"Just believe in ID, it has more prove that the stuff you pull out."
Oh really? Care to site sources for this proof?
Most of the so-called "proof" for Intelligent Design rests on claims that the probability of life coming about as it did is so low that some mind has to be behind it. However, if the universe is one big roll of the dice than every possibility is equally likely, and thus while any one particular possibility can occur by chance w/o the help of God.
Furthermore, the ID supporters assume that there was only a single chance for life to occur in the universe. From what we have seen from studying the universe and space exploration this is probably far from the case. Mars, Venus, and several moons in our solar system may all have at one time or in some cases may still support microbial life. A single chance in a million will probably not yield much, but a billion runs at a one in a million shot should give several successes. There are billions upon billions of stars. We have already seen several with planets.
All that said. I do believe that there is a higher order to the universe, but simply putting things as "God did it" is both a disservice to mankind and a thoughtless disrespect for any such God who I am pretty well sure put us on this earth for more than just kissing up to him.
Actually it does matter to MS as those who don't use Vista are less likely to upgrade to the next edition or worse switch to another OS. Not to mention those that do switch to a different OS (read Dell users who eventually go w/Ubuntu should that work out) will no longer have their home page automatically linked to an MS property.
The bad that I see is that if/when the heads in the Ubuntu organization start catering to the wants and needs of Dell more than end users. Now some catering is good, expected, and right on their part. However the worry is that the focus of Ubuntu will change.
I attended school in the US and have been in school when tornadoes where in the area and have been in the school when it caught fire. Gunmen attacking isn't something that generally happens in US schools. Furthermore, in all those drills it was clearly stated that they were in fact drills and not the real thing.
Such a drill has no basis in reality and goes against fairly well reasoned and tested methods of conducting such drills. A gunman attack isn't something that is likely to happen to a student in their entire school lifetime, including if they go through a doctorate program, and even if it was what reason is there to pretend that such a drill is the real thing?
Of coarse. I didn't mean to claim that this was all just a scare tactic. They probably do have a few suits coming up, perhaps even a couple that are valid.
Then again having one or two successful lawsuits to point to helps them put doubt on other OSS.
Not really, anyone who would actually look at the detailed list would also probably be out of their target audience to use the tactic on. The tactic is to get the *IDEA* that OSS is somehow legally questionable into the minds of people, not to actually prosecute or follow any of that legality.
So it doesn't matter as long as they have enough evidence so that they can defend themselves should someone happen to raise a slander suit.
No. The big problem is not a legal fight between MS and any OSS or other parties over patents. At least if MS is smart.
The way I see them going it far more insidious. This is publicity. They are hinting that OSS is infringing on their patents and are openly saying that "free software" should pay for the privilege of using said patents. The idea is to get this out into the public sphere, and to make people start to get nervous thinking about "free software" as possible patent infringement or as they would likely put it if this works, pirating.
The idea is to make people worry about a legal technicality as if they are breaking the law by association. In order to do this MS has to put out several complaints over a period of time, and probably sponsor "education campaigns" to teach kids about copyright and patent infringement.
They don't need to stop those who are educated in getting OSS, all they have to do is add another worry for people who are non-tech savey who might adopt OSS.
The knowledge of how to make a nuke also comes fairly easily with an understanding of physics on a degree level. Would you deny physics doctorates to anyone from a foreign country that might want to make nukes or support terrorists?
Biological and chemical weaponry are the same. Anyone with a modern degree in the field should fairly easily be able to use such knowledge as is required for such a degree (and all the GOOD that can be done with it) to create a weapon of devastating proportions that I, for one, would not like to imagine on the real world.
The truth is knowledge, to use a cliche, is power. It is a tool. A knife that can be used to reap crops and prepare food or a weapon to be used out of desperation and fear against a threat real or perceived.
Just because a tool can be used for harm does not mean that it is wise to take it out of the hands of man and if we do decide to try and limit it we are fools to think that it can be held entirely from others.
No it doesn't apply to you or anyone on slashdot. You see a human must be legally recognized as a person by the DMCA/RIAA/**AA. You have to have money enough to buy the law in order to be a person, otherwise you are a potential criminal who needs to pay fees to prove your innocence.
The way I see it is that schools should not be providing laptops. They should be providing desktops or rather making sure that each student has home access to a basic possibly internet capable machine and perhaps a usb drive to carry their work to and from home and school. There is no need to have a computer in front of every student in every class. When a class needs students to be in front of computers they can a either use a lab or b have simple terminals that the teacher controls and passes out/takes back with each class. If you must have laptops tie them to the room not the student so that one room can quickly be converted to a computer lab and back for classes that sometimes could use computers but other times don't need them.
Otherwise instate a program to make sure that each student has access to a home computer so every student can do homework that requires a computer.
Well I think the confusion here is over the concept that the assistant came to help.
You see there is more than one Steve Jobs and thus his "assistants" are in fact copies of himself. Thought Apple was outsourcing manufacturing to China or somewhere else? Nope, just a cover ploy to hide the fact that they have a manufacturing plant filled with Jobses.
I could stand to see Starcraft as an MMO (Heck it was Multi Online the first time), but what I DON'T want to see is another single hero based MMO out of it where you have a single character that you "level up" and improve who might summon extra support characters. What I would rather see is that every player take control of a squad or small group of units and have to improve and expand them. Some units will be destroyed along the way while new ones may be recruited. Home base construction ect. Even having players buy ships to move their units from star-system to star system (AKA servers).
I think one problem is that we are making document formats that are far more than just what they are ostensibly used for. Word processing documents are generally meant to hold blocks of text, some pictures and charts, and some internal pointers. Does a word processing format really need java script, and support for every feature under the sun?
However a new format for every feature doesn't work too well either. Perhaps an extendable document format that plainly details what features are used in the document, so you can tell if that Word doc in your email has more than just the text of that newly leaked Harry Potter novel.
I agree, I should have said many works. Then again look at the average/. post. There is a cost associated with them, the cost of the computer infrastructure and the time taken to make the post. Such cost I submit is non-trivial as most of the world's population cannot pay it.
You forgot that industrialization also allows for much higher human populations and for the life expectancy of an individual to reach 60+ years, or do you like most people dieing in their 30s?
People who rally against industrialization often sound like the Monty Python sketch in Life of Brian when they ask "What have the Romans done for us?"
"Once they're released, they belong to the public. The distributors steal from the public. So, yes, copyright is theft. It used to be something that 'borrowed' from the public back when distribution costs were an issue. Now it justs takes and hoards and speculates." --iminplaya (723125)
I really can't agree with you on this. Your argument is completely unsound.
For one, cost still is an issue in producing music, the written word, or any kind of copy-right-able material. To produce good quality works it costs time, as well as the cost of equipment, and not to mention the costs of training. Nearly all artists, even the worst hacks touted by the record labels, have been working for years to be able to produce their work practicing, attempting, and even failing. Sure you could say that artists and creators should be in it for the love but then again you could say quite a lot of things, and the love doesn't fill the belly or pay the bills.
Secondly the concept of ownership is a construct of society. We define what ownership means. Now that does not make the construct invalid. We also define what murder and rape are as well. Thus information is "owned" by whomever society deems it should be owned by.
Because the costs of producing any work are non-trivial, and these works on the whole do enrich and further society as well as our individual lives a system to reward the production of such works should be in place. Now in order for such a system to really be viable it is necessary to have a system that identifies who the creators are and which should be rewarded for their work. In today's society that system of identification is the system of ownership, which mostly is represented as copyright. The concept of copyright is still valid; however the practice has become more and more abused, on both sides of the issue.
As most works are in some form derivative of other works, because all works arguably are derived from the creator's own experiences there also is a need for any system of information ownership to allow for derivation and to differentiate between what works should be considered 'original' and thus completely property of the creator (at least for a time), and what works should be considered 'derivative' and are still at least in part or in whole, property of a former creator. Furthermore because property generally can be bought, sold and given away, a system of transfer must also be provided for information properties. All these parts are fairly necessary and well in and of themselves, it is the implimentation of modern copyright as well as its abuse that is the problem.
This is a fellow human being who is being harassed. Death threats and the like are harassment or worse weather they come from real mail or email. Insults and Flames people should have a thick skin about but there is a line.
As for her remaining Anonymous. She is an author, a technical author at that. Her blog probably helps spur sales of her books if it is popular, and she may be out financially for this.
Now while I don't see the Internet as a "Right" because it is something that you do have to pay for. However I do think it is something that one should have the freedom to obtain for legal use, a freedom stemming out of the right to free speech, the right for freedom of the press, and the right for freedom of assembly among others.
It boils down to the line between free speech that we must endure, insulting opinions, unwanted interest, and speech that is harassment threats which may be non-idle, slander, spam (in the online world).
Why would the executive branch own up to anything of this kind?
From their point of view most people who would get mistaken never hear of the list, and it often gives them something to nail down someone they want to catch with when they don't have enough evidence or time or effort to get them another way. It is a back pocket law which many many people might break unknowingly and be charged with if a trump charge is needed.
Right now the Executive branch is trying to flex all the muscle it can.
Had the same problem, but solved it. Work like you are training for bowling, go for consistency over accuracy and then move the computer so everything is on target.
Slashdot Mirror
"Just believe in ID, it has more prove that the stuff you pull out."
Oh really? Care to site sources for this proof?
Most of the so-called "proof" for Intelligent Design rests on claims that the probability of life coming about as it did is so low that some mind has to be behind it. However, if the universe is one big roll of the dice than every possibility is equally likely, and thus while any one particular possibility can occur by chance w/o the help of God.
Furthermore, the ID supporters assume that there was only a single chance for life to occur in the universe. From what we have seen from studying the universe and space exploration this is probably far from the case. Mars, Venus, and several moons in our solar system may all have at one time or in some cases may still support microbial life. A single chance in a million will probably not yield much, but a billion runs at a one in a million shot should give several successes. There are billions upon billions of stars. We have already seen several with planets.
All that said. I do believe that there is a higher order to the universe, but simply putting things as "God did it" is both a disservice to mankind and a thoughtless disrespect for any such God who I am pretty well sure put us on this earth for more than just kissing up to him.
Actually it does matter to MS as those who don't use Vista are less likely to upgrade to the next edition or worse switch to another OS. Not to mention those that do switch to a different OS (read Dell users who eventually go w/Ubuntu should that work out) will no longer have their home page automatically linked to an MS property.
Not having the real users is a big deal for MS.
The bad that I see is that if/when the heads in the Ubuntu organization start catering to the wants and needs of Dell more than end users. Now some catering is good, expected, and right on their part. However the worry is that the focus of Ubuntu will change.
Reality? Where are you from? Bosnia? Iraq?
I attended school in the US and have been in school when tornadoes where in the area and have been in the school when it caught fire. Gunmen attacking isn't something that generally happens in US schools. Furthermore, in all those drills it was clearly stated that they were in fact drills and not the real thing.
Such a drill has no basis in reality and goes against fairly well reasoned and tested methods of conducting such drills. A gunman attack isn't something that is likely to happen to a student in their entire school lifetime, including if they go through a doctorate program, and even if it was what reason is there to pretend that such a drill is the real thing?
News outlets however pick up Ballmer's rants and ramblings while the patch releases you describe would be lucky to be mentioned.
Of coarse. I didn't mean to claim that this was all just a scare tactic. They probably do have a few suits coming up, perhaps even a couple that are valid.
Then again having one or two successful lawsuits to point to helps them put doubt on other OSS.
Not really, anyone who would actually look at the detailed list would also probably be out of their target audience to use the tactic on. The tactic is to get the *IDEA* that OSS is somehow legally questionable into the minds of people, not to actually prosecute or follow any of that legality.
So it doesn't matter as long as they have enough evidence so that they can defend themselves should someone happen to raise a slander suit.
No. The big problem is not a legal fight between MS and any OSS or other parties over patents. At least if MS is smart.
The way I see them going it far more insidious. This is publicity. They are hinting that OSS is infringing on their patents and are openly saying that "free software" should pay for the privilege of using said patents. The idea is to get this out into the public sphere, and to make people start to get nervous thinking about "free software" as possible patent infringement or as they would likely put it if this works, pirating.
The idea is to make people worry about a legal technicality as if they are breaking the law by association. In order to do this MS has to put out several complaints over a period of time, and probably sponsor "education campaigns" to teach kids about copyright and patent infringement.
They don't need to stop those who are educated in getting OSS, all they have to do is add another worry for people who are non-tech savey who might adopt OSS.
Indeed.
The knowledge of how to make a nuke also comes fairly easily with an understanding of physics on a degree level. Would you deny physics doctorates to anyone from a foreign country that might want to make nukes or support terrorists?
Biological and chemical weaponry are the same. Anyone with a modern degree in the field should fairly easily be able to use such knowledge as is required for such a degree (and all the GOOD that can be done with it) to create a weapon of devastating proportions that I, for one, would not like to imagine on the real world.
The truth is knowledge, to use a cliche, is power. It is a tool. A knife that can be used to reap crops and prepare food or a weapon to be used out of desperation and fear against a threat real or perceived.
Just because a tool can be used for harm does not mean that it is wise to take it out of the hands of man and if we do decide to try and limit it we are fools to think that it can be held entirely from others.
No it doesn't apply to you or anyone on slashdot. You see a human must be legally recognized as a person by the DMCA/RIAA/**AA. You have to have money enough to buy the law in order to be a person, otherwise you are a potential criminal who needs to pay fees to prove your innocence.
The way I see it is that schools should not be providing laptops. They should be providing desktops or rather making sure that each student has home access to a basic possibly internet capable machine and perhaps a usb drive to carry their work to and from home and school. There is no need to have a computer in front of every student in every class. When a class needs students to be in front of computers they can a either use a lab or b have simple terminals that the teacher controls and passes out/takes back with each class. If you must have laptops tie them to the room not the student so that one room can quickly be converted to a computer lab and back for classes that sometimes could use computers but other times don't need them.
Otherwise instate a program to make sure that each student has access to a home computer so every student can do homework that requires a computer.
Well I think the confusion here is over the concept that the assistant came to help.
You see there is more than one Steve Jobs and thus his "assistants" are in fact copies of himself. Thought Apple was outsourcing manufacturing to China or somewhere else? Nope, just a cover ploy to hide the fact that they have a manufacturing plant filled with Jobses.
Pope "Bob" may be resting but it probably isn't peaceful. He's got things to do with his furtherlife!
I could stand to see Starcraft as an MMO (Heck it was Multi Online the first time), but what I DON'T want to see is another single hero based MMO out of it where you have a single character that you "level up" and improve who might summon extra support characters. What I would rather see is that every player take control of a squad or small group of units and have to improve and expand them. Some units will be destroyed along the way while new ones may be recruited. Home base construction ect. Even having players buy ships to move their units from star-system to star system (AKA servers).
I think one problem is that we are making document formats that are far more than just what they are ostensibly used for. Word processing documents are generally meant to hold blocks of text, some pictures and charts, and some internal pointers. Does a word processing format really need java script, and support for every feature under the sun?
However a new format for every feature doesn't work too well either. Perhaps an extendable document format that plainly details what features are used in the document, so you can tell if that Word doc in your email has more than just the text of that newly leaked Harry Potter novel.
I agree, I should have said many works. Then again look at the average /. post. There is a cost associated with them, the cost of the computer infrastructure and the time taken to make the post. Such cost I submit is non-trivial as most of the world's population cannot pay it.
You forgot that industrialization also allows for much higher human populations and for the life expectancy of an individual to reach 60+ years, or do you like most people dieing in their 30s?
People who rally against industrialization often sound like the Monty Python sketch in Life of Brian when they ask "What have the Romans done for us?"
"Once they're released, they belong to the public. The distributors steal from the public. So, yes, copyright is theft. It used to be something that 'borrowed' from the public back when distribution costs were an issue. Now it justs takes and hoards and speculates." --iminplaya (723125)
I really can't agree with you on this. Your argument is completely unsound.
For one, cost still is an issue in producing music, the written word, or any kind of copy-right-able material. To produce good quality works it costs time, as well as the cost of equipment, and not to mention the costs of training. Nearly all artists, even the worst hacks touted by the record labels, have been working for years to be able to produce their work practicing, attempting, and even failing. Sure you could say that artists and creators should be in it for the love but then again you could say quite a lot of things, and the love doesn't fill the belly or pay the bills.
Secondly the concept of ownership is a construct of society. We define what ownership means. Now that does not make the construct invalid. We also define what murder and rape are as well. Thus information is "owned" by whomever society deems it should be owned by.
Because the costs of producing any work are non-trivial, and these works on the whole do enrich and further society as well as our individual lives a system to reward the production of such works should be in place. Now in order for such a system to really be viable it is necessary to have a system that identifies who the creators are and which should be rewarded for their work. In today's society that system of identification is the system of ownership, which mostly is represented as copyright. The concept of copyright is still valid; however the practice has become more and more abused, on both sides of the issue.
As most works are in some form derivative of other works, because all works arguably are derived from the creator's own experiences there also is a need for any system of information ownership to allow for derivation and to differentiate between what works should be considered 'original' and thus completely property of the creator (at least for a time), and what works should be considered 'derivative' and are still at least in part or in whole, property of a former creator. Furthermore because property generally can be bought, sold and given away, a system of transfer must also be provided for information properties. All these parts are fairly necessary and well in and of themselves, it is the implimentation of modern copyright as well as its abuse that is the problem.
I thought minidisc was doing all right in Japan?
Most of them just use the tactic of saying things longer and louder than everyone else in the room and eventually people will believe you.
In America this has worked.
Just remain anonymous?!
This is a fellow human being who is being harassed. Death threats and the like are harassment or worse weather they come from real mail or email. Insults and Flames people should have a thick skin about but there is a line.
As for her remaining Anonymous. She is an author, a technical author at that. Her blog probably helps spur sales of her books if it is popular, and she may be out financially for this.
Now while I don't see the Internet as a "Right" because it is something that you do have to pay for. However I do think it is something that one should have the freedom to obtain for legal use, a freedom stemming out of the right to free speech, the right for freedom of the press, and the right for freedom of assembly among others.
It boils down to the line between free speech that we must endure, insulting opinions, unwanted interest, and speech that is harassment threats which may be non-idle, slander, spam (in the online world).
Why would the executive branch own up to anything of this kind?
From their point of view most people who would get mistaken never hear of the list, and it often gives them something to nail down someone they want to catch with when they don't have enough evidence or time or effort to get them another way. It is a back pocket law which many many people might break unknowingly and be charged with if a trump charge is needed.
Right now the Executive branch is trying to flex all the muscle it can.
Had the same problem, but solved it. Work like you are training for bowling, go for consistency over accuracy and then move the computer so everything is on target.
No the RIAA would put copyright infringment as stealing and one of the worst crimes for which they should be paid $$$ in damages
Ah. So this woman DOES actually have a voice that may mean something. What a delightful surprise.