I'll keep this brief (unlike the rambling article). RMS is admirable for his contribution to open source with the GPL and its offshoots. He would be a very valuable consultant for a software company. However, I must ask what kind of sycophancy inspired this article? For God's sake timothy, you're spending time detailing on how to wine and dine Mr. Stallman? Why not interview him or discuss the services he can perform and use to benefit an open source company or creator in need of advice/help? I appreciate Mr. Stallman, GNU, and all the tireless work he has invested into the open source community. I just find the whole tone of the article to be nothing more than a "how to worship RMS" guide written in the same manner as a teenage girl droning on about her adoration of a rock star. It's a potentially good article which has been wasted and bloated by unnecessary sucking up. I wonder how RMS would view this shameless attempt at getting brownie points.
Actually, I usually avoid responding to Katz's articles for just that reason. I've always disdained Katz, but I thought his 'ambition' made up for his reptetiveness and poor writing. However, after reading this piece of tripe (which I actually agree with for once oddly enough), it has become so clear that Katz is solely doing his schitck to get bullshit attention and draw flames, not make any relevant point or act on as "an ambassador to the real world." Perhaps it is common to most, but for me this is the boiling point, so I felt my post was necessary, if unread:)
Fairly eloquent, well thought out response. In spite of Katz's obvious trolling, I actually tend to agree with the subject article, but now I at least have some idea where many/. readers are coming from.
The worst thing about this article, I think, is that Katz has probably predicted exactly what type of responses this piece of flamebait will generate. He posts an article about the rudeness of the geek community, and we (I guess even my reply) all respond with flames, thus making it look like his newfound point (which never existed in any of his other works:) is invariably true. I think Katz is finally beginning to realize that the majority of the slashdot community does not need his frequent mollycodling, and thus dislikes him immensely.
If you ask me, this is just Katz's way of bawling in front of the teacher because the other kids won't talk to him. I commend you for your good, thoughtful reply on the work involved with tech though... pity it was wasted as a reply to a blatent troll though.
I'm sorry to flame like this, and I don't care much of the techno elitism that is rapant on slashdot either... BUT DOESNT THIS JUST CONTRADICT EVERYTHING YOUVE WRITTEN?
What happened to the poor, persecuted geeks who were isolated for their differences?
What happened to the tragic Hellmouth tales of the geeks who suffered for challenging the authority do to their 'above average intelligence?'
What happened to the faceless evil of corporatism and the use of Napster as a form of rebellion?
What happened to the rampant of abuse of artists done by record companies (who now are being robbed by this 'selfish society?')
What happened to free information and the urgent call for it (except in your writings of course, right)?
I don't like the growing zealot and elitist attitude in the tech sector, nor did I agree with your muckracking articles crying foul over the plight of the poor geek and of the need for open/free everything. I agreed with a fair share of the examples in this article, and experienced my own disgust at selfishness and elitism.
But you, sir, are in no position to suddenly 180 from your hyper-sympathy to the geek community and expect us to convenientally forget about all your other muckracking. At first I thought you were just a misguided soul who still had nobility in your adherence to your goals for 'free information and less isolation of the intelligent geek community.' Now I realize you are nothing more than a common troll. I think I will now be using my block filter for you.
While the Big Bang is an utterly bizarre theory to myself, a small part of me believes that it *may* be a relevant part of God's plan as a whole. Perhaps God has a place in the universe for the scientists, or He would not have created them and assigned their role. I will always retain my faith in God, but I keep my mind open to the possibility that greater pieces of His divine plan may be intended to be unraveled after the writing of the Bible. Your intolerant attitude suggests a 17th Century old meme Puritan who is fixated on "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." Regardless of your hellfire fixations, allow me to quote Matthew 11:15-11:17. "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented." You are doing a service in your attempts to convert others, but you are commiting the even worse sin of hating your fellow man. You may preach as God says, but you must allow your neighbor to make his own decision, for upon he rests his own salvation. Such hatred on your part violates the Christian covenant with the Lord.
And as for my denomination, how dare you call me a Catholic! I may heed the pope, but I have grown up in a strong, New England Episcopalian background which I continue to apply to my life. I am also somewhat of a transcendentalist such as my namesake, in which I can see the beauty of God as He displays his power through an Oversoul which permeates nature and connects us to it. No matter what you may speak, I am a pure and devoted Christian, which I swear upon in the eyes of our Lord. I only hope He may understand your misguided wrath and spare you from the flames of Hell.
"I will 0wn j00 with m4h ant1bi0tik skillz!"
on
Biotransistors
·
· Score: 4
Now instead of trying to hax0r into someone's computer and trying to 0wn them with 31337 skills, all you'd have to do is sneak into his room and smear Neosporin all over his PC:) Enter the new wave of 31337 hax0rs.
While I, as a Christian myself, respect the princples of Jesus Christ and the words of the Bible, I must take offense at the way in which you abuse them through reference. You honestly think God will penalize humanity for paying attention to space exploration and questioning the sciences? I must say I have to wonder if you learned your Christianity straight from Jonathan Edwards:P
Not only do you give us a bad name with your condemnations, you draw inaccurate conclusions from reading the article. It is not being suggested that there is no God, and even if so, I hardly see fit to punish those who differ in our beliefs of the world. The way I see it, the big bang may have occured, but if so it was forseen by God himself as part of his plan. I'd like to know how sending microbes in space will get you sent to hell, sir. As a modern Christian, I am ashamed to count extremists like you in our ranks. Our pope has revealed it that Christians may believe in evolution. I believe in evolution, and I believe that microbes have their own place in the niche of the world.
If I had any problem with the article, it would be that devoting time to microbe research lowers the value of life and humanity to a raw artificial level which strips out the magic of life itself.
All this talk about colonizing planets hearkens back to the Space Race days of the 1950's and 1960's when everyone was raving about how the future will bring cities on the moon. It's 2000 and I still don't see those cities. Granted the concept of a simulator is intriguing, but that is the farthest humankind will get. It's just no feasible or realistic to expect to colonize other planets.
First of all, what is the need of settling Mars, if not to satisfy the ego of 21st century manifest destiny? Earth has its overpopulation and resource problems, but we are still safely far from the brink of those issues. Besides, is this a way of abandoning hope? Earth is gonna be gone, so lets try another planet? Absurd!
Any efforts to bring large scale colonization on Mars would be prohibitively complicated, time consuming and expensive. Even if habitation is possible, there will definitely need to be some way for man to prepare for colonies and deal with such issues as temperature and air composition. It's not as simple as fly in spaceships and build a new world. The costs of settling and transporting people to Mars en masse would be exhorbitant. Maybe 10-20 people can fit on a space shuttle, and those trips cost billions and take months to prepare, as shown by NASA's adventures. It definitely wont happen on a large scale.
It's a good idea, scientists, but why waste effort on idealistic dreams of settling other planets? I'd rather see our great scientific minds work to fix the growing shortage of resources here on Earth.
Fair enough, sir, assuming you are not a troll. Pray tell me why? Factor out the cost of the cd for a second. Now, CD's are: easy to use, extremely portable, have great sound quality, reasonably durable. The only problem with CD's is if something happens of your own fault (e.g. you scratch it to death or lose it or smash it...)
Now look at the options present with 'digital music.' It's highly compressed, thus losing some degree of quality which may or may not be significant. It's easily damaged or lost by conditions that aren't your fault (bad file transfer, crashes, hard drive problems). It will be highly encrypted and beyond your control if people like Shamoon have a say in anything to do with it. And worst of all, DIGITAL MUSIC IS NOT TANGIBLE! You can not carry it around, move it from place to place (if the RIAA implements SDMI and only through media even then), feel it, or look at it. And if a problem comes up with your hard drive or media or internet connection, it's gone for good and knowing the RIAA you're expected to buy another copy. There's just something about the thought of paying money for an encrypted file and having no tangible backup of it that just makes me foam at the mouth.
Exacly one of the reasons why I utterly loathe the concept of 'secure digital music' embodied by SDMI and others. Does he understand what the consumers are thinking? Obviously not! PEOPLE DO NOT WANT CD'S TO GO AWAY! That's a ludicrous and absurd notion. Portable music media is a necessity, because I don't know how many people are willing to shell out money for intangible digital music that they wont be able to control.
People like this are exactly the problem with the whole digital music movement today. Pirates do not exist just because mp3's are out there, they exist because consumers are growing weary of buying overpriced cd's and have the option to get the music free. (Note: I am vehemently anti-piracy, but I understand some of the rationale aside from the whole 'its free' thing) People want to pay for music they can listen to. I think I can speak for many music fans when I say that they do NOT want to spend the same amount of money (on music that they spend on cd's) on watered down digital content with no actual medium. I understand the costs behind the making of the CD's, but if the RIAA actually had any sort of clue they would offer digital songs very cheaply (perhaps some subscription service) so customers could just use them as previews, and then maybe lower the price a dollar or two (let's be realistic, making and recording the full cd is fairly expensive) while increasing the artists cut.
Once again Apple chooses to forsake the rest of the PC using populace by stubbornly adhering to its begrudginly minimalist one-button design. Since my first days as a computer user neither I nor any 'normal' person has had any excessive problems with the traditional two button design, perhaps even finding it easier. Left click actions, right click menus (or vice versa)... that's not too hard to comprehend. I've used one button Apple mouses, and found them consistently annoying and irksome.
Of course there is also the problem that the new mouse appears to be aiming to sell on mainly asthetic value. It costs more than the overpriced wireless MS mouses (the one thing MS always gets right, if you ask me) and yet it keeps the cable. I guess the optical sensor is an innovation from the so called 'puck' (another obvious asthetically based selling point) but still I'd expect better of a long standing company like Apple. I guess Apple doesn't fancy its customers to be above buying based on looks and feel alone (function be damned, right?). Shame on the reviewer too, for he seems to be too absorbed in the attractive design judging by how he shills Apple's latest halfass job.
I realize 'piracy' may be what is most convenient for the general public, but still the artists interest should be in mind. Napster may be copying physically, but in principle it is common thievery and deprives and hurts the artist you are desiring to hear. Yes, the record label's get the majority of the costs from album sales, but you must remember how much they do in the process of realease. They provide quality recording studios, producers, artwork, distribution, and marketing. All are very vital jobs that allow musicians to gain exposure and popularity from their music. Is it asking too much to compensate them for the privilege of listening to their hard work and craft?
Please, don't abuse the ars gratia artis argument and suggest that music should be free for everyone. After all, Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms and the majority of the great classical composers recieved money from patrons and kings in exchange for their works. They were no doubt great artisans, but they also were known at times to churn out compositions in order to recieve the money to afford the cost of living. If Beethoven had not been paid, do you really think we would have his 9 symphonies to treasure today?
I think that at some point the need for a smaller computer would have arose, prompting scientists to develop the microchip. Granted, the space program did hasten its development, but I think it was obvious as it were that large bulky computers would never be practical. And to be honest, what did we really get out of the Apollo missions except a Tom Hanks movie and a sensationalized media event around Neil Armstrong?
Slashdot Mirror
I'll keep this brief (unlike the rambling article). RMS is admirable for his contribution to open source with the GPL and its offshoots. He would be a very valuable consultant for a software company. However, I must ask what kind of sycophancy inspired this article? For God's sake timothy, you're spending time detailing on how to wine and dine Mr. Stallman? Why not interview him or discuss the services he can perform and use to benefit an open source company or creator in need of advice/help? I appreciate Mr. Stallman, GNU, and all the tireless work he has invested into the open source community. I just find the whole tone of the article to be nothing more than a "how to worship RMS" guide written in the same manner as a teenage girl droning on about her adoration of a rock star. It's a potentially good article which has been wasted and bloated by unnecessary sucking up. I wonder how RMS would view this shameless attempt at getting brownie points.
Actually, I usually avoid responding to Katz's articles for just that reason. I've always disdained Katz, but I thought his 'ambition' made up for his reptetiveness and poor writing. However, after reading this piece of tripe (which I actually agree with for once oddly enough), it has become so clear that Katz is solely doing his schitck to get bullshit attention and draw flames, not make any relevant point or act on as "an ambassador to the real world." Perhaps it is common to most, but for me this is the boiling point, so I felt my post was necessary, if unread :)
Fairly eloquent, well thought out response. In spite of Katz's obvious trolling, I actually tend to agree with the subject article, but now I at least have some idea where many /. readers are coming from.
:) is invariably true. I think Katz is finally beginning to realize that the majority of the slashdot community does not need his frequent mollycodling, and thus dislikes him immensely.
The worst thing about this article, I think, is that Katz has probably predicted exactly what type of responses this piece of flamebait will generate. He posts an article about the rudeness of the geek community, and we (I guess even my reply) all respond with flames, thus making it look like his newfound point (which never existed in any of his other works
If you ask me, this is just Katz's way of bawling in front of the teacher because the other kids won't talk to him. I commend you for your good, thoughtful reply on the work involved with tech though... pity it was wasted as a reply to a blatent troll though.
I'm sorry to flame like this, and I don't care much of the techno elitism that is rapant on slashdot either... BUT DOESNT THIS JUST CONTRADICT EVERYTHING YOUVE WRITTEN?
What happened to the poor, persecuted geeks who were isolated for their differences?
What happened to the tragic Hellmouth tales of the geeks who suffered for challenging the authority do to their 'above average intelligence?'
What happened to the faceless evil of corporatism and the use of Napster as a form of rebellion?
What happened to the rampant of abuse of artists done by record companies (who now are being robbed by this 'selfish society?')
What happened to free information and the urgent call for it (except in your writings of course, right)?
I don't like the growing zealot and elitist attitude in the tech sector, nor did I agree with your muckracking articles crying foul over the plight of the poor geek and of the need for open/free everything. I agreed with a fair share of the examples in this article, and experienced my own disgust at selfishness and elitism.
But you, sir, are in no position to suddenly 180 from your hyper-sympathy to the geek community and expect us to convenientally forget about all your other muckracking. At first I thought you were just a misguided soul who still had nobility in your adherence to your goals for 'free information and less isolation of the intelligent geek community.' Now I realize you are nothing more than a common troll. I think I will now be using my block filter for you.
While the Big Bang is an utterly bizarre theory to myself, a small part of me believes that it *may* be a relevant part of God's plan as a whole. Perhaps God has a place in the universe for the scientists, or He would not have created them and assigned their role. I will always retain my faith in God, but I keep my mind open to the possibility that greater pieces of His divine plan may be intended to be unraveled after the writing of the Bible. Your intolerant attitude suggests a 17th Century old meme Puritan who is fixated on "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God."
Regardless of your hellfire fixations, allow me to quote Matthew 11:15-11:17. "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented." You are doing a service in your attempts to convert others, but you are commiting the even worse sin of hating your fellow man. You may preach as God says, but you must allow your neighbor to make his own decision, for upon he rests his own salvation. Such hatred on your part violates the Christian covenant with the Lord.
And as for my denomination, how dare you call me a Catholic! I may heed the pope, but I have grown up in a strong, New England Episcopalian background which I continue to apply to my life. I am also somewhat of a transcendentalist such as my namesake, in which I can see the beauty of God as He displays his power through an Oversoul which permeates nature and connects us to it. No matter what you may speak, I am a pure and devoted Christian, which I swear upon in the eyes of our Lord. I only hope He may understand your misguided wrath and spare you from the flames of Hell.
Now instead of trying to hax0r into someone's computer and trying to 0wn them with 31337 skills, all you'd have to do is sneak into his room and smear Neosporin all over his PC :) Enter the new wave of 31337 hax0rs.
While I, as a Christian myself, respect the princples of Jesus Christ and the words of the Bible, I must take offense at the way in which you abuse them through reference. You honestly think God will penalize humanity for paying attention to space exploration and questioning the sciences? I must say I have to wonder if you learned your Christianity straight from Jonathan Edwards :P
Not only do you give us a bad name with your condemnations, you draw inaccurate conclusions from reading the article. It is not being suggested that there is no God, and even if so, I hardly see fit to punish those who differ in our beliefs of the world. The way I see it, the big bang may have occured, but if so it was forseen by God himself as part of his plan. I'd like to know how sending microbes in space will get you sent to hell, sir. As a modern Christian, I am ashamed to count extremists like you in our ranks. Our pope has revealed it that Christians may believe in evolution. I believe in evolution, and I believe that microbes have their own place in the niche of the world.
If I had any problem with the article, it would be that devoting time to microbe research lowers the value of life and humanity to a raw artificial level which strips out the magic of life itself.
All this talk about colonizing planets hearkens back to the Space Race days of the 1950's and 1960's when everyone was raving about how the future will bring cities on the moon. It's 2000 and I still don't see those cities. Granted the concept of a simulator is intriguing, but that is the farthest humankind will get. It's just no feasible or realistic to expect to colonize other planets.
First of all, what is the need of settling Mars, if not to satisfy the ego of 21st century manifest destiny? Earth has its overpopulation and resource problems, but we are still safely far from the brink of those issues. Besides, is this a way of abandoning hope? Earth is gonna be gone, so lets try another planet? Absurd!
Any efforts to bring large scale colonization on Mars would be prohibitively complicated, time consuming and expensive. Even if habitation is possible, there will definitely need to be some way for man to prepare for colonies and deal with such issues as temperature and air composition. It's not as simple as fly in spaceships and build a new world. The costs of settling and transporting people to Mars en masse would be exhorbitant. Maybe 10-20 people can fit on a space shuttle, and those trips cost billions and take months to prepare, as shown by NASA's adventures. It definitely wont happen on a large scale.
It's a good idea, scientists, but why waste effort on idealistic dreams of settling other planets? I'd rather see our great scientific minds work to fix the growing shortage of resources here on Earth.
What's stopping you from converting your cd's to mp3 and making mp3 cds? Besides, I'm sure higher density media will take over at some point anyway.
I want music, not empty bits and bytes that I can't even touch or control.
Fair enough, sir, assuming you are not a troll. Pray tell me why? Factor out the cost of the cd for a second. Now, CD's are: easy to use, extremely portable, have great sound quality, reasonably durable. The only problem with CD's is if something happens of your own fault (e.g. you scratch it to death or lose it or smash it...)
Now look at the options present with 'digital music.' It's highly compressed, thus losing some degree of quality which may or may not be significant. It's easily damaged or lost by conditions that aren't your fault (bad file transfer, crashes, hard drive problems). It will be highly encrypted and beyond your control if people like Shamoon have a say in anything to do with it. And worst of all, DIGITAL MUSIC IS NOT TANGIBLE! You can not carry it around, move it from place to place (if the RIAA implements SDMI and only through media even then), feel it, or look at it. And if a problem comes up with your hard drive or media or internet connection, it's gone for good and knowing the RIAA you're expected to buy another copy. There's just something about the thought of paying money for an encrypted file and having no tangible backup of it that just makes me foam at the mouth.
So is that why you want with the end of cd's?
Exacly one of the reasons why I utterly loathe the concept of 'secure digital music' embodied by SDMI and others. Does he understand what the consumers are thinking? Obviously not! PEOPLE DO NOT WANT CD'S TO GO AWAY! That's a ludicrous and absurd notion. Portable music media is a necessity, because I don't know how many people are willing to shell out money for intangible digital music that they wont be able to control.
People like this are exactly the problem with the whole digital music movement today. Pirates do not exist just because mp3's are out there, they exist because consumers are growing weary of buying overpriced cd's and have the option to get the music free. (Note: I am vehemently anti-piracy, but I understand some of the rationale aside from the whole 'its free' thing) People want to pay for music they can listen to. I think I can speak for many music fans when I say that they do NOT want to spend the same amount of money (on music that they spend on cd's) on watered down digital content with no actual medium. I understand the costs behind the making of the CD's, but if the RIAA actually had any sort of clue they would offer digital songs very cheaply (perhaps some subscription service) so customers could just use them as previews, and then maybe lower the price a dollar or two (let's be realistic, making and recording the full cd is fairly expensive) while increasing the artists cut.
Once again Apple chooses to forsake the rest of the PC using populace by stubbornly adhering to its begrudginly minimalist one-button design. Since my first days as a computer user neither I nor any 'normal' person has had any excessive problems with the traditional two button design, perhaps even finding it easier. Left click actions, right click menus (or vice versa)... that's not too hard to comprehend. I've used one button Apple mouses, and found them consistently annoying and irksome.
Of course there is also the problem that the new mouse appears to be aiming to sell on mainly asthetic value. It costs more than the overpriced wireless MS mouses (the one thing MS always gets right, if you ask me) and yet it keeps the cable. I guess the optical sensor is an innovation from the so called 'puck' (another obvious asthetically based selling point) but still I'd expect better of a long standing company like Apple. I guess Apple doesn't fancy its customers to be above buying based on looks and feel alone (function be damned, right?). Shame on the reviewer too, for he seems to be too absorbed in the attractive design judging by how he shills Apple's latest halfass job.
I realize 'piracy' may be what is most convenient for the general public, but still the artists interest should be in mind. Napster may be copying physically, but in principle it is common thievery and deprives and hurts the artist you are desiring to hear. Yes, the record label's get the majority of the costs from album sales, but you must remember how much they do in the process of realease. They provide quality recording studios, producers, artwork, distribution, and marketing. All are very vital jobs that allow musicians to gain exposure and popularity from their music. Is it asking too much to compensate them for the privilege of listening to their hard work and craft?
Please, don't abuse the ars gratia artis argument and suggest that music should be free for everyone. After all, Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms and the majority of the great classical composers recieved money from patrons and kings in exchange for their works. They were no doubt great artisans, but they also were known at times to churn out compositions in order to recieve the money to afford the cost of living. If Beethoven had not been paid, do you really think we would have his 9 symphonies to treasure today?
Go Here
Yes, it's been done before but those login required sites annoy me to no end.
Go here.
I think that at some point the need for a smaller computer would have arose, prompting scientists to develop the microchip. Granted, the space program did hasten its development, but I think it was obvious as it were that large bulky computers would never be practical. And to be honest, what did we really get out of the Apollo missions except a Tom Hanks movie and a sensationalized media event around Neil Armstrong?