OK, it seems that the sum total of all these posts (aside from the "music is my soul and not math" troll) is that what we all really want is our own personal soundtracks that we don't even want to have to play with. We just want to push a button or two and have the right music come out all the time...
I just gotta ask.... do we REALLY want this? I mean, in our house is one thing, I suppose (although what if you live other people who don't necessarily feel your mood?), but nothing ever stops at the house. Next thing people will want is for it to link to their car stereos, walkmen, etc... a situation which leads me to two consequences
1: Actual human contact will be really annoying. Both of you will have to shout over your respective soundtracks to actually communicate. Or, god forbid, turn them way down, or even off. Plus, imagine the irritation when the guy you nearly ran down honks at you, interrupting your favorite song!
2: It's possible that creativity will be stifled. How? Well, this seems like it would knock music radio way down the charts. After all, why listen to ads or songs you don't like? So that outlet for new music would be gone. Where would people hear new music, then? It would have to travel by word of mouth, and that could take forever...
Anyway, just my $.02. Is this a future that we want, or am I just dreaming? (Gawd, that sounds like one of the awful trolls from the ZDNet authors....)
Here the US is responsible for the death of over half a million children.
Ahhhh, your true colors finally appear. It's America's fault. (Oh, *I*'m sorry... the US. Because people might think I meant Paraguay when I said America...). Saddam Hussein is responsible for those deaths. What America is responsible for is not letting Saddam bully us into letting him feed his people AND build up an NBC weapons stockpile. Saddam has proven over the past ten years that given a choice between (a) delivering food to his people and (b) buying another tank, he will choose the tank EVERY DAMN TIME. Saddam will feed himself and his army. Everyone else is merely a distraction to him. I personally think that one of Clinton's few foriegn policy triumphs has been his refusal to back down on the oil-for-food program.
Do not demonize the US for killing Iraqi children. Demonize Saddam Hussein.
Ummm... and birds will? Or are airplanes no longer technology? Do you think that the Wright brothers built an airplane to feed somalians? Hell, I bet they didn't know what Somalia WAS. They built an airplane to see if they could BUILD AN AIRPLANE. It has been other people since who have applied that technology to help people.
It may not be possible to see now, but I bet something very similar could happen with SETI. Distributed.net is great and all, but no distributed project until SETI really grabbed the common American's attention. Just by asking the question, you have already found an audience for helping people with a distributed project. I argue that w/o SETI@Home, these new ideas would not have happened for a long time.
It is all well and good to rant about meat production. We'd probably be a lot healthier w/o it. Unfortunately, it would piss MANY people off. As good as that might make YOU feel, it is a damned poor way to actually get anything done. You have to decide whether it is more important to you to accuse the rest of this nation of being heartless (thereby making yourself feel good)or whether it is more important to you to work with people who don't share all of your views in order to achieve your goals.
Enough grain is produced today, even with the meat industry, to feed the world. This is, in part, to basic research that has enabled us to grow disease resistant and drought resistant grains. There is a significant research project funded by the US Dept. of Agricuture to develop a grain that will grow in the terrible conditions on the Horn of Africa, to be GIVEN to Somalians. Having all those people quit their jobs to go "help people" as you seem to view it would be a detriment to Somalians in the long run.
Anyway, this post has gone on much longer than you really deserve. I'm sure it won't change your mind in the slightest. But, maybe, you should think about it, huh?
Ahh... but mp3s are good for more than just playing them! Imagine, every song Metallica ever made (including bootlegs) downloaded for free and sitting unused on a drive someplace! I'd do it just for the laughs (until I needed the space, of course....) B
Call me crazy, but war certainly seems extreme to me. Especially since the last declaration of war made by Congress was against some little nation known as Japan....
Wow, why don't they just go after these foul pesky identified 'criminals' if they know where their e-mail is coming from!?
For the same reason real world cops set up wire taps instead of busting in the doors and arresting live criminals. Arresting seems to be fairly easy... but to actually convict requires EVIDENCE.
As for why they look at the whole ISP and not just the criminal, I asked that question myself when this story first broke on/. Here are the answers I got.
Show up at every ISP with a SWAT team and shut off the power.
Cut the big pipes that carry traffic up and down the east coast (or cross-country... hey, it wouldn't bring the internet down, but it would slow it up considerably.)
Face it, the US government has the resources and manpower to do just about whatever it wants to the US portion of the Internet. Problem is, NONE OF THOSE OPTIONS WOULD BE LEGAL! And neither would using the Carnivore's to cut off a legitimate ISP. I can't believe a court would allow that under anythign but the most severe circumstances. As the Microsoft case has shown, most federal judges (even those like Jackson with little technical expertise) are pretty bright guys. They can catch on to the issues quickly and see what's truly important.
I guess my question is why this has to be ISP wide. They claim that they only use it for specific cases, and not an "Echelon" style global system, but if that's the case why do they have to cover the whole ISP? Why can't they just get the IP given the "target" by the ISP and only read HIS mail?
There's only a certain amount of space in the "Nice" orbits.
I'm as die hard a capitalist as the next guy, but Earth Orbit can not be the free-for-all that relying on the free market would dictate. The problem is, quite simply, what you stated above. Without a national (global?) agency to control what goes in what orbit, the resulting chaos of independent launches could actually reduce the usefulness of satellites. Plus the free-market is not exactly known for its environmental concern. There's enough junk up there now, wait until Microsoft starts launching rockets......
This article doesn't say we shouldn't teach kids to use a computer. Fourth through Twelfth grades seems plenty of time to me. I do quite well with computers and I didn't even use one until my dad brought home an Apple IIGS when I was in sixth grade. The point the article makes is that kids should be given a few years to develop their real world communication and thinking skills before we enable them to rely on the computer. Considering the number of "pleas email mee info on painters lik michael angeloe" I get from my two cousins, I don't think this is a bad idea at all.
The computer is a wonderful tool, but it is not a substitute for critical thinking, english skills, or the ability to so actual research (in a *gasp* library). Computer skills are based on real world skills, not the other way around...
I could be confused, but isn't NetZero a "free" service? Those poor people have to make money somehow (well, eventually anyway). I certainly prefer it where they gouge advertisers and not the user (AOL, of course, does both...). I have AllAdvantage and I am basically earning money for free, because I can just ignore their ads! B
Working summers at a particular gov't agency has shown me the benefits AND dangers of "e-gov't." I work for the Office of Justice Programs, an agency that doles out grant money to law enforcement agencies and crime prevention programs around the nation. Starting three years ago, OJP decided to completely revamp the way grant applications and the dispersal of funds are handled.
Previously grantees had had to submit paper forms to apply for grants. If the form was incomplete or incorrect, there was a turn around time of a week or two. Now people can simply fill out their applications on the Web (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov) with all the ease of creating a/. account.
Also, to actually receive their money, grantees in the past had to dial in to a modem bank. A dropped connection or other error could cause great confusion as to the status of a financial transaction. Again, these functions were moved over to the Web, which has made grantees' lives much easier.
OJP is only one example. I believe that if one surveys gov't agencies at any level many will be found to have a significant web presence. This is especially true in affluent jurisdictions and with "customer service" types of agencies like OJP or the local DMV (Virginia's has an excellent website).
E-Gov't is well on it's way, from what I have seen on the inside. The gov't just moves more slowly than the private sector (duh.).
Slashdot Mirror
OK, it seems that the sum total of all these posts (aside from the "music is my soul and not math" troll) is that what we all really want is our own personal soundtracks that we don't even want to have to play with. We just want to push a button or two and have the right music come out all the time...
I just gotta ask.... do we REALLY want this? I mean, in our house is one thing, I suppose (although what if you live other people who don't necessarily feel your mood?), but nothing ever stops at the house. Next thing people will want is for it to link to their car stereos, walkmen, etc... a situation which leads me to two consequences
1: Actual human contact will be really annoying. Both of you will have to shout over your respective soundtracks to actually communicate. Or, god forbid, turn them way down, or even off. Plus, imagine the irritation when the guy you nearly ran down honks at you, interrupting your favorite song!
2: It's possible that creativity will be stifled. How? Well, this seems like it would knock music radio way down the charts. After all, why listen to ads or songs you don't like? So that outlet for new music would be gone. Where would people hear new music, then? It would have to travel by word of mouth, and that could take forever...
Anyway, just my $.02. Is this a future that we want, or am I just dreaming? (Gawd, that sounds like one of the awful trolls from the ZDNet authors....)
Unless it was misprogrammed. Then it would be possibly the most terrifying device ever created. Imagine, a different cat howling every time!
Here the US is responsible for the death of over half a million children.
Ahhhh, your true colors finally appear. It's America's fault. (Oh, *I*'m sorry... the US. Because people might think I meant Paraguay when I said America...). Saddam Hussein is responsible for those deaths. What America is responsible for is not letting Saddam bully us into letting him feed his people AND build up an NBC weapons stockpile. Saddam has proven over the past ten years that given a choice between (a) delivering food to his people and (b) buying another tank, he will choose the tank EVERY DAMN TIME. Saddam will feed himself and his army. Everyone else is merely a distraction to him. I personally think that one of Clinton's few foriegn policy triumphs has been his refusal to back down on the oil-for-food program.
Do not demonize the US for killing Iraqi children. Demonize Saddam Hussein.
technology won't fly the food across an ocean
Ummm... and birds will? Or are airplanes no longer technology? Do you think that the Wright brothers built an airplane to feed somalians? Hell, I bet they didn't know what Somalia WAS. They built an airplane to see if they could BUILD AN AIRPLANE. It has been other people since who have applied that technology to help people.
It may not be possible to see now, but I bet something very similar could happen with SETI. Distributed.net is great and all, but no distributed project until SETI really grabbed the common American's attention. Just by asking the question, you have already found an audience for helping people with a distributed project. I argue that w/o SETI@Home, these new ideas would not have happened for a long time.
It is all well and good to rant about meat production. We'd probably be a lot healthier w/o it. Unfortunately, it would piss MANY people off. As good as that might make YOU feel, it is a damned poor way to actually get anything done. You have to decide whether it is more important to you to accuse the rest of this nation of being heartless (thereby making yourself feel good)or whether it is more important to you to work with people who don't share all of your views in order to achieve your goals.
Enough grain is produced today, even with the meat industry, to feed the world. This is, in part, to basic research that has enabled us to grow disease resistant and drought resistant grains. There is a significant research project funded by the US Dept. of Agricuture to develop a grain that will grow in the terrible conditions on the Horn of Africa, to be GIVEN to Somalians. Having all those people quit their jobs to go "help people" as you seem to view it would be a detriment to Somalians in the long run.
Anyway, this post has gone on much longer than you really deserve. I'm sure it won't change your mind in the slightest. But, maybe, you should think about it, huh?
BDewAhh... but mp3s are good for more than just playing them! Imagine, every song Metallica ever made (including bootlegs) downloaded for free and sitting unused on a drive someplace! I'd do it just for the laughs (until I needed the space, of course....) B
under anythign but the most severe circumstances
Call me crazy, but war certainly seems extreme to me. Especially since the last declaration of war made by Congress was against some little nation known as Japan....
Wow, why don't they just go after these foul pesky identified 'criminals' if they know where their e-mail is coming from!?
For the same reason real world cops set up wire taps instead of busting in the doors and arresting live criminals. Arresting seems to be fairly easy... but to actually convict requires EVIDENCE.
As for why they look at the whole ISP and not just the criminal, I asked that question myself when this story first broke on /. Here are the answers I got.
Show up at every ISP with a SWAT team and shut off the power.
Cut the big pipes that carry traffic up and down the east coast (or cross-country... hey, it wouldn't bring the internet down, but it would slow it up considerably.)
Face it, the US government has the resources and manpower to do just about whatever it wants to the US portion of the Internet. Problem is, NONE OF THOSE OPTIONS WOULD BE LEGAL! And neither would using the Carnivore's to cut off a legitimate ISP. I can't believe a court would allow that under anythign but the most severe circumstances. As the Microsoft case has shown, most federal judges (even those like Jackson with little technical expertise) are pretty bright guys. They can catch on to the issues quickly and see what's truly important.
So relax. I mean it. Life's too short...
ZDNet has an arti cle also.
I guess my question is why this has to be ISP wide. They claim that they only use it for specific cases, and not an "Echelon" style global system, but if that's the case why do they have to cover the whole ISP? Why can't they just get the IP given the "target" by the ISP and only read HIS mail?
I'm as die hard a capitalist as the next guy, but Earth Orbit can not be the free-for-all that relying on the free market would dictate. The problem is, quite simply, what you stated above. Without a national (global?) agency to control what goes in what orbit, the resulting chaos of independent launches could actually reduce the usefulness of satellites. Plus the free-market is not exactly known for its environmental concern. There's enough junk up there now, wait until Microsoft starts launching rockets......
This article doesn't say we shouldn't teach kids to use a computer. Fourth through Twelfth grades seems plenty of time to me. I do quite well with computers and I didn't even use one until my dad brought home an Apple IIGS when I was in sixth grade. The point the article makes is that kids should be given a few years to develop their real world communication and thinking skills before we enable them to rely on the computer. Considering the number of "pleas email mee info on painters lik michael angeloe" I get from my two cousins, I don't think this is a bad idea at all.
The computer is a wonderful tool, but it is not a substitute for critical thinking, english skills, or the ability to so actual research (in a *gasp* library). Computer skills are based on real world skills, not the other way around...
I could be confused, but isn't NetZero a "free" service? Those poor people have to make money somehow (well, eventually anyway). I certainly prefer it where they gouge advertisers and not the user (AOL, of course, does both...). I have AllAdvantage and I am basically earning money for free, because I can just ignore their ads! B
Previously grantees had had to submit paper forms to apply for grants. If the form was incomplete or incorrect, there was a turn around time of a week or two. Now people can simply fill out their applications on the Web (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov) with all the ease of creating a /. account.
Also, to actually receive their money, grantees in the past had to dial in to a modem bank. A dropped connection or other error could cause great confusion as to the status of a financial transaction. Again, these functions were moved over to the Web, which has made grantees' lives much easier.
OJP is only one example. I believe that if one surveys gov't agencies at any level many will be found to have a significant web presence. This is especially true in affluent jurisdictions and with "customer service" types of agencies like OJP or the local DMV (Virginia's has an excellent website).
E-Gov't is well on it's way, from what I have seen on the inside. The gov't just moves more slowly than the private sector (duh.).
BDew