To me, the difference is that I can articulate my moral code as having a coherent philosophical spine which feels fundamentally right. If something makes people happy, and doesn't hurt anyone else, then it's okay. There are many things I am personally uncomfortable with, but which nevertheless pass this code, because I realize that it is not right to base judgments on my prejudices or my difficulty in immediately understanding others' interests.
The best you've been willing to do is "it's wrong because it's wrong." In my book that's not really a moral code, it's just repeating arbitrary stuff that other people told you to believe. Once you start to actually examine the source of your judgment rather than following yourself around in circles, you'll find the fear and ignorance part staring you in the face.
Because an appropriate relationship (morally) is between a man and his wife. If he has sexual relations with someone other than his wife, whether it's another man, a child, or some other woman, it's inappropriate.
That's not an answer, that's a clarification of your earlier statement.
Why is it not appropriate? This is the question the kids will be asking. I don't think it would be easy to come up a concrete answer that doesn't lead back to fear and ignorance.
Oh for fuck's sake. This is the same thing that Network Solutions and ISPs all over the world have tried for years. Nothing new to see here, folks. Just a response to failed DNS queries that redirects to a selected search provider.
It's amazing to me that not a single person in this entire thread (at least that I detected on a fairly close skim) actually read TFA where that was made plain as day.
Regardless of whether or not there is such an entity in China, it wouldn't have jurisdiction over Hong Kong, which has its own regulatory authorities (in this case OFTA).
And in point of fact, China does have a communications regulator, MII.
Paper is a renewable resource. Printing documents doesn't destroy forests, because most paper comes from tree farms. If you don't print out this Slashdot article, the tree you think you're saving will just get cut down for someone else.
That's the most retarded thing I've read all day. If demand goes down, then less will be produced. You think if everyone stopped buying 8-track players, they'd just keep making them by the millions? Oh wait.
And you think paper companies don't reuse their processing chemicals? What purpose is wasting their supplies supposed to serve?
The chemicals they use cannot be infinitely reused. They become tainted and the cost of purifying them is higher than the cost of buying more. So they get dumped.
Buying less paper will always result in less of this happening. There's no way around that.
I really don't understand how you can be trying to argue this point.
Certainly, wasting paper is a waste. But if you're not wasting it, it isn't a waste to use it.
People have found ways to achieve the same things without using paper. This company wants people to go back to using paper. That's a waste, since effective alternatives demonstrably exist.
Are you serious? Around here Billion is like half the price of the other brands, and their hardware and software really shows it. They run extremely hot, and their own firmware freezes every time anyone in the city sneezes. It's what people buy when they can't afford to spend the money on something that works.
I don't need anything more than a windows compatable 802.11g router for the foreseeable future, so I have no experience with linux compatability or open source availability.
You're missing the point. Basically all routers are compatible with Linux/Mac/Windows. What people want is open source firmware on the router itself so they can customize how it works.
Just clicked around the Soekris site and they still don't seem to have anything with gigabit ethernet. At those prices I'd expect technology from the past few years at least.
Where can you get a gig-e connection at home?
Seriously, that's total bullshit. I don't think I've heard of a consumer connection that does over 100mbps let alone 1000mbps.
But any connection faster than 100mbps requires gigabit ethernet locally to fully realize it (unless you are running fiber to the desktop). And those are more and more common, at least in Asia and Europe. Maybe you live in Africa or some other broadband backwater, but that doesn't mean everyone does.
More and more ISPs are offering consumer connections that would require gigE. Would be a bummer to get a gigabit connection for $25 a month and then have to lay out several hundred dollars to actually get that speed routed around my house.
Common sense ought to be sufficient. If "familiarity" was such an overriding concern then the change wouldn't have been made in the first place. If it suddenly became a concern, then they could easily have told people how to change the default search engine with a couple clicks.
The only explanation that adds up is that Yahoo offered more than Google, then Google offered more than Yahoo, and part of the new Google deal was that they wouldn't publicly discuss the details of the deal.
His question is, why can't he configure the app to sync directly with the Ubuntu machine in his own house, rather than passing the data through a remote intermediary? It's a good question.
Re:CmdrTaco drags big brass ones along the ground
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
I think dhobbit is right: in a decade or two the original iPads are going to go for huge amounts on eBay (or whatever replaced it). People will look back at them as the device that set people free from PCs.
Not to mention that grandma's arthritic hands aren't going to enjoy this thing.
It will get lighter. This is a short-sighted objection.
And are you seriously telling me you want to type tricky cli commands on a no-feedback slick-surface touchscreen keyboard? Please.
That's why I currently don't use an iPhone - I feel more comfortable using ssh with a physical qwerty keyboard in situations where one wrong move can wipe out a lot of data. But with the iPad's considerably larger keyboard I could see myself feeling sufficiently confident to use it. I also think that in the very near future we'll be seeing tactile feedback (maybe electrical or something) in onscreen keyboards.
The iPad's "killer functionality" will be mobile videos, ebooks, and generally media playback. I don't expect that to revolutionize the computing world, however. It will likely compete with existing Apple products, like the iPod Touch.
You're probably right, it will eat into Touch sales. The space between iPhone and iPad is probably going to seem less and less attractive to buyers. But I think that the iPad will appeal to a whole lot of people who weren't willing to go for the Touch because it was too small or couldn't do enough.
This is a device without a purpose.
Today maybe. But I think you're underestimating the transformative capacity of all those app developers out there. It's foolish to believe that you can rule out the collective inspiration of thousands of very smart people. Developers are going to come up with things that make this device indispensable for an ever-growing number of users.
I don't see myself getting one anytime soon. But I do grasp the vision behind it. A device with the power of a computer (not to belabour nitpickery like USB ports) and the approachability of a simple physical object is a fundamentally revolutionary thing. Maybe not this year, but soon, this device or its successor will be the thing that ushers in the next iteration of interactivity between people and electronics.
There is no fucking way there are google servers in 190 some odd countries.
No, but you'd be surprised how many places www.google.com is a 15ms ping from. I'm in a little middle-income country hanging off Asia's rear end, with not that many more people than metropolitan NYC, and we've got Google servers by the rackload just for the local audience.
I'd love to know which countries Yale has a beef with
I don't "have a beef" with most random people on the street, but if my bank is proposing to distribute bits of my money to them, I'd like to know who they are.
So if your request for data (YouTube video etc) isn't located in the DC that you connected to, they would have to transit that data across their own links. It would then make sense that they would replicate their own data over those same links during the night on that side of the world when the link is quiet.
If they're going to replicate it, and the data is traveling across their own network anyway, wouldn't it make more sense to store a copy locally while they're sending it to your browser?
a survey of the populace would consider the matter at hand "stealing."
This wouldn't surprise me. However, it is a consequence of decades of propaganda from the IP industry.
A survey of the populace would result in a lot of incorrect notions evincing widespread support. I don't see what that proves. Did Saddam order the WTC attacks?
Sure they're stealing. They are taking something that is not theirs without paying for it. That's stealing, plain and simple. You may not like to look at it that way because they don't "take" anything that is a "physical" item, but it's stealing nonetheless. You are the one lying as an attempt to create justification for stealing.
Just because it's possible to construct an analogy to theft doesn't mean it is theft. They are violating intellectual property law. There is a reason why we have different words for different crimes.
I am not "stealing" your life if I take it, I am murdering. I am not "stealing" the cleanliness of a river if I pollute it. I am not "stealing" your modesty if I sneak a camera into your shower and take pictures of you naked.
Slashdot Mirror
To me, the difference is that I can articulate my moral code as having a coherent philosophical spine which feels fundamentally right. If something makes people happy, and doesn't hurt anyone else, then it's okay. There are many things I am personally uncomfortable with, but which nevertheless pass this code, because I realize that it is not right to base judgments on my prejudices or my difficulty in immediately understanding others' interests.
The best you've been willing to do is "it's wrong because it's wrong." In my book that's not really a moral code, it's just repeating arbitrary stuff that other people told you to believe. Once you start to actually examine the source of your judgment rather than following yourself around in circles, you'll find the fear and ignorance part staring you in the face.
That's not an answer, that's a clarification of your earlier statement.
Why is it not appropriate?
Why is it not appropriate? This is the question the kids will be asking. I don't think it would be easy to come up a concrete answer that doesn't lead back to fear and ignorance.
I'm saying that if their morals promote fear and ignorance, then they are bad morals, and inflicting them on kids is irresponsible and abusive.
Oh for fuck's sake. This is the same thing that Network Solutions and ISPs all over the world have tried for years. Nothing new to see here, folks. Just a response to failed DNS queries that redirects to a selected search provider.
It's amazing to me that not a single person in this entire thread (at least that I detected on a fairly close skim) actually read TFA where that was made plain as day.
Switch your DNS and the problem goes away.
Regardless of whether or not there is such an entity in China, it wouldn't have jurisdiction over Hong Kong, which has its own regulatory authorities (in this case OFTA).
And in point of fact, China does have a communications regulator, MII.
That's the most retarded thing I've read all day. If demand goes down, then less will be produced. You think if everyone stopped buying 8-track players, they'd just keep making them by the millions? Oh wait.
The chemicals they use cannot be infinitely reused. They become tainted and the cost of purifying them is higher than the cost of buying more. So they get dumped.
Buying less paper will always result in less of this happening. There's no way around that.
I really don't understand how you can be trying to argue this point.
People have found ways to achieve the same things without using paper. This company wants people to go back to using paper. That's a waste, since effective alternatives demonstrably exist.
Are you serious? Around here Billion is like half the price of the other brands, and their hardware and software really shows it. They run extremely hot, and their own firmware freezes every time anyone in the city sneezes. It's what people buy when they can't afford to spend the money on something that works.
You're missing the point. Basically all routers are compatible with Linux/Mac/Windows. What people want is open source firmware on the router itself so they can customize how it works.
Just clicked around the Soekris site and they still don't seem to have anything with gigabit ethernet. At those prices I'd expect technology from the past few years at least.
US$26/month if you're in Hong Kong. Hongkies need routers too, you know.
Total bullshit?
Two examples off the top of my head: Here in Asia there's 1000mbps home broadband in Hong Kong. In Portugal you can also find 1000mbps broadband.
But any connection faster than 100mbps requires gigabit ethernet locally to fully realize it (unless you are running fiber to the desktop). And those are more and more common, at least in Asia and Europe. Maybe you live in Africa or some other broadband backwater, but that doesn't mean everyone does.
More and more ISPs are offering consumer connections that would require gigE. Would be a bummer to get a gigabit connection for $25 a month and then have to lay out several hundred dollars to actually get that speed routed around my house.
Don't be silly, email him if you want to email him.
They are mainly looking for Thai-language material. The government doesn't care about foreigners unless they are seriously inciting trouble.
Common sense ought to be sufficient. If "familiarity" was such an overriding concern then the change wouldn't have been made in the first place. If it suddenly became a concern, then they could easily have told people how to change the default search engine with a couple clicks.
The only explanation that adds up is that Yahoo offered more than Google, then Google offered more than Yahoo, and part of the new Google deal was that they wouldn't publicly discuss the details of the deal.
I understand fairly well how the trash in my kitchen rubbish bin came to exist.
Wow, that's a lot of leeway. So if my kid refuses to do the dishes, I can chop off her toe?
His question is, why can't he configure the app to sync directly with the Ubuntu machine in his own house, rather than passing the data through a remote intermediary? It's a good question.
I think dhobbit is right: in a decade or two the original iPads are going to go for huge amounts on eBay (or whatever replaced it). People will look back at them as the device that set people free from PCs.
It will get lighter. This is a short-sighted objection.
That's why I currently don't use an iPhone - I feel more comfortable using ssh with a physical qwerty keyboard in situations where one wrong move can wipe out a lot of data. But with the iPad's considerably larger keyboard I could see myself feeling sufficiently confident to use it. I also think that in the very near future we'll be seeing tactile feedback (maybe electrical or something) in onscreen keyboards.
You're probably right, it will eat into Touch sales. The space between iPhone and iPad is probably going to seem less and less attractive to buyers. But I think that the iPad will appeal to a whole lot of people who weren't willing to go for the Touch because it was too small or couldn't do enough.
Today maybe. But I think you're underestimating the transformative capacity of all those app developers out there. It's foolish to believe that you can rule out the collective inspiration of thousands of very smart people. Developers are going to come up with things that make this device indispensable for an ever-growing number of users.
I don't see myself getting one anytime soon. But I do grasp the vision behind it. A device with the power of a computer (not to belabour nitpickery like USB ports) and the approachability of a simple physical object is a fundamentally revolutionary thing. Maybe not this year, but soon, this device or its successor will be the thing that ushers in the next iteration of interactivity between people and electronics.
No, but you'd be surprised how many places www.google.com is a 15ms ping from. I'm in a little middle-income country hanging off Asia's rear end, with not that many more people than metropolitan NYC, and we've got Google servers by the rackload just for the local audience.
I don't "have a beef" with most random people on the street, but if my bank is proposing to distribute bits of my money to them, I'd like to know who they are.
If they're going to replicate it, and the data is traveling across their own network anyway, wouldn't it make more sense to store a copy locally while they're sending it to your browser?
This wouldn't surprise me. However, it is a consequence of decades of propaganda from the IP industry.
A survey of the populace would result in a lot of incorrect notions evincing widespread support. I don't see what that proves. Did Saddam order the WTC attacks?
Is counterfeiting money stealing? Why or why not?
Just because it's possible to construct an analogy to theft doesn't mean it is theft. They are violating intellectual property law. There is a reason why we have different words for different crimes.
I am not "stealing" your life if I take it, I am murdering. I am not "stealing" the cleanliness of a river if I pollute it. I am not "stealing" your modesty if I sneak a camera into your shower and take pictures of you naked.