Rather than sitting and listening to all the different encoder/decoder combinations, wouldn't you prefer to view some metric that you can evaluate at a glance?
Besides, something that might show up in the visual depiction may be audible, but not necessarily obvious the first time you listen. It's kinda like when you're at the eye doctor and he's flipping through lenses: "Is this one better? How about this one? Is the first one better than the second one? First one? Second one?"
You may not notice a visual problem with one of the lenses at first, but then after wearing them all day, you get a headache.
Corporations, politicians, and non-profit organizations!
Those organizations can make problems at times, but with the ICANN, I see the major offenders as the little guru wanna-bees, who are constant malcontents. A few years back, I was a lurker on the main mailing list where domain changes were being discussed and decided. I can't recall the name of the list, but I do recall the political environment. You had some people who were just stellar leaders, like Paul Vixie, who were working their asses off and making sense as proven technical leaders. Then you had a few crack-pots who were always complaining and screaming about every little thing - apparently just to have something to post about.
In a smaller environment like that mailing list, where the participants were more informed, the crack-pots were mostly ignored. Unfortunately, as the process has opened up to a wider audience, that audience hasn't been able to keep abreast of the history and details of the issues. That's really opened up the door for the crack-pots, some of whom have worked their way into ICANN.
It's a shame, but it's a tradeoff that we in the technical community are constantly making. Time and again, we have some technology that seems cool, but lacks the real development that comes with popular acceptance. Unfortunately, with popular acceptance comes the ignorant influence of the masses.
Give us a break, Karl Marx. Think of the last really cool thing that the US government got started but that really exploded once private enterprise jumped on it... give up? I'll give you a hint - Al Gore took the initiative to create it!
I have a good friend whose aunt lived in Sweden. She had a growth that she had to have biopsied. Thanks to socialized medicine, she had to wait weeks to have the biopsy performed, and then months to see the results. In that time, the cancer had metastasized and moved beyond the treatable phaze.
My closest friend has an uncle in Canada who just had his hernia operation. He had to spend over a year in agony, unable to lift anything or do any real exercise, thanks to socialized medicine.
I know that we're just discussing the socialization of medicine here, but I think that it illustrates the core problems of socialism. When you turn every industry into a tool of government, ruled by bureaucracies and unable to rise above the lowest common denominator, everyone loses.
McReynolds made alot of good points, but I guess what I would like to know is why as school children, etc., we have been brainwashed to "fear" Socialism?
I disagree with your premise. School children have no more been 'brainwashed to "fear" Socialism' than they have been brainwashed to fear being beaten with a stick. Dislike of socialism seems obvious to me. If anything, school children and students in Universities are brainwashed to "fear" capitalism.
To me, capitalism is as obvious a force for societal improvement as "survival of the fittest" has been for genetic improvement. I'm not saying that capitalism should be completely allowed to run free, but Socialists stick their fingers in the pot a bit too often for my tastes.
There are plenty enough experiments in this world where socialism is more dominant than here in the US, and they're mostly utter failures. I think that the US's demonstrated successful use of capitalism should be explored further.
Since George Bush will be taking Texas anyway, I'm giving my vote to Harry Browne.
I'm a native English(US) speaker, but I wouldn't mind learning another language if it were the "common" one. I learned Spanish because of my wish to travel in Latin America and my desire to speak the native language of the people there.
That being said, I think that it's inevitable that English will be the universal common language. Haven't any of you seen Star Trek? Everyone in the whole damned Universe speaks English.:)
Anyhow, I'd like to see the English language morph into something more friendly to both the human and the mechanical users. The main problem that needs to be tackled is the large number of spelling exceptions. The Simplified Spelling Society has a simple solution called "Cut Spelling". Here's an example.
Don't fall for this gee-whiz, wouldn't it be neat, oh yeah we haven't even built or flown one yet, Pop Sci-type garbage.
It's all crap that people have been eating up for the last hundred years. I'd love to see something feasible as much as the next guy, but I'm sick of watching irresponsible journalists get everyones' hopes up.
While we're all waiting for someone to build the jet pack of tomorrow that actually works worth a damn, be very afraid of trusting your life to something that is unable to glide.
No... RMS is a moral figurehead. As such, he *must* have zero compromise.
Your argument implies that the moral solution must be RMS's simple uncompromising one. RMS could just as easily be a moral figurehead and embrace the Open Software movement's friendlier position.
Besides, who says what RMS *must* do? If we're voting, I'd like to vote that he use his influence to be reasonable. As it is now, he alienates a lot of good software developers who might otherwise support some of the coinciding philosophies of the Open and Free Software movements.
That would be like the Pope saying "War is okay, sometimes."
I would chide Jorrit a bit for not having read enough of RMS's writings to have known his answer ahead of time. He slapped the LGPL on his blood sweat and code without even doing an hour's worth of reading? Tsk... tsk.
That being said, I'd like to give Jorrit my written support. Stallman really turns me off when he adopts a holier than thou attitude when it comes to "free" vs "open" software. The whole issue contains way too many shades of gray to fit within his black and white depiction.
Let this be a lesson to all of you about to use the [L]GPL: It's extreme and it locks you into a philosophy just as surely as signing a deal with Microsoft. I'm not saying that it's wrong or evil. I'm just recommending that you read it carefully before you use it.
Given that currently (in the US) your bank, the federal government, and other entities identify you with a credit card number, your social security number, and ACK! your mother's maiden name - smart cards are a huge step in the right direction.
If a conservative president had done anything remotely like what Clinton has done he would have been removed from office
Correction. If a conservative president had done anything remotely like what Clinton has done, he would have resigned immediately upon being caught, instead of using the might of his office to villain-ize people just doing their jobs, like Kenneth Starr and the Congress. Clinton has no shame, and no regrets except for being caught.
If you've listened to them, BOTH candidates are for dramatically increasing the size of our government at the taxpayers expense
Not quite true. Bush is proposing to cut taxes more than Gore is. That decreases the size of what the government has to spend, which decreases the size of the government - assuming Bush consistently balances the budget. If he's elected and he and a Republican congress can't keep reducing taxes (or at least the deficit) while balancing the budget, I probably won't be voting for him again.
And Gore also never made any pronouncement that he wishes to tax and control the internet
You can't go by what he says, since it's been shown that he has a significant problem telling the truth - by politician standards, even. No, what you have to do is look at his voting history, the history of the administration he's been a part of, the history of his party, and at the implication of his new social programs (they're going to need to raise that money somewhere).
I'll spare you from going into my reasons why all of those factors point to his wanting to control and tax things.:)
However, keep in mind that when the Democrats controlled both the White House and the Legislature ('93 & '94), they raised the shit out of our taxes. It wasn't until the Republicans took control in '95 that there was some tax relief, that the welfare system was reformed, etc.
Bwahahahaha! Yeah, so is Hollywood, and the entertainment industry is so different from the news reporting industry, isn't it? Give us a break. You kinda defeat your credibility by starting off with a whopper like that one.
The "I invented the Internet" meme is a perfect example. Gore never said this
I saw the full interview. What he actually said was, "I took the initiative in creating the Internet". He made no clarification as to what he really did, and like so many other exaggerations he's made, it was said in order to way overstate his contribution to something successful. He's the only one who can be held responsible for his being misunderstood.
and taken contextually what he did say was wholly correct
Yes, and taken in the proper context, Bill Clinton "did not have sex with that woman."
Notice that when people like revscat mention the "creation of the Internet" problem, they only quote the misstatement of "I created the Internet". They don't quote what Al Gore actually said because they realize that readers will realize that "I took the initiative in creating the Internet" implies much the same thing. Word games and deception to cover up a deception... fascinating.
Having some technical know-how does me little good if the guy's overall bent (that of dramatically increasing the size of the federal government at the taxpayer's expense) is against everything I believe in.
If anything, it worries me that Gore knows what the Internet is. His next goal will be to control it and to tax it.
The lady got REALLY badly burnt, think hospital, HR, surgery... not just inconvenienced.
So McDonald's nefariously managed to exceed the boiling point of coffee? Otherwise, their coffee is more or less served at the same temperature that comes out of my coffee pot at home.
And I'm not going to cry for McDonald's
I don't cry for the corporation. I cry for a legal system that doesn't dispense justice. McDonalds did nothing wrong, why are they held to blame? Yeah, it's easy to penalize them because they're successful and Ronald McDonald is annoying. But does that make it right?
If the coffee was too hot for human consumption...
Of course it was. Anyone who drinks coffee knows that it's boiled in the percolation (or analogous) process and usually kept somewhat below the boiling point before consumption. That's the way it happens when I make coffee at home, that's the way it happens when McDonalds makes a pot/vat. Who would that woman have held responsible if she had just made her own coffee at home and then spilled it in her lap?
Besides, that's part of the joy of drinking a cup of coffee: sipping it gently and letting it cool to your preferred drinking temperature.
If you can't keep hot beverages out of your lap, don't get the coffee.
Decrease the size of government, and you'll decrease its power.
Decrease its power and you'll decrease its importance to control.
Decrease its importance to control and you'll decrease the money spent to make the attempt.
I saw Nader on Politically Incorrect way before he was a candidate. He actually was in strong support of that old woman who sued McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee on her own lap.
That we're all helpless consumers who must be protected at all costs from big evil companies crap is just too extreme for me.
Of course he is. However, despite all of Gore's superior intelligence, he still thinks that higher taxes and huge government bureaucracies are the answer to everything. Screw that, my taxes are too high as it is. I'm voting for the idiot.
Be honest. Electric flying RC's compare even worse to combustion flying RC's than electric automobiles compare to combustion ones. Range, size, and power on electrics are all awful.
No one wants electric RC aircraft to be on par with petro's more than I do but currently it's not even close. Given the specs, NEC's batteries won't change that.
Slashdot Mirror
I used a similar example to debunk a well-known physicist
Wow, you debunked a well-known physicist - and maybe even quantum mechanics itself just by not understanding it! You're really smart!
I'd be willing to bet that you've also debunked evolution and all those non-Christian religions.
Skepticism is great, but pride in ignorance is another thing altogether. After you've debunked your VCR for thinking it's 12:00, visit the link below.
At every advent of new technology, there are those who wish to keep Pandora's Box closed. So sad, really.
Run back inside, Chicken Little, and don't come back out until you have the actual formula that tells us what we should and shouldn't know.
Rather than sitting and listening to all the different encoder/decoder combinations, wouldn't you prefer to view some metric that you can evaluate at a glance?
Besides, something that might show up in the visual depiction may be audible, but not necessarily obvious the first time you listen. It's kinda like when you're at the eye doctor and he's flipping through lenses: "Is this one better? How about this one? Is the first one better than the second one? First one? Second one?"
You may not notice a visual problem with one of the lenses at first, but then after wearing them all day, you get a headache.
Corporations, politicians, and non-profit organizations!
Those organizations can make problems at times, but with the ICANN, I see the major offenders as the little guru wanna-bees, who are constant malcontents. A few years back, I was a lurker on the main mailing list where domain changes were being discussed and decided. I can't recall the name of the list, but I do recall the political environment. You had some people who were just stellar leaders, like Paul Vixie, who were working their asses off and making sense as proven technical leaders. Then you had a few crack-pots who were always complaining and screaming about every little thing - apparently just to have something to post about.
In a smaller environment like that mailing list, where the participants were more informed, the crack-pots were mostly ignored. Unfortunately, as the process has opened up to a wider audience, that audience hasn't been able to keep abreast of the history and details of the issues. That's really opened up the door for the crack-pots, some of whom have worked their way into ICANN.
It's a shame, but it's a tradeoff that we in the technical community are constantly making. Time and again, we have some technology that seems cool, but lacks the real development that comes with popular acceptance. Unfortunately, with popular acceptance comes the ignorant influence of the masses.
Wake up and realize privitization = enslavement.
Give us a break, Karl Marx. Think of the last really cool thing that the US government got started but that really exploded once private enterprise jumped on it... give up? I'll give you a hint - Al Gore took the initiative to create it!
It's called the Internet!
Vote Nader in November
By all means, please do. At least that will keep you from giving your vote to Gore.
Yeah, like Scandinavia.
I have a good friend whose aunt lived in Sweden. She had a growth that she had to have biopsied. Thanks to socialized medicine, she had to wait weeks to have the biopsy performed, and then months to see the results. In that time, the cancer had metastasized and moved beyond the treatable phaze.
My closest friend has an uncle in Canada who just had his hernia operation. He had to spend over a year in agony, unable to lift anything or do any real exercise, thanks to socialized medicine.
I know that we're just discussing the socialization of medicine here, but I think that it illustrates the core problems of socialism. When you turn every industry into a tool of government, ruled by bureaucracies and unable to rise above the lowest common denominator, everyone loses.
Sell socialism somewhere else, please.
McReynolds made alot of good points, but I guess what I would like to know is why as school children, etc., we have been brainwashed to "fear" Socialism?
I disagree with your premise. School children have no more been 'brainwashed to "fear" Socialism' than they have been brainwashed to fear being beaten with a stick. Dislike of socialism seems obvious to me. If anything, school children and students in Universities are brainwashed to "fear" capitalism.
To me, capitalism is as obvious a force for societal improvement as "survival of the fittest" has been for genetic improvement. I'm not saying that capitalism should be completely allowed to run free, but Socialists stick their fingers in the pot a bit too often for my tastes.
There are plenty enough experiments in this world where socialism is more dominant than here in the US, and they're mostly utter failures. I think that the US's demonstrated successful use of capitalism should be explored further.
Since George Bush will be taking Texas anyway, I'm giving my vote to Harry Browne.
I'm a native English(US) speaker, but I wouldn't mind learning another language if it were the "common" one. I learned Spanish because of my wish to travel in Latin America and my desire to speak the native language of the people there.
:)
That being said, I think that it's inevitable that English will be the universal common language. Haven't any of you seen Star Trek? Everyone in the whole damned Universe speaks English.
Anyhow, I'd like to see the English language morph into something more friendly to both the human and the mechanical users. The main problem that needs to be tackled is the large number of spelling exceptions. The Simplified Spelling Society has a simple solution called "Cut Spelling". Here's an example.
you'll never see a French tourist in a foreign country starting to talk to people in the street in French...
Yeah, those French people are known the world over for being polite, humble, and bathed.
Glass houses... stones...
Hopefully someday the gross ignorance of foreign languages and history will backfire
That's it, stick to the high road.
Don't fall for this gee-whiz, wouldn't it be neat, oh yeah we haven't even built or flown one yet, Pop Sci-type garbage.
It's all crap that people have been eating up for the last hundred years. I'd love to see something feasible as much as the next guy, but I'm sick of watching irresponsible journalists get everyones' hopes up.
While we're all waiting for someone to build the jet pack of tomorrow that actually works worth a damn, be very afraid of trusting your life to something that is unable to glide.
No... RMS is a moral figurehead. As such, he *must* have zero compromise.
Your argument implies that the moral solution must be RMS's simple uncompromising one. RMS could just as easily be a moral figurehead and embrace the Open Software movement's friendlier position.
Besides, who says what RMS *must* do? If we're voting, I'd like to vote that he use his influence to be reasonable. As it is now, he alienates a lot of good software developers who might otherwise support some of the coinciding philosophies of the Open and Free Software movements.
That would be like the Pope saying "War is okay, sometimes."
Yeah, well, think "The Crusades".
I would chide Jorrit a bit for not having read enough of RMS's writings to have known his answer ahead of time. He slapped the LGPL on his blood sweat and code without even doing an hour's worth of reading? Tsk... tsk.
That being said, I'd like to give Jorrit my written support. Stallman really turns me off when he adopts a holier than thou attitude when it comes to "free" vs "open" software. The whole issue contains way too many shades of gray to fit within his black and white depiction.
Let this be a lesson to all of you about to use the [L]GPL: It's extreme and it locks you into a philosophy just as surely as signing a deal with Microsoft. I'm not saying that it's wrong or evil. I'm just recommending that you read it carefully before you use it.
Ah, but the freedom to make a decision like that isn't something that RMS would like you to have.
Double-standards are sad, huh?
Given that currently (in the US) your bank, the federal government, and other entities identify you with a credit card number, your social security number, and ACK! your mother's maiden name - smart cards are a huge step in the right direction.
Heh, touché :) I think that lots of Americans forget that they're submitting their opinions to an international audience.
Would you say that you're totally unconcerned with military or political aggressiveness from China?
Just curious.
If a conservative president had done anything remotely like what Clinton has done he would have been removed from office
Correction. If a conservative president had done anything remotely like what Clinton has done, he would have resigned immediately upon being caught, instead of using the might of his office to villain-ize people just doing their jobs, like Kenneth Starr and the Congress. Clinton has no shame, and no regrets except for being caught.
If you've listened to them, BOTH candidates are for dramatically increasing the size of our government at the taxpayers expense
:)
Not quite true. Bush is proposing to cut taxes more than Gore is. That decreases the size of what the government has to spend, which decreases the size of the government - assuming Bush consistently balances the budget. If he's elected and he and a Republican congress can't keep reducing taxes (or at least the deficit) while balancing the budget, I probably won't be voting for him again.
And Gore also never made any pronouncement that he wishes to tax and control the internet
You can't go by what he says, since it's been shown that he has a significant problem telling the truth - by politician standards, even. No, what you have to do is look at his voting history, the history of the administration he's been a part of, the history of his party, and at the implication of his new social programs (they're going to need to raise that money somewhere).
I'll spare you from going into my reasons why all of those factors point to his wanting to control and tax things.
However, keep in mind that when the Democrats controlled both the White House and the Legislature ('93 & '94), they raised the shit out of our taxes. It wasn't until the Republicans took control in '95 that there was some tax relief, that the welfare system was reformed, etc.
the media is by and large conservative
Bwahahahaha! Yeah, so is Hollywood, and the entertainment industry is so different from the news reporting industry, isn't it? Give us a break. You kinda defeat your credibility by starting off with a whopper like that one.
The "I invented the Internet" meme is a perfect example. Gore never said this
I saw the full interview. What he actually said was, "I took the initiative in creating the Internet". He made no clarification as to what he really did, and like so many other exaggerations he's made, it was said in order to way overstate his contribution to something successful. He's the only one who can be held responsible for his being misunderstood.
and taken contextually what he did say was wholly correct
Yes, and taken in the proper context, Bill Clinton "did not have sex with that woman."
Notice that when people like revscat mention the "creation of the Internet" problem, they only quote the misstatement of "I created the Internet". They don't quote what Al Gore actually said because they realize that readers will realize that "I took the initiative in creating the Internet" implies much the same thing. Word games and deception to cover up a deception... fascinating.
Having some technical know-how does me little good if the guy's overall bent (that of dramatically increasing the size of the federal government at the taxpayer's expense) is against everything I believe in.
If anything, it worries me that Gore knows what the Internet is. His next goal will be to control it and to tax it.
The lady got REALLY badly burnt, think hospital, HR, surgery... not just inconvenienced.
So McDonald's nefariously managed to exceed the boiling point of coffee? Otherwise, their coffee is more or less served at the same temperature that comes out of my coffee pot at home.
And I'm not going to cry for McDonald's
I don't cry for the corporation. I cry for a legal system that doesn't dispense justice. McDonalds did nothing wrong, why are they held to blame? Yeah, it's easy to penalize them because they're successful and Ronald McDonald is annoying. But does that make it right?
If the coffee was too hot for human consumption...
Of course it was. Anyone who drinks coffee knows that it's boiled in the percolation (or analogous) process and usually kept somewhat below the boiling point before consumption. That's the way it happens when I make coffee at home, that's the way it happens when McDonalds makes a pot/vat. Who would that woman have held responsible if she had just made her own coffee at home and then spilled it in her lap?
Besides, that's part of the joy of drinking a cup of coffee: sipping it gently and letting it cool to your preferred drinking temperature.
If you can't keep hot beverages out of your lap, don't get the coffee.
Decrease the size of government, and you'll decrease its power.
Decrease its power and you'll decrease its importance to control.
Decrease its importance to control and you'll decrease the money spent to make the attempt.
That's my idea of campaign finance reform.
I saw Nader on Politically Incorrect way before he was a candidate. He actually was in strong support of that old woman who sued McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee on her own lap.
That we're all helpless consumers who must be protected at all costs from big evil companies crap is just too extreme for me.
Of course he is. However, despite all of Gore's superior intelligence, he still thinks that higher taxes and huge government bureaucracies are the answer to everything. Screw that, my taxes are too high as it is. I'm voting for the idiot.
almost as good as the "slimers"
Be honest. Electric flying RC's compare even worse to combustion flying RC's than electric automobiles compare to combustion ones. Range, size, and power on electrics are all awful.
No one wants electric RC aircraft to be on par with petro's more than I do but currently it's not even close. Given the specs, NEC's batteries won't change that.