TFA only concerns spoken language.
Early mutant A/C humans may have indeed knapped flint knives
and employed them to off themselves in that cold morn,
if rejected by their shaggy, urine crystal encrusted
would-be girlfriends.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_M._Auel
I propose only that since voting is a means by which everyone can affect policy, we take advantage of the fact that large numbers of people make any one person's vote irrelevant, as long as trends are wise, on average. As voters go cukoo, others go cukoo in different directions, and still others, hot off the press, start voting.
"A means", yes, but the financial contributions to the campaigns are a large component of the output, too. The idea that the voter noise cancels might be theoretically true, but I'm not so sure of the reality.
I submit that what is needed is a healthy dose of transparency.
If there was away to appoint a non-partisan broker,
through which _all_ money used in political campaigns must pass, _period_,
and that broker allowed transparency,
such that knowledge of who bought whom and for how much was globally visible,
US politics would get quite a bit simpler in a hurry.
Instantiating this idea is impossible, even if you could somehow obviate all of the history that got us here: every system implies a work-around, no?
What is of as much interest to me as the system for scoring the initial wisdom of the leadership is the negative feedback loop that keeps the leaders from going "cuckoo for cocoa-puffs" over time.
If things move to the point where it is socially unacceptable to bother people at home, then this is a good transitional state.
No one bothers people on cell phones. Probably due to pricing. Interesting, how the flat rate for the home line makes spamming people somehow acceptable.
If they are trying to evolve into something like a gaming version of Gnome, where the schedule is fairly straightforward, than that might be a Good Thing.
The transition may be painful, and could even kill them.
Depends on the management.
Many of the framers didn't want the common people getting too much control over things for fear that we wouldn't choose to let them run things.
One possible motive.
There may have also been a nod to the level of literacy in the general population. Remember, this was in the day where if you could do enough math to perform celestial navigation, you could be an officer in the navy.
Times have changed, the pool of smarter heads is bigger. You'll never eliminate the "dumb rubes", but you can gather useful input from a broader swath of people.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, those Framers may not have come off as so elitist in a modern context.
Hey, now: so many arguments these days are predicated upon assertions that your free will is somehow constrained.
Fortune forbid that anyone take responsibility and think clearly these days. How would we ever hold elections?
I know people will think I'm crazy, but I have a vision for kGnome.
You call that vision?
Apple adopted kGnome, and begat ikGnome.
Asus bought Apple, and begat eeeikGnome.
Warren Buffet bought Asus, shuffled the letters, and made a digital surfboard of the product:
MeNoGeekie.
He retired to Hawaii and surfed, like, for real, dude.
Now that's vision.
You think you're old...
Sure, they funded manned trips to the moon those decades ago.
Think of the pyramids of Egypt. They were built thousands of years ago. You try funding a project of that scope today, with that kind of durability, and see how far you get.
Kids these days...
Somewhat. Look, good hardcopy under F/OSS remains relatively unhealthy compared to proprietary offerings.
As with the original RMS incident, the proprietary offerings continue to chain you to the upgrade treadmill, as I saw recently trying to get a perfectly servicable HP Deskjet to install under Vista.
1. No Windows Update driver.
2. HP.com driver downloads well enough, doesn't quite install.
3. Drilling sensation in wallet region.
4. (Someone else's) Profit!!!
No, I couldn't just convert this person to Ubuntu or whatever; leaving them chained to Caesar's oar is my minimal support approach.
I wasn't well worded previously.
Could you argue that the flagrant use of XmlHTTPRequest() to give you that shiny Web 2.0 experience binds the browser so tightly to the server as to be more like client-server?
Daring a bit of research, Wikipedia clearly answers no:
Though it can do synchronous fetches, it is virtually always asynchronous, due to the greater UI responsiveness.
Some code for the mind, some for the heart, and some for the wallet.
BSD licensing is predominantly for the mind: sheer pursuit of technical excellence, don't bore me with politics and philosopy.
GPL licensing is for the heart, for abstractions that may not play well in the head of another. Technical excellence is fine, but societal "improvement" is the driver.
Proprietary is for the wallet. And let's not kid ourselves: something as tedious as getting the printer driver to work right is something I would need to be paid large frogskins to get excited about. Glad someone else beat their head against those details.
The challenge is to relax and admit that there is not a single motive that models "Why folks do code".
While respecting RMS, I can't reach the religious level of devotion to an idea like the GPL without a fully-worked philosophical system showing how he arrives at proprietary software being "unethical". Un-bright, perhaps.
I use software from all three major flavors of license, and they all have their time and place.
"Bosun" and "fo'c'sle" are shibboleths meant to reveal the landlubber. Wouldn't want/.ers to arrive on a ship and look like a bunch of Windows users at the Ottawa Linux Symposium, would I?
Slashdot Mirror
What's wrong with D2?
Between me and you
Omitting "R2", so brave
Is a day without
Burma Shave
http://i-want-a-pony.com/
Ronnggpq:
Emacs
The 2008 US Presidential campaign?
It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand.
--Mark Twain
But can he sell car insurance?
TFA only concerns spoken language.
Early mutant A/C humans may have indeed knapped flint knives
and employed them to off themselves in that cold morn,
if rejected by their shaggy, urine crystal encrusted
would-be girlfriends.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_M._Auel
I propose only that since voting is a means by which everyone can affect policy, we take advantage of the fact that large numbers of people make any one person's vote irrelevant, as long as trends are wise, on average. As voters go cukoo, others go cukoo in different directions, and still others, hot off the press, start voting.
"A means", yes, but the financial contributions to the campaigns are a large component of the output, too. The idea that the voter noise cancels might be theoretically true, but I'm not so sure of the reality.
I submit that what is needed is a healthy dose of transparency.
If there was away to appoint a non-partisan broker,
through which _all_ money used in political campaigns must pass, _period_,
and that broker allowed transparency,
such that knowledge of who bought whom and for how much was globally visible,
US politics would get quite a bit simpler in a hurry.
Instantiating this idea is impossible, even if you could somehow obviate all of the history that got us here: every system implies a work-around, no?
What is of as much interest to me as the system for scoring the initial wisdom of the leadership is the negative feedback loop that keeps the leaders from going "cuckoo for cocoa-puffs" over time.
Aye, particularly when making a sandwich, putting on makeup, correcting the children, and, oh, driving the SUV.
If things move to the point where it is socially unacceptable to bother people at home, then this is a good transitional state.
No one bothers people on cell phones. Probably due to pricing. Interesting, how the flat rate for the home line makes spamming people somehow acceptable.
If they are trying to evolve into something like a gaming version of Gnome, where the schedule is fairly straightforward, than that might be a Good Thing.
The transition may be painful, and could even kill them.
Depends on the management.
Many of the framers didn't want the common people getting too much control over things for fear that we wouldn't choose to let them run things.
One possible motive.
There may have also been a nod to the level of literacy in the general population. Remember, this was in the day where if you could do enough math to perform celestial navigation, you could be an officer in the navy.
Times have changed, the pool of smarter heads is bigger. You'll never eliminate the "dumb rubes", but you can gather useful input from a broader swath of people.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, those Framers may not have come off as so elitist in a modern context.
Hey, now: so many arguments these days are predicated upon assertions that your free will is somehow constrained.
Fortune forbid that anyone take responsibility and think clearly these days. How would we ever hold elections?
No, that's cruel and inhuman use of furniture.
Won't somebody think of the chairs?
I know people will think I'm crazy, but I have a vision for kGnome.
You call that vision?
Apple adopted kGnome, and begat ikGnome.
Asus bought Apple, and begat eeeikGnome.
Warren Buffet bought Asus, shuffled the letters, and made a digital surfboard of the product:
MeNoGeekie.
He retired to Hawaii and surfed, like, for real, dude.
Now that's vision.
You think you're old...
Sure, they funded manned trips to the moon those decades ago.
Think of the pyramids of Egypt. They were built thousands of years ago.
You try funding a project of that scope today, with that kind of durability, and see how far you get.
Kids these days...
"Wardrobe malfunction"
Somewhat. Look, good hardcopy under F/OSS remains relatively unhealthy compared to proprietary offerings.
As with the original RMS incident, the proprietary offerings continue to chain you to the upgrade treadmill, as I saw recently trying to get a perfectly servicable HP Deskjet to install under Vista.
1. No Windows Update driver.
2. HP.com driver downloads well enough, doesn't quite install.
3. Drilling sensation in wallet region.
4. (Someone else's) Profit!!!
No, I couldn't just convert this person to Ubuntu or whatever; leaving them chained to Caesar's oar is my minimal support approach.
Thanks. My Burma Shave efforts typically do better, but going small for photons got very little lovin' this time. :(
Could you argue that the flagrant use of XmlHTTPRequest() to give you that shiny Web 2.0 experience binds the browser so tightly to the server as to be more like client-server?
Daring a bit of research, Wikipedia clearly answers no:
Though it can do synchronous fetches, it is virtually always asynchronous, due to the greater UI responsiveness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest
Maybe the question could be tweaked as:
"Does Web 2.0 mean that n-tier solutions are retreating to client-server?"
George Clinton walking an atomic dog.
Or, for the politically minded,
Bill Clinton walking...naah...
Some code for the mind, some for the heart, and some for the wallet.
BSD licensing is predominantly for the mind: sheer pursuit of technical excellence, don't bore me with politics and philosopy.
GPL licensing is for the heart, for abstractions that may not play well in the head of another. Technical excellence is fine, but societal "improvement" is the driver.
Proprietary is for the wallet. And let's not kid ourselves: something as tedious as getting the printer driver to work right is something I would need to be paid large frogskins to get excited about. Glad someone else beat their head against those details.
The challenge is to relax and admit that there is not a single motive that models "Why folks do code".
While respecting RMS, I can't reach the religious level of devotion to an idea like the GPL without a fully-worked philosophical system showing how he arrives at proprietary software being "unethical". Un-bright, perhaps.
I use software from all three major flavors of license, and they all have their time and place.
"Bosun" and "fo'c'sle" are shibboleths meant to reveal the landlubber. Wouldn't want /.ers to arrive on a ship and look like a bunch of Windows users at the Ottawa Linux Symposium, would I?