There is one word that is VERY important in this discussion, and I don't see it much on these pages:
CORPORATIONS
So in most cases, nobody makes any money when people can connect and help each other feel good and solve each other's problems. Now, if they are connecting and buying coffee, or they are coming togther and buying entertainment, or they are coming together and buying a meal -- then somebody's making a buck. Or maybe they are coming together in a college classroom, or a dance class, or meeting at the mall. there is a buck there too. Let's not even start with bars.
The one thing I see more and more is the wholesale cash-for-connection thing in the US that is not in other parts of the world. Basically you have to pay to have any place where you can meet *new* people and socialize.
The other affect corporations have is that they keep most people SO busy working to survive, there is little time or energy left to have many friends. This may be toward a demographic older than most/. readers - but I know in my life, the more the work-a-day world takes my time, there is less time for friends. This also is almost uniquely American.
Finally, the rise in corporate power has further stratified society along money lines. In the US we have more financial difference between the top and bottom since the early 1900s. There is virtually no middle class anymore. What this leads to is a reluctance of peopel to reach out to others, for fear of crossing the (now huge) social chasm created by wealth disparity.
I think the rise in power of corporations is largely to blame for destroying the social networks of people - as much or more than the "Internet". Basically, the Internet to me is near-free, near-instant, widely available communication. By ITSELF - more communication will help people connect to more people in more meaningful ways than ever possible before. We have only seen the first 2-5% of what is possible because of the Internet. Instant communication will break down all barriers eventually and lead to abundance.
If you're expecting another episode of desperate housewives, then yes, you would think it was awful.
I thought it was fantastic. it was rich with symbols. more than anything else, I saw the two characters as a representation of different forces both inside people's heads and in , more broadly, forces moving in the world.
Emo - a short for "emotion" represents the feeling (right brain) activities. Proog is the logical, thinking angle - his actions have (up to now) created most of the structure around them (much as the NT types have structured the real world as logical-only wins). There is distinct symbolism throughout that the two exist within a "machine" that resembles many features of what it might look like inside someone's head. Both characters create the machine around them. Proog keeps referring to left and right - the sides of the brain. Proog is desperately trying to convince the young, emerging emotional side that the world he has created is "safe" but all evidence shows us it's not at all safe. Emo seems like he's been abused, kept down by Proog.
Proog is scared of what Emo has and can do. Proog is simultaneously trying to control what Emo sees and what he believes, but also has distinct interest. Emo shows us that he has far more power than Proog to "create" the world they are in, and Proog swiftly knocks him out again.
This whole story is a reflection of what is going on in the world today. Read, for example this:
this "problem" is more a result of the mentality of what employment really means. employer / employee relationships are another example of a relationship typically structured as dominance and heirarchy -- which (across society) are breaking down because of increased ease in mass communication. when enough people figure out what's going on - they don't want to play this game.
yup - that worked pretty well! the search even worked. previous attempts with google earth were lackluster. surpising to me, this time I typed in Mount St. Helens and zooooooom right to the mountain. no shark fin visible though.:(
I've always had a problem with the idea that there was a "beginning" of time, or the universe. No real reason to expect that other than theological ones. and I mostly reject those.
The other thought that comes to mind -- and one that I have not seen discussed is one of regional "big bangs" - that is: in an infinite sea of space, there could be regions of matter that clump, grow in size and then eventually explode out again. there may be several such regions with interstitial space of relatively low matter density.
Also -- imagine if there were a cycle of big bangs in one region. Looking at the numbers, there is a strong argument that intelligent life will arise given the number of stars, planets, time scale and the assumptions about how difficult it is to get living things started. Hence SETI and other search efforts. So... if there were previous big bang cycles there could have been intelligent races. In fact cycles in big bangs greatly increases the chance at some point an intelligent race existed. Imagine where humans might get in a few billion years... Imagine the challenge of trying to get a race to survive through a Big Bang. Or - more interesting for us - affecting the situation after the crunch to encourage intelligent life in the next cycle or possibly leaving a message for us to find. all kinds of neat possibilities.
Note to the information archaeologists of the 31st century.... Hi!
it seems that 3d virtual environments are getting pretty good. lots of people playing WOW and 2nd life, simms...
When I see an article like this - I want a 3D environment. I want to download the "map -o- the crater" and be able to fly around and see what it's really like there.
it wouldn't need to be that detailed, or be a replacement for pictures. it's just that I can't seem to get a sense for the size or the scope of what we're talking about.
3D standards litter the last 10 years like dead bodies in war zones - but it still is nice to dream.
It's true not just in open Linux / open source - it's true everywhere now.
As a consultant - all I do is help startups and organizations really "get" this whole community thing. Many \ factors are pushing it, but mostly increased communication.
Buckner: a name that will live in infamy through to the end of human consciousness due to the tireless and (sometimes unbelievable) sports history fanatics!
How these these people love sports details so much is beyond me.
PostgreSQL is a much bigger long term threat to Oracle than MySQL. The one place where Oracle still has an advantage over FOS projects is in big iron and big databases. PostreSQL has closed that gap significantly where (I believe) MySQL never will. It simply will not serve the market need that Oracle meets now.
in my opinion... PostgreSQL is superior to MySQL in amny ways Ruby has many advantages over Perl and Python... I have been using Perl for 5 years. After 1 month with Ruby, I'm not going back.
... impacting almost every aspect of business, entertainment, and family life as we know it today.
In my opinion, a negative impact. I am so glad I don't own a TV any more. I now think that the real effects of mass video propiganda can only been truly understood by living without TV for a few months. I tolerate it when I'm over at friends houses and in public places like bars, but not as the sole activity.
Many people benefit from scarcity (real or artificial), and those who benefit keep the "system" working with.com as really the only viable game in town for a commercial domain. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Over the last 2 weeks I've been brainstorming on names fora new project and the domain name issue is insane. All reasonable combinations of 1 or 2 words in business oriented applications are taken in.com -- and 3/4 oof them have either no content or parked ads.
I think there should be arbitrary three and four-letter TLD's - just open it up.
this was close to my first thought... this is "fox news" folks. I don't trust fox news at all any more. Call them whnat they are: liars. From my point of view, sometimes what's reported is true, but often times it's not -- not much of a "news" source.
I agree. The real issue here is that there is no authenication to send mail.
Lots of people have thought on this problem -- so I'll add another idea to the mix:
imail: a completely different service from email. works on a different port, different rfc, an open standard - borrows most stuff that works from smtp, but it is bi-directional.
addresses would look differnt, maybe like user007#domain21.com
Basically, imail servers must authenicate users when accepting a mail. They are responsible for the content in the From: and Reply-To fields. When a server accepts mail from another server, there must also be an authenitcation, either by keys or by IP. Mechanism must exists for a server to autheticate to another server, and for feedback to come back regarding misuse relevant to specific messages (bidirectional). Each server maintain numerical thresholds (for age of relationship, total # sent and # flagged) that, when they get too high, will trigger no longer accepting mail from other servers or a given user. Servers would probably implement policies to limit numbers of emails at first, and let the number grow with time.
Imail clients have a defined protocol for sending feedback to the imail server about a specific mail that is unwanted. It's very simple, if a mail is unwanted, end recipient flags it in the imail client and a message (a server request with data) goes back to the server. The sever knows for each message it delivered which upstream imail server it came from, and passes the message back. For any given server, when enough of those messages get sent back, it would simply stop accepting imail from that server or user. This will force the owners of imail servers to play nice, or no one will accept imail from them.
Getting an imail account means having an imail server that would be willing to let you have one. Setting up your own imail server would be a challenge, but not impossible - you would need to get other imail servers to know you send mail that does not generate flags from their imail clients they service. Each server could maintain white lists/black lists for known good imail servers and provide the number of flags recieved. This would allow new servers to pop up. Another way would be to have new seevers be accepted, but with low transfer rates until messages went through without being flagged, and then slowly increase the number allowed. And finally, imail clients that are rejected could send the message by email.
Finally, imail addresses would mirror exactly existing email addresses: so if user007@domain21.com is the email, then simply using the # is the imail...
I'm being pretty vague - it would be easier to draw on paper.
I would say that spam and junk faxes are directly at the center of the free speech and the problems that arise because of the ease and lower costs in mass communication.
You have a choice to accept email or faxes. Those costs are ones you choose to accept by connecting to the system. Should we limit free speech to make it more convenient for people? Darn inconvenient when lots of people want to talk and they say things we don't like. Maybe the US should limit assembly too -- to make it more convenient for the police and the FBI? hmmm, that doesn't sound so good - but how is it any different?
You would be correct, if spammers didn't take measures to disguise their messages
I agree that people who use email for DNS attacks or other annoying and disruptive actions are not ones I would support.
But there are 2 problems with your statement above. The "disguise their messages" is vague. Who says someone can't choose to communicate any way they want? No one agreed to the rules you expect for proper english, well formed headers, or proper server syntax. Expressing yourself the way you choose is the core of what free speech is.
The second problem is bunching all people who spam together into one pot. There are lots of different activities. If I find the address of a person online and send an email to the person with a question - technically I'm spammer: I sent an unsolicited email. Do the rules change if I send 10,000? If so, this is not consistent with the core of free speech.
I don't like spam. Its people trying to sell me stuff get my attention and distract me from my work. The world would be great if no one had a need to spam.
Free speech is an even more powerful concept. This means that everyone has the right to express themselves. EVEN IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEY STILL HAVE THE RIGHT. Spam is a great example defining whose responsibility is it to determine what you hear? Email addresses are effectively public domain - like standing out in public. It's the inbox owner who must decide what they want.
All that said, effective spam filtering works really, really well. I get 200+ spam/day and see 3-5/week in my inbox, and virtually 0 false positives. I use vanilla spamassassin and regularly update the ruleset (with 1 keystroke in mutt) for each false negative.
Posts like this on China makes me realize that even with the lying criminals running the US - they are still (for now) better off than the Chinese.
Slashdot Mirror
There is one word that is VERY important in this discussion, and I don't see it much on these pages:
/. readers - but I know in my life, the more the work-a-day world takes my time, there is less time for friends. This also is almost uniquely American.
CORPORATIONS
So in most cases, nobody makes any money when people can connect and help each other feel good and solve each other's problems. Now, if they are connecting and buying coffee, or they are coming togther and buying entertainment, or they are coming together and buying a meal -- then somebody's making a buck. Or maybe they are coming together in a college classroom, or a dance class, or meeting at the mall. there is a buck there too. Let's not even start with bars.
The one thing I see more and more is the wholesale cash-for-connection thing in the US that is not in other parts of the world. Basically you have to pay to have any place where you can meet *new* people and socialize.
The other affect corporations have is that they keep most people SO busy working to survive, there is little time or energy left to have many friends. This may be toward a demographic older than most
Finally, the rise in corporate power has further stratified society along money lines. In the US we have more financial difference between the top and bottom since the early 1900s. There is virtually no middle class anymore. What this leads to is a reluctance of peopel to reach out to others, for fear of crossing the (now huge) social chasm created by wealth disparity.
I think the rise in power of corporations is largely to blame for destroying the social networks of people - as much or more than the "Internet". Basically, the Internet to me is near-free, near-instant, widely available communication. By ITSELF - more communication will help people connect to more people in more meaningful ways than ever possible before. We have only seen the first 2-5% of what is possible because of the Internet. Instant communication will break down all barriers eventually and lead to abundance.
is "Ill" schools
So lots of people are saying how bad this is.
m l
If you're expecting another episode of desperate housewives, then yes, you would think it was awful.
I thought it was fantastic. it was rich with symbols. more than anything else, I saw the two characters as a representation of different forces both inside people's heads and in , more broadly, forces moving in the world.
Emo - a short for "emotion" represents the feeling (right brain) activities. Proog is the logical, thinking angle - his actions have (up to now) created most of the structure around them (much as the NT types have structured the real world as logical-only wins). There is distinct symbolism throughout that the two exist within a "machine" that resembles many features of what it might look like inside someone's head. Both characters create the machine around them. Proog keeps referring to left and right - the sides of the brain. Proog is desperately trying to convince the young, emerging emotional side that the world he has created is "safe" but all evidence shows us it's not at all safe. Emo seems like he's been abused, kept down by Proog.
Proog is scared of what Emo has and can do. Proog is simultaneously trying to control what Emo sees and what he believes, but also has distinct interest. Emo shows us that he has far more power than Proog to "create" the world they are in, and Proog swiftly knocks him out again.
This whole story is a reflection of what is going on in the world today. Read, for example this:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.02/brain.ht
Part of the issue with the Slashdot crowd is that mostly you are "T" oriented, so you won't "get" this it at all.
This is the story of the emergence of the power of the NF, and the efforts of the NT to control and prevent it. It's a loosing battle folks.
PLEASE tell us what bank you work for so that I will know to never use them. Asking SLASHDOT how to create a security policy?
That's like asking a rioting mob how to reach enlightenment.
I use my local credit union.
jesus christ (PBUH) - life imitates art!
this is straight out of colbert
this "problem" is more a result of the mentality of what employment really means. employer / employee relationships are another example of a relationship typically structured as dominance and heirarchy -- which (across society) are breaking down because of increased ease in mass communication. when enough people figure out what's going on - they don't want to play this game.
yup - that worked pretty well! the search even worked. previous attempts with google earth were lackluster. surpising to me, this time I typed in Mount St. Helens and zooooooom right to the mountain. no shark fin visible though. :(
I've always had a problem with the idea that there was a "beginning" of time, or the universe. No real reason to expect that other than theological ones. and I mostly reject those.
The other thought that comes to mind -- and one that I have not seen discussed is one of regional "big bangs" - that is: in an infinite sea of space, there could be regions of matter that clump, grow in size and then eventually explode out again. there may be several such regions with interstitial space of relatively low matter density.
Also -- imagine if there were a cycle of big bangs in one region. Looking at the numbers, there is a strong argument that intelligent life will arise given the number of stars, planets, time scale and the assumptions about how difficult it is to get living things started. Hence SETI and other search efforts. So... if there were previous big bang cycles there could have been intelligent races. In fact cycles in big bangs greatly increases the chance at some point an intelligent race existed. Imagine where humans might get in a few billion years... Imagine the challenge of trying to get a race to survive through a Big Bang. Or - more interesting for us - affecting the situation after the crunch to encourage intelligent life in the next cycle or possibly leaving a message for us to find. all kinds of neat possibilities.
Note to the information archaeologists of the 31st century.... Hi!
reading more into the eruption... found some cool before and after pics
8 0_st_helens_from_johnston_ridge_05-17-80_med.jpg
8 0_st_helens_from_johnston_ridge_09-10-80_med.jpg
Before:
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Imgs/Jpg/MSH/Images/MSH
After:
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Imgs/Jpg/MSH/Images/MSH
wow
TFA links to a "volcano cam"
http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/
it seems that 3d virtual environments are getting pretty good. lots of people playing WOW and 2nd life, simms...
When I see an article like this - I want a 3D environment. I want to download the "map -o- the crater" and be able to fly around and see what it's really like there.
it wouldn't need to be that detailed, or be a replacement for pictures. it's just that I can't seem to get a sense for the size or the scope of what we're talking about.
3D standards litter the last 10 years like dead bodies in war zones - but it still is nice to dream.
It's true not just in open Linux / open source - it's true everywhere now.
As a consultant - all I do is help startups and organizations really "get" this whole community thing. Many \
factors are pushing it, but mostly increased communication.
Buckner: a name that will live in infamy through to the end of human consciousness due to the tireless and (sometimes unbelievable) sports history fanatics!
How these these people love sports details so much is beyond me.
I wish Bush was censured
well, I want Bush in an orange jumpsuit with leg irons. He deserves no better.
like this.
PostgreSQL is a much bigger long term threat to Oracle than MySQL. The one place where Oracle still has an advantage over FOS projects is in big iron and big databases. PostreSQL has closed that gap significantly where (I believe) MySQL never will. It simply will not serve the market need that Oracle meets now.
I think LAMP should/will become LARP:
... I have been using Perl for 5 years. After 1 month with Ruby, I'm not going back.
Linux Apache Ruby PostgreSQL
in my opinion...
PostgreSQL is superior to MySQL in amny ways
Ruby has many advantages over Perl and Python
In my opinion, a negative impact. I am so glad I don't own a TV any more. I now think that the real effects of mass video propiganda can only been truly understood by living without TV for a few months. I tolerate it when I'm over at friends houses and in public places like bars, but not as the sole activity.
Anyone else out there kick the addiction?
two words: artificial scarcity
.com as really the only viable game in town for a commercial domain. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Over the last 2 weeks I've been brainstorming on names fora new project and the domain name issue is insane. All reasonable combinations of 1 or 2 words in business oriented applications are taken in .com -- and 3/4 oof them have either no content or parked ads.
Many people benefit from scarcity (real or artificial), and those who benefit keep the "system" working with
I think there should be arbitrary three and four-letter TLD's - just open it up.
this was close to my first thought ... this is "fox news" folks. I don't trust fox news at all any more. Call them whnat they are: liars. From my point of view, sometimes what's reported is true, but often times it's not -- not much of a "news" source.
I found this list a good reply to the small-minded right-wing majority:
Bush Wrong 36 Ways
by Edward Jayne
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Jayne11.htm
Slanted: yes, but a useful list to put things in perspective.
I agree. The real issue here is that there is no authenication to send mail.
Lots of people have thought on this problem -- so I'll add another idea to the mix:
imail: a completely different service from email. works on a different port, different rfc, an open standard - borrows most stuff that works from smtp, but it is bi-directional.
addresses would look differnt, maybe like
user007#domain21.com
Basically, imail servers must authenicate users when accepting a mail. They are responsible for the content in the From: and Reply-To fields. When a server accepts mail from another server, there must also be an authenitcation, either by keys or by IP. Mechanism must exists for a server to autheticate to another server, and for feedback to come back regarding misuse relevant to specific messages (bidirectional). Each server maintain numerical thresholds (for age of relationship, total # sent and # flagged) that, when they get too high, will trigger no longer accepting mail from other servers or a given user. Servers would probably implement policies to limit numbers of emails at first, and let the number grow with time.
Imail clients have a defined protocol for sending feedback to the imail server about a specific mail that is unwanted. It's very simple, if a mail is unwanted, end recipient flags it in the imail client and a message (a server request with data) goes back to the server. The sever knows for each message it delivered which upstream imail server it came from, and passes the message back. For any given server, when enough of those messages get sent back, it would simply stop accepting imail from that server or user. This will force the owners of imail servers to play nice, or no one will accept imail from them.
Getting an imail account means having an imail server that would be willing to let you have one. Setting up your own imail server would be a challenge, but not impossible - you would need to get other imail servers to know you send mail that does not generate flags from their imail clients they service. Each server could maintain white lists/black lists for known good imail servers and provide the number of flags recieved. This would allow new servers to pop up. Another way would be to have new seevers be accepted, but with low transfer rates until messages went through without being flagged, and then slowly increase the number allowed. And finally, imail clients that are rejected could send the message by email.
Finally, imail addresses would mirror exactly existing email addresses:
so if user007@domain21.com is the email, then simply using the # is the imail...
I'm being pretty vague - it would be easier to draw on paper.
I would say that spam and junk faxes are directly at the center of the free speech and the problems that arise because of the ease and lower costs in mass communication.
You have a choice to accept email or faxes. Those costs are ones you choose to accept by connecting to the system. Should we limit free speech to make it more convenient for people? Darn inconvenient when lots of people want to talk and they say things we don't like. Maybe the US should limit assembly too -- to make it more convenient for the police and the FBI? hmmm, that doesn't sound so good - but how is it any different?
You would be correct, if spammers didn't take measures to disguise their messages
I agree that people who use email for DNS attacks or other annoying and disruptive actions are not ones I would support.
But there are 2 problems with your statement above. The "disguise their messages" is vague. Who says someone can't choose to communicate any way they want? No one agreed to the rules you expect for proper english, well formed headers, or proper server syntax. Expressing yourself the way you choose is the core of what free speech is.
The second problem is bunching all people who spam together into one pot. There are lots of different activities. If I find the address of a person online and send an email to the person with a question - technically I'm spammer: I sent an unsolicited email. Do the rules change if I send 10,000? If so, this is not consistent with the core of free speech.
my experience with iTunes and buying videos
d =15104209
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=182689&ci
I don't like spam. Its people trying to sell me stuff get my attention and distract me from my work. The world would be great if no one had a need to spam.
Free speech is an even more powerful concept. This means that everyone has the right to express themselves. EVEN IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEY STILL HAVE THE RIGHT. Spam is a great example defining whose responsibility is it to determine what you hear? Email addresses are effectively public domain - like standing out in public. It's the inbox owner who must decide what they want.
All that said, effective spam filtering works really, really well. I get 200+ spam/day and see 3-5/week in my inbox, and virtually 0 false positives. I use vanilla spamassassin and regularly update the ruleset (with 1 keystroke in mutt) for each false negative.
Posts like this on China makes me realize that even with the lying criminals running the US - they are still (for now) better off than the Chinese.