Seriously. If you want to show them that you care enough to participate in democracy, but think that the choices on the ballot amount to crap, just cast a blank ballot. It is more effective than not voting at all.
EXPERTS: There is no good technology to filter the net.
PEOPLE: We must protect the children!!!!
EXPERTS: Mandatory filtering is an undue restriction on free speech.
PEOPLE: You guys are a bunch of pedophiles, aren't you?
EXPERTS: Fine, you're on your own. ok bye.
Seriously. Mandate that basic cable be free - it's not like the cable companies can't afford to give six or seven measely channels to anyone who doesn't want to pay for expanded basic, premium, or whatever (I'm ignoring HDTV, of course, but you get the idea).
How much bandwidth will that give us? If it's enough so that I can have a 1Mbps wireless data link wherever I go, it's worth it.
If I read Jon Katz right, he seems to think that cultural values, mores, and priorities of our parents and grandparents are obsolete. Now we have the Net, and we can make our own morals, our own priorities, and to hell with anything those out-of-touch old people have to say.
Jon Katz seems to think this is ok.
I think it's bullshit.
I think that the Net has created an atmosphere where we, the young generation, are protected and insulated, safe from whatever wisdom our parents and grandparents have to offer. But our parents and grandparents are only just now waking up to what's going on.
And they are freaking out.
Unfortunately, the only reaction they seem capable of is a knee-jerk, "net bad, must censor!" response. This, in my opinion, is not the right response, even though it has been embraced by both Bush and Gore.
Jon Katz's reaction: "All children should have Net access to enhance their lives!"
I think that's bullshit.
I went from kindergarten through high school without the Net, and I'm not at all worse off for it. We now have two polarized camps of people: one, represented by Bush and Gore, that thinks that there are pedophiles and pornographers lurking behind every URL, and the other, represented by Jon Katz, Wired, and Slashdot, which thinks that the Net is the great savior of our generation, the bringer of Goodness and Light and Empowerment to all.
I think both sides are missing the point: we now have a generational rift wider than an OC-7. If parents actually paid attention to what their children were doing, showed them actual attention and love, then their children wouldn't be absorbed in violent TV, sex on the Net, or be grabbing guns and shooting their classmates.
Sorry if this is incoherent... I'm writing as I think, and I need to go now.
Divx with Mp3 audio compression comes out to around 120 Kbps max. Not only will that stream over 100bT Ethernet, it will stream across the Internet and down any DSL connection. My 650 MHz coppermine can encode an analog signal into Divx at 640x480 realtime. Not only is this great for movie delivery, but Internet video conferencing just went high-definition.
One thing that I think is worth pointing out: bandwidth was, for a very long time, the limiting factor to Internet technologies. Now that high-tech compression schemes like Mpeg 4 (and soon Mpeg 7) are here, the limiting factor may be shifting to CPU power. We'll be able to squeeze HDTV into a 56K line, assuming you have the CPU muscle to decode the stream. ok bye.
Damn. Going through the entire original Quake as fast as possible. I suggest we make this the official Q1 benchmark. What does this look like at 150 fps?
IANAL, but I thought that the purpose of patents was so that a company like Digital Convergence could protect its inventions and prevent anyone else from capitalizing on them. So what if the Linux drivers contain the secrets of how the Barcode reader works? Even if those secrets become public, Digital Convergence still has the sole right to use those secrets in production, right? If I discover a method to make a better widget, and patent it, then publish exactly how the method works, that doesn't void my exclusive right to use that method to make my widgets, does it?
...that all of this effort has been spent on two separate projects. Imagine, for a minute, if the "Linux desktop development community" could put all of their eggs into one basket. I mean, KDE and GNOME started with exactly the same goals and philosophy. There is a tremendous amount of talent and good technology in both desktops. Think about what the Linux/Unix desktop could be if all of that talent and technology were pooled together. Instead, the current KDE/GNOME feud is doing the following:
-It is preventing one, single, unified desktop standard for Linux/Unix from emerging. This, as Miguel has pointed out, is crucial to Linux moving into the desktop world. Some layer needs to take over policy, behavior, look+feel, and code sharing/APIs. I know the geek community likes to have choice (and even if one environment becomes the "standard" you will still be Free to choose your own), but at some point Linux needs to show the world "this is what Linux looks like, this is how Linux apps behave, etc."
-It proves open-source nay-sayers correct. Those people who say that open-source projects only lead toward fragmentation and dissent: they are absolutely right. Why should we put our faith in open standards when tomorrow that open standard my split into two competing ones? Why should I port my commercial application to GNOME, when next week GNOME may split into "Helix" and "Foundation" strains that have different, new incompatible features?
So, I know it may be a pipe dream, but I wish that the talent pool out there would decide on one desktop environment to put their effort behind. It would be better for Linux, and better for those of us who believe that open platforms and standards are the way to go in the software business.
The problem at hand is not "how do we get AD to work with Unix," but rather, "why use AD at all?" I mean, NetWare's NDS is much more feature-rich and multi-platform compatable than AD. I hate to sound like an advocate, but I use NDS every day, and there is no better way to easily administer an environment with many users, many workstations, and many network resources. AD (and NIS, for that matter) pale in comparison. The fact that any organization would choose W2K over Netware for their server environment shows that management far too easily falls for weasily marketing tacticts. ok bye.
I assume that you are not from the United States. Well, you will be pleased to learn that the US probably has more constitutional machinery to prevent this sort of thing from happening than other countries (e.g. UK, EU, Canada, etc). Rights to free speech are being eroded in the UK every day under the banner of "libel." And in Canada, it is illegal to express certain moral views in public.
I find it scary that a ruling like this, and bad legislation such as the DMCA are even easier in nations that don't have a First Amendment. If it's kosher in America, chances are there is not much preventing it from spreading to the rest of the globe.
This battle needs to be won here, or it may never be won, and DMCA will be International Law. ok bye.
They need to throw in a few buzzwords with their name change, kinda like the What Snooze guy:
CorrectoMundo Decision Networks, Inc.
Sunnyvale, CA. US We specialize in providing custom control tools that offer solutions to understanding, analyzing and planning information about ordering information systems and networked enterprise decision software to help you design affordable creative marketing managerial methodologies which meet the challenges of professional business-to-business turnkey sales services and information product networks. Also Bull Semen.
http://www.mundo.com/correcto.html
That would be very cool. Of course, you KNOW that the signal will be sent content-scrambled, and that only "licensed" receivers will be able to descramble the signal. Then someone will crack one of the players, and get taken to court by the Digital Radio Copy Control Association.
I guess that's how the whole dang human comedy keeps perpetuating itself. ok bye.
Slashdot Mirror
Axel
bastard.
Axel
EXPERTS: There is no good technology to filter the net.
PEOPLE: We must protect the children!!!!
EXPERTS: Mandatory filtering is an undue restriction on free speech.
PEOPLE: You guys are a bunch of pedophiles, aren't you?
EXPERTS: Fine, you're on your own. ok bye.
Axel
How much bandwidth will that give us? If it's enough so that I can have a 1Mbps wireless data link wherever I go, it's worth it.
Axel
Jon Katz seems to think this is ok.
I think it's bullshit.
I think that the Net has created an atmosphere where we, the young generation, are protected and insulated, safe from whatever wisdom our parents and grandparents have to offer. But our parents and grandparents are only just now waking up to what's going on.
And they are freaking out.
Unfortunately, the only reaction they seem capable of is a knee-jerk, "net bad, must censor!" response. This, in my opinion, is not the right response, even though it has been embraced by both Bush and Gore.
Jon Katz's reaction: "All children should have Net access to enhance their lives!"
I think that's bullshit.
I went from kindergarten through high school without the Net, and I'm not at all worse off for it. We now have two polarized camps of people: one, represented by Bush and Gore, that thinks that there are pedophiles and pornographers lurking behind every URL, and the other, represented by Jon Katz, Wired, and Slashdot, which thinks that the Net is the great savior of our generation, the bringer of Goodness and Light and Empowerment to all.
I think both sides are missing the point: we now have a generational rift wider than an OC-7. If parents actually paid attention to what their children were doing, showed them actual attention and love, then their children wouldn't be absorbed in violent TV, sex on the Net, or be grabbing guns and shooting their classmates.
Sorry if this is incoherent... I'm writing as I think, and I need to go now.
Axel
Axel
Axel
Axel
Axel
Axel
Thus, it is the first book about UNIX with a picture of one on the cover.
Axel
Getting better? See my point? ok bye.
Axel
One thing that I think is worth pointing out: bandwidth was, for a very long time, the limiting factor to Internet technologies. Now that high-tech compression schemes like Mpeg 4 (and soon Mpeg 7) are here, the limiting factor may be shifting to CPU power. We'll be able to squeeze HDTV into a 56K line, assuming you have the CPU muscle to decode the stream. ok bye.
Axel
FOR ME TO CRACK!
Axel
Lim[t->(end of the year)] (Mean(expected time E of release)/(End of the year - t)) = 0
Or maybe I'm spending a little bit too much time studying for my algorithms class. ok bye.
Axel
Axel
Axel
Or is there something I'm missing? ok bye.
Axel
Axel
-It is preventing one, single, unified desktop standard for Linux/Unix from emerging. This, as Miguel has pointed out, is crucial to Linux moving into the desktop world. Some layer needs to take over policy, behavior, look+feel, and code sharing/APIs. I know the geek community likes to have choice (and even if one environment becomes the "standard" you will still be Free to choose your own), but at some point Linux needs to show the world "this is what Linux looks like, this is how Linux apps behave, etc."
-It proves open-source nay-sayers correct. Those people who say that open-source projects only lead toward fragmentation and dissent: they are absolutely right. Why should we put our faith in open standards when tomorrow that open standard my split into two competing ones? Why should I port my commercial application to GNOME, when next week GNOME may split into "Helix" and "Foundation" strains that have different, new incompatible features?
So, I know it may be a pipe dream, but I wish that the talent pool out there would decide on one desktop environment to put their effort behind. It would be better for Linux, and better for those of us who believe that open platforms and standards are the way to go in the software business.
ok bye.
Axel
Axel
I find it scary that a ruling like this, and bad legislation such as the DMCA are even easier in nations that don't have a First Amendment. If it's kosher in America, chances are there is not much preventing it from spreading to the rest of the globe.
This battle needs to be won here, or it may never be won, and DMCA will be International Law. ok bye.
Axel
Axel
CorrectoMundo Decision Networks, Inc.
Sunnyvale, CA. US
We specialize in providing custom control tools that offer solutions to understanding, analyzing and planning information about ordering information systems and networked enterprise decision software to help you design affordable creative marketing managerial methodologies which meet the challenges of professional business-to-business turnkey sales services and information product networks. Also Bull Semen.
http://www.mundo.com/correcto.html
Axel
I guess that's how the whole dang human comedy keeps perpetuating itself. ok bye.
Axel