"The Hindenberg fear of hydrogen is also misplaced. The paint on the skin of the Hindenberg was composed of similar chemicals to gunpowder, making it extremely inflammable. It is likely the skin that caught fire first, even after which the terrible fire was not fueled by hydrogen, because all the hydrogen was consumed within a minute of the crash (Rogerson, 1991)."
The problem was the paint, not the hydrogen. I like to mention this any time safety concerns involving the Hindenberg crop up. Is there a more focused corollary for Godwin's law in discussions about hydrogen fuels? : )
Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion...
You're stretching your metaphor a lot beyond the breaking point. If Coke owned 90% of the trucks capable of delivering cola to stores, and did not allow other cola manufacturers to use them (or charged them exorbitantly to do so), Coke would have the sort of monopoly power that, according to the findings of law, Microsoft wields.
WHY should the Court not force a company to abandon an industry? Does Microsoft have some sort of inalienable right to exist? PEOPLE have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. CORPORATIONS have no such guarantees. We're kind of getting off on a tangent from your original argument, due to my quip. However, businesses that are found to wield monopoly power can and should be treated differently by the law than businesses that do not.
As far as GPL'ing Windows...ick! Who'd want to try to figure out THAT code?? : )
It might take longer to install a phone line (though I've never had an analog line take more than five to seven days), but it's a hell of a lot cheaper (overall...especially in Texas, they're still playing some nasty games with the rates. Metro number my arse...). And I can plug whatever I want to into it. And I don't have to pay through the nose for long distance.
Thanks, but the good old days of monopoly telephone service just weren't.
Exackery. Very clever of you to home in on the point. : ) Microsoft doesn't get to be anything more than just another company. They don't get to be the 800 pound monopoly gorilla they've been playing for the last seven(ish) years. They get to be a company, which has to obey the law. Mission accomplished.
Why should he be taken seriously? Umm...perhaps because of the well-thought-out nature of his commentary? Geez...since when do you have to have credentials to write an essay?
Take the arguments for what they are...arguments. They stand on their own, apart from the politics or qualifications of their expressor.
Do you think Microsoft is going to hesitate for a nanosecond thinking about all the nice people who work for Slashdot (or the DOJ or Stac Electronics or Digital Research or Sun or whoever they happen to be trying to destroy today) if it improves their bottom line? Look, people who own Microsoft stock have a moral dilemma on their hands. If they think MS is doing Bad Things, they need to sell. If they don't, well and good. That's up to each individual stockholder. If you don't want to take risks with your money (namely, buying stock in a shady company), don't do it. Don't whine about how mean ol' Slashdot was talking to the Wall Street Journal (or whatever). Microsoft has shown no quarter, EVER, to any of its opponents. Why should Slashdot have to play nice with them? As General Patton said, hold 'em by the nose and kick 'em in the ass. Turn Microsoft's stockholders against them. That is the ONLY way that company will listen...period.
So what's the problem? If I lend someone money, and they waste it (I'm not arguing that that's what the debtors are doing, I'm just drawing a hackneyed parallel) and then I choose to give them more money, with the hope that they'll be able to make good on the debt, I'm being MORE selfish? How does this follow?
Duh. Who said anything about altruism? Generosity often makes sense. However, I'm talking about more than just cash here.
http://www.phillytalkradioonline.com/usa.html
Again, I'm not saying that the USA is the ultimate paradigm of sweetness and light. I'm simply saying that not all of us are the bloodthirsty dictator wanna-bes that we're so often cariacatured as.
If I decided in my head that the word "Thief" means "considerate, conscientious person tryin' to get a break in life", and called myself a thief in conversation, I oughtn't be surprised if people got the wrong impression. Communication requires that one is responsible for making at least a rudimentary attempt at using words as they are commonly understood.
I think you've got it backwards. Seems like the article is a great explanation of why the "hacker" is used to connote malicious computer vandals. Words mean what people think they mean. Most people think "hacker" means "computer vandal". Some are aware of its other meaning "computer enthusiast/expert". I can jump up and down and scream that fire is "hot cockleorum", but that doesn't mean anybody else has to agree with me. I've always thought this is a pretty ridiculous debate...English (and, likely, many other languages) is not subject to the delicate sensibilities of its users.
Other than the money and foreign aid we give those countries, often with no prayer of getting it back, nothing.
America is historically the most generous country in the world, but nobody seems to remember that. America has all sorts of problems, but it's irksome that nobody bothers to notice the (all to few) things the country does right.
Yup. Violent video games have completely destroyed any empathy I might have for the fictional characters in the video games I play *. Violent movies have removed my capacity to feel like anything real is happening on the movie screen.
How this has any influence whatsoever on any emotions or actions I might feel or commit in the presence of any other sentient lifeform is totally unclear to me.
Hmm...here's a thought. Just send him an email that says: "Gee, thanks! I accept your offer of source code! Feel free to send it to myaddress@foo.com at your very earliest convenience! I am fully confident that you will comply with the license that gave you access to the Quake source, and look forward to seeing your email soon!"
Good thing you don't run the Internet. Why do you care? Are they hurting you somehow? Leave the poor schlocks alone. Everybody's got to start somewhere.
Wah wah, there's nothing on the internet, wah wah. Whatever. If you don't think it useful, stop using it. I don't think TV is useful, so I use mine to a) hold down my dresser and b) play Grand Turismo and c) watch movies. I don't carp about how bad TV is, I just don't use it. It's called voting with your feet. The other alternative is MAKE something useful to go on the Internet. Pundits who just sit around and carp about how nothing interesting is happening around them simply aren't paying attention.
The censorware programs do not just filter out porn and smut. They also filter out perfectly "legitimate" (I will leave the discussion as to whether or not porn is legitmate for another day) materials, with no accountability whatsoever to the community that they are ostensibly protecting. THAT is what this debate is (or should be) about.
Seems to me that the easiest way to prevent that Columbine thang would be for that psychopath's father to say "Hey, Son, those 13 rifle clips you ordered came in today. I think we ought to talk about your feelings of hostility!".
Explain to me again how making more laws will prevent people from breaking existing laws. IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT PEOPLE (most of the time). End of story.
Re:Somebody please post the article here.
on
Sir Arthur Speaks
·
· Score: 1
Information might want to be free, but it's not ready to pay for the costs of producing itself yet in many cases. Get used to it. : )
Span an ocean? Clarke orbit is 4 or 5 Earth radii from the surface...according to 2piR, that means that the cable would go all the way around the planet. Don't be on the equator when this happens.
Terrorists did this at the end of Red Mars...what a COOL sequence in a COOL book. Moral of the story is: Don't break the space elevator.
Want to sell it to me? I could give a damn about colour. : )
Re:Reading by reference
on
Snow Crash
·
· Score: 1
Tell you what. I promise I'll never, ever, ever make you use it. Surely you don't have a problem with those of us who think it's a good idea contributing to this resource, do you? You are free to take whatever umbrage you wish, but a lot of Slashdot readers have similar (though not congruent) taste in books, and a site like the one proposed could make for more enjoyable reading for everyone. For instance, if I'd read a review of Shadow Moon by George Lucas by somebody who had similar tastes to mine, I'd have avoided that TERRIBLE book like plague. On the other hand, my Sterling/Gibson/Stevenson/Rucker cyberpunk binge is running out of fuel, so I very much like the thought of somewhere I can find more grist for the mill. As for going to the bookstore, I'd much rather be sold on a book by somebody who's actually willing to write their opinion on the thing, rather than some reviewer who's paid to say "It's great!" or shiny pictures on the front cover.
You make this out to be some sort of "book police", where no information can be read without being vetted by this body. That has nothing whatsoever to do with what's being discussed here.
I guess, in summation, what I'm trying to say is: "Lighten up!"
So, not only do you want to be able to "muck around" in the box, you want Apple to bail you out if you break it? Sounds pretty damn contradictory to me. I've never understood why people think Macs are less hackable than PC's. Jesus, I work on HP PC's daily that have a sticker on the back that voids your warranty if you crack the case. It's not like Steve Jobs is going to break your fingers if you fire up ResEdit and do horrible things to the memory space...but don't expect his company to help you pick up the pieces!
My mommy told me when I was very young...if you mess with stuff, you'll probably break it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well drat. I THOUGHT I pasted the URL in there...
a zarsci8/000000fa.htm
The rest of the article talks about some other hydrogen fuel ideas. God I love the Internet.
http://www.chathamtech.com/lazarscience8/_discl
Let me pick a nit. Exerpted from
"The Hindenberg fear of hydrogen is also misplaced. The paint on the skin of the Hindenberg was composed of similar chemicals to gunpowder, making it extremely inflammable. It is likely the skin that caught fire first, even after which the terrible fire was not fueled by hydrogen, because all the hydrogen was consumed within a minute of the crash (Rogerson, 1991)."
The problem was the paint, not the hydrogen. I like to mention this any time safety concerns involving the Hindenberg crop up. Is there a more focused corollary for Godwin's law in discussions about hydrogen fuels? : )
Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion...
You're stretching your metaphor a lot beyond the breaking point. If Coke owned 90% of the trucks capable of delivering cola to stores, and did not allow other cola manufacturers to use them (or charged them exorbitantly to do so), Coke would have the sort of monopoly power that, according to the findings of law, Microsoft wields.
WHY should the Court not force a company to abandon an industry? Does Microsoft have some sort of inalienable right to exist? PEOPLE have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. CORPORATIONS have no such guarantees. We're kind of getting off on a tangent from your original argument, due to my quip. However, businesses that are found to wield monopoly power can and should be treated differently by the law than businesses that do not.
As far as GPL'ing Windows...ick! Who'd want to try to figure out THAT code?? : )
It might take longer to install a phone line (though I've never had an analog line take more than five to seven days), but it's a hell of a lot cheaper (overall...especially in Texas, they're still playing some nasty games with the rates. Metro number my arse...). And I can plug whatever I want to into it. And I don't have to pay through the nose for long distance.
Thanks, but the good old days of monopoly telephone service just weren't.
Exackery. Very clever of you to home in on the point. : ) Microsoft doesn't get to be anything more than just another company. They don't get to be the 800 pound monopoly gorilla they've been playing for the last seven(ish) years. They get to be a company, which has to obey the law. Mission accomplished.
Why would we want them to police? Simple...because they cannot govern themselves. Confusion to my enemies! : )
Why should he be taken seriously? Umm...perhaps because of the well-thought-out nature of his commentary? Geez...since when do you have to have credentials to write an essay?
Take the arguments for what they are...arguments. They stand on their own, apart from the politics or qualifications of their expressor.
Do you think Microsoft is going to hesitate for a nanosecond thinking about all the nice people who work for Slashdot (or the DOJ or Stac Electronics or Digital Research or Sun or whoever they happen to be trying to destroy today) if it improves their bottom line? Look, people who own Microsoft stock have a moral dilemma on their hands. If they think MS is doing Bad Things, they need to sell. If they don't, well and good. That's up to each individual stockholder. If you don't want to take risks with your money (namely, buying stock in a shady company), don't do it. Don't whine about how mean ol' Slashdot was talking to the Wall Street Journal (or whatever). Microsoft has shown no quarter, EVER, to any of its opponents. Why should Slashdot have to play nice with them? As General Patton said, hold 'em by the nose and kick 'em in the ass. Turn Microsoft's stockholders against them. That is the ONLY way that company will listen...period.
So what's the problem? If I lend someone money, and they waste it (I'm not arguing that that's what the debtors are doing, I'm just drawing a hackneyed parallel) and then I choose to give them more money, with the hope that they'll be able to make good on the debt, I'm being MORE selfish? How does this follow?
Duh. Who said anything about altruism? Generosity often makes sense. However, I'm talking about more than just cash here.
http://www.phillytalkradioonline.com/usa.html
Again, I'm not saying that the USA is the ultimate paradigm of sweetness and light. I'm simply saying that not all of us are the bloodthirsty dictator wanna-bes that we're so often cariacatured as.
If I decided in my head that the word "Thief" means "considerate, conscientious person tryin' to get a break in life", and called myself a thief in conversation, I oughtn't be surprised if people got the wrong impression. Communication requires that one is responsible for making at least a rudimentary attempt at using words as they are commonly understood.
Like "nucular". : )
I think you've got it backwards. Seems like the article is a great explanation of why the "hacker" is used to connote malicious computer vandals. Words mean what people think they mean. Most people think "hacker" means "computer vandal". Some are aware of its other meaning "computer enthusiast/expert". I can jump up and down and scream that fire is "hot cockleorum", but that doesn't mean anybody else has to agree with me. I've always thought this is a pretty ridiculous debate...English (and, likely, many other languages) is not subject to the delicate sensibilities of its users.
Maybe you can tell me why NTBackup just won't start unless I restart the servers three times a week...
Other than the money and foreign aid we give those countries, often with no prayer of getting it back, nothing.
America is historically the most generous country in the world, but nobody seems to remember that. America has all sorts of problems, but it's irksome that nobody bothers to notice the (all to few) things the country does right.
Yup. Violent video games have completely destroyed any empathy I might have for the fictional characters in the video games I play *. Violent movies have removed my capacity to feel like anything real is happening on the movie screen.
How this has any influence whatsoever on any emotions or actions I might feel or commit in the presence of any other sentient lifeform is totally unclear to me.
*'Cept for Aeris. I cried...
Hmm...here's a thought. Just send him an email that says:
"Gee, thanks! I accept your offer of source code! Feel free to send it to myaddress@foo.com at your very earliest convenience! I am fully confident that you will comply with the license that gave you access to the Quake source, and look forward to seeing your email soon!"
Nobody asked for nothin'. : )
Good thing you don't run the Internet. Why do you care? Are they hurting you somehow? Leave the poor schlocks alone. Everybody's got to start somewhere.
Wah wah, there's nothing on the internet, wah wah. Whatever. If you don't think it useful, stop using it. I don't think TV is useful, so I use mine to a) hold down my dresser and b) play Grand Turismo and c) watch movies. I don't carp about how bad TV is, I just don't use it. It's called voting with your feet. The other alternative is MAKE something useful to go on the Internet. Pundits who just sit around and carp about how nothing interesting is happening around them simply aren't paying attention.
The censorware programs do not just filter out porn and smut. They also filter out perfectly "legitimate" (I will leave the discussion as to whether or not porn is legitmate for another day) materials, with no accountability whatsoever to the community that they are ostensibly protecting. THAT is what this debate is (or should be) about.
Seems to me that the easiest way to prevent that Columbine thang would be for that psychopath's father to say "Hey, Son, those 13 rifle clips you ordered came in today. I think we ought to talk about your feelings of hostility!".
Explain to me again how making more laws will prevent people from breaking existing laws. IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT PEOPLE (most of the time). End of story.
Information might want to be free, but it's not ready to pay for the costs of producing itself yet in many cases. Get used to it. : )
Span an ocean? Clarke orbit is 4 or 5 Earth radii from the surface...according to 2piR, that means that the cable would go all the way around the planet. Don't be on the equator when this happens.
Terrorists did this at the end of Red Mars...what a COOL sequence in a COOL book. Moral of the story is: Don't break the space elevator.
Want to sell it to me? I could give a damn about colour. : )
Tell you what. I promise I'll never, ever, ever make you use it. Surely you don't have a problem with those of us who think it's a good idea contributing to this resource, do you? You are free to take whatever umbrage you wish, but a lot of Slashdot readers have similar (though not congruent) taste in books, and a site like the one proposed could make for more enjoyable reading for everyone. For instance, if I'd read a review of Shadow Moon by George Lucas by somebody who had similar tastes to mine, I'd have avoided that TERRIBLE book like plague. On the other hand, my Sterling/Gibson/Stevenson/Rucker cyberpunk binge is running out of fuel, so I very much like the thought of somewhere I can find more grist for the mill. As for going to the bookstore, I'd much rather be sold on a book by somebody who's actually willing to write their opinion on the thing, rather than some reviewer who's paid to say "It's great!" or shiny pictures on the front cover.
You make this out to be some sort of "book police", where no information can be read without being vetted by this body. That has nothing whatsoever to do with what's being discussed here.
I guess, in summation, what I'm trying to say is: "Lighten up!"
So, not only do you want to be able to "muck around" in the box, you want Apple to bail you out if you break it? Sounds pretty damn contradictory to me. I've never understood why people think Macs are less hackable than PC's. Jesus, I work on HP PC's daily that have a sticker on the back that voids your warranty if you crack the case. It's not like Steve Jobs is going to break your fingers if you fire up ResEdit and do horrible things to the memory space...but don't expect his company to help you pick up the pieces!
My mommy told me when I was very young...if you mess with stuff, you'll probably break it.