Conspiracy theories are nuts, but we really have to agree there are conspiracy facts: people with higher power will always try to conspire against any other people, it always seem to happen that way. There are no conspiracy theories, but it's just a fact that there as so many examples out there where politics is just a tool to fuck up citizens. I'm wondering how the hell those guys can do this hit without even alarming citizen. I think we have come to be 99% sheeps who will not question or not worry about this, 0.5% turning crazy because of knowing this, and 0.5% being the actual elite who fuck up everybody.
Well you can't always trust this particular human element, bitcoin is just a low level protocol, he should have also proposed ways to use this currency...
Facebook would have been useful if it had at least tried to make people meet for whatever reason, and I'm not talking about just recreational friendly stuff like parties and dates and whatever stupid "event". The software and database facebook possesses could allow people to find jobs easily, to share cars, to share a dinner between neighbors, to share tedious chores, and to match services when it requires to, etc.
I really thought about that recently, that those kinds of social software could change the world we live in currently, with the crisis and all this things.
I'm not sharing more views on those things, even if "ideas are cheap":p
Free speech is important in society, but even today everybody knows it has its limit: it's either abused, or censored, or moderated for incoherent reasons. And EVEN THOUGH, some countries don't have free speech.
From here try to understand how single individuals can wisely interpret society as a whole: it's just impossible.
You could also try to separate the cognitive patterns of opinions from other thoughts. Good luck with that.
Seriously, the recent advances in sciences and technologies are grains of salt versus what we should need in terms of society advances. Not social, just society.
To me the http/html centralized architecture will always be full of crap. Apache is ok for sites until 2002 where traffic rose and a lot of things began to be possible.
Look at how p2p technologies are fast and reliable, why doesn't anyone start something with something more decentralized ? Look at DVCSs, even those Mercurial and git are replacing crap like subversion and CVS.
Decentralized is teh shit, I seriously want to start developing it as I have ideas, but the involvement and work required are huge on this.
This would really empowers the internet, make censorship totally impossible, and ruin companies like facebook.
1. you are introducing funny jokes with a serious argument, I find it a little hypocritical.
2. You can think that most people don't care about how stuff works, and that those people will easily give money for a car to just works, but that's also people's choice. In fact, these people that are just interested about every little detail of what they use, and that concerns geeks, maybe like Stallman and other, are just people conscious of what happens and the world and its ethics. Saying most people don't care is just like saying they're dumb. You are just insulting customers, and happily taking they money and treating them like nice milk cows. Not so much brilliant.
3. In the OSS world, you can make those people use free software, it just needs to pay people who delivers the service of delivering it the right way, not the one who actually make the same software over and over; today, it just doesn't happen because laws favors proprietary software at 99%, and don't come and say companies aren't taking advantages of that, they are, and when they can prevent OSS to take market share, THEY DO, BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT'S THEIR ENEMY'S ECONOMIC MODEL AND THEY'RE SCREWED IF THEY DON'T.
I find it easy to say that the proprietary software model just works better, there are obvious reasons for it to work better: 1. we live in a capitalist/patentable world, it favors proprietary software and big companies. 2. those huge companies don't have a monopoly in a proper sense, but they are putting a lot of barriers to keep the world proprietary: that's some kind of economic monopoly to me.
OSS has a lot of obstacles, my answer is you can't compare.
Slashdot Mirror
Conspiracy theories are nuts, but we really have to agree there are conspiracy facts: people with higher power will always try to conspire against any other people, it always seem to happen that way. There are no conspiracy theories, but it's just a fact that there as so many examples out there where politics is just a tool to fuck up citizens. I'm wondering how the hell those guys can do this hit without even alarming citizen. I think we have come to be 99% sheeps who will not question or not worry about this, 0.5% turning crazy because of knowing this, and 0.5% being the actual elite who fuck up everybody.
Well you can't always trust this particular human element, bitcoin is just a low level protocol, he should have also proposed ways to use this currency...
Facebook would have been useful if it had at least tried to make people meet for whatever reason, and I'm not talking about just recreational friendly stuff like parties and dates and whatever stupid "event". The software and database facebook possesses could allow people to find jobs easily, to share cars, to share a dinner between neighbors, to share tedious chores, and to match services when it requires to, etc.
:p
I really thought about that recently, that those kinds of social software could change the world we live in currently, with the crisis and all this things.
I'm not sharing more views on those things, even if "ideas are cheap"
Free speech is important in society, but even today everybody knows it has its limit: it's either abused, or censored, or moderated for incoherent reasons. And EVEN THOUGH, some countries don't have free speech.
From here try to understand how single individuals can wisely interpret society as a whole: it's just impossible.
You could also try to separate the cognitive patterns of opinions from other thoughts. Good luck with that.
Seriously, the recent advances in sciences and technologies are grains of salt versus what we should need in terms of society advances. Not social, just society.
To me the http/html centralized architecture will always be full of crap. Apache is ok for sites until 2002 where traffic rose and a lot of things began to be possible.
Look at how p2p technologies are fast and reliable, why doesn't anyone start something with something more decentralized ? Look at DVCSs, even those Mercurial and git are replacing crap like subversion and CVS.
Decentralized is teh shit, I seriously want to start developing it as I have ideas, but the involvement and work required are huge on this.
This would really empowers the internet, make censorship totally impossible, and ruin companies like facebook.
1. you are introducing funny jokes with a serious argument, I find it a little hypocritical.
2. You can think that most people don't care about how stuff works, and that those people will easily give money for a car to just works, but that's also people's choice. In fact, these people that are just interested about every little detail of what they use, and that concerns geeks, maybe like Stallman and other, are just people conscious of what happens and the world and its ethics. Saying most people don't care is just like saying they're dumb. You are just insulting customers, and happily taking they money and treating them like nice milk cows. Not so much brilliant.
3. In the OSS world, you can make those people use free software, it just needs to pay people who delivers the service of delivering it the right way, not the one who actually make the same software over and over; today, it just doesn't happen because laws favors proprietary software at 99%, and don't come and say companies aren't taking advantages of that, they are, and when they can prevent OSS to take market share, THEY DO, BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT'S THEIR ENEMY'S ECONOMIC MODEL AND THEY'RE SCREWED IF THEY DON'T.
I find it easy to say that the proprietary software model just works better, there are obvious reasons for it to work better:
1. we live in a capitalist/patentable world, it favors proprietary software and big companies.
2. those huge companies don't have a monopoly in a proper sense, but they are putting a lot of barriers to keep the world proprietary: that's some kind of economic monopoly to me.
OSS has a lot of obstacles, my answer is you can't compare.