I am vehemently opposed to the suppression of speech for the sake of others, uninformed or not. An uninformed but educated person will recognize the fallacies and lies for what they are. And uninformed but curious person will go a bit farther and seek out the truth. Neither of those likely represents the average uninformed person. That person is usually poorly educated and disinterested, and I don't really care about him. He's a lost cause and will spend his life being led around the nose by whomever can dupe him more convincingly (or more recently). It's really no better in my eyes if he believes the truth without understanding why or if he believes a lie without understanding why. At that point, the harm is already done. If it isn't the creationist museum it will be the local psychic or the crystal merchant or the magnetic bracelet salesman or Head-On or the latest diet or any of a million other things that prey on the uninformed every day. More power to them - P. T. Barnum would be proud.
But the point isn't really to convince the Creationists that they're wrong. That will never happen. The point of publicizing it as widely as possible is to shine as bright a light as possible on these beliefs for the benefit of those who aren't convinced one way or the other. I always liked John Stuart Mill's take on this sort of thing:
"I acknowledge that the tendency of all opinions to become sectarian is not cured by the freest discussion, but is often heightened and exacerbated thereby; the truth which ought to have been, but was not, seen, being rejected all the more violently because proclaimed by persons regarded as opponents. But it is not on the impassioned partisan, it is on the calmer and more disinterested bystander, that this collision of opinions works its salutary effect."
Frankly, I think this museum is the best thing that's happened to the Evolution/Creationism debate since Scopes.
I have some questions about the second of the Green Party's Ten Key Values, "Social Justice and Equal Opportunity". As described on the Green Party's site:
"All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law."
First, does the claim that all persons should have the right to benefit equally from resources imply that no person should have the right to benefit more than another from these resources? What, exactly, are these resources, and how are they afforded by society and the environment? What exactly do you mean by "benefit", and how do you propose to measure it, that you may ensure that nobody receives more than anybody else?
Second, I'm a little concerned about the claim that we should confront all of these "isms" in society. Can racism, for example, even exist in society, or only in a person? While we can confront racism in anybody and everybody, can we really do anything about the racism that resides in another person? Is it perhaps possible to remove only the racism that is inside oneself? How does one reconcile the right of the citizens to equal protection under the law with the right of a person to his beliefs? Is government's proper business with action or with belief?
Your friendly neighborhood public library still doesn't treat you like a criminal. Amazing as it sounds, you can walk in and ask for a book, and they'll lend it to you. All they ask is that you return it when they ask you to. That's right, they'll actually take you at your word. No deposits, DRM, FBI warnings or EULAs involved. Why not go today, and remind yourself how it feels to be treated with a little respect?
I'm pretty sure panasonic is known as pan sonic these days, at least in the states. Seems some company already had that name or something. Either way, great music. And if you're just starting with electronica, I would recommend Tri Repetae++ from autechre before diving into their more recent work. There's a bit more to hold on to there, and it lays a good foundation for the music they've released sinc, much of which is absolutely incredible.
Fair enough. I'd be lying if I said I could give you anything resembling an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of virtual machines (actually, if you could point me to some good reading material on virtual machines, I'd appreciate it). From what you say, it definitely sounds like a robust virtual machine would be a superior approach to a bunch of different applications emulating different parts of the Win32 API to do what they need to do. I just think that WINE currently allows a fair amount of people to get most of what they really need to do done on a day-to-day basis.
I like your idea of popping up a window with NT4 on a linux desktop, though I can just see the scenario that would lead to it.
IT dept: Hey, we're upgrading to Linux. Here's a machine with KDE, it's a desktop environment that is similar to the Windows environment you've been using.
Users: But, it looks all different and stuff. Where's the "Start" button? What's that stuff in the taskbar? Where's Internet Explorer.
IT Dept: Oh, that's no big deal, just click the "K". You can use Konqueror inst...
Users (interrupting): This is too hard. It's too different. I don't have time for this.
IT Dept: Well, if you'd like, we've given you the option of opening a window to run NT4 while we make the transition. Here, click this.
Users: Ah, that's better.
IT Dept: So, you can use this to do things that cause you trouble, while you're learning the new applications that we have on Linux. See, Linux offers us a number of advantages, such as...
Users (interrupting again): Can you make the NT4 window come up in fullscreen mode?
IT Dept:
Of course, maybe the fact that I'm at work right now enhancing pefrectly good software for these same users has colored my opinion of them a bit:)
I don't know that it's necessarily a dead end, just because the cutting edge apps aren't running from Day 1. I have been very interested (and impressed) by the efforts of companies like both CodeWeavers and Transgaming to use this codebase to produce products that allow people to run common Windows apps under Linux. In particular (sorry if this sounds like an ad), CrossOver office is very impressive.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of office documents out there, and if we're going to see more linux desktops (the need for which is a separate argument, not taken up here), people will need to be able to read and save documents in those formats. CrossOver Office allows you to do that very well for Office 97 and 2000. The fact that it doesn't support Office XP isn't too big a deal in my book, at elast from a business perspective. Office compatibility issues exist even at companies that are primarily Windows shops. I work for a major cable shopping channel (yes, that one), and we're still running NT4 and using Office 97. Our case is a bit extreme, but the fact remains that large companies simply aren't able to deploy the latest versions of Microsoft's office tools as soon as they come out. In fact, it's downright bad practice to deploy any Microsoft software in a business environment until a Service Pack or two is released (and many -myself included- would say I should have stopped that sentence after the word 'environment'). If WINE and projects based on it are even able to stay consistently one generation behind in their support for Office and such apps (and I think they'll do much better than that), they will have successfully addressed a major issue with getting companies to migrate from Windows to Linux. Of course, this doesn't help the home user who wants to be able to get at Office XP documents or play the latest games today, but we linux folks are a bunch of do-it-yourselfers anyway. That's why the source is available:)
I just hope that folks at both companies (and any that should follow suit later) can keep sight of the bigger picture and not kill the project with petty licensing squabbles. There must be some way to remain commercially viable *and* return code to the WINE project. It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out.
This isn't a double standard at all. We're talking about a fix to a security hole in a RELEASE CANDIDATE for version 1.0. If Mozilla is riddled with security flaws by the time it's at version 6.0 like IE is, I'm sure people wil be jumping down their throats as well.
Thank you for actually reading the article before replying. Nowhere here does it state anything about pay-to-view, nor does it state anything about support from Hollings and Tauzin. It's actually a rather mundane article about the head of the FCC pushing for adoption of digital broadcasts in the wake of the television industry's endless bickering. Sounds valid to me. Let's hold off on the conspiracy theories until there's at least a shred of actual evidence to support them.
...when you combine this with the description of Visoly's other Flash Advance products. It sure sounds from the visoly site's description of those products that they are marketing them for copying first, and developing second. The first paragraph of the Flash Advance description states:
"Once you have sent games, demos or programs to it's memory using the Flash Advance Linker, it can simply be plugged into the Gameboy Advance and it will act like an original game -- there is 100% not any difference!"
Not until the fourth paragraph do they chime in with:
"The Flash Advance 64M is furthermore the perfect choice for any professional Gameboy Advance developers or even home developers"
I know this doesn't invalidate the legitimate uses of the Linker, but it can't help their cause to have language in their other products' descriptions that seems to advocate piracy using the Linker.
Slashdot Mirror
I am vehemently opposed to the suppression of speech for the sake of others, uninformed or not. An uninformed but educated person will recognize the fallacies and lies for what they are. And uninformed but curious person will go a bit farther and seek out the truth. Neither of those likely represents the average uninformed person. That person is usually poorly educated and disinterested, and I don't really care about him. He's a lost cause and will spend his life being led around the nose by whomever can dupe him more convincingly (or more recently). It's really no better in my eyes if he believes the truth without understanding why or if he believes a lie without understanding why. At that point, the harm is already done. If it isn't the creationist museum it will be the local psychic or the crystal merchant or the magnetic bracelet salesman or Head-On or the latest diet or any of a million other things that prey on the uninformed every day. More power to them - P. T. Barnum would be proud.
But the point isn't really to convince the Creationists that they're wrong. That will never happen. The point of publicizing it as widely as possible is to shine as bright a light as possible on these beliefs for the benefit of those who aren't convinced one way or the other. I always liked John Stuart Mill's take on this sort of thing:
"I acknowledge that the tendency of all opinions to become sectarian is not cured by the freest discussion, but is often heightened and exacerbated thereby; the truth which ought to have been, but was not, seen, being rejected all the more violently because proclaimed by persons regarded as opponents. But it is not on the impassioned partisan, it is on the calmer and more disinterested bystander, that this collision of opinions works its salutary effect."
Frankly, I think this museum is the best thing that's happened to the Evolution/Creationism debate since Scopes.
...14:58...14:59...
I have some questions about the second of the Green Party's Ten Key Values, "Social Justice and Equal Opportunity". As described on the Green Party's site:
"All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law."
First, does the claim that all persons should have the right to benefit equally from resources imply that no person should have the right to benefit more than another from these resources? What, exactly, are these resources, and how are they afforded by society and the environment? What exactly do you mean by "benefit", and how do you propose to measure it, that you may ensure that nobody receives more than anybody else?
Second, I'm a little concerned about the claim that we should confront all of these "isms" in society. Can racism, for example, even exist in society, or only in a person? While we can confront racism in anybody and everybody, can we really do anything about the racism that resides in another person? Is it perhaps possible to remove only the racism that is inside oneself? How does one reconcile the right of the citizens to equal protection under the law with the right of a person to his beliefs? Is government's proper business with action or with belief?
Your friendly neighborhood public library still doesn't treat you like a criminal. Amazing as it sounds, you can walk in and ask for a book, and they'll lend it to you. All they ask is that you return it when they ask you to. That's right, they'll actually take you at your word. No deposits, DRM, FBI warnings or EULAs involved. Why not go today, and remind yourself how it feels to be treated with a little respect?
You forgot the 12 year old with the laser pointer
Man, that is one unfortunate url for a newspaper. :)
I'm pretty sure panasonic is known as pan sonic these days, at least in the states. Seems some company already had that name or something. Either way, great music. And if you're just starting with electronica, I would recommend Tri Repetae++ from autechre before diving into their more recent work. There's a bit more to hold on to there, and it lays a good foundation for the music they've released sinc, much of which is absolutely incredible.
Thanks for all the info! I'll be sure to check it out when I get home.
Fair enough. I'd be lying if I said I could give you anything resembling an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of virtual machines (actually, if you could point me to some good reading material on virtual machines, I'd appreciate it). From what you say, it definitely sounds like a robust virtual machine would be a superior approach to a bunch of different applications emulating different parts of the Win32 API to do what they need to do. I just think that WINE currently allows a fair amount of people to get most of what they really need to do done on a day-to-day basis.
:)
I like your idea of popping up a window with NT4 on a linux desktop, though I can just see the scenario that would lead to it.
IT dept: Hey, we're upgrading to Linux. Here's a machine with KDE, it's a desktop environment that is similar to the Windows environment you've been using.
Users: But, it looks all different and stuff. Where's the "Start" button? What's that stuff in the taskbar? Where's Internet Explorer.
IT Dept: Oh, that's no big deal, just click the "K". You can use Konqueror inst...
Users (interrupting): This is too hard. It's too different. I don't have time for this.
IT Dept: Well, if you'd like, we've given you the option of opening a window to run NT4 while we make the transition. Here, click this.
Users: Ah, that's better.
IT Dept: So, you can use this to do things that cause you trouble, while you're learning the new applications that we have on Linux. See, Linux offers us a number of advantages, such as...
Users (interrupting again): Can you make the NT4 window come up in fullscreen mode?
IT Dept:
Of course, maybe the fact that I'm at work right now enhancing pefrectly good software for these same users has colored my opinion of them a bit
I don't know that it's necessarily a dead end, just because the cutting edge apps aren't running from Day 1. I have been very interested (and impressed) by the efforts of companies like both CodeWeavers and Transgaming to use this codebase to produce products that allow people to run common Windows apps under Linux. In particular (sorry if this sounds like an ad), CrossOver office is very impressive.
:)
Unfortunately, there are a lot of office documents out there, and if we're going to see more linux desktops (the need for which is a separate argument, not taken up here), people will need to be able to read and save documents in those formats. CrossOver Office allows you to do that very well for Office 97 and 2000. The fact that it doesn't support Office XP isn't too big a deal in my book, at elast from a business perspective. Office compatibility issues exist even at companies that are primarily Windows shops. I work for a major cable shopping channel (yes, that one), and we're still running NT4 and using Office 97. Our case is a bit extreme, but the fact remains that large companies simply aren't able to deploy the latest versions of Microsoft's office tools as soon as they come out. In fact, it's downright bad practice to deploy any Microsoft software in a business environment until a Service Pack or two is released (and many -myself included- would say I should have stopped that sentence after the word 'environment'). If WINE and projects based on it are even able to stay consistently one generation behind in their support for Office and such apps (and I think they'll do much better than that), they will have successfully addressed a major issue with getting companies to migrate from Windows to Linux. Of course, this doesn't help the home user who wants to be able to get at Office XP documents or play the latest games today, but we linux folks are a bunch of do-it-yourselfers anyway. That's why the source is available
I just hope that folks at both companies (and any that should follow suit later) can keep sight of the bigger picture and not kill the project with petty licensing squabbles. There must be some way to remain commercially viable *and* return code to the WINE project. It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out.
This isn't a double standard at all. We're talking about a fix to a security hole in a RELEASE CANDIDATE for version 1.0. If Mozilla is riddled with security flaws by the time it's at version 6.0 like IE is, I'm sure people wil be jumping down their throats as well.
Thank you for actually reading the article before replying. Nowhere here does it state anything about pay-to-view, nor does it state anything about support from Hollings and Tauzin. It's actually a rather mundane article about the head of the FCC pushing for adoption of digital broadcasts in the wake of the television industry's endless bickering. Sounds valid to me. Let's hold off on the conspiracy theories until there's at least a shred of actual evidence to support them.
...when you combine this with the description of Visoly's other Flash Advance products. It sure sounds from the visoly site's description of those products that they are marketing them for copying first, and developing second. The first paragraph of the Flash Advance description states: "Once you have sent games, demos or programs to it's memory using the Flash Advance Linker, it can simply be plugged into the Gameboy Advance and it will act like an original game -- there is 100% not any difference!" Not until the fourth paragraph do they chime in with: "The Flash Advance 64M is furthermore the perfect choice for any professional Gameboy Advance developers or even home developers" I know this doesn't invalidate the legitimate uses of the Linker, but it can't help their cause to have language in their other products' descriptions that seems to advocate piracy using the Linker.