Yes well, I've had multiple cats simultaneously since over a decade whilst being free of suicidal thoughts or mental disorders (even if I do say so myself), so this finding shouldn't discourage anyone from having them.
When will people realise this!? They both address the same issue: figuring out this world and all that there is beyond. It's just that science insists on testability and reproducibility while religion doesn't.
And ethics isn't separate from either. Science itself has nothing to say about ethics, but that doesn't mean scientific research and decisions shouldn't consider ethical guidelines. They should in fact.
Neither science nor religion should hamper the other, IMHO, until sometime in future both might have merged into one body of knowledge. And both should guide the other, from the standpoint of each one's strength. Really, Einstein got it spot on nearly a century ago! Why is it that the world is seeming becoming increasingly stupid and reactionary.
I've ignored the "My God is the Only True God!" variety of religion in the foregoing, as that type is nothing but dogmatism.
I guess the bigger issue is not the form factor of future computers, but their capabilities. Will I be able to easily install an OS of my choice? Will I be able to develop for it without too many restrictions? Will I be able to modify it's bootloader and/or firmware? Will I be able to connect together diverse peripherals from many different manufacturers for the functionality I desire? Can I retain most of the functionality of the system even without an Internet connection?
Currently you can do all these with today's PCs. But will it remain so in the future?
Indeed. Moving everything to the Cloud and requiring Internet access just to run your computer for your routine tasks is a blinkered and short-sighted view (from the user's standpoint.) The recent mad rush towards Mobile/Tablet and Cloud leaves me nauseous. I like the ability to run arbitrary code of my choice on a general purpose computer, with flexibility and extendibility, not keep caressing a 6-inch screen of a black-box over which I've no control to understand, tinker or extend.
It's ironic that computing devices were special purpose during the dawn of the era, and now we're turning back in a full-circle, after the heydays of the 70s, 80s and 90s.:-(
Can you state any clinching advantage SeaMonkey has over Firefox? And here we'll just consider SeaMonkey's Navigator component versus Firefox; comparing the whole suite is unfair to Firefox.
As far as I can see, SeaMonkey Navigator is more or less the same as Firefox. I was hoping it'd have a preference box to selectively whitelist Javascript execution, so I could ditch NoScript, but no, even such a fundamental feature isn't there (in a easy to use manner; editing user.js isn't easy or obvious) - something by the way that both Chrome and Opera now support.
The built-in ability to switch profiles on the fly is nice, which requires yet another add-on in Firefox.
Unfortunately the recently added Data Manager is uselessly broken when compared to old Cookie Manager, which Firefox still has, for the moment. I can't even use it to add white/blacklisted sites!
It's nice that a few advanced options like pipelining and Mouse Wheel are exposed in Preferences, but they seem to be little used and not really missed in Firefox
So other than the fact that it's a complete "Internet Suite" rather than just a browser, there really doesn't seem to be any noteworthy differences between SeaMonkey Navigator and Firefox. OTOH since they now share a nearly common code-base, any differences between the two will only be cosmetic, unless the SeaMonkey developers take the initiative to add useful and user-requested functionality, especially that which makes it stand apart from Firefox as a realistic alternative, which, understandably, they neither have the time nor manpower to.
As I've commented in this story previously, thepiratebay and isohunt are not (yet?) blocked from my ISP (BSNL), but while randomly browsing I've come across a site that has been blocked here with the exact same message as others have noted: "This site has been blocked as per instructions from Department of Telecom (DOT)."
Just because the majority are silent about something (which is what usually happens. They don't want it; They're simply too uninformed/confused/jaded to speak out) doesn't make it right, and doesn't absolve those who know better from at least speaking out about it.
At different points in history, in different societies, the majority have silently condoned or even approved virtually every form of evil man is capable of. That doesn't make them all right.
I wasn't on slashdot, but I did hear about that incident, as well as a fiasco involving Blogger if I remember correctly, again blacking out the entire blogspot domain instead of just the offending blog.
By and large the Indian government seems all set and eager to follow the Western censorship tactics, step-by-step. It was inevitable. A fragile democracy of over a billion people, of a greater spectrum of religions and classes than any other country, with at least a couple of hostile governments nearby as well - what better excuse does any govt need for proposing any and every censorship/surveillance law.
In fact, given the lesser degree of overall awareness of digital technologies and issues among the masses (not the IT techs), the govt stands a good chance of passing through many of these legislations completely under the public/media radar.
We just didn't have the kind of widespread digital penetration till quite recently, but now that it's started happening, we can expect these kind of actions more and more frequently.
I've often heard comments about BSNL's unreliability but it's broadband DSL service has been working pretty well for me since several years, though speeds are little lower than advertised. But their mobile signal is very poor even in the center of a major city!
One country blocks PB, and a lot follow. It's like they can't think by themselves so they need others to make way for their stupid decisions, so they are encouraged to censor and butch the world in the name of "piracy".
It's like my country that started a CISPA-like law before the US did, and then the US did, infallibly, after a few weeks.
Best thing. We got the highest unemployment rate in Europe, with numbers that are ridiculous. Yet, they worry about piracy instead.
I bet India's mid/low-class suffering is also ignored in behalf of "entertainment" as well (when was the last time those companies managed to entertain me, I don't know).
Entertainment makes us happier (at times) and gives us things to talk about. But it's definitely not what matters in the big picture. I'd rather be able to feed myself than to watch a new Hollywood hit, or play a fucking EA game.
At what point in time we gave extreme priority to Big Media so they have the power to actually affect our freedom? Because people (in suits) spewing out movies and music and videogames should not have this kind of power. They should only need to entertain us. Yet, they command more than governments.
Unfortunately entertainment in various forms has become the 'opiate' of the masses the world over. I would attribute this to the lack of meaningful employment of the vast majority. People simply don't get to do what makes them excited or passionate, or they never even get a chance to discover what inspires them, and get stuck in all sorts of mind-numbingly boring jobs, with the result that sextetainment sells like never before in history.
I don't blame them too. Often a scan of world (or local) news reads so monotonously depressing one wants to forget it all in some game/film.
Society failed (or rather the promise of a new age of enlightened living) when it's vast majority's lives aren't worth the paper to write it on.
Back on topic, these half-hearted attempts at blocking torrent-trackers will fail resoundingly given that black-market CD/DVD discs of all major films are easily available in practically every town and city for about a dollar or so each. All it will do is drive discerning users to seek other ISP (I hope.)
Is it legal for them to do so? I wonder what particular law gives them the leeway to block arbitrary sites at arbitrary times, claiming that the Department of Telecommunications ordered them to do so, which is wrong in this case apparently, since it's purely a private decision by Reliance.
Thanks for the info. Interesting that Reliance a private ISP has implemented the block while both MTNL and BSNL have not, AFAICS. And pray tell what's the reason for blocking vimeo? Why not go the whole hog and block Youtube as well? I've been following the numerous US and European Internet censorship attempts the past few years, and wondering when this place was going to be ordered to heel; I guess the fun has begun.
Exactly. For example slashdot wants to run scripts from four domains viz., slashdot.org, fsdn.com, doubleclick.net and google-analytics.com, but I allow only those from the first two, and that too only when I want to post a reply. Similarly for most other sites I find that allowing scripts from the same domain as the site is usually enough to enable essential site functionality.
And this is the reason I'll never own a smartphone. I've a 'dumbphone' right now, and after it dies I'm going back to being reachable through landline, and those who absolutely must have a mobile number can go stuff it...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes well, I've had multiple cats simultaneously since over a decade whilst being free of suicidal thoughts or mental disorders (even if I do say so myself), so this finding shouldn't discourage anyone from having them.
When will people realise this!? They both address the same issue: figuring out this world and all that there is beyond. It's just that science insists on testability and reproducibility while religion doesn't.
And ethics isn't separate from either. Science itself has nothing to say about ethics, but that doesn't mean scientific research and decisions shouldn't consider ethical guidelines. They should in fact.
Neither science nor religion should hamper the other, IMHO, until sometime in future both might have merged into one body of knowledge. And both should guide the other, from the standpoint of each one's strength. Really, Einstein got it spot on nearly a century ago! Why is it that the world is seeming becoming increasingly stupid and reactionary.
I've ignored the "My God is the Only True God!" variety of religion in the foregoing, as that type is nothing but dogmatism.
I guess the bigger issue is not the form factor of future computers, but their capabilities. Will I be able to easily install an OS of my choice? Will I be able to develop for it without too many restrictions? Will I be able to modify it's bootloader and/or firmware? Will I be able to connect together diverse peripherals from many different manufacturers for the functionality I desire? Can I retain most of the functionality of the system even without an Internet connection?
Currently you can do all these with today's PCs. But will it remain so in the future?
Fair enough, though under Linux, Firefox's UI isn't all that Chrome like. At least, not yet.
Indeed. Moving everything to the Cloud and requiring Internet access just to run your computer for your routine tasks is a blinkered and short-sighted view (from the user's standpoint.) The recent mad rush towards Mobile/Tablet and Cloud leaves me nauseous. I like the ability to run arbitrary code of my choice on a general purpose computer, with flexibility and extendibility, not keep caressing a 6-inch screen of a black-box over which I've no control to understand, tinker or extend.
It's ironic that computing devices were special purpose during the dawn of the era, and now we're turning back in a full-circle, after the heydays of the 70s, 80s and 90s. :-(
Can you state any clinching advantage SeaMonkey has over Firefox? And here we'll just consider SeaMonkey's Navigator component versus Firefox; comparing the whole suite is unfair to Firefox.
As far as I can see, SeaMonkey Navigator is more or less the same as Firefox. I was hoping it'd have a preference box to selectively whitelist Javascript execution, so I could ditch NoScript, but no, even such a fundamental feature isn't there (in a easy to use manner; editing user.js isn't easy or obvious) - something by the way that both Chrome and Opera now support.
The built-in ability to switch profiles on the fly is nice, which requires yet another add-on in Firefox.
Unfortunately the recently added Data Manager is uselessly broken when compared to old Cookie Manager, which Firefox still has, for the moment. I can't even use it to add white/blacklisted sites!
It's nice that a few advanced options like pipelining and Mouse Wheel are exposed in Preferences, but they seem to be little used and not really missed in Firefox
So other than the fact that it's a complete "Internet Suite" rather than just a browser, there really doesn't seem to be any noteworthy differences between SeaMonkey Navigator and Firefox. OTOH since they now share a nearly common code-base, any differences between the two will only be cosmetic, unless the SeaMonkey developers take the initiative to add useful and user-requested functionality, especially that which makes it stand apart from Firefox as a realistic alternative, which, understandably, they neither have the time nor manpower to.
You underestimate the resilience of the masses to abuse. The sheep won't leave their pasture no matter how much they are beat and sheared...
And to follow-up, the block seems to be at IP level, as the same blocked notification page is displayed even when I go through Google's Public DNS.
As I've commented in this story previously, thepiratebay and isohunt are not (yet?) blocked from my ISP (BSNL), but while randomly browsing I've come across a site that has been blocked here with the exact same message as others have noted: "This site has been blocked as per instructions from Department of Telecom (DOT)."
http://www.funscrape.com/
Is this site blocked for others too, both BSNL and other ISP users?
I wonder what's the reason for this one? Seems to be a harmless site...
Just because the majority are silent about something (which is what usually happens. They don't want it; They're simply too uninformed/confused/jaded to speak out) doesn't make it right, and doesn't absolve those who know better from at least speaking out about it.
At different points in history, in different societies, the majority have silently condoned or even approved virtually every form of evil man is capable of. That doesn't make them all right.
Popular yes. Impressive no.
Indeed the film crowd has finally finished their remedial from MAFIAA, and all set and raring to go, and make their masters proud.
I wasn't on slashdot, but I did hear about that incident, as well as a fiasco involving Blogger if I remember correctly, again blacking out the entire blogspot domain instead of just the offending blog.
By and large the Indian government seems all set and eager to follow the Western censorship tactics, step-by-step. It was inevitable. A fragile democracy of over a billion people, of a greater spectrum of religions and classes than any other country, with at least a couple of hostile governments nearby as well - what better excuse does any govt need for proposing any and every censorship/surveillance law.
In fact, given the lesser degree of overall awareness of digital technologies and issues among the masses (not the IT techs), the govt stands a good chance of passing through many of these legislations completely under the public/media radar.
We just didn't have the kind of widespread digital penetration till quite recently, but now that it's started happening, we can expect these kind of actions more and more frequently.
I've often heard comments about BSNL's unreliability but it's broadband DSL service has been working pretty well for me since several years, though speeds are little lower than advertised. But their mobile signal is very poor even in the center of a major city!
One country blocks PB, and a lot follow. It's like they can't think by themselves so they need others to make way for their stupid decisions, so they are encouraged to censor and butch the world in the name of "piracy".
It's like my country that started a CISPA-like law before the US did, and then the US did, infallibly, after a few weeks. Best thing. We got the highest unemployment rate in Europe, with numbers that are ridiculous. Yet, they worry about piracy instead.
I bet India's mid/low-class suffering is also ignored in behalf of "entertainment" as well (when was the last time those companies managed to entertain me, I don't know). Entertainment makes us happier (at times) and gives us things to talk about. But it's definitely not what matters in the big picture. I'd rather be able to feed myself than to watch a new Hollywood hit, or play a fucking EA game. At what point in time we gave extreme priority to Big Media so they have the power to actually affect our freedom? Because people (in suits) spewing out movies and music and videogames should not have this kind of power. They should only need to entertain us. Yet, they command more than governments.
Unfortunately entertainment in various forms has become the 'opiate' of the masses the world over. I would attribute this to the lack of meaningful employment of the vast majority. People simply don't get to do what makes them excited or passionate, or they never even get a chance to discover what inspires them, and get stuck in all sorts of mind-numbingly boring jobs, with the result that sextetainment sells like never before in history.
I don't blame them too. Often a scan of world (or local) news reads so monotonously depressing one wants to forget it all in some game/film.
Society failed (or rather the promise of a new age of enlightened living) when it's vast majority's lives aren't worth the paper to write it on.
Back on topic, these half-hearted attempts at blocking torrent-trackers will fail resoundingly given that black-market CD/DVD discs of all major films are easily available in practically every town and city for about a dollar or so each. All it will do is drive discerning users to seek other ISP (I hope.)
Is it legal for them to do so? I wonder what particular law gives them the leeway to block arbitrary sites at arbitrary times, claiming that the Department of Telecommunications ordered them to do so, which is wrong in this case apparently, since it's purely a private decision by Reliance.
Thanks for the info. Interesting that Reliance a private ISP has implemented the block while both MTNL and BSNL have not, AFAICS. And pray tell what's the reason for blocking vimeo? Why not go the whole hog and block Youtube as well? I've been following the numerous US and European Internet censorship attempts the past few years, and wondering when this place was going to be ordered to heel; I guess the fun has begun.
IP address of thepiratebay.se is 194.71.107.15 IP address of thepiratebay.org is 194.71.107.50 IP address of isohunt.com is 208.95.173.130
thepiratebay.se works for me with BSNL (which is govt owned), so I doubt private ISPs would be quicker to block it.
Oooh! Hunger Games!!
Mod parent-up...
good post. Mod this up...
mod him up
Mod this up
Exactly. For example slashdot wants to run scripts from four domains viz., slashdot.org, fsdn.com, doubleclick.net and google-analytics.com, but I allow only those from the first two, and that too only when I want to post a reply. Similarly for most other sites I find that allowing scripts from the same domain as the site is usually enough to enable essential site functionality.
And this is the reason I'll never own a smartphone. I've a 'dumbphone' right now, and after it dies I'm going back to being reachable through landline, and those who absolutely must have a mobile number can go stuff it...