OK, now put down your history book and look around. Turkey is applying for EU membership - in other words it wants to be allowed into the (exclusive) club of civilized, peaceful nations. Sorry guys, but military regime, Islamic civil code (especially treatment of women and a few other nice things) and stuff like censorship are not considered civilized. I just hope EU politicians won't be stupid enough to admit Turkey before it changes for real, not just on the surface.
Americans are paranoid nuts, and this is incurable. Spending $10B on something that fixes the problem that does not exist while at the same time making airlines seem even less secure than we thought they were - this can only happen in the US.
Problem does not exist? Hello! Wake up, dude!! Do you really think all ex-soviet and Chinese ICBMs dissipated into thin air somewhere in early nineties? Do you have any idea how many of them are still out there, ready to be fired within minutes if not seconds from getting the order?
And what about Pakistan and India actually entering the arms race in terms of missiles with nuclear warheads? And what about North Korea, whose test rocket nearly hit Japan some time ago? They have a nice, steady nuclear program too - and unlike Iraq their facility was, regrettably, never bombed.
So this is not paranoia. This is common sense. Thanks God someone in the US still has enough of it not to believe that there is no problem only because they don't talk that much on TV about nuclear war these days.
Come on guys, be serious. Did anyone seriously expect corporate behemoth like AOL to keep a team of creative programmers unharmed forever? This is corporation, everything that sticks out of the line would be squished, it's just a matter of time. Corporations are a great place for those with mediocre talents or bad luck that need a paycheck at the end of the month in return for some spiritless effort. Anyone creative will suffocate there in the long run.
But, as someone pointed out, they asked for it. After all AOL bought Nullsoft with real money. So, basically, it's their now and they can do whatever they want. And I bet Justin Frankel doesn't regret selling Nullsoft when he looks at his bank account. So it is all OK in the end - entrepreneurs got their money, AOL got the product and employees got their paychecks.
When I read comments here on/., especially ones like "We are f**ked", it appears as if the US has been invaded by some aliens. I can hardly believe that. Come on guys, this is democracy and this is just a 4 year tenure (last btw for this guy you all hate so much). Here in Europe no one despairs that much after the election doesn't go the way they wanted. Maybe it's that aggressive campaign style - maybe you really believe all those TV ads and speeches about how bad the other candidate is? But Kerry fought with Edwards for the nomination and I'm sure he wasn't telling then all those kind words he told him last night (well, at least night in my time zone).
Do you really really think there would be a significant difference between Kerry and Bush in real life? Isn't it obvious that there could be small adjustments here and there but the overall course of American policy has to remain the same since US interests and world challenges don't depend on who's in the White House.
Anyway - a word of advice from the distance (which gives some prospective). Democrats - cool down, this is not the end of the world as you know it. Republicans - rejoice, you won so you can have some celebration but don't stump too hard on the other side.
But both sides - remember, you are all Americans, you live in one country and would have to work with each other no matter how this or that election turns out. Too much wounded hopes on one side and too much triumphalism on the other lead to too much hate. And hate is not good for anyone.
Read up some history. Especially read beyond encyclopedia entries. Facism was a form of nationalist socialism. Mussolini started his political career in trade unions in Italy after the I-st world war. As to NSDAP - Germany ruled by them was the first country to introduce some of the solutions now associated with "welfare state".
Don't you think that only a small step divides wishing someone to be dead and actually doing something about it? For the sake of your own mind it's better not to wish anyone to be dead. You harm your own mind with such wishes. Even if you don't get to the point when you will start planning how to kill them.
Getting back to the Secret Service - there is some logic behind their actions. After all, it all starts with a thought. The problem is that these should be protected.
Re:The Mac is better than it was a few years ago
on
Jef Raskin On The Mac
·
· Score: 1
And, sadly, one must wonder who at Apple thinks the users can't understand a second mousebutton after all these years.
Clearly you never coached non-technical females into using computers. I did that with my girlfriend and recently with one of her friends who just bought herself a PC. Before those experiences (and similar from the past) I also didn't get it and used to laugh at Apple's ads where they underlined that as feature.
But now I understand that to most users computers are hard to master, because they don't know how and why they work (and why should they know that?). The whole idea that you can click with the right button and then you can do something special is not something as intuitive as it is for you or me - computer users for many years.
The problem with Windows is that in many cases you have to use the right button. Therefore I really like Apple's approach of today - you can use a two-button mouse if you wish and it's useful, but the default remains a single button one and you can still do everything with it.
Bollywood has no MPAA equivalent and doesn't give a damn about bootleg copies. They have grown and evolved in a market with virtually no copyright enforcement. Ever. And they are thriving. Why? Because they get enough revenue from cinema tickets and their own sales.
Yet another point that shows clearly how crappy is this whole argument that "piracy" would kill the recording (or movie) industry. Not surprising, really, since most arguments of copyright supporters are illogical or based on prejudices and emotions rather than facts.
First of all it's an interesting insight for myself, because thanks to your comment I realized that I didn't expect a commercial OS to actually have a working support provided by its vendor. Interesting how Microsoft dominance influences expectations - even mine, and I never considered myself MS supporter.
I must say that even now I have some doubts whether OS X support does indeed work.
But, that doesn't explain entirely why Apple won't do that since it would be possible to license OS X only to selected vendors (like Dell, HP or Asus) and with only selected configurations. That would solve the support issue to some extent, but as others have pointed out it would rather decrease Apple's revenue in the long run.
This point has been debated over and over, so I'll mention the $799 eMacs (educ discount) and $949 ibooks (also discount) and $1199 iMacs and move on.
I love that. No, I hate that. University years are a dim memory by now for me and I didn't choose scientific career. So, sorry, but educational discount doesn't apply to me. Interesting to how many of/. readers it does apply, but please don't use special discounts for limited customer groups as a basis for any comparisons.
The amount of interest this story generated (CheryOS' site is already slashdoted) shows clearly how many people would love to run OS X, but can't afford the hardware. In fact I'm one of those people - I hate Windows, but I'm too old to tweak with Linux. Apple's OS X is the best choice for the likes of me - easy to use, tons of good commercial software for the desktop user, no frustrating tweaking and adjusting to get it working and no Microsoft. However, prices of their hardware are murder when compared to the PC world. I know there are many good reasons for that, but what has bothered me for some time now is why Apple won't release OS X for Intel platform.
In fact OS X is a really great, consequently designed GUI on top of a robust BSD Unix. It should be rather portable by nature, even if it would have high hardware requirements (like lots of memory and fast graphic boards with again lots of memory). Possibly achieving binary compatibility for software would be a problem, but I don't think it would be necessary. After all on a Unix system porting software between hardware platforms is just a question of recompiling it. Now, why don't they try to do it?
As much as I hate paying Microsoft for XP I would gladly pay twice the price of OS X for Mac to be able to run it on PC. Why Apple won't do it? Maybe because they don't want to get into Microsoft's gun sight?
"So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.
I don't understand what he is talking about. What does it mean "to offload legal liability to kids"??? I don't get it. Could someone explain it to me?
I'm not kidding or ironizing here, I really don't understand RIAA's point.
Ok., so I did some research and it is really better than I thought. They were wise enough to start a program for biomass fuels after the first fuel crisis in early 70-ties, since 1979 there were 5.4 million cars running on ethanol in Brasil. Wow! This source (PDF) describes the program. It turns out that combined effect was beneficial for the environment, but it wasn't cost effective in the late eighties and early nineties due to low oil prices. But now, prices are rising again so...
Yeah... I mean heaven forbid we try and stop people from running over someone with this hideous high-speed steam car, or frightening chickens and cows who would stop to give us eggs and milk.
This is common sense stuff. Just because you hear the words "man with a red flag" doesn't mean it's time to freak out.
(Did it occur to you that at the time when aviation was where spaceflight roughly is now your beloved airline regulation didn't exist? In fact no law about aviation existed in the US until 1926.)
I wonder... how many employees of various government agencies there are, eager to regulate space tourism, but I bet they highly outnumber the space tourists. Especially since most of them actually departed from Russia.
Well, I don't have time to look it up right now but I recall reading somewhere that 1/3 of cars in Brasil run on ethanol. So maybe they figured it out somehow.
This project shows clearly, that right now the main problem is storing the energy. After all, making hydrogen with electricity from solar panels to then turn an internal combustion engine with it has to be inefficient as compared to running directly on electricity. However, you can't squeeze that amount of energy into an accumulator which would be the size of a typical (even hydrogen) fuel tank. So as long as we won't be able to make such accumulators running purely on solar energy would be hard to achieve for a normal-sized family vehicle.
But hey, there are easier ways to make cars less polluting and everyone less dependent on oil! Take alcohol for example, you can produce it cheaply, even in your own backyard from some potatoes or grain, it is way easier and safer to handle than hydrogen and typical car engine can be easily modified to run on it. Same applies to vegetable oils and diesel engine (which was originally designed for vegetable oil).
Sorry to say that, but it seems that the trauma you've gone through because of that guy death has left an imprint in your mind and that you are unnaturally afraid of dying (at least for your age). I don't say that fucking around is a good thing, but relating sex to dying in your mind might be a problem for you when you'll want to develop a relationship. I would recommend that you talk to a psychotherapist about this.
And on the philosophical side - dying is a big part of life, we die with every breath we take and we have to live with that. But don't worry, it's not as real as you might think.
I don't think forcing people to accept a point of view is the right method no matter how nice your ideals are (and how much I happen to agree). Don't you see the irony of your argument which boils down to forcing people to consider free software & Linux?
After reading your post I tried eHarmony personality test out of curiosity and this is what it said in the end:
Unable to Match You at This Time
eHarmony is based upon a complex matching system developed through extensive testing of married individuals. One of the requirements for it to work successfully is for participants to fall into our rigorously defined profiles. If we aren't able to match a user well using these profiles, the most considerate approach is to inform them early in the process.
We are so convinced of the importance of creating compatible matches to help people establish and enjoy happy, lasting relationships that we choose not to provide service rather than risk an uncertain match.
Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.
All those years since the old glorious space race went dead just as I was finishing elementary school I thought that getting into space is beyond my dreams. After all, my chances of becoming one of the few that fly on government funded missions were nonexistent. But somewhere on the back of my head was the thought that if I live long enough I might get a chance of seeing space and Earth from the orbit. Today's event makes that little thought stronger.
I just wish I could work there where future is wrought.
....heart disease research....breast cancer research....prostate cancer research.
It's a very stupid argument actually. Just an old version of "sleeping vs. eating" when you need both. In other words: how much would that help us all when a stray rock happens to slam into our small planet?
Slashdot Mirror
OK, now put down your history book and look around. Turkey is applying for EU membership - in other words it wants to be allowed into the (exclusive) club of civilized, peaceful nations. Sorry guys, but military regime, Islamic civil code (especially treatment of women and a few other nice things) and stuff like censorship are not considered civilized. I just hope EU politicians won't be stupid enough to admit Turkey before it changes for real, not just on the surface.
Americans are paranoid nuts, and this is incurable. Spending $10B on something that fixes the problem that does not exist while at the same time making airlines seem even less secure than we thought they were - this can only happen in the US.
Problem does not exist? Hello! Wake up, dude!! Do you really think all ex-soviet and Chinese ICBMs dissipated into thin air somewhere in early nineties? Do you have any idea how many of them are still out there, ready to be fired within minutes if not seconds from getting the order?
And what about Pakistan and India actually entering the arms race in terms of missiles with nuclear warheads? And what about North Korea, whose test rocket nearly hit Japan some time ago? They have a nice, steady nuclear program too - and unlike Iraq their facility was, regrettably, never bombed.
So this is not paranoia. This is common sense. Thanks God someone in the US still has enough of it not to believe that there is no problem only because they don't talk that much on TV about nuclear war these days.
Come on guys, be serious. Did anyone seriously expect corporate behemoth like AOL to keep a team of creative programmers unharmed forever? This is corporation, everything that sticks out of the line would be squished, it's just a matter of time. Corporations are a great place for those with mediocre talents or bad luck that need a paycheck at the end of the month in return for some spiritless effort. Anyone creative will suffocate there in the long run.
But, as someone pointed out, they asked for it. After all AOL bought Nullsoft with real money. So, basically, it's their now and they can do whatever they want. And I bet Justin Frankel doesn't regret selling Nullsoft when he looks at his bank account. So it is all OK in the end - entrepreneurs got their money, AOL got the product and employees got their paychecks.
Do you really really think there would be a significant difference between Kerry and Bush in real life? Isn't it obvious that there could be small adjustments here and there but the overall course of American policy has to remain the same since US interests and world challenges don't depend on who's in the White House.
Anyway - a word of advice from the distance (which gives some prospective). Democrats - cool down, this is not the end of the world as you know it. Republicans - rejoice, you won so you can have some celebration but don't stump too hard on the other side.
But both sides - remember, you are all Americans, you live in one country and would have to work with each other no matter how this or that election turns out. Too much wounded hopes on one side and too much triumphalism on the other lead to too much hate. And hate is not good for anyone.
Read up some history. Especially read beyond encyclopedia entries. Facism was a form of nationalist socialism. Mussolini started his political career in trade unions in Italy after the I-st world war. As to NSDAP - Germany ruled by them was the first country to introduce some of the solutions now associated with "welfare state".
Don't you think that only a small step divides wishing someone to be dead and actually doing something about it? For the sake of your own mind it's better not to wish anyone to be dead. You harm your own mind with such wishes. Even if you don't get to the point when you will start planning how to kill them.
Getting back to the Secret Service - there is some logic behind their actions. After all, it all starts with a thought. The problem is that these should be protected.
Have an entire Virtual Life.
Maybe you already have that, hm?
And, sadly, one must wonder who at Apple thinks the users can't understand a second mousebutton after all these years.
Clearly you never coached non-technical females into using computers. I did that with my girlfriend and recently with one of her friends who just bought herself a PC. Before those experiences (and similar from the past) I also didn't get it and used to laugh at Apple's ads where they underlined that as feature.
But now I understand that to most users computers are hard to master, because they don't know how and why they work (and why should they know that?). The whole idea that you can click with the right button and then you can do something special is not something as intuitive as it is for you or me - computer users for many years.
The problem with Windows is that in many cases you have to use the right button. Therefore I really like Apple's approach of today - you can use a two-button mouse if you wish and it's useful, but the default remains a single button one and you can still do everything with it.
Simpler, less confusing for new, non-tech users.
Yet another point that shows clearly how crappy is this whole argument that "piracy" would kill the recording (or movie) industry. Not surprising, really, since most arguments of copyright supporters are illogical or based on prejudices and emotions rather than facts.
One word:
Support.
Interesting point.
First of all it's an interesting insight for myself, because thanks to your comment I realized that I didn't expect a commercial OS to actually have a working support provided by its vendor. Interesting how Microsoft dominance influences expectations - even mine, and I never considered myself MS supporter.
I must say that even now I have some doubts whether OS X support does indeed work.
But, that doesn't explain entirely why Apple won't do that since it would be possible to license OS X only to selected vendors (like Dell, HP or Asus) and with only selected configurations. That would solve the support issue to some extent, but as others have pointed out it would rather decrease Apple's revenue in the long run.
This point has been debated over and over, so I'll mention the $799 eMacs (educ discount) and $949 ibooks (also discount) and $1199 iMacs and move on.
I love that. No, I hate that. University years are a dim memory by now for me and I didn't choose scientific career. So, sorry, but educational discount doesn't apply to me. Interesting to how many of /. readers it does apply, but please don't use special discounts for limited customer groups as a basis for any comparisons.
$529?!?! Where??? I checked www.apple.com and didn't find a system there that would cost this little.
The amount of interest this story generated (CheryOS' site is already slashdoted) shows clearly how many people would love to run OS X, but can't afford the hardware. In fact I'm one of those people - I hate Windows, but I'm too old to tweak with Linux. Apple's OS X is the best choice for the likes of me - easy to use, tons of good commercial software for the desktop user, no frustrating tweaking and adjusting to get it working and no Microsoft. However, prices of their hardware are murder when compared to the PC world. I know there are many good reasons for that, but what has bothered me for some time now is why Apple won't release OS X for Intel platform.
In fact OS X is a really great, consequently designed GUI on top of a robust BSD Unix. It should be rather portable by nature, even if it would have high hardware requirements (like lots of memory and fast graphic boards with again lots of memory). Possibly achieving binary compatibility for software would be a problem, but I don't think it would be necessary. After all on a Unix system porting software between hardware platforms is just a question of recompiling it. Now, why don't they try to do it?
As much as I hate paying Microsoft for XP I would gladly pay twice the price of OS X for Mac to be able to run it on PC. Why Apple won't do it? Maybe because they don't want to get into Microsoft's gun sight?
"So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.
I don't understand what he is talking about. What does it mean "to offload legal liability to kids"??? I don't get it. Could someone explain it to me?
I'm not kidding or ironizing here, I really don't understand RIAA's point.
Ok., so I did some research and it is really better than I thought. They were wise enough to start a program for biomass fuels after the first fuel crisis in early 70-ties, since 1979 there were 5.4 million cars running on ethanol in Brasil. Wow! This source (PDF) describes the program. It turns out that combined effect was beneficial for the environment, but it wasn't cost effective in the late eighties and early nineties due to low oil prices. But now, prices are rising again so...
Some other links: 1 2
Yeah... I mean heaven forbid we try and stop people from running over someone with this hideous high-speed steam car, or frightening chickens and cows who would stop to give us eggs and milk.
This is common sense stuff. Just because you hear the words "man with a red flag" doesn't mean it's time to freak out.
(Did it occur to you that at the time when aviation was where spaceflight roughly is now your beloved airline regulation didn't exist? In fact no law about aviation existed in the US until 1926.)
I wonder... how many employees of various government agencies there are, eager to regulate space tourism, but I bet they highly outnumber the space tourists. Especially since most of them actually departed from Russia.
Well, I don't have time to look it up right now but I recall reading somewhere that 1/3 of cars in Brasil run on ethanol. So maybe they figured it out somehow.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that ethanol requires more petroleum to create than it saves when used in internal combustion engines...
Are you kidding? Ethanol was mass produced long before petroleum was anything more than a medicine. After all, people were drinking for centuries.
It only takes some heat to distillate it. And heat can come from many sources.
But hey, there are easier ways to make cars less polluting and everyone less dependent on oil! Take alcohol for example, you can produce it cheaply, even in your own backyard from some potatoes or grain, it is way easier and safer to handle than hydrogen and typical car engine can be easily modified to run on it. Same applies to vegetable oils and diesel engine (which was originally designed for vegetable oil).
Sorry to say that, but it seems that the trauma you've gone through because of that guy death has left an imprint in your mind and that you are unnaturally afraid of dying (at least for your age). I don't say that fucking around is a good thing, but relating sex to dying in your mind might be a problem for you when you'll want to develop a relationship. I would recommend that you talk to a psychotherapist about this.
And on the philosophical side - dying is a big part of life, we die with every breath we take and we have to live with that. But don't worry, it's not as real as you might think.
Force people to understand the...
I don't think forcing people to accept a point of view is the right method no matter how nice your ideals are (and how much I happen to agree). Don't you see the irony of your argument which boils down to forcing people to consider free software & Linux?
Unable to Match You at This Time
eHarmony is based upon a complex matching system developed through extensive testing of married individuals. One of the requirements for it to work successfully is for participants to fall into our rigorously defined profiles. If we aren't able to match a user well using these profiles, the most considerate approach is to inform them early in the process.
We are so convinced of the importance of creating compatible matches to help people establish and enjoy happy, lasting relationships that we choose not to provide service rather than risk an uncertain match.
Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.
So, it looks like I'm doomed.
I just wish I could work there where future is wrought.
It's a very stupid argument actually. Just an old version of "sleeping vs. eating" when you need both. In other words: how much would that help us all when a stray rock happens to slam into our small planet?