Re:Enough with the optimism
on
David Brin On LOTR
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't think I agree with your reading of Tolkien. Tolkien's writing ends with the dawn of the age of man - the end of the mystical Third Age marks the close both the Silmarillion and the LotR saga.
I find a central theme in Tolkien to be the passing of the mystical third age into the fourth age of man, and with it a passing of all that has come before. No longer will there be mystical eternal elves; the world is broken and round, and magic is passing from the world. We enter now into the unknown, the age of man. In man, Tolkien sees not the dichotomy of good and evil, the old heroic notions of old that are so present in his talks of past ages. Tolkien sees an unpredictable free will, no disposition to heroics, good or evil. Man is the great enigma, in both his complete unpredictability and his untethered potential.
Tolkien, in this writing, is much like C.S. Lewis - Lewis believed that the world had become devoid of the certain magic and mysticism of being alive. With the decline of religion and morality, the world had lost its spark of charm and character. While Lewis took it as his mission to "re-enchant" the world, I feel that Tolkien did not take so much of a reconstructionist attitude; rather, he recognized the passing and change, and put his faith, albeit haltingly, in the self-creation and free will of mankind. He was not optimistic. He was not pessimistic. He was truly unsure of the future to come, and merely hoped for the best. It is this unpredictability, this certainty in nothing but change, this is what Tolkien was truly attempting to express.
The Lord of the Rings is Tolkein's last hurrah of heroism. It is the final shout of classical myths and larger than life heroes, one last tale to remind us of the fading magic of being alive. Just as we all must eventually lay down the books themselves, eventually we too must emerge from this classical perspective into our own contemporary worldview. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't still lessons to be learned from the tales of our enchanted past, the middle-earth.
There are quite a few people getting far too uppity about this. And while it is a goal worth taking political action over, I think one of the core problems with the Open Source movement is the fact that we don't know when to back down. Our collective character wants to resolve the problem, crush the "evil bad guys" (Microsoft and proprietary giants) and save the future of computing for people everywhere - seriously, it's our mindset. We grew up watching star wars and star trek, right? As a movement we've been overcome by the blindness and fervor that we decry in the corporations and government we struggle against.
If we truly want freedom, we should be fighting for the freedom to choose - the freedom to pick the best tool for the job. The freedom to use open source if it is better, or to pick proprietary software if it's the best tool for the job. Passing bills mandating the use of open source in the government takes away the freedom of the government to do its job as efficiently as possible. We're taking away from their freedom. Using the exact same method that the MPAA, RIAA, and other corporate entities make use of things like the DMCA to impact our own freedom. And what's the point of inflicting one "freedom" on the government just to take away another?
I've bought a case and other parts from directron.com and recently orchestrated a large purchase for a school computer systems lab from mwave. Both were excellent in service, price, and speed. I would highly recommend either.
The IBM is different in the fact that it uses permanent magnets to focus the electrons into tight beams to hit the phosphor screen, while it seems that the Candescent model uses small holes on a grid placed over the cathode that direct the electrons into a focused pattern.
once again, he who assumes that my name comes from Ender's game is sadly mistaken. Ender Sai was the name of a thief in the fourth chapter of Baldur's Gate. You met him after you invaded and destroyed a camp of big orcs (I think). Sorry if I confused you, but it's the truth.
Microsoft Mobile Internet Toolkit Beta 2
Accompanying this Agreement is a prerelease copy of the Microsoft software identified above, which includes software and related documentation and information (collectively the "Software").
This means that this is a beta release of a toolkit, which is somewhat different than a development tool, (i.e. a compiler, or an IDE). This also means that the term the "Software" refers to the toolkit and not code that you've written...thus, essentially what that clause is saying is that you can't redistribute the Microsoft Mobile Internet Toolkit Beta 2 code with your GPL'ed source, presumably because they want to track downloads of the source. Yay.
Well, according to Bill Gates, the GPL is like Pacman. If this is true, I would certainly hope that Gabe from Penny Arcade doesn't get to it any time soon.
You seem convinced that Linux as an operating system cannot take on both the server and the desktop markets. I, however, would like to remind you that Linux itself is just the kernel; not the full operating system. That's why we can have distributions like Mandrake, which do a great job on the desktop, as well as specialized server distros, router distros (coyotelinux), and others. So, I really don't think anything would be a "tradgedy" if Linux tried to take both markets, as it is already moving in that direction, and seems to be doing fine.
"Proper censorship" usually does do a great job in blocking just about every legit site you want to go to.
The other day, I was trying to find a nice console based mail program to use at school (don't ask why I didn't just use sendmail). I fired up netscape, and headed over to freshmeat.net
At the time, I was in the computer systems lab, our fairly nice all-Linux lab full of dual celerons. Until recently, we had enjoyed unrestricted access while the rest of the (windows-driven) school network had to be filtered. However, the administration got to our dedicated line as well, and before you know it, I couldn't access freshmeat.net
Yes, the name is not really condusive to being a software site, but it's just merely another example of good sites being blocked by bad censorware.
Well, I don't know what MUN you may be talking about, but at my school (TJHSST), anyone who so desires can join model UN. In fact, the club is very diverse, and there are people with widely differing viewpoints. There are staunchly conservative folks, and passionate liberals. I'm sure there are those who share the viewpoint on speaking out on any injustice anywhere. I know for sure that there are folks who are deeply involved on the topic of Tibetan injustices, among others. So, I feel deeply sorry for you if the Model UN you are familiar with excludes you or others, or is composed of folks with only one viewpoint.
Then again, if we were actually to talk about how to get things done, the most probable course of action would be to go through a relevant international body, as the Chinese government wouldn't give a damn about what you said they were doing.
So, let's assume we try to work with the UN to get something accomplished. Let's say we go through the UN Commision on Science and Technology. In the United Nations, and, in fact, all international multi-lateral bodies, there is a thing called National Sovreignty. The gist of it is that, because each of these International Bodies is voluntary, each country reserves the right to do whatever it wants. Usually, it is in the country's best interest to go along with the international body. However, if China does not want to accept our terms and allow Chinese citizens to access the internet, they certainly don't have to. The UN Commission on SciTech has no power to violate national sovreignty and enforce it's new regulations for China. Sorry to crush any idealistic hopes, but that's pretty much how it all works...
(By the way, Model UN was invaluable in the preparation of this topic)
I seriously think that Chinese governmental "information purification" wouldn't really have a great effect. Chinese citizens could just use public proxy servers or a host of other tools to circumvent any attempt the chinese government were to make.
Perhaps the only real step the Chinese government could take would be to "purify" the cafés in earnest, or, in other words, get rid of them completely.
The theme for the game is that you are "The Nameless One" - a freakish scarred being who cannot die. In fact, you first wake up in the game to be greeted by a talking skull telling you that you've come back to life once more, yet you cannot remember anything. Throughout the game, you find clues, and other secrets which sheds more light on your past life, or past lives. For example, at one point you wander into a cache of information for yourself that you constructed ages ago. The game doesnt move backwards through time, but there are flashbacks, memories, and other interesting developments that really make it seem like you are figuring out who or what you are. Quite a fun game - try it out some time.
Re:What is the "323" all about.
on
AI Movie Promo
·
· Score: 1
Nah. I always enjoy using them...it's quite fun sending people scrambling all over the web to figure them out if they don't know already. Sorry if you thought it dumbed down the post (gee, that phrase has been used a lot throughout the thread) but the message remains the same.
Good lord...I look up and see that over half the comments are "Linux is better than Winblows" or "Linux is gonna be hurtin when XP comes out". My friends, it appears that YHBT by this story. In fact, I believe that YHL. Why don't you all just HAND. Or if you don't want that, why don't you all start a flamewar concerning ninjas vs. pancakes; it makes about as much sense as flaming about Linux vs. Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think I agree with your reading of Tolkien. Tolkien's writing ends with the dawn of the age of man - the end of the mystical Third Age marks the close both the Silmarillion and the LotR saga.
I find a central theme in Tolkien to be the passing of the mystical third age into the fourth age of man, and with it a passing of all that has come before. No longer will there be mystical eternal elves; the world is broken and round, and magic is passing from the world. We enter now into the unknown, the age of man. In man, Tolkien sees not the dichotomy of good and evil, the old heroic notions of old that are so present in his talks of past ages. Tolkien sees an unpredictable free will, no disposition to heroics, good or evil. Man is the great enigma, in both his complete unpredictability and his untethered potential.
Tolkien, in this writing, is much like C.S. Lewis - Lewis believed that the world had become devoid of the certain magic and mysticism of being alive. With the decline of religion and morality, the world had lost its spark of charm and character. While Lewis took it as his mission to "re-enchant" the world, I feel that Tolkien did not take so much of a reconstructionist attitude; rather, he recognized the passing and change, and put his faith, albeit haltingly, in the self-creation and free will of mankind. He was not optimistic. He was not pessimistic. He was truly unsure of the future to come, and merely hoped for the best. It is this unpredictability, this certainty in nothing but change, this is what Tolkien was truly attempting to express.
The Lord of the Rings is Tolkein's last hurrah of heroism. It is the final shout of classical myths and larger than life heroes, one last tale to remind us of the fading magic of being alive. Just as we all must eventually lay down the books themselves, eventually we too must emerge from this classical perspective into our own contemporary worldview. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't still lessons to be learned from the tales of our enchanted past, the middle-earth.
There are quite a few people getting far too uppity about this. And while it is a goal worth taking political action over, I think one of the core problems with the Open Source movement is the fact that we don't know when to back down. Our collective character wants to resolve the problem, crush the "evil bad guys" (Microsoft and proprietary giants) and save the future of computing for people everywhere - seriously, it's our mindset. We grew up watching star wars and star trek, right? As a movement we've been overcome by the blindness and fervor that we decry in the corporations and government we struggle against.
If we truly want freedom, we should be fighting for the freedom to choose - the freedom to pick the best tool for the job. The freedom to use open source if it is better, or to pick proprietary software if it's the best tool for the job. Passing bills mandating the use of open source in the government takes away the freedom of the government to do its job as efficiently as possible. We're taking away from their freedom. Using the exact same method that the MPAA, RIAA, and other corporate entities make use of things like the DMCA to impact our own freedom. And what's the point of inflicting one "freedom" on the government just to take away another?
I've bought a case and other parts from directron.com and recently orchestrated a large purchase for a school computer systems lab from mwave. Both were excellent in service, price, and speed. I would highly recommend either.
Quick note,
CPL = Cyberathlete Professional League
NiP=Ninjas in Pyjamas, a counterstrike clan (i.e. a group of players banded together into a team)
As someone else has already pointed out, they do use two very different technologies.
Here is the candescent model.
Here is the IBM model.
The IBM is different in the fact that it uses permanent magnets to focus the electrons into tight beams to hit the phosphor screen, while it seems that the Candescent model uses small holes on a grid placed over the cathode that direct the electrons into a focused pattern.
speaking of puns...
so what do you get when you combine:
1.)Windows CE, portable yet powerful handheld OS;
2.)Windows ME, user oriented Windows mainstay, the sucessor to Windows 98;
4.)Windows NT, Microsoft's rocksteady corporate OS?
Why, quite obviously you get Windows CEMENT, the perfect OS to run on this system.
once again, he who assumes that my name comes from Ender's game is sadly mistaken. Ender Sai was the name of a thief in the fourth chapter of Baldur's Gate. You met him after you invaded and destroyed a camp of big orcs (I think). Sorry if I confused you, but it's the truth.
Rule 2: Never expect any real wit from anyone who assumes that my name is from ender's game. (Hint - check your Greek history bud)
that includes you too, eh?
to qoute a comment from k5:
Well, according to Bill Gates, the GPL is like Pacman. If this is true, I would certainly hope that Gabe from Penny Arcade doesn't get to it any time soon.
Here is the page (kinda) translated into English courtesy of systran.
http://www.citydesk.pt/produto_ezgo.htm
You seem convinced that Linux as an operating system cannot take on both the server and the desktop markets. I, however, would like to remind you that Linux itself is just the kernel; not the full operating system. That's why we can have distributions like Mandrake, which do a great job on the desktop, as well as specialized server distros, router distros (coyotelinux), and others. So, I really don't think anything would be a "tradgedy" if Linux tried to take both markets, as it is already moving in that direction, and seems to be doing fine.
Here is the team forming Voltron.
"Proper censorship" usually does do a great job in blocking just about every legit site you want to go to.
The other day, I was trying to find a nice console based mail program to use at school (don't ask why I didn't just use sendmail). I fired up netscape, and headed over to freshmeat.net
At the time, I was in the computer systems lab, our fairly nice all-Linux lab full of dual celerons. Until recently, we had enjoyed unrestricted access while the rest of the (windows-driven) school network had to be filtered. However, the administration got to our dedicated line as well, and before you know it, I couldn't access freshmeat.net
Yes, the name is not really condusive to being a software site, but it's just merely another example of good sites being blocked by bad censorware.
Well, I don't know what MUN you may be talking about, but at my school (TJHSST), anyone who so desires can join model UN. In fact, the club is very diverse, and there are people with widely differing viewpoints. There are staunchly conservative folks, and passionate liberals. I'm sure there are those who share the viewpoint on speaking out on any injustice anywhere. I know for sure that there are folks who are deeply involved on the topic of Tibetan injustices, among others. So, I feel deeply sorry for you if the Model UN you are familiar with excludes you or others, or is composed of folks with only one viewpoint.
Then again, if we were actually to talk about how to get things done, the most probable course of action would be to go through a relevant international body, as the Chinese government wouldn't give a damn about what you said they were doing.
So, let's assume we try to work with the UN to get something accomplished. Let's say we go through the UN Commision on Science and Technology. In the United Nations, and, in fact, all international multi-lateral bodies, there is a thing called National Sovreignty. The gist of it is that, because each of these International Bodies is voluntary, each country reserves the right to do whatever it wants. Usually, it is in the country's best interest to go along with the international body. However, if China does not want to accept our terms and allow Chinese citizens to access the internet, they certainly don't have to. The UN Commission on SciTech has no power to violate national sovreignty and enforce it's new regulations for China. Sorry to crush any idealistic hopes, but that's pretty much how it all works...
(By the way, Model UN was invaluable in the preparation of this topic)
I seriously think that Chinese governmental "information purification" wouldn't really have a great effect. Chinese citizens could just use public proxy servers or a host of other tools to circumvent any attempt the chinese government were to make.
Perhaps the only real step the Chinese government could take would be to "purify" the cafés in earnest, or, in other words, get rid of them completely.
The theme for the game is that you are "The Nameless One" - a freakish scarred being who cannot die. In fact, you first wake up in the game to be greeted by a talking skull telling you that you've come back to life once more, yet you cannot remember anything. Throughout the game, you find clues, and other secrets which sheds more light on your past life, or past lives. For example, at one point you wander into a cache of information for yourself that you constructed ages ago. The game doesnt move backwards through time, but there are flashbacks, memories, and other interesting developments that really make it seem like you are figuring out who or what you are. Quite a fun game - try it out some time.
323 = DAD on a touchtone phone
The article mentioned above can be found here.
So what are you suggesting here? An all out war between IBM and Maxtor? How exactly does your post apply to the situation now at hand?
Nah. I always enjoy using them...it's quite fun sending people scrambling all over the web to figure them out if they don't know already. Sorry if you thought it dumbed down the post (gee, that phrase has been used a lot throughout the thread) but the message remains the same.
Good lord...I look up and see that over half the comments are "Linux is better than Winblows" or "Linux is gonna be hurtin when XP comes out". My friends, it appears that YHBT by this story. In fact, I believe that YHL. Why don't you all just HAND. Or if you don't want that, why don't you all start a flamewar concerning ninjas vs. pancakes; it makes about as much sense as flaming about Linux vs. Windows.