Don't you love this modern age of zero-liability software producers? Have you read some of the newer software licenses? Some of these licenses would basically allow the software firm to sell you a virus and be unassailable in court. And M$ pioneered this sort of license. I don't think any suit against Microsoft based on functionality or truth in advertising has a snowball's chance in hell of getting through.
But I always considered Boromir's appearance to be a minor plot point: He's dark haired and grey eyed like Aragorn, but Aragorn passes the test of the Ring and Boromir does not. I always saw that as Tolkien saying, "See, this is not a physical thing, the blood of Westernesse is a quality of character more than of body."
But whatever.
Elijah Wood for Frodo? I suppose it could work, though to me he'll always seem too young for the role. He'll be great for the Long Expected Party, but he's almost 50 (can't remember exactly) when he leaves on the quest.
Gandalf being panicky is definitely not good. I can remember him being excited, even (as Treebeard would put it), hasty, but never panicked.
And as for gollum... there are some things that don't lend themselves to the big screeen very well. In LOTR, the only indication of a pursuer was when the Hobbits would hear Gollum's feet behind them in the caves. This sort of subtlety is simply lost utterly in a movie, especially with a soundtrack playing. So they probably decided to make Gollum's pursuit more obvious.
I mean, cmon - it'll still be a suprise to the ones who've never read LOTR, and those who have will already know he's there. I guess it can't hurt that much. What worries me more are the plans for Aragorn and Arwen. I am SERIOUSLY upset the more I read about this.
The love of Aragorn for Arwen Undomiel is MOST importantly an unrequited love. Elrond has told him that he will give his daughter to no lesser man than the King of a reunited Gondor and Arnor. And I worry about the characterization of Arwen. They're probably going to get some hollywood bimbo with glitter on her cheeks to fall all over Aragorn. God only knows if there'll be a tawdry sex scene.
The REAL Arwen is over 2500 years old at the beginning of the War of the Rings! An attempt should be made to show how lonely and sad and ageless she is. And her beauty shouldn't be the blinding beauty of a hollywood sex goddess, but the sublime beauty of a elven Queen, living vision of Luthien.
How likely is it that any moviemaker can ever pull these off in a way that has "mass market" appeal? LOTR was popular but never on the scale of the mass market.
At best this movie will probably just make me feel, "Wow, this strange movie bears a striking resemblance to the Lord of the Rings."
Have you ever seen a fantasy novel where the cover painting of the characters bears almost no resemblance to the actual characters in the book? Refer to almost any cover illustration ever done by Darrel K. "The Mangler" Sweet to see what I mean.
Some people are incapable of reproducing things accurately, and they're not to be blamed (or employed). Others simply aren't devoted enough to care.
The tines on Galadriel's fork? Well, it would be very cool if they reproduced details that small. But I don't consider trying to make the characters look their their counterparts unimportant. It doesn't even need to involve casting! Just give him a shave and some black hair coloring for god's sakes. But they can't be bothered.
It's this attitude of "ahh fuckit, who cares?" that will doom a movie version of a book to fail.
How good can it be when they get simple details wrong? Have you seen the trailer? At the end it has the party climbing through mountains (presumably Caradhras, though not certain). Not only does Gandalf look unlike himself (Charlton Heston or even Sean Connery would have looked better), but they got something else strangely wrong. There is a blond haired, bearded human walking with the party. Rounded ears, he's human, not Legolas.
But there is no blond human in the nine. Boromir and Aragorn are BOTH black haired, read the description of Boromir in Rivendell. So how can we trust the judgement of moviemakers who can't be bothered to research the characters they're representing?
DNA's books changed my life. I always wanted to meet him some day, more than any other (living) author except possibly Clarke. He'll be sorely missed indeed.
I meant street musicians in jam sessions creating totally new music.
I honestly think that this may be attempted by the corporations involved. God knows they've done enough to prove that they'll stop at no slimy act to make a buck. They'd probably murder their employees in their sleep and sell the organs if the return on investment was good. (thanks to Scott Adams for that lovely concept)
So I was wondering if they will try to crush all musicians except ones who have signed with them. Instead of the RIAA we'll have the Music Licensing Authority. Are YOU a Licensed Audio Content Provider, sir? Then I'm afraid you'll have to hand over those bongo drums.
The line that worried me the most was something I hadn't considered. The notion being that music industries might try to crack down on individuals performing music for free on the street.
As far as I can see, this is DIRECTLY comparable to the Gracenote suit posted to/. earlier today. True, in that case, they have a very thin veil of deception involved with claiming it is the methods of accessing freedb that infringe on their (undeserved) patents. However, what Gracenote is really trying to do is outlaw freedb use by crushing the players that access it.
I see a striking parallel to the line about street musicians. Was this just tossed off as another scary what-if analogy that wasn't meant seriously, or does anyone besides me think this sort of destruction of freedoms could occur?
Maybe this will set a precedent to help destroy the "frivolous lawsuits rather than honest work" business model.
Awww, poor widdle Rambus. Couldn't sue all your competition out of business. Crap! Now you'll have to, like, commit yourselves to making quality products to increase market share. That's gotta suck. Competition is soooo unfair, right guys?
Magnequench employs about 300 people at its headquarters in Anderson, Ind., and about 1,500 worldwide. It has annual revenues of more than $250 million.
Ummm, HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAA! I'm sorry Archie, but your little corporation is the proverbial fart in the windstorm to Compaq and HP. I can't imagine them being able to win the sort of draconian restitutions they're asking for.
This is just another case of "little company sees greedy lawsuits as more profitable business model than honest work". And the customers get to shoulder the costs.
It's called the "We saw a widely used idea that wasn't yet patented which we didn't make and snapped it up before anyone else thought to snooker the USPTO in that specific way before us" business model.
That is to say, I'm willing to suggest that the reason no one acted like it was patented was that until recently it was NOT.
All your prior art are belong to us!
-Kasreyn
I certainly hope so. Or it'll be another Dark Age
on
SQL Over FreeNet
·
· Score: 2
The way things are looking now, I believe that in a few centuries the advent of the internet may be seen as the start of the second Dark Age, in which no one was wise enough to preserve documents and history in imperishable formats. I think that would be supremely ironic, given how the current age is being touted as "the Information Age".
While it's true governments may maintain records, that's no solution. Governments are well known for their propensity for rewriting history. The same with corporations. And all our individual histories will vanish. Think on it: We have records of individual soldiers in the Civil War, for example, because of letters home that they wrote, and regimental histories, all preserved on paper (which is probably the greatest data storage medium yet invented by man).
However, our modern, individual histories are beginning, more and more, to take place by email and on weblogs. Which will of course vanish when the ISP folds or the hard drive goes kaput. I expect historians of the future to have their work cut out for them trying to find out what everyday life was like in the 2020's.
-Kasreyn
The problem I've always seen with Freenet...
on
SQL Over FreeNet
·
· Score: 4
...is the problem I've always had with the internet, albeit reduced. However, it is merely changed.
The problem is unstable content. It annoys me when I find some great webcomic or website or FTP server that really makes me sit up and say, "Wow. This is one of the reasons I get online in the first place.", and then the site up and vanishes. Either there wasn't enough funding, or it became unpopular (or rather, with my tastes, it *started* unpopular and became moreso over time;), or it got hit hard with lawyer-torpedoes and had to be scuttled. It's gotten to the point where I've simply taken to storing anything I like on my own hard drive, because I've found that I can't trust any enjoyable site to still be there in a month.
The only things that are permanent on the internet as far as I can see are things supported by well funded institutions, or based on something really popular. I don't have very mainstream tastes, and the sort of content the web is trying to push these days just doesn't get me excited.
Freenet, I at first thought, would be an improvement. The third reason for content vanishment, lawyer attacks, would be removed. However, the longer I look at it the less certain I am of its usefulness. It is designed very carefully as a system to host only the most popular data. I'm beginning to think this is a dreadful weakness.
For one thing, the quality of Freenet users will directly impact the quality of the content, in a way the web can only dream of. While it's annoying that the quality stuff on the web seems drowned out by all the AOLer-Britney-Spears-fan pages, it's at least still THERE. If those were the people using Freenet, however, there would be nothing BUT.
Ah, but you say, surely Freenet will be used by other hackish types like me? Well, maybe, but I don't share the same views and preferences with some demographic majority of hackerdom. I think in the end the popularity system of Freenet will cause enjoyable content to be unfindable for a minority of people, of which I have little doubt I shall be a part. And eventually as Freenet grows the tastes and likes of the majority of its users will come more into line with the mainstream (ie., become more likely to delete content I enjoy).
The other great argument for Freenet is that it is a great forum, say, to speak out on about important issues. Say, a chinese citizen could speak out about his government's crimes. However, what good is that? How will anyone hear about the document before it gets deleted due to lack of requests? How will the voice of the minority ever be heard in a system where only the content approved by the majority is maintained?
I also find it annoying that, just like the web, there is no attempt to determine whether a piece of work is valuable IN AND OF ITSELF, and is such a masterwork that even if you don't personally like it it must be maintained indefinitely for posterity. I personally would rather Freenet have a system whereby one could rank files by their value. I would also propose that a Freenet user would have the one-time ability (if it could be made unabuseable that is), to give up his rating priviledges to mark a file as permanent and never to be deleted.
I see a great amount of history, art, literature, and achievement being transferred to digital storage. How much of it will remain undeleted in 30 years? 50 years? I'm certainly hoping someone can reply and tell me I've got it all wrong and show me that Freenet has a fix for these problems. After all, it's gotta be better than.NET - with.NET you'll have the worst of both worlds. I *want* to believe, but I'm too depressed over how the web turned out I guess.
Freenet, hmm. What was that saying about Democracy, eh? I guess what I'm saying is that Freenet is great, but it still does not deal with the ancient problem of those whose outlooks are in the minority getting screwed.
...I like the department this time. =P How's that joke go? "Boil the frog slowly or it'll jump out of the pot"? =)
As for Office XP subscriptions, I don't think we've seen the last of this. I just think MS realized they would have too hard a sell with that. I think they'd much rather sell Office XP and put it on all Windows desktops, and THEN go over to subscriptions if people want to keep accessing their documents. Gotcha.
Hey, let's think how we could use genetics to piss off EVERYbody and make 3 mistakes all at once!
I know!
Let's find another way to cure infertility so the world can be more overcrowded! The last thing we need to do is sink those research dollars into learning how to house and feed the humans we already have. Sure, we need more momentarily coddled and then ignored brats popping out of american women who don't care about the overpopulation problem as long as THEY get to have their 2.2 kids.
Second idea: Let's make genetically-altered babies at their parents' whims. Not only do we completely piss off the religeous right to the point where they mght stop shooting abortion doctors and start shooting genetics researchers, and not only do we piss off civil rights activists (at least those with any sense and commitment to their cause), we may yet manage to set the world at war when some neo-nazi parents specify that their offspring will be blond, blue eyed, and have a predilection for torturing the helpless. Or better yet, let's start making crippling or permanent changes to helpless children that they'll have to live with. Let's make ANOTHER reason for kids to hate their parents, and not just giving them dorky names! Who needs Ritalin when we can genetically moronize Jimmy before birth?! He'll be very docile when born.
Third way to strike out: let's completely forego scientific responsiblity and peer review and just do it for the fuckin money. I mean, hey, why not? What did we become researchers FOR? Certainly not to, like, expand human knowledge in an ethical and methodical way. It's all about the Benjamins baby, and these new superbabies are worth a hell of a lot per head!
Can we name the next one "Khan"? =)
Assholes. My girlfriend is going to be a genetics researcher. Thanks to unethical fools like these she'll probably get killed by some suicide bomber to make Jebus happy.
-Kasreyn
"Intolerant people should be shot." - the best one-sentence troll I have ever seen.
Hey, let's think how we could use genetics to piss off EVERYbody and make 3 mistakes all at once!
I know!
Let's find another way to cure infertility so the world can be more overcrowded! The last thing we need to do is sink those research dollars into learning how to house and feed the humans we already have.
Second idea: Let's make genetically-altered babies at their parents' whims. Not only do we completely piss off the religeous right to the point where they mght stop shooting abortion doctors and start shooting genetics researchers, we may yet manage to set the world at war when some neo-nazi parents specify that their offspring will be blond, blue eyed, and have a predilection for torturing the helpless. Or better yet, let's start making crippling or permanent changes to helpless children that they'kll have to live with. Who needs Ritalin when we can genetically moronize Jimmy before birth?! He'll be very docile when born.
Third way to strike out: let's completely forego scientific responsiblity and peer review and just do it for the fuckin money. I mean, hey, why not? What did we become researchers FOR? Certainly not to, like, expand human knowledge in an ethical and methodical way. It's all about the Benjamins baby, and these new superbabies are worth a hell of a lot per head!
Can we name the next one "Khan"? =)
Assholes. My girlfriend is going to be a genetics researcher. Thanks to unethical fools like these she'll probably get killed by some suicide bomber to make Jebus happy.
I mentioned in a K5 post here what I think of the RIAA.
The same ideas still stand.
The RIAA are a bunch of thieving jerks. They long had the excuse that they're the champions of the artists. Now, when online music distribution threatens to render their business model obsolete they show their true colors. They attempt to destroy this amazing new channel of music distribution rather than lose profits. They have declared that their profit is more important than the artists' profit. It's time they learned otherwise.
Keep copying the mp3's. And if you feel the artists deserve remuneration for their work, by all means mail them a check.
The world would never have cared much about the condition of India if Gandhi hadn't drawn out the wrath of the oppressors and goaded them to commit atrocities, thus generating tons of bad press for them.
Think about it. When in human history have the people moved to crush a large corporation or nation? Only when they finally have appalling evidence thrust under their noses of its crimes.
Let's see in what way we can publicize DMCA in a way non slashdot-freedom-advocates can understand. Their multitude of voices can silence this if they look up from their TV's long enough.
...what technologies, that would make our lives better (taken with a grain of salt;), are currently ready but likewise being held up by red tape? Another 30 years down the road we might be saying, "Man, the personal forceshield belt would have been great in the riots of 2011... pity it was stuck in red tape."
This was sent to the EFF in regard to the CIPA and the rallies going on today.
Hello,
I would like to add my support for this online. I'm not currently able to
attend the rally in NYC, though I would if I could. This legislation cuts
down on neccessary freedoms - I have never seen in the Constitution where it
says that children shall be second class citizens to whom the Bill of Rights
does not apply. However, what is worse, it causes the censorware companies
to be subsidized with taxpayer money. I am incensed that part of the money
freedom-loving, anti-censorship Americans pay as taxes will then go to
support censorship and the trampling of the constitutional rights of
children. These companies have never done a single thing right; their
products are faulty and do not work as advertised, and furthermore are not
needed. They do not deserve to be subsidized by the people of the U.S.
I will also be investigating into the matter of which representatives
are/have voted for this atrocity, and I will certainly weight that into my
decisions of who to vote for in the next congressional elections. I will
try to do my part to prevent those who love censorship and hate freedom from
being in power in this nation.
I urge everyone else to get off their duffs and get involved! If I could go to that rally in NYC, I would. Write your congressmen. I intend to send a copy of this to mine.
And? I still dont see the problem. The only people who have anything to fear from these systems is the criminals, and I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
Criminals, ah, ok. Then it's all well and good. You therefore won't mind, of course, when added legislation describes the things YOU do as criminal, and the monitoring cameras gather evidence on you doing it before the fact, will you? By your own words, this will be perfectly all right, since god knows only true criminals are EVER accused of being criminals, and their privacy violated.
Give me a break. No government is all-wise and simon pure. They should not be wielding this kind of power, at least not without severe checks on their ability to use it, and monitoring of THEM (the monitors) available for public scrutiny.
But the way this will enter private lives will be very simple: Subtle threatening and social pressure. "What, you don't have a telescreen in your house?! You must be one of those terrorist hackers!" (shun shun shun shun shun). And eventually, NOT having a telescreen in your home will be declared illegal, once the situation is ready for that. More and more, I see citizens of supposedly democratic nations sitting idly by and letting their governments usurp powers they should not have, and these "law enforcement" agencies get away with it through subtle threats, claiming that the only people who need to fear this are the bad guys. Well, let me tell you, in an authoritarian government one of the main goals is to make it impossible for ordinary citizens to avoid breaking the law, so the police forces will always have an excuse for anything they do.
So let's all just let the most uptight, law-beridden nation in Europe dictate law enforcement in any of the other member countries. There are no checks on this that I can see; this is completely based on trusting the other nations to have sane laws. What if an islamic member nation makes it a crime, a legal crime, for women to not wear their veils etc, and then tried to enforce their weirdo ideas in *other countries*? That wouldn't be appropriate, and thank god it's not happening yet; so why is it appropriate to do the same sort of thing vis. computers and the internet? I'm sorry to inform you, but I am a United States Citizen, Mr. German Prosecutor, and under my freedoms of speech is included the freedom to spout Nazi hate if I so choose.
You know what, you can take your fucking terrorism warrant and shove it. U.S. Prosecutors already have enough on their plates dealing with the criminals we have HERE, breaking OUR laws. The last thing our courts need is a wave of "criminals" whose only f-ing crime is that they broke a law which they were never advised of, which is only a law in a country they've never heard of, under the terms of a treaty they were also never advised of!! Talk about being arrested out of the blue!
What's even worse is that the american public is not even being TOLD. At ALL. Now I understand that our nation has so many laws that only lawyers, those who have dedicated their lives to the law, can hope to understand the vast, bloated beast it has become. However, I don't believe in making laws and never explaining them to the populace before enforcing them. This isn't like a bill in congress, where the representatives who made it can be voted out afterwards, and the bill struck down by the Supreme Court. This is a binding treaty with another group of nations, and it will be much harder for the american people to get out of it.
This entire thing just sickens me. It really does.
Where do you think Microsoft gets the money it uses to try to stamp out free software and innovation? From the joe schmoe end users over whose eyes it has successfully pulled the shorn hairs of a sheep! That's who.
As long as people on slashdot continue to be arrogant and flippant about letting the computer-illiterates suffer under Microfost, Microsoft will continue to be funded by those users. And will use that funding to continue to oppress free software.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you love this modern age of zero-liability software producers? Have you read some of the newer software licenses? Some of these licenses would basically allow the software firm to sell you a virus and be unassailable in court. And M$ pioneered this sort of license. I don't think any suit against Microsoft based on functionality or truth in advertising has a snowball's chance in hell of getting through.
-Kasreyn
But I always considered Boromir's appearance to be a minor plot point: He's dark haired and grey eyed like Aragorn, but Aragorn passes the test of the Ring and Boromir does not. I always saw that as Tolkien saying, "See, this is not a physical thing, the blood of Westernesse is a quality of character more than of body."
But whatever.
Elijah Wood for Frodo? I suppose it could work, though to me he'll always seem too young for the role. He'll be great for the Long Expected Party, but he's almost 50 (can't remember exactly) when he leaves on the quest.
Gandalf being panicky is definitely not good. I can remember him being excited, even (as Treebeard would put it), hasty, but never panicked.
And as for gollum... there are some things that don't lend themselves to the big screeen very well. In LOTR, the only indication of a pursuer was when the Hobbits would hear Gollum's feet behind them in the caves. This sort of subtlety is simply lost utterly in a movie, especially with a soundtrack playing. So they probably decided to make Gollum's pursuit more obvious.
I mean, cmon - it'll still be a suprise to the ones who've never read LOTR, and those who have will already know he's there. I guess it can't hurt that much. What worries me more are the plans for Aragorn and Arwen. I am SERIOUSLY upset the more I read about this.
The love of Aragorn for Arwen Undomiel is MOST importantly an unrequited love. Elrond has told him that he will give his daughter to no lesser man than the King of a reunited Gondor and Arnor. And I worry about the characterization of Arwen. They're probably going to get some hollywood bimbo with glitter on her cheeks to fall all over Aragorn. God only knows if there'll be a tawdry sex scene.
The REAL Arwen is over 2500 years old at the beginning of the War of the Rings! An attempt should be made to show how lonely and sad and ageless she is. And her beauty shouldn't be the blinding beauty of a hollywood sex goddess, but the sublime beauty of a elven Queen, living vision of Luthien.
How likely is it that any moviemaker can ever pull these off in a way that has "mass market" appeal? LOTR was popular but never on the scale of the mass market.
At best this movie will probably just make me feel, "Wow, this strange movie bears a striking resemblance to the Lord of the Rings."
-Kasreyn
Have you ever seen a fantasy novel where the cover painting of the characters bears almost no resemblance to the actual characters in the book? Refer to almost any cover illustration ever done by Darrel K. "The Mangler" Sweet to see what I mean.
Some people are incapable of reproducing things accurately, and they're not to be blamed (or employed). Others simply aren't devoted enough to care.
The tines on Galadriel's fork? Well, it would be very cool if they reproduced details that small. But I don't consider trying to make the characters look their their counterparts unimportant. It doesn't even need to involve casting! Just give him a shave and some black hair coloring for god's sakes. But they can't be bothered.
It's this attitude of "ahh fuckit, who cares?" that will doom a movie version of a book to fail.
-Kasreyn
How good can it be when they get simple details wrong? Have you seen the trailer? At the end it has the party climbing through mountains (presumably Caradhras, though not certain). Not only does Gandalf look unlike himself (Charlton Heston or even Sean Connery would have looked better), but they got something else strangely wrong. There is a blond haired, bearded human walking with the party. Rounded ears, he's human, not Legolas.
But there is no blond human in the nine. Boromir and Aragorn are BOTH black haired, read the description of Boromir in Rivendell. So how can we trust the judgement of moviemakers who can't be bothered to research the characters they're representing?
-Kasreyn
...who knew where his towel was.
DNA's books changed my life. I always wanted to meet him some day, more than any other (living) author except possibly Clarke. He'll be sorely missed indeed.
-Kasreyn
I meant street musicians in jam sessions creating totally new music.
I honestly think that this may be attempted by the corporations involved. God knows they've done enough to prove that they'll stop at no slimy act to make a buck. They'd probably murder their employees in their sleep and sell the organs if the return on investment was good. (thanks to Scott Adams for that lovely concept)
So I was wondering if they will try to crush all musicians except ones who have signed with them. Instead of the RIAA we'll have the Music Licensing Authority. Are YOU a Licensed Audio Content Provider, sir? Then I'm afraid you'll have to hand over those bongo drums.
Are you scared yet? Tune in later!
-Kasreyn
The line that worried me the most was something I hadn't considered. The notion being that music industries might try to crack down on individuals performing music for free on the street.
/. earlier today. True, in that case, they have a very thin veil of deception involved with claiming it is the methods of accessing freedb that infringe on their (undeserved) patents. However, what Gracenote is really trying to do is outlaw freedb use by crushing the players that access it.
As far as I can see, this is DIRECTLY comparable to the Gracenote suit posted to
I see a striking parallel to the line about street musicians. Was this just tossed off as another scary what-if analogy that wasn't meant seriously, or does anyone besides me think this sort of destruction of freedoms could occur?
-Kasreyn
Maybe this will set a precedent to help destroy the "frivolous lawsuits rather than honest work" business model.
Awww, poor widdle Rambus. Couldn't sue all your competition out of business. Crap! Now you'll have to, like, commit yourselves to making quality products to increase market share. That's gotta suck. Competition is soooo unfair, right guys?
-Kasreyn
Magnequench employs about 300 people at its headquarters in Anderson, Ind., and about 1,500 worldwide. It has annual revenues of more than $250 million.
Ummm, HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAA! I'm sorry Archie, but your little corporation is the proverbial fart in the windstorm to Compaq and HP. I can't imagine them being able to win the sort of draconian restitutions they're asking for.
This is just another case of "little company sees greedy lawsuits as more profitable business model than honest work". And the customers get to shoulder the costs.
-Kasreyn
It's called the "We saw a widely used idea that wasn't yet patented which we didn't make and snapped it up before anyone else thought to snooker the USPTO in that specific way before us" business model.
That is to say, I'm willing to suggest that the reason no one acted like it was patented was that until recently it was NOT.
All your prior art are belong to us!
-Kasreyn
The way things are looking now, I believe that in a few centuries the advent of the internet may be seen as the start of the second Dark Age, in which no one was wise enough to preserve documents and history in imperishable formats. I think that would be supremely ironic, given how the current age is being touted as "the Information Age".
While it's true governments may maintain records, that's no solution. Governments are well known for their propensity for rewriting history. The same with corporations. And all our individual histories will vanish. Think on it: We have records of individual soldiers in the Civil War, for example, because of letters home that they wrote, and regimental histories, all preserved on paper (which is probably the greatest data storage medium yet invented by man).
However, our modern, individual histories are beginning, more and more, to take place by email and on weblogs. Which will of course vanish when the ISP folds or the hard drive goes kaput. I expect historians of the future to have their work cut out for them trying to find out what everyday life was like in the 2020's.
-Kasreyn
...is the problem I've always had with the internet, albeit reduced. However, it is merely changed.
;), or it got hit hard with lawyer-torpedoes and had to be scuttled. It's gotten to the point where I've simply taken to storing anything I like on my own hard drive, because I've found that I can't trust any enjoyable site to still be there in a month.
.NET - with .NET you'll have the worst of both worlds. I *want* to believe, but I'm too depressed over how the web turned out I guess.
The problem is unstable content. It annoys me when I find some great webcomic or website or FTP server that really makes me sit up and say, "Wow. This is one of the reasons I get online in the first place.", and then the site up and vanishes. Either there wasn't enough funding, or it became unpopular (or rather, with my tastes, it *started* unpopular and became moreso over time
The only things that are permanent on the internet as far as I can see are things supported by well funded institutions, or based on something really popular. I don't have very mainstream tastes, and the sort of content the web is trying to push these days just doesn't get me excited.
Freenet, I at first thought, would be an improvement. The third reason for content vanishment, lawyer attacks, would be removed. However, the longer I look at it the less certain I am of its usefulness. It is designed very carefully as a system to host only the most popular data. I'm beginning to think this is a dreadful weakness.
For one thing, the quality of Freenet users will directly impact the quality of the content, in a way the web can only dream of. While it's annoying that the quality stuff on the web seems drowned out by all the AOLer-Britney-Spears-fan pages, it's at least still THERE. If those were the people using Freenet, however, there would be nothing BUT.
Ah, but you say, surely Freenet will be used by other hackish types like me? Well, maybe, but I don't share the same views and preferences with some demographic majority of hackerdom. I think in the end the popularity system of Freenet will cause enjoyable content to be unfindable for a minority of people, of which I have little doubt I shall be a part. And eventually as Freenet grows the tastes and likes of the majority of its users will come more into line with the mainstream (ie., become more likely to delete content I enjoy).
The other great argument for Freenet is that it is a great forum, say, to speak out on about important issues. Say, a chinese citizen could speak out about his government's crimes. However, what good is that? How will anyone hear about the document before it gets deleted due to lack of requests? How will the voice of the minority ever be heard in a system where only the content approved by the majority is maintained?
I also find it annoying that, just like the web, there is no attempt to determine whether a piece of work is valuable IN AND OF ITSELF, and is such a masterwork that even if you don't personally like it it must be maintained indefinitely for posterity. I personally would rather Freenet have a system whereby one could rank files by their value. I would also propose that a Freenet user would have the one-time ability (if it could be made unabuseable that is), to give up his rating priviledges to mark a file as permanent and never to be deleted.
I see a great amount of history, art, literature, and achievement being transferred to digital storage. How much of it will remain undeleted in 30 years? 50 years? I'm certainly hoping someone can reply and tell me I've got it all wrong and show me that Freenet has a fix for these problems. After all, it's gotta be better than
Freenet, hmm. What was that saying about Democracy, eh? I guess what I'm saying is that Freenet is great, but it still does not deal with the ancient problem of those whose outlooks are in the minority getting screwed.
-Kasreyn
I'm sure the next version of Office will get rid of that pesky "Save As" feature (or maybe that will be part of a premium subscription package).
And strangely, you'll find copying to the clipboard from Word won't... work... anymore. Wonder how that could be? =P
Enjoy delicious Microsoft Word!
-Kasreyn
...I like the department this time. =P How's that joke go? "Boil the frog slowly or it'll jump out of the pot"? =)
As for Office XP subscriptions, I don't think we've seen the last of this. I just think MS realized they would have too hard a sell with that. I think they'd much rather sell Office XP and put it on all Windows desktops, and THEN go over to subscriptions if people want to keep accessing their documents. Gotcha.
-Kasreyn
Hey, let's think how we could use genetics to piss off EVERYbody and make 3 mistakes all at once!
I know!
Let's find another way to cure infertility so the world can be more overcrowded! The last thing we need to do is sink those research dollars into learning how to house and feed the humans we already have. Sure, we need more momentarily coddled and then ignored brats popping out of american women who don't care about the overpopulation problem as long as THEY get to have their 2.2 kids.
Second idea: Let's make genetically-altered babies at their parents' whims. Not only do we completely piss off the religeous right to the point where they mght stop shooting abortion doctors and start shooting genetics researchers, and not only do we piss off civil rights activists (at least those with any sense and commitment to their cause), we may yet manage to set the world at war when some neo-nazi parents specify that their offspring will be blond, blue eyed, and have a predilection for torturing the helpless. Or better yet, let's start making crippling or permanent changes to helpless children that they'll have to live with. Let's make ANOTHER reason for kids to hate their parents, and not just giving them dorky names! Who needs Ritalin when we can genetically moronize Jimmy before birth?! He'll be very docile when born.
Third way to strike out: let's completely forego scientific responsiblity and peer review and just do it for the fuckin money. I mean, hey, why not? What did we become researchers FOR? Certainly not to, like, expand human knowledge in an ethical and methodical way. It's all about the Benjamins baby, and these new superbabies are worth a hell of a lot per head!
Can we name the next one "Khan"? =)
Assholes. My girlfriend is going to be a genetics researcher. Thanks to unethical fools like these she'll probably get killed by some suicide bomber to make Jebus happy.
-Kasreyn
"Intolerant people should be shot." - the best one-sentence troll I have ever seen.
Meant to post this to the discussion on genetics... came back and clicked on the wrong thread grrr!
Forgive me, and mod the above down.
(sob!) My precious Karma... =P
-Kasreyn
Hey, let's think how we could use genetics to piss off EVERYbody and make 3 mistakes all at once!
I know!
Let's find another way to cure infertility so the world can be more overcrowded! The last thing we need to do is sink those research dollars into learning how to house and feed the humans we already have.
Second idea: Let's make genetically-altered babies at their parents' whims. Not only do we completely piss off the religeous right to the point where they mght stop shooting abortion doctors and start shooting genetics researchers, we may yet manage to set the world at war when some neo-nazi parents specify that their offspring will be blond, blue eyed, and have a predilection for torturing the helpless. Or better yet, let's start making crippling or permanent changes to helpless children that they'kll have to live with. Who needs Ritalin when we can genetically moronize Jimmy before birth?! He'll be very docile when born.
Third way to strike out: let's completely forego scientific responsiblity and peer review and just do it for the fuckin money. I mean, hey, why not? What did we become researchers FOR? Certainly not to, like, expand human knowledge in an ethical and methodical way. It's all about the Benjamins baby, and these new superbabies are worth a hell of a lot per head!
Can we name the next one "Khan"? =)
Assholes. My girlfriend is going to be a genetics researcher. Thanks to unethical fools like these she'll probably get killed by some suicide bomber to make Jebus happy.
-Kasreyn
I mentioned in a K5 post here what I think of the RIAA.
The same ideas still stand.
The RIAA are a bunch of thieving jerks. They long had the excuse that they're the champions of the artists. Now, when online music distribution threatens to render their business model obsolete they show their true colors. They attempt to destroy this amazing new channel of music distribution rather than lose profits. They have declared that their profit is more important than the artists' profit. It's time they learned otherwise.
Keep copying the mp3's. And if you feel the artists deserve remuneration for their work, by all means mail them a check.
-Kasreyn
The world would never have cared much about the condition of India if Gandhi hadn't drawn out the wrath of the oppressors and goaded them to commit atrocities, thus generating tons of bad press for them.
Think about it. When in human history have the people moved to crush a large corporation or nation? Only when they finally have appalling evidence thrust under their noses of its crimes.
Let's see in what way we can publicize DMCA in a way non slashdot-freedom-advocates can understand. Their multitude of voices can silence this if they look up from their TV's long enough.
-Kasreyn
...what technologies, that would make our lives better (taken with a grain of salt ;), are currently ready but likewise being held up by red tape? Another 30 years down the road we might be saying, "Man, the personal forceshield belt would have been great in the riots of 2011... pity it was stuck in red tape."
-Kasreyn
This was sent to the EFF in regard to the CIPA and the rallies going on today.
Hello,
I would like to add my support for this online. I'm not currently able to
attend the rally in NYC, though I would if I could. This legislation cuts
down on neccessary freedoms - I have never seen in the Constitution where it
says that children shall be second class citizens to whom the Bill of Rights
does not apply. However, what is worse, it causes the censorware companies
to be subsidized with taxpayer money. I am incensed that part of the money
freedom-loving, anti-censorship Americans pay as taxes will then go to
support censorship and the trampling of the constitutional rights of
children. These companies have never done a single thing right; their
products are faulty and do not work as advertised, and furthermore are not
needed. They do not deserve to be subsidized by the people of the U.S.
I will also be investigating into the matter of which representatives
are/have voted for this atrocity, and I will certainly weight that into my
decisions of who to vote for in the next congressional elections. I will
try to do my part to prevent those who love censorship and hate freedom from
being in power in this nation.
I urge everyone else to get off their duffs and get involved! If I could go to that rally in NYC, I would. Write your congressmen. I intend to send a copy of this to mine.
-Kasreyn
IBM proposes new bus standard to go in all PC's?
IBM has also been proposing a new HD standard, CPRM, and got smacked down (for the moment).
Hmmm... can anyone tell me if a new bus standard could be used to drop or encrypt certain data types as they pass from one device to another?
Need I say more to explain my paranoia?
-Kasreyn
And? I still dont see the problem. The only people who have anything to fear from these systems is the criminals, and I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
Criminals, ah, ok. Then it's all well and good. You therefore won't mind, of course, when added legislation describes the things YOU do as criminal, and the monitoring cameras gather evidence on you doing it before the fact, will you? By your own words, this will be perfectly all right, since god knows only true criminals are EVER accused of being criminals, and their privacy violated.
Give me a break. No government is all-wise and simon pure. They should not be wielding this kind of power, at least not without severe checks on their ability to use it, and monitoring of THEM (the monitors) available for public scrutiny.
But the way this will enter private lives will be very simple: Subtle threatening and social pressure. "What, you don't have a telescreen in your house?! You must be one of those terrorist hackers!" (shun shun shun shun shun). And eventually, NOT having a telescreen in your home will be declared illegal, once the situation is ready for that. More and more, I see citizens of supposedly democratic nations sitting idly by and letting their governments usurp powers they should not have, and these "law enforcement" agencies get away with it through subtle threats, claiming that the only people who need to fear this are the bad guys. Well, let me tell you, in an authoritarian government one of the main goals is to make it impossible for ordinary citizens to avoid breaking the law, so the police forces will always have an excuse for anything they do.
Privacy is doubleplusungoodthinkful, Winston.
-Kasreyn
I don't even know where to start...
So let's all just let the most uptight, law-beridden nation in Europe dictate law enforcement in any of the other member countries. There are no checks on this that I can see; this is completely based on trusting the other nations to have sane laws. What if an islamic member nation makes it a crime, a legal crime, for women to not wear their veils etc, and then tried to enforce their weirdo ideas in *other countries*? That wouldn't be appropriate, and thank god it's not happening yet; so why is it appropriate to do the same sort of thing vis. computers and the internet? I'm sorry to inform you, but I am a United States Citizen, Mr. German Prosecutor, and under my freedoms of speech is included the freedom to spout Nazi hate if I so choose.
You know what, you can take your fucking terrorism warrant and shove it. U.S. Prosecutors already have enough on their plates dealing with the criminals we have HERE, breaking OUR laws. The last thing our courts need is a wave of "criminals" whose only f-ing crime is that they broke a law which they were never advised of, which is only a law in a country they've never heard of, under the terms of a treaty they were also never advised of!! Talk about being arrested out of the blue!
What's even worse is that the american public is not even being TOLD. At ALL. Now I understand that our nation has so many laws that only lawyers, those who have dedicated their lives to the law, can hope to understand the vast, bloated beast it has become. However, I don't believe in making laws and never explaining them to the populace before enforcing them. This isn't like a bill in congress, where the representatives who made it can be voted out afterwards, and the bill struck down by the Supreme Court. This is a binding treaty with another group of nations, and it will be much harder for the american people to get out of it.
This entire thing just sickens me. It really does.
-Kasreyn
Where do you think Microsoft gets the money it uses to try to stamp out free software and innovation? From the joe schmoe end users over whose eyes it has successfully pulled the shorn hairs of a sheep! That's who.
As long as people on slashdot continue to be arrogant and flippant about letting the computer-illiterates suffer under Microfost, Microsoft will continue to be funded by those users. And will use that funding to continue to oppress free software.
-Kasreyn