Very true. I've been using Redhat Linux (starting with 7.3) on a laptop for, what, 3 years? I'm currently running RH9 on an HP ze1230.
It certainly works, but the features I miss are:
1. Proper battery reporting. There is some applet I can run (battfink or batmon or something like that?), but sometimes it doesn't report the battery status correctly. And sometimes it crashes.
2. Hibernate mode. I'd like to be able to shut the screen on my laptop and have the thing go to sleep. That doesn't happen.
3. Screen power-off. My screensaver is "turn off screen" but the backlight doesn't turn off.
Perhaps all of these features are currently supported--or maybe they were even supported in RH9--but I don't have the time or inclination to go dinking around trying to figure out how to make it work. Neither do most end users. These features should just work "out of the box."
While taxes are a necessary evil, they must be minimized. That's because, unlike private industry where you can take your business elsewhere, you cannot opt out of taxes just because you don't use the "services" that are being "provided." If you don't need a service being offered by a business, you don't buy that service--but no such luxury is available when it comes to taxes.
I believe the government should build and maintain roads, provide domestic security (police, essentially) so that we are not in danger out in public, and provide for the defense of the country. Local governments should also provide public education. THAT'S IT. If that's all we had to pay for tax-wise we'd probably be paying about 20% what we pay now in taxes... and be not confused, social security and medicare are both taxes.
Minimal taxation is not unreasonable and is a necessary evil of life. But the "services" provided by the government have far exceeded what is necessary and the taxation necessary to support that spending is a huge burden on the citizens.
In that sense, minimal taxation is reasonable. But excessive taxation beyond the minimal amount necessary to support the basic functions of government is, morally, theft.
Microsoft officials told BetaNews they are trying 'to find a way that companies can implement these technologies in code that would get distributed with open source products, but the source code wouldn't be published itself.'"
In other news, Microsoft is looking for a way to have its cake and eat it too.
That sucked, especially since they wouldn't let me return it because I had cut the UPC off (guess their is a problem with people cashing in on rebates and returning goods, never intending to keep them in the first place). Since I did the damage, it wasn't covered under warranty either, so I was SOL.
Were you trying to return it or exchange it? I'd say that if you really wanted the printer, you were trying to exchange it. I just bought an $800 camera and had a small problem. I walked into Best Buy with the camera (no box, no manual, etc.) and a copy of my original receipt. They exchanged it without blinking an eye.
Now, if you were trying to return it after slicing the cable, well, that's just weird.
I've received every rebate I've sent in for from Best Buy, including a $100 rebate on a laptop about 2 years ago. I never received anything back from them except a check.
I also just recently purchased an $800 digital camera in San Antonio. I was hundreds of miles away when I discovered a problem (a stuck pixel, or a "hot pixel" or whatever you wanted to call them). I walked into another Best Buy, explained that I had found a problem and would like to exchange, and they accepted it no problem at all. Didn't just swap out the camera either--they told me, "We're going to exchange the camera, lense, and battery... might as well start fresh."
I'm sure Best Buy is guilty of all kinds of bad things. All companies above a certain size are just because, statistically speaking, it's hard to do nothing wrong once you get to a certain size. But I've personally had nothing but good luck with Best Buy.
The reason is that pirates always try to paint their activities as some sort of revolution for the artists against the big, bad record labels. It's not the case...piracy is just people wanting to get stuff for free.
Sorry to break it to you, but DRM is the only way to sell media on computers without mass piracy.
So we're supposed to accept DRM because they somehow feel entitled to our money? Oxygen is freely available too. If it were't, someone would be charging for it. That doesn't mean that some chemical company is entitled to a subsidy, tax, or other business structure to prop up their failing business because no-one is willing to pay for their freely-available Oxygen product.
My prediction: Artists will make money off of concerts, merchandise, and endorsements but their music will be available free. More music will be available from more artists since the only difference between a garage band and Madonna will be the quality of their music, not whether or not they got a record contract. And I predict the recording industry will shrivel up and die because it no longer serves a useful purpose. And I mean the recording industry, not music. RIAA != music. If RIAA dies that doesn't mean music dies. It just means some useless media executive will go have to find a real job instead of pimping for the real talent which is the musicians.
Yes, things will get worse before they get better. The recording industry will not die quietly. But it will die. And music will be free. Technology and the free market guarantees that, and even rich industry and corrupt government are incapable of stopping technology and market forces over the long term. It's like a 5-foot seawall trying to stop a 50-foot tsunami.
Here in Monterrey Mexico, there is one major local paper: El Norte. They used to have a free website that gave full access to everything in their printed paper. Well about a year or two ago they started charging; and not just a little, they're charging MXP$450 for 3 months! That's about US$40 per quarter, or $13/month! Consider that their paper subscription is N$550/quarter ($16/month) and you have to wonder what they're smoking.
Needless to say I stopped reading their newspaper and, no, I don't buy the print version either. The only thing I miss is some local news in Monterrey--everything else is covered and available for free elsewhere. And there's simply not enough news going on in Monterrey to justify paying US$13/month to read about it online.
I also don't know how well their subscription system has done. I don't know anyone who has subscribed, though I do know of a lot of people who use "borrowed" accounts.
Almost everything else that was free (and legal) on the 'net is gone now.
Like what? I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm sure you have examples. But as far as I recall I've never subscribed or paid for anything on the web (other than placing orders for physical goods) and I don't seem to feel any more restricted today than I did 5 or 10 years ago.
Absolutely. I live in Mexico where the taxes are even more absurd than in the U.S. Essentially, you get a $600/year exemption and then pay 35% on all additional income.
I am unable to offer my consulting services at a reasonable price in Mexico. If I offer my consulting services at the same price I offer them in the U.S., I'm actually earning 35% less. If I increase my rates 35% in Mexico, I've priced myself out of the market.
Yes, my decision since 4 years ago was to not do business in Mexico. Period. Even though I live here. All my business takes place in the U.S. and is subject to U.S. tax law.
So you can claim that what the original poster said is complete and utter nonsense, but I can assure you that he's completely right. Unfair taxes do reduce the incentive to work. In the case of me in Mexico, it's forced me right out of the market. I earn less money, Mexico's government collects less tax, and Mexican business do not benefit from the services I could be providing them. EVERYONE LOSES.
I'm sure there are cases in which Think Secret has had it wrong- how could he possibly fact check the rumor for backup- get someone else to break a non-disclosure agreement?
And I'm sure there are quite a few cases in which the "mainstream media" had it wrong. One need not look any further than CBSNews and the Bush files to see that.
I'd say that in some cases bloggers might conduct enough investigation to be considered journalism and in some cases the mainstream media disregards the truth or does not conduct adequate research to warrant their elevation above a common blogger.
In either case, we should be suspicious of and look for biases in everything we read--be it from a blog or from the "mainstream media." Both have provided ample reason to not put our full trust in what they report.
Ah, well that isn't at all clear in the sentence of the summary that reads: "23 people paid £50,000 to settle out of court". It can be read either way. When I started reading the story I, too, was under the impression it was £50,000 each.
Yep, and XP is what finally drove me to Linux on my laptop. I had kicking the idea around for awhile, but when I bought a new laptop that came with XP pre-installed and it ran my applications slow than my previous laptop running '98, I said "enough is enough." I bought a new HD, stored the old Windows HD in case I ever needed it for anything or if I had problems installing Linux. I then proceeded to install Linux without a hitch.
That was two years ago. And while my decision was based on many factors, XP was the breaking point that caused me to make the jump. I don't regret that decision at all.
Apparently the data is based on lots of ocean temperatures. But all the conclusions are based off of models. I love how the article concludes that the debate on whether or not humans are causing it to be "over." What a load of B.S. The debate isn't over just because their latest fangled model says it's over.
So basically it evolved liked this:
1. 1970's... Here comes an ice age!
2. 1980's... No ice, in fact the problem is the ozone hole and global warming!
3. 1990's... Well, satellites don't really seem to be showing any significant warming, but check out these massaged surface records from lots of stations in urban heat islands of varying quality over the last 100 years.
4. 2000's... Well, the temperature doesn't seem to be rising that much, but that's because global warming might actually cause regional cooling. If temperatures seem warmer, that's global warming. If temperatures seem cooler, that's regional cooling. And if storms are more or less and intense than they used to be, that's even more proof. Droughts are now because of global warming when they used to just be droughts.
5. 2004... Watch out, the ocean conveyor belt is going to shut down and Europe is going to get cold. Oh, and check out this cool movie, Day after Tomorrow (audience snickers).
6. 2005... Ok, so stop looking at the atmosphere for evidence of global warming. The ocean is the proof now. And that cinches it.
Could this be any more silly? Next they're going to point to a 5 degree rise in average temperature on the moon as evidence of global warming because of atmospheric expansion which is going to cause 10 molecules of our atmosphere to hit the moon every year instead of the 5, currently.
But the most ridiculous thing of this article is their absolute conclusion that humans are to blame, that there's no other explanation because the models they wrote say so. Arrogant pricks.
Just goes to show that overpriced SSL certificates are worthless. That's why I use InstantSSL... cheap and no frills. But who cares. If it encrypts the connection, that's what people really care about.
The only tension that exists between technology and faith is on the part of the faithful.
And on the part of the religiously un-faithful. Face it, there are people that are just as vocal about their beliefs that religion is goofy as there are that believe that religion is the answer to everything. No need to paint the faithful as the only radical bunch in the equation.
So perhaps this $10 tax (let's call it what it really is) will be waived for monitors and computers that don't use toxic materials? I'm not saying the technology exists now, but this looks like the kind of thing that could get instituted now and, 20 years from now when things are made with no toxic material, the tax will still be there, filling up government coffers along with all the other taxes that were only supposed to be "temporary" in nature.
And it breaks new ground by putting a figure - for the first time in such a high-level document - on the danger point of global warming, that is, the temperature rise beyond which the world would be irretrievably committed to disastrous changes. These could include widespread agricultural failure, water shortages and major droughts, increased disease, sea-level rise and the death of forests - with the added possibility of abrupt catastrophic events such as "runaway" global warming, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, or the switching-off of the Gulf Stream.
Oh, good. It's nice to know we finally have an environmentalist scare report that contains all the gloom and doom in a single document.
I'm glad they're starting to put solid numbers and dates behind these predictions though. When it doesn't happen at least we can finally start realizing it was a political effort, not an environmental one based on real science.
That being said, if you have thirty seconds to impress a potential employer, starting with "I went to Harvard" will usually always do more than "I have a correspondence degree from the Saskatoon Community College of Liberal Arts and Small Engine Repair."
Of course, if you got a correspondence degree from Saskatoon Community College of Liberal Arts and Small Engine Repair you probably wouldn't spend your thirty seconds focusing on that--you'd spend it focusing on what you've accomplished since then.
On my resume my education comes after my work experience and no-one has ever asked me about my education.
I think what school you went to, at best, makes a difference for your first job when you have no experience. Given two people with no experience but one went to Harvard, sure, Harvard would probably have an edge (depending on interview performance). But once you have work experience under your belt it has been my experience that no-one cares where you went to school. That's ancient history. What matters is the ability you've demonstrated since then.
But it's very interesting that you assume that the Harvard grad can't do it, and hasn't done it.
Actually, what I told the interviewer was that I had real experience and the Harvard graduate may just have academic experience. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear in my original post.
That said, that was my answer in the interview. After I was hired that person became my boss (14 years later I no longer work for him but he remains one of my best friends) he told me that, effectively, the Harvard man had no real experience and he was struck both by my real experience and the fact that a "19 year old punk kid" (which is what he used to call me, in good humor) would have the balls to say that of a Harvard grad.:)
Slashdot Mirror
It certainly works, but the features I miss are:
1. Proper battery reporting. There is some applet I can run (battfink or batmon or something like that?), but sometimes it doesn't report the battery status correctly. And sometimes it crashes.
2. Hibernate mode. I'd like to be able to shut the screen on my laptop and have the thing go to sleep. That doesn't happen.
3. Screen power-off. My screensaver is "turn off screen" but the backlight doesn't turn off.
Perhaps all of these features are currently supported--or maybe they were even supported in RH9--but I don't have the time or inclination to go dinking around trying to figure out how to make it work. Neither do most end users. These features should just work "out of the box."
Cool, that's where I want to buy gas!
I believe the government should build and maintain roads, provide domestic security (police, essentially) so that we are not in danger out in public, and provide for the defense of the country. Local governments should also provide public education. THAT'S IT. If that's all we had to pay for tax-wise we'd probably be paying about 20% what we pay now in taxes... and be not confused, social security and medicare are both taxes.
Minimal taxation is not unreasonable and is a necessary evil of life. But the "services" provided by the government have far exceeded what is necessary and the taxation necessary to support that spending is a huge burden on the citizens.
In that sense, minimal taxation is reasonable. But excessive taxation beyond the minimal amount necessary to support the basic functions of government is, morally, theft.
In other news, Microsoft is looking for a way to have its cake and eat it too.
Were you trying to return it or exchange it? I'd say that if you really wanted the printer, you were trying to exchange it. I just bought an $800 camera and had a small problem. I walked into Best Buy with the camera (no box, no manual, etc.) and a copy of my original receipt. They exchanged it without blinking an eye.
Now, if you were trying to return it after slicing the cable, well, that's just weird.
I also just recently purchased an $800 digital camera in San Antonio. I was hundreds of miles away when I discovered a problem (a stuck pixel, or a "hot pixel" or whatever you wanted to call them). I walked into another Best Buy, explained that I had found a problem and would like to exchange, and they accepted it no problem at all. Didn't just swap out the camera either--they told me, "We're going to exchange the camera, lense, and battery... might as well start fresh."
I'm sure Best Buy is guilty of all kinds of bad things. All companies above a certain size are just because, statistically speaking, it's hard to do nothing wrong once you get to a certain size. But I've personally had nothing but good luck with Best Buy.
Actually, if we're going to be honest, it's both.
So we're supposed to accept DRM because they somehow feel entitled to our money? Oxygen is freely available too. If it were't, someone would be charging for it. That doesn't mean that some chemical company is entitled to a subsidy, tax, or other business structure to prop up their failing business because no-one is willing to pay for their freely-available Oxygen product.
My prediction: Artists will make money off of concerts, merchandise, and endorsements but their music will be available free. More music will be available from more artists since the only difference between a garage band and Madonna will be the quality of their music, not whether or not they got a record contract. And I predict the recording industry will shrivel up and die because it no longer serves a useful purpose. And I mean the recording industry, not music. RIAA != music. If RIAA dies that doesn't mean music dies. It just means some useless media executive will go have to find a real job instead of pimping for the real talent which is the musicians.
Yes, things will get worse before they get better. The recording industry will not die quietly. But it will die. And music will be free. Technology and the free market guarantees that, and even rich industry and corrupt government are incapable of stopping technology and market forces over the long term. It's like a 5-foot seawall trying to stop a 50-foot tsunami.
"1111111111" is cool and all, but won't it be even more cool when we get to "2222222222?" :)
Needless to say I stopped reading their newspaper and, no, I don't buy the print version either. The only thing I miss is some local news in Monterrey--everything else is covered and available for free elsewhere. And there's simply not enough news going on in Monterrey to justify paying US$13/month to read about it online.
I also don't know how well their subscription system has done. I don't know anyone who has subscribed, though I do know of a lot of people who use "borrowed" accounts.
Like what? I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm sure you have examples. But as far as I recall I've never subscribed or paid for anything on the web (other than placing orders for physical goods) and I don't seem to feel any more restricted today than I did 5 or 10 years ago.
I am unable to offer my consulting services at a reasonable price in Mexico. If I offer my consulting services at the same price I offer them in the U.S., I'm actually earning 35% less. If I increase my rates 35% in Mexico, I've priced myself out of the market.
Yes, my decision since 4 years ago was to not do business in Mexico. Period. Even though I live here. All my business takes place in the U.S. and is subject to U.S. tax law.
So you can claim that what the original poster said is complete and utter nonsense, but I can assure you that he's completely right. Unfair taxes do reduce the incentive to work. In the case of me in Mexico, it's forced me right out of the market. I earn less money, Mexico's government collects less tax, and Mexican business do not benefit from the services I could be providing them. EVERYONE LOSES.
And I'm sure there are quite a few cases in which the "mainstream media" had it wrong. One need not look any further than CBSNews and the Bush files to see that.
I'd say that in some cases bloggers might conduct enough investigation to be considered journalism and in some cases the mainstream media disregards the truth or does not conduct adequate research to warrant their elevation above a common blogger.
In either case, we should be suspicious of and look for biases in everything we read--be it from a blog or from the "mainstream media." Both have provided ample reason to not put our full trust in what they report.
No, I didn't RTFA.
That was two years ago. And while my decision was based on many factors, XP was the breaking point that caused me to make the jump. I don't regret that decision at all.
I like saying "No, thank you". Throwing in the "thank you" confuses them long enough that they don't even try to insist until you're out the door.
So basically it evolved liked this:
1. 1970's... Here comes an ice age!
2. 1980's... No ice, in fact the problem is the ozone hole and global warming!
3. 1990's... Well, satellites don't really seem to be showing any significant warming, but check out these massaged surface records from lots of stations in urban heat islands of varying quality over the last 100 years.
4. 2000's... Well, the temperature doesn't seem to be rising that much, but that's because global warming might actually cause regional cooling. If temperatures seem warmer, that's global warming. If temperatures seem cooler, that's regional cooling. And if storms are more or less and intense than they used to be, that's even more proof. Droughts are now because of global warming when they used to just be droughts.
5. 2004... Watch out, the ocean conveyor belt is going to shut down and Europe is going to get cold. Oh, and check out this cool movie, Day after Tomorrow (audience snickers).
6. 2005... Ok, so stop looking at the atmosphere for evidence of global warming. The ocean is the proof now. And that cinches it.
Could this be any more silly? Next they're going to point to a 5 degree rise in average temperature on the moon as evidence of global warming because of atmospheric expansion which is going to cause 10 molecules of our atmosphere to hit the moon every year instead of the 5, currently.
But the most ridiculous thing of this article is their absolute conclusion that humans are to blame, that there's no other explanation because the models they wrote say so. Arrogant pricks.
And on the part of the religiously un-faithful. Face it, there are people that are just as vocal about their beliefs that religion is goofy as there are that believe that religion is the answer to everything. No need to paint the faithful as the only radical bunch in the equation.
- And it breaks new ground by putting a figure - for the first time in such a high-level document - on the danger point of global warming, that is, the temperature rise beyond which the world would be irretrievably committed to disastrous changes. These could include widespread agricultural failure, water shortages and major droughts, increased disease, sea-level rise and the death of forests - with the added possibility of abrupt catastrophic events such as "runaway" global warming, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, or the switching-off of the Gulf Stream.
Oh, good. It's nice to know we finally have an environmentalist scare report that contains all the gloom and doom in a single document.I'm glad they're starting to put solid numbers and dates behind these predictions though. When it doesn't happen at least we can finally start realizing it was a political effort, not an environmental one based on real science.
Of course, if you got a correspondence degree from Saskatoon Community College of Liberal Arts and Small Engine Repair you probably wouldn't spend your thirty seconds focusing on that--you'd spend it focusing on what you've accomplished since then.
On my resume my education comes after my work experience and no-one has ever asked me about my education.
I think what school you went to, at best, makes a difference for your first job when you have no experience. Given two people with no experience but one went to Harvard, sure, Harvard would probably have an edge (depending on interview performance). But once you have work experience under your belt it has been my experience that no-one cares where you went to school. That's ancient history. What matters is the ability you've demonstrated since then.
Actually, what I told the interviewer was that I had real experience and the Harvard graduate may just have academic experience. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear in my original post.
That said, that was my answer in the interview. After I was hired that person became my boss (14 years later I no longer work for him but he remains one of my best friends) he told me that, effectively, the Harvard man had no real experience and he was struck both by my real experience and the fact that a "19 year old punk kid" (which is what he used to call me, in good humor) would have the balls to say that of a Harvard grad. :)