, as when this innocent child becomes a teenager they will be pressured to have sex, and because they know so little about it (contraception, and how to say 'no') they do it, and ruin their lives by becoming pregnant. This is why the final thing in the programme is a young teenager saying she will lose her virginity 'tomorrow, maybe'.
That's all I can think of right now, and this as been written pretty hastily so don't be suprised if there are copious spelling mistakes
P.S. I'm pretty sure that this 'open letter' was one big joke.
I've noticed this build doesn't include many new features, but I guess that's OK as long as it's stable (which it is!).
Anyhoo, here's my 'most wanted' improvements and features:
Soon:
HTML compressor/validator for composer,
Nicer icons (for favourites and navigation toolbar),
(more) responsive GUI,
java installed by default,
dictionary.
The future:
babelfish translator,
voice/gesture control?,
jabber built in.
Surely the whole reason for having polling booths and ballot boxes is so that the people, of all and every party get to count themselves, and the losers (and winners) can't appeal beacause they Counted.
Couldn't this technology be used to manipulate votes?
Sorry about the programme link, It's not been uploaded yet. An article about the programme is here and on that page (left side) there are links to realaudio versions of some of the interviews from the show.
As a British citizen, I'm mainly disgusted by the attitude of many (but not all) americans towards energy conservation.
Per person, US citizens use about a third more energy than western eurpeans. This is not because they have a more develped lifestyle, but because they mainly can't be bothered to save energy. I Think this can be attreibuted to many things, but here are a few off the top of my head:
1)Since america is a large country, people drive long distances. Petrol is very cheap in the US compared to the UK. SUVs also seem to be very popular
2)The government seems to offer few incentives to save energy.
3)Laziness
4) Scepticism
Though there is concencus among scientists that global warming is happening, and a look at the facts will probably lead you to realise we are the main cause, many people deny it is happening at all. I consider this an incredibly small minded and dangerous attitude.
In the UK, children are taught about global warming and the scince behind it in Geography lessons at school, does this happen in the US?
coincidentily, Radio 4 had a programme last night about attitudes to energy conservation in the US. They offer a 'listen again' service over the web, so you can listen to the programme in Realaudio format here
I've installed it, and other than a minor installation problem (apparently it wasn't in gzip format, despite the extension being tar.gz) I've had no problems with it all day.
If you though 0.9.1 was good, this is even better and seems a little faster (though not a huge improvement on 9.1)
Also, if you have had problems with mozilla fonts (overlapping etc) in mandrake 8.0, you can fix it by forcing the 'adobe-hectavia' font.
I read a pre-production script witha few extra scenes, for example one in which Obi-Wan lets his Lightsaber 'battery' run down, and another when their sub almost falls off a waterfall opon surfacing in Theed. Does anyone know if these were ever shot?
One thing Katz seems to be forgetting, is that in the end its up to the consumers to decide what product is a sucess and what isn'y. Microsoft products won't suceed purely because they're microsoft products - they'll succeed because consumers believe them to be the best, and so buy them
Katz seems to think that everything MS does performs well, when this is not the case, just look at WebTV.
I thought katz's tone was somewhat melodramitic, but anyhow I just cant seen MS 'owning the internet', given its strong links with UNIX, If companies chose MS, it's generally because it suits them better - like MS, they're just businesses, trying to make as much profit as possible.
So If you want linux to succeed, or MS to fail, why not try improving Linux in anyway you can, be that through bug reporting, programming or simply advising your friends to use it.
Much as people view MS as some evil force, they don't have some sort of control over people - most people will use their products because it's simplest or best them. If you want Linux to succeed, just try and make it better.
I rembeber reading a report somewhere else that people spend 50% of their online time each month viewing pr0n sites.
Am to believe there are people who's entire internet experience is these four sites and pr0n?
Published on the web?
on
Just For Fun
·
· Score: 2
Why isn't this book published on the web? Wouldnt torvalds want to 'opensource' his autobigoraphy?
I just want to read some of it first to make sure the tone isn't too self congratulatory.
For $500 million, you could most likely send more than a dozen probes out - There's very little than requires actual people in space nowadays. It's a pity that countries have to burn money on such 'prestige' missions.
Is this the Same Mundie that led microsoft into disregarding the Inernet, and who then went on to mastermind the Famous Web TV Disaster? I don't think I'll be taking his opinion for much, and nor should anyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't we used to call these people political philosophers?
Also, it seems to me that globalisation is too large a subject to be resolved in a few editorials. here are Oxfam's more considered views on the subject.
There's a new site, Gagpipe [gagpipe.com], that sifts through the best comedy sites around (e.g satirewire, the onion) and allows you to navigate them all. It's in beta now, but is shaping up to be this: rather good.
Anything by O'Reilly is good, especially Running Linux and Linux in a nutshell. An excellent book aimed a competent users converting to unix is Jon Lassers' Think Unix.
Mandrake Disk 2 is not mandatory, but I'd reccomend getting it as it contains lots of cool programs.
The observer newspaper ran two stories on this today, a roundup here, and an interesting comment by John Naughton here.
Everything in that reply is right and true.
A dictionary for one.
>1.Sexually explicit images of children, which were even classified on-air as being "obscene" by a former head of the Obscene >Publications Branch, were shown to the >unsuspecting viewing public. Broadcasting this foul artwork must surely have provided >cheap titillation to any perverts watching the programme.
The FORMER head was giving snap judgements. This section was showing how the people who decide what's obscene simply pull arbitrary judgements from thin air (for instance, a barbie doll with a penis attached to it isn't unacceptable, a womens naked body with a childs head grafted on isn't unacceptable, but a barbie doll with a penis attached and a childs head is)
>* Mockery was made of last summer's anti-paedopile protests by concerned mothers. It is simply unacceptable to criticise the >genuine fears of honest law-abiding citizens in this >manner.
These protests were absolutely disgusting. They were made by ill-informed people (banners used often had peadophile spelt incorrectly), their fears were totally illegitimate, and the hysteria came to such heights that a peadiatritcian was chased from her home my a mob. It is perfectly acceptable to mock peoples fears if they are ill advised fears that harmed innocent people. (We do not still respect the fears of the German people during krystallnacht for instance)
>* The sickening music of the notorious American paedophile rap musician "JLb-8" was openly promoted on this programme.
Is this letter a joke? (If so I shall continue writing as I'm rather enjoying this). Anyhow, JLb-8 is entirely ficticious, and this section of the programme satirised both the tabloid media's sensationalist views of rappers, and how young, middle class children buy music by people like eminem, despite it not being to do with anything they have, or will ever, experience.
>Numerous celebrities, including members of parliament, newscasters and a musician were ridiculed by their unsuspecting >involvement with this programme.
Celebrities thrust themselves into the public eye deliberatly, and as such are liable to be ridiculed, if they wanted to avoid such ridicule, they could have done the tiniest bit of reaserch into what they were saying. This section also made a valid point; that celebrities will endorse anything, so we cannot trust them alone to 'sell' a charity.
> Worst of all, real children appeared in this programme. It is clearly wrong to expose them to this sinister subject matter at such a >tender age. The experiences of this programme may permanently damage these poor infants.
This is a disgusting attitude in my opinion. Surely we should expose children in order to educate them about peadophilla, sex and other taboo subjects, rather than keep them in the dark (to maintain the victorian notion of childhood innocence). Knowledge of peadophillia means the child is more likely to report this crime in the unlikely event that they expereince it.
Futhermore this 'crusade for innocence' has resulted in Britain having the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in europe, as when this innocent child becomes a teenager they will be pressured to have sex, and because they know so little about it (contraception, and how to say 'no') they do it, and ruin their lives by becoming pregnant. This is why the final thing in the programme is a young teenager saying she will lose her virginity 'tomorrow, maybe'.
That's all I can think of right now, and this as been written pretty hastily so don't be suprised if there are copious spelling mistakes
P.S. I'm pretty sure that this 'open letter' was one big joke.
I've noticed this build doesn't include many new features, but I guess that's OK as long as it's stable (which it is!).
Anyhoo, here's my 'most wanted' improvements and features:
Soon: HTML compressor/validator for composer, Nicer icons (for favourites and navigation toolbar), (more) responsive GUI, java installed by default, dictionary.
The future: babelfish translator, voice/gesture control?, jabber built in.
What are yours?
I've put up a mirror here.
Couldn't this technology be used to manipulate votes?
NASA will send a blue collar slob into space in the next ten years. I fear the accuracy of simpsons writers.
Sorry about the programme link, It's not been uploaded yet. An article about the programme is here and on that page (left side) there are links to realaudio versions of some of the interviews from the show.
1)Since america is a large country, people drive long distances. Petrol is very cheap in the US compared to the UK. SUVs also seem to be very popular
2)The government seems to offer few incentives to save energy.
3)Laziness
4) Scepticism
Though there is concencus among scientists that global warming is happening, and a look at the facts will probably lead you to realise we are the main cause, many people deny it is happening at all. I consider this an incredibly small minded and dangerous attitude.In the UK, children are taught about global warming and the scince behind it in Geography lessons at school, does this happen in the US?
coincidentily, Radio 4 had a programme last night about attitudes to energy conservation in the US. They offer a 'listen again' service over the web, so you can listen to the programme in Realaudio format hereI've installed it, and other than a minor installation problem (apparently it wasn't in gzip format, despite the extension being tar.gz) I've had no problems with it all day. If you though 0.9.1 was good, this is even better and seems a little faster (though not a huge improvement on 9.1) Also, if you have had problems with mozilla fonts (overlapping etc) in mandrake 8.0, you can fix it by forcing the 'adobe-hectavia' font.
I read a pre-production script witha few extra scenes, for example one in which Obi-Wan lets his Lightsaber 'battery' run down, and another when their sub almost falls off a waterfall opon surfacing in Theed. Does anyone know if these were ever shot?
I wonder if this made a difference.
One thing Katz seems to be forgetting, is that in the end its up to the consumers to decide what product is a sucess and what isn'y. Microsoft products won't suceed purely because they're microsoft products - they'll succeed because consumers believe them to be the best, and so buy them Katz seems to think that everything MS does performs well, when this is not the case, just look at WebTV.
I thought katz's tone was somewhat melodramitic, but anyhow I just cant seen MS 'owning the internet', given its strong links with UNIX, If companies chose MS, it's generally because it suits them better - like MS, they're just businesses, trying to make as much profit as possible. So If you want linux to succeed, or MS to fail, why not try improving Linux in anyway you can, be that through bug reporting, programming or simply advising your friends to use it. Much as people view MS as some evil force, they don't have some sort of control over people - most people will use their products because it's simplest or best them. If you want Linux to succeed, just try and make it better.
I rembeber reading a report somewhere else that people spend 50% of their online time each month viewing pr0n sites. Am to believe there are people who's entire internet experience is these four sites and pr0n?
Why isn't this book published on the web? Wouldnt torvalds want to 'opensource' his autobigoraphy? I just want to read some of it first to make sure the tone isn't too self congratulatory.
Couldn't MS write a firewall for XP? or perhaps shops selling it could reccomend a visit to zonelabs site everytime someone buys it.
For $500 million, you could most likely send more than a dozen probes out - There's very little than requires actual people in space nowadays. It's a pity that countries have to burn money on such 'prestige' missions.
Is this the Same Mundie that led microsoft into disregarding the Inernet, and who then went on to mastermind the Famous Web TV Disaster? I don't think I'll be taking his opinion for much, and nor should anyone else.
I'm just hoping that they've perfected this stuff by the time I'm around 50 and heart disease starts being a problem for me.
Hopefully, they'll have a nanobot that can go about my arteries, sweeping cholestrol away!