YES!! I can finally put Linux on my mother and sister's computers. When (if:) they have a problem, I can just dial in and fix it (hope, hope)
This is indeed a good day for those of us who get those 1 am tech calls from the lady who figures she bought a lifetime supply of tech support when she sent me to college. (Urmm.. No, I didn't have a grammar course:)
First I had to figure out how to dispose of floppies. Then CD's. Now they send out the friggin' disks in a DVD keepcase. Now appliances? How the hell am I gonna get rid of them? My mail carrier and trash pickup guys are gonna be real pissed.
I probably would have gone with Slack if I had a distro lying around. As it is, I have only had to dl around 70 or 80 megs worth of tgz's.
BTW, for other folks: no X (at least, not yet). But I hope to be doing some C and/or Perl and/or bash programming. The first (and possibly the last) require a bit of space. I would just use NFS and mount the libraries from a desktop, but then I'd have to have a similar setup at home and work (and keep them sync'ed!) as well as two ethernet configs (one for wireless at home, the other for wired at work).
But thanks for the suggestion. Might consider it in the future (have a few 486 desktops at my disposal with even smaller hard drives. Too easy to just make 'em a router:)
You PPC snobs. We need all of the above for Linux and BSD m68k!! Seriously, what we need is the source. That way all of the BSD and Linux platforms can thrive. In addition, suppose I don't like the GTK toolset. Having the source makes it possible to change that.
Anyway (since you are for some reason low modded) to repeat:
We really need to push for Real Player, AIM, and Yahoo on Linux PPC, *BSD PPC, Linux m68k (and SH3 and others) and BSD m68k (and others).
Even as I type, I am dl'ing the source packages to do the same thing. I tried (in vain) to install RH on a Thinkpad 360P. No matter what I did, I could not get rid of enough packages to fit on a 250 +/- partition. Too damned many interdependencies. As I don't have a current disk for a conventional distro, I figured I'd do it this way.
It would seem that the next step, once one has gained some proficiency with Linux is to either HEAVILY modify their distro, or roll their own. Nine times out of ten, I skip the RPM's anyway. And if you aren't using them or DEB's, and have your favorite config tools (I like emacs myself, although I suppose I might have to learn vi to squeeze things onto the drive:) why not roll your own?
BTW, one trick in my install is that I will be installing the laptop drive into a desktop, do the compiling on the desktop (Celeron 550, I think, vs a 486 SX), thus making some of the install steps a little different than the 'official' LinuxFromScratch steps. Should be fun.
One more BTW: why a ratty old 486SX laptop? A few reasons. First, it is free. Second, it has an active matrix screen. Third, it is free. Fourth, I also scored the WaveLan wireless rig we used at work (complete with access point!) Finally, coding in front of the idiot box without annoying the SO with a full tower in the living room:) Oh, did I mention it was free? That last seems to be a great motivator in many a Linux project.
Apparantly (sp) it is okay to distribute speech of damn near any type in the US. So why not release software ONLY as code, and under the OCL? I haven't checked it out yet, but is there any reason that code cannot be released under this license? It would state (and should also be commented in the code itself) that this is speech, and a discussion of how a certain project may be completed. That it is written in C, Java, perl, etc. is of no more meaning than if it was written in Polish, English, Esperanto, etc. It is writing intended for a group of computer savvy individuals who can understand instructions better when 'spoken' in a computer language than in a strict human language.
Liability is therefore foisted onto those who distributed binaries. Another (possibly necessary) step to take is to comment out "main ()". Program won't compile until it is read. Therefore forcing one to read the disclaimer that this is a form of discussion, not a computer program.
Now, we all know that this is the highest degree of semantic bullshit. But that is what typically carries the day in court.
The difference being that the computer at CompUSA is a piece of tangible property. The photo is not. The photo is a legitimate news item that is (should?) be covered under fair use doctrine.
Now, if someone stole a cube, and the Today show displayed it outside their studio so that all of the audience could play with it... That would be possession of stolen property.
I know as well as anyone that you are SOL when it comes to suing M$. But the original "Ask Slashdot" question was "what will be asked of me?" And "who can we sue" is right up there.
OTOH, this is either a government, or a government agency who would possibly be switching to Linux. And those types frequently have EULAs that are much more favorable to them than they are to the rest of us.
PR#3 should switch you over to 80 columns (if you have the 80 column card) PR#6 is for floppies one and two (usually) and PR#7 is normally for the second pair of floppies (although I never saw such a beast). PR#1 is normally the printer. PR#2 would have been the serial card where you plug in the modem. Not sure about the rest.
BTW, anybody remember the DuoDrives? Looked nifty, but damn if you weren't screwed if one went down.
Seeing as there are already at least 188 comments, I'll take the chance that this is repetitive:
I'll pay $1 now. And another in a month. And save both files. If the final installment doesn't come out, so I wasted $2. Big deal. I waste more than that every day on cigarettes.
I'm quite aware of the Prisoner's Dilemma. It was one of the favorite lessons of my micro prof. And your analysis seems good. And no, I shouldn't pay. But then again, I shouldn't support NPR (and won't, until Dianne Rehm is buried) and I shouldn't support PBS (which I do). Sometimes, you have to do the right thing, even if it doesn't make financial sense.
You used to be able to buy tons of Apple IIe stuff from Sun Remarketing. Now they seem to specialize in Macs. But in the past, they have sold manuals, serial cards, etc, etc, etc.
It's funny you mention the Apple IIe. I just saw mine while at my parents' over the weekend. If I can find my copy of EA's Space Station Construction set (or whatever it was called) I think I'd bring it to my house. But now that you mention it, it could be fun to use as a Linux terminal for controlling an MP3 jukebox. It already has the video output to let me plug it into the TV...
I should have a spare manual for either a serial or parallel card (I can't remember which it had two of). Also, might want to check eBay.
This page has a bunch of info on the subject. Relevent only to those in the US. This is on low power radio in general. Basically, pirate radio is still illegal. This is a site that talks about LPFM. It is available in Alaska, California, District of Columbia, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Mariana Islands, Maryland, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and Utah. This is a list of when other states come online.
Unfortunately, when I checked a few months ago, it was still fairly difficult to get a license and do what you want with it. These LPFM stations are supposed to be public in nature. They can't be for profit (I know it's cheap, but electricity costs money). As others have stated, there isn't much bandwidth left in many parts of the country. If you want to play commercial music, you still have to pay those bastards. I imagine that many of the big broadcasters have tried to suck up the available channels.
The other problem that I haven't seen mentioned is that the big stations frequently trample on the spectrum of the smaller ones. The father of a friend of mine ran a small station. He was constantly in court against one of the larger stations. There was too much frequency bleed into his area. But the fees imposed by the FCC were far lower than the increase in revenue the large station received by having a larger broadcast area. So they paid the lawyers for a little while, then paid the fine, and did it all over again.
I am currently in the middle of Rosen's book, and find it quite interesting, especially having just read "Database Nation".
One of the interesting points (thus far) of the book is that it focuses on the legislative and judicial aspects of privacy rather than the technical. As fast as technology changes, it seems that the judiciary has in the short course of 100 years pissed away any ideas of personal privacy.
Of particular note is that many of the anti-privacy judgements by the Supremes were written by Sandra Dee^H^H^HDay O'Connor, many dissents written by Thomas. Also, several important lower court decisions were from our favorite jurist, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson. So what? So, it appears that one of the lesser judges has been making smarter decisions on this case, and a judge revered (at least by the/. community) has been at the forefront of tearing down our rights.
The book also echoes some of the points of "No Logo": (and yes, this is obvious and redundant) money buys privacy.
If knowledge is our current currency du-jour, it is apparant that much of the current intellectual capital is being wasted either protecting the lingering threads of our privacy or tearing them down. For every hacker working on GPG and other encryption techniques, we have several working on Echelon, that crazy FBI scheme, and others.
Perhaps it's the dark side of the force versus the light? And it seems that many universities are being bought out by the quick, easy path of the dark side: disallowing free speech, signing up with M$ and others, selling out concessions to Coke/Pepsi.
Unfortunately, it is to end with the rebellion of the people. Doubly unfortunate is that most rebellions have been led by the bourgeous (sp?) shopkeepers and their children in universities. They were the first ones bought and sold. University is no longer (hell, maybe in the US never was) a place for intellectual freedom and curiosity; it is a factory that turns out pieces of paper that entitle one to a higher salary. Perhaps in the natural sciences (and of this I am not sure) discovery is not allowed. However, in any of the humanities and social sciences, only dogma is allowed. Expect not to find any revolutionaries there unless they are of the chic, neo-hippy type, just waiting to put on their three piece suits and do five hours of pro-bono after 55 hours working for a corporate firm.
So we are left with the shopkeepers. Sadly, there are no more in the US. Or very few. Wal-Mart has pushed them out. Actually, consumers have pushed out the shopkeeper by shopping at Wal-Mart instead of at the local shop. Laws are increasingly tough on small businesses, despite the fact that they are the primary source of jobs for the current economic expansion. The deck is stacked. When you reach the point of having some political pull (say 50 employees) the governments heap crushing requirements on you. This may be the reason so many new companies do not last forever.
So, if they aren't working for or owning small companies anymore, where is the middle class? Here in Southern Maryland, they are owned by the government. If they don't work directly for them, they work for a contractor or other business that is 100% beholden to the gubmint. So there is no way they will rise up and demand the return of their privacy.
The upper class doesn't count. They can buy their own freedom.
The lower class? Most of them haven't had privacy in a long time, so nothing has changed.
So, while this may seem like a Katzian rant, things HAVE changed. And for the worse. The past 100 years (particularly the past 25) has seen the technology to allow unwanted intrusion skyrocket at the same time that the courts have ignored any pretense of paying attention to the fourth, fifth, and first amendment.
About a week back, I submitted an Ask Slashdot. In it, I requested information on what people thought was a fair email/web privacy policy for a company, given the current legal/judicial state. It wasn't posted. Is Slashdot not interested? Perhaps. Or perhaps this is yet another source of rebellion that is quickly mainstreaming. Or even worse: maybe what they say is right. Maybe it is easy to shout down the law, it is easy to complain about M$, it is easy to complain in general. But change is hard. Perhaps too hard.
Maybe we all like our air-conditioned homes and new cars too much to actually dare upset the balance.
>>While we're at it, why not sue makers of baseball bats because their products >>_can_ be used to violently kill people ? Same difference.
In the US, we already do this. We sued tobacco companies (quite successfully, according to the jury verdict last Friday) and we have sued weapons manufacturers (okay, we are GOING TO sue them). Suing Napster follows quite logically.
>>>We do not have a constitutional right to privacy
Okay, I'll assume you live in the US, and therefore cannot use that as an excuse for ignorance. You may remember hearing of a case about 25 years ago called 'Roe v. Wade'. The crux of the decision was based on the fact that people in the US DO have a constitutional right to privacy. It is not specifically written (AFAIK) but it has been interpreted thus.
Kinda. Programs are more deterministic than recipes, but OK.
Source code is like a recipe. Sometimes it comes out right. Sometimes, you code fails to compile, like a bad souffle
A shrink-wrapped software suite is like a cook-book.
Yes and no. A library is like a cookbook, surely. A shrink-wrapped software suite is...a recipe you pay for. No analog.
A library is like a cookbook. Shrink-wrapped software is like those deli-party platters, and just about as edible. Or perhaps like a store-bought cake.
"Operating systems are like kitchens."
Kitches aren't made of recipes. Operating systems are like...holding a banquet while you cook. (running programs to make other programs)
Under my new metaphor, I think an OS might again be a kitchen.
Gee. This is fun. Oh, I know: the MS Developer Toolkit (or whatever it is called) is like a 50 watt microwave that still manages to explode every potato you put into it. GCC and friends are like a 30,000 BTU convection oven that also explodes potatoes, but in a much cooler way!
Hence the reason my company makes it VERY clear that we can, may, and will monitor email. What the hell, we wrote the check for the mail server, soon we'll be doing maintenance on same, we pay for the connectivity, etc.
The trick is this: we probably won't ever monitor mail. We'll keep it, of course, in case we ever have to defend ourselves in court. But if someone is spending so much time on the net or sending email that it becomes an issue, it would be a simple matter to dismiss/reprimand them without using the email as an excuse.
IOW, if it is only occasional, and doesn't impinge on work performance, who cares? The only thing that concerns me with this policy (from a PHB POV) is that my company is liable for what my employees put in their email. So if someone at my company sends a sexist/racist/fooish joke to someone who takes offense, I'm on the hook.
Assume for a minute that we cannot change the law or the interpretation of same with regards to 'creating a hostile work environment.' How does anyone propose that a company protect both their employees' privacy and the company's ass?
I ask not to go trolling, but seriously: presumably people on/. use email/web more than the average person. So what would be a fair policy to you that takes into account both what you want, and what the company needs? (Hmm... Think I'll post this on Ask Slashdot)
Jon Katz, frequently on point, has missed it here. A little perspective is in order:
1) The youngest/newest man in an organization has always had to put in the hours and deal with the shit.
2) Most young people (Hey, I'm only 27. I'm not that far out of it.) don't have a work ethic at all. The attitude seems to be, to paraphrase Janeane Garofolo, "My parents said they worked hard so I wouldn't have to. So I don't."
3) If your skills are so in demand, thumb your nose at your boss at 5:00. If you are so great, you'll either get a new job, or the boss will deal with your quirks.
As far as vacation: I don't take 'em too often. But when I do, the only calls made are to reassure people that I am alive. Other than that, it stays off. If you were given vacation or annual leave time as part of your employment arrangement, do the same. Inform your boss that if you have to be 'on call', you'll also be 'on the clock'. If they don't like it, see above paragraph.
I've read 'No Logo'. I know how lousy it is for people stuck in meaningless jobs. But guess what? Nobody told you to screw around in high school. Nobody told you to get pregnant without a decent support system. Nobody told you to get hooked on aromatics. You've only got yourself to blame. As for the rest: if you've got the skills, shop them around until someone is willing to pay your price, including the price of your freedom.
Who gets to decide this sort of thing, anyway? Does the government get to define what is OS and what is application? What kind of input will Microsoft have?
Microsoft develops the plan. The DOJ then gives it a yea/nay. Presumably if M$ screws around for too long, the DOJ gets to write the plan.
"Aahh, see you cannot compare Win2k and Linux because they do not have the same drivers, one OS might perform better on some hardware, and the results would never be consistent. So you linux freaks stop trying to prove linux is better. Even if Windows has license cost its for a reason, its made by a commercial company (oh you've never heard of it? I'm sorry then) and they need to make money to make more software & profit. Besides Windows is done by professional coders, some of Linux is done by hobby-programmers. If you want to argue about the internals of Windows give me a ring at my ICQ # at 31546029. I've had enough of this Linux crap, stupid people trying to force their choices on Windows users."
This diatribe should show that immaturity is one thing the Linux community definately does NOT have a monopoly on. Why do the press of all sorts mention the rudeness of Linux advocates, yet fail to do the same for Windows advocates? This is hardly unusual. Any discussion on zd-net or elsewhere features similar mindless rants, yet they are ignored.
Perhaps the next time some 'journalist' mentions how Linux advocates act, they could merely be sent the URL and quote of something like the above to prove that it works both ways. At the same time send some of the essays written by ESR, Linus, Alan Cox, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc to show that there an equally large (if not greater) number of intelligent, rational, well-meaning Linux advocates.
And if that doesn't work, we could just use this guy's ICQ number, find out what his 'puter's IP is, and crack away>;)
I think AMD no longer gives a rat's patoot what overclockers do. When they needed every sale they could, of course they glommed on and 'allowed' hackers to OC their chips. Now that they have just enough respectibility (again:) and just enough OEM contracts (again:) they no longer need you. Don't worry: should the sales swing to Intel as a result of this or Merced, or whatever, AMD will once again be trying to court the OC crowd.
(BTW, for those who care: I tend to be chip on the processor and spend money on the graphics, network, and disk subsystems. Works for me.)
I would say that people with an aptitude might learn the technical skills of computers from exposure. I've seen countless classmates go into a computer class and learn:
A) Nothing. B) How to type a report in Write or Word. C) How to play solitaire. D) How to pay me in order to get anything productive done on a computer.
Unfortunately, most instruction is either too simple, or too advanced for most people. And, unfortunately, most people seem to fall into a trap of making the machine too difficult to use. I'd like it if people were taught how mail works rather than how to use AOL/Pine/Mutt/Outlook only. But it just doesn't seem to work that well. Maybe because I'm dealing (and have dealt) with older people (by that meaning those who have graduated high school:) and the same thing doesn't carry over for kids who have had more exposure and don't automatically have an image of a computer in their mind that it is "impossible to learn how to use".
But on the other point, you are 100% correct. I've seen several schools spend tons of money on computers only to have the teachers say "what the hell am I supposed to do with this?" Especially at the elementary level, computers just add another degree of frustration and instruction. Teaching a child to read with a book is simple. Open. Flip back and forth. Same with writing: put pointy stick to paper. Move stick.
Now, of course, there are good teachers who can teach with computers at the lower levels, and there are students who learn better with them, but in my experience, teachers, administrators, school boards, and legislators have yet to figure out how to put the pieces together.
And on another rant: What is the deal with every school being wired? I'd have been happy if we had history books that talked about how the gas crisis turned out (the one in the 1970's, young'uns:). (And yeah, sure, you might find that information on the web, but either "Sponsored by Shell" or "the gas crisis was a conspiracy to track down the militias/tree-huggers/"those-of-us-living-in-fear- of-black-helicopters")
Slashdot Mirror
YES!! I can finally put Linux on my mother and sister's computers. When (if:) they have a problem, I can just dial in and fix it (hope, hope)
This is indeed a good day for those of us who get those 1 am tech calls from the lady who figures she bought a lifetime supply of tech support when she sent me to college. (Urmm.. No, I didn't have a grammar course:)
First I had to figure out how to dispose of floppies. Then CD's. Now they send out the friggin' disks in a DVD keepcase. Now appliances? How the hell am I gonna get rid of them? My mail carrier and trash pickup guys are gonna be real pissed.
I probably would have gone with Slack if I had a distro lying around. As it is, I have only had to dl around 70 or 80 megs worth of tgz's.
BTW, for other folks: no X (at least, not yet). But I hope to be doing some C and/or Perl and/or bash programming. The first (and possibly the last) require a bit of space. I would just use NFS and mount the libraries from a desktop, but then I'd have to have a similar setup at home and work (and keep them sync'ed!) as well as two ethernet configs (one for wireless at home, the other for wired at work).
But thanks for the suggestion. Might consider it in the future (have a few 486 desktops at my disposal with even smaller hard drives. Too easy to just make 'em a router:)
You PPC snobs. We need all of the above for Linux and BSD m68k!! Seriously, what we need is the source. That way all of the BSD and Linux platforms can thrive. In addition, suppose I don't like the GTK toolset. Having the source makes it possible to change that.
Anyway (since you are for some reason low modded) to repeat:
We really need to push for Real Player, AIM, and Yahoo on Linux PPC, *BSD PPC, Linux m68k (and SH3 and others) and BSD m68k (and others).
Even as I type, I am dl'ing the source packages to do the same thing. I tried (in vain) to install RH on a Thinkpad 360P. No matter what I did, I could not get rid of enough packages to fit on a 250 +/- partition. Too damned many interdependencies. As I don't have a current disk for a conventional distro, I figured I'd do it this way.
It would seem that the next step, once one has gained some proficiency with Linux is to either HEAVILY modify their distro, or roll their own. Nine times out of ten, I skip the RPM's anyway. And if you aren't using them or DEB's, and have your favorite config tools (I like emacs myself, although I suppose I might have to learn vi to squeeze things onto the drive:) why not roll your own?
BTW, one trick in my install is that I will be installing the laptop drive into a desktop, do the compiling on the desktop (Celeron 550, I think, vs a 486 SX), thus making some of the install steps a little different than the 'official' LinuxFromScratch steps. Should be fun.
One more BTW: why a ratty old 486SX laptop? A few reasons. First, it is free. Second, it has an active matrix screen. Third, it is free. Fourth, I also scored the WaveLan wireless rig we used at work (complete with access point!) Finally, coding in front of the idiot box without annoying the SO with a full tower in the living room:) Oh, did I mention it was free? That last seems to be a great motivator in many a Linux project.
Apparantly (sp) it is okay to distribute speech of damn near any type in the US. So why not release software ONLY as code, and under the OCL? I haven't checked it out yet, but is there any reason that code cannot be released under this license? It would state (and should also be commented in the code itself) that this is speech, and a discussion of how a certain project may be completed. That it is written in C, Java, perl, etc. is of no more meaning than if it was written in Polish, English, Esperanto, etc. It is writing intended for a group of computer savvy individuals who can understand instructions better when 'spoken' in a computer language than in a strict human language.
Liability is therefore foisted onto those who distributed binaries. Another (possibly necessary) step to take is to comment out "main ()". Program won't compile until it is read. Therefore forcing one to read the disclaimer that this is a form of discussion, not a computer program.
Now, we all know that this is the highest degree of semantic bullshit. But that is what typically carries the day in court.
The difference being that the computer at CompUSA is a piece of tangible property. The photo is not. The photo is a legitimate news item that is (should?) be covered under fair use doctrine.
Now, if someone stole a cube, and the Today show displayed it outside their studio so that all of the audience could play with it... That would be possession of stolen property.
I know as well as anyone that you are SOL when it comes to suing M$. But the original "Ask Slashdot" question was "what will be asked of me?" And "who can we sue" is right up there.
OTOH, this is either a government, or a government agency who would possibly be switching to Linux. And those types frequently have EULAs that are much more favorable to them than they are to the rest of us.
How secure is it?
What about code forking?
Free? It must be garbage?
Who do we sue when it breaks?
PR#3 should switch you over to 80 columns (if you have the 80 column card) PR#6 is for floppies one and two (usually) and PR#7 is normally for the second pair of floppies (although I never saw such a beast). PR#1 is normally the printer. PR#2 would have been the serial card where you plug in the modem. Not sure about the rest.
BTW, anybody remember the DuoDrives? Looked nifty, but damn if you weren't screwed if one went down.
Seeing as there are already at least 188 comments, I'll take the chance that this is repetitive:
I'll pay $1 now. And another in a month. And save both files. If the final installment doesn't come out, so I wasted $2. Big deal. I waste more than that every day on cigarettes.
I'm quite aware of the Prisoner's Dilemma. It was one of the favorite lessons of my micro prof. And your analysis seems good. And no, I shouldn't pay. But then again, I shouldn't support NPR (and won't, until Dianne Rehm is buried) and I shouldn't support PBS (which I do). Sometimes, you have to do the right thing, even if it doesn't make financial sense.
Is WhiteKnight/RedRyder still available anywhere?
It's funny you mention the Apple IIe. I just saw mine while at my parents' over the weekend. If I can find my copy of EA's Space Station Construction set (or whatever it was called) I think I'd bring it to my house. But now that you mention it, it could be fun to use as a Linux terminal for controlling an MP3 jukebox. It already has the video output to let me plug it into the TV...
I should have a spare manual for either a serial or parallel card (I can't remember which it had two of). Also, might want to check eBay.
This page has a bunch of info on the subject. Relevent only to those in the US. This is on low power radio in general. Basically, pirate radio is still illegal. This is a site that talks about LPFM. It is available in Alaska, California, District of Columbia, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Mariana Islands, Maryland, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and Utah. This is a list of when other states come online.
Unfortunately, when I checked a few months ago, it was still fairly difficult to get a license and do what you want with it. These LPFM stations are supposed to be public in nature. They can't be for profit (I know it's cheap, but electricity costs money). As others have stated, there isn't much bandwidth left in many parts of the country. If you want to play commercial music, you still have to pay those bastards. I imagine that many of the big broadcasters have tried to suck up the available channels.
The other problem that I haven't seen mentioned is that the big stations frequently trample on the spectrum of the smaller ones. The father of a friend of mine ran a small station. He was constantly in court against one of the larger stations. There was too much frequency bleed into his area. But the fees imposed by the FCC were far lower than the increase in revenue the large station received by having a larger broadcast area. So they paid the lawyers for a little while, then paid the fine, and did it all over again.
Hope some of these links help.
I am currently in the middle of Rosen's book, and find it quite interesting, especially having just read "Database Nation".
/. community) has been at the forefront of tearing down our rights.
One of the interesting points (thus far) of the book is that it focuses on the legislative and judicial aspects of privacy rather than the technical. As fast as technology changes, it seems that the judiciary has in the short course of 100 years pissed away any ideas of personal privacy.
Of particular note is that many of the anti-privacy judgements by the Supremes were written by Sandra Dee^H^H^HDay O'Connor, many dissents written by Thomas. Also, several important lower court decisions were from our favorite jurist, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson. So what? So, it appears that one of the lesser judges has been making smarter decisions on this case, and a judge revered (at least by the
The book also echoes some of the points of "No Logo": (and yes, this is obvious and redundant) money buys privacy.
If knowledge is our current currency du-jour, it is apparant that much of the current intellectual capital is being wasted either protecting the lingering threads of our privacy or tearing them down. For every hacker working on GPG and other encryption techniques, we have several working on Echelon, that crazy FBI scheme, and others.
Perhaps it's the dark side of the force versus the light? And it seems that many universities are being bought out by the quick, easy path of the dark side: disallowing free speech, signing up with M$ and others, selling out concessions to Coke/Pepsi.
Unfortunately, it is to end with the rebellion of the people. Doubly unfortunate is that most rebellions have been led by the bourgeous (sp?) shopkeepers and their children in universities. They were the first ones bought and sold.
University is no longer (hell, maybe in the US never was) a place for intellectual freedom and curiosity; it is a factory that turns out pieces of paper that entitle one to a higher salary. Perhaps in the natural sciences (and of this I am not sure) discovery is not allowed. However, in any of the humanities and social sciences, only dogma is allowed. Expect not to find any revolutionaries there unless they are of the chic, neo-hippy type, just waiting to put on their three piece suits and do five hours of pro-bono after 55 hours working for a corporate firm.
So we are left with the shopkeepers. Sadly, there are no more in the US. Or very few. Wal-Mart has pushed them out. Actually, consumers have pushed out the shopkeeper by shopping at Wal-Mart instead of at the local shop. Laws are increasingly tough on small businesses, despite the fact that they are the primary source of jobs for the current economic expansion. The deck is stacked. When you reach the point of having some political pull (say 50 employees) the governments heap crushing requirements on you. This may be the reason so many new companies do not last forever.
So, if they aren't working for or owning small companies anymore, where is the middle class? Here in Southern Maryland, they are owned by the government. If they don't work directly for them, they work for a contractor or other business that is 100% beholden to the gubmint. So there is no way they will rise up and demand the return of their privacy.
The upper class doesn't count. They can buy their own freedom.
The lower class? Most of them haven't had privacy in a long time, so nothing has changed.
So, while this may seem like a Katzian rant, things HAVE changed. And for the worse. The past 100 years (particularly the past 25) has seen the technology to allow unwanted intrusion skyrocket at the same time that the courts have ignored any pretense of paying attention to the fourth, fifth, and first amendment.
About a week back, I submitted an Ask Slashdot. In it, I requested information on what people thought was a fair email/web privacy policy for a company, given the current legal/judicial state. It wasn't posted. Is Slashdot not interested? Perhaps. Or perhaps this is yet another source of rebellion that is quickly mainstreaming. Or even worse: maybe what they say is right. Maybe it is easy to shout down the law, it is easy to complain about M$, it is easy to complain in general. But change is hard. Perhaps too hard.
Maybe we all like our air-conditioned homes and new cars too much to actually dare upset the balance.
I was flipping through an issue of Network Computing from last month, and saw this link to their review of terminal emulators.
YMMV, IANAL, FYI, etc.
>>While we're at it, why not sue makers of baseball bats because their products
>>_can_ be used to violently kill people ? Same difference.
In the US, we already do this. We sued tobacco companies (quite successfully, according to the jury verdict last Friday) and we have sued weapons manufacturers (okay, we are GOING TO sue them). Suing Napster follows quite logically.
>>>We do not have a constitutional right to privacy
Okay, I'll assume you live in the US, and therefore cannot use that as an excuse for ignorance. You may remember hearing of a case about 25 years ago called 'Roe v. Wade'. The crux of the decision was based on the fact that people in the US DO have a constitutional right to privacy. It is not specifically written (AFAIK) but it has been interpreted thus.
Source code is like a recipe. Sometimes it comes out right. Sometimes, you code fails to compile, like a bad souffle
A library is like a cookbook. Shrink-wrapped software is like those deli-party platters, and just about as edible. Or perhaps like a store-bought cake.
"Operating systems are like kitchens."
Under my new metaphor, I think an OS might again be a kitchen.
Gee. This is fun. Oh, I know: the MS Developer Toolkit (or whatever it is called) is like a 50 watt microwave that still manages to explode every potato you put into it. GCC and friends are like a 30,000 BTU convection oven that also explodes potatoes, but in a much cooler way!
Hence the reason my company makes it VERY clear that we can, may, and will monitor email. What the hell, we wrote the check for the mail server, soon we'll be doing maintenance on same, we pay for the connectivity, etc.
/. use email/web more than the average person. So what would be a fair policy to you that takes into account both what you want, and what the company needs? (Hmm... Think I'll post this on Ask Slashdot)
The trick is this: we probably won't ever monitor mail. We'll keep it, of course, in case we ever have to defend ourselves in court. But if someone is spending so much time on the net or sending email that it becomes an issue, it would be a simple matter to dismiss/reprimand them without using the email as an excuse.
IOW, if it is only occasional, and doesn't impinge on work performance, who cares? The only thing that concerns me with this policy (from a PHB POV) is that my company is liable for what my employees put in their email. So if someone at my company sends a sexist/racist/fooish joke to someone who takes offense, I'm on the hook.
Assume for a minute that we cannot change the law or the interpretation of same with regards to 'creating a hostile work environment.' How does anyone propose that a company protect both their employees' privacy and the company's ass?
I ask not to go trolling, but seriously: presumably people on
Jon Katz, frequently on point, has missed it here. A little perspective is in order:
1) The youngest/newest man in an organization has always had to put in the hours and deal with the shit.
2) Most young people (Hey, I'm only 27. I'm not that far out of it.) don't have a work ethic at all. The attitude seems to be, to paraphrase Janeane Garofolo, "My parents said they worked hard so I wouldn't have to. So I don't."
3) If your skills are so in demand, thumb your nose at your boss at 5:00. If you are so great, you'll either get a new job, or the boss will deal with your quirks.
As far as vacation: I don't take 'em too often. But when I do, the only calls made are to reassure people that I am alive. Other than that, it stays off. If you were given vacation or annual leave time as part of your employment arrangement, do the same. Inform your boss that if you have to be 'on call', you'll also be 'on the clock'. If they don't like it, see above paragraph.
I've read 'No Logo'. I know how lousy it is for people stuck in meaningless jobs. But guess what? Nobody told you to screw around in high school. Nobody told you to get pregnant without a decent support system. Nobody told you to get hooked on aromatics. You've only got yourself to blame. As for the rest: if you've got the skills, shop them around until someone is willing to pay your price, including the price of your freedom.
Sorry, this is off topic (I got to it via an article mentioned in the story), but:
Windows User Rant (and quote here:)
This diatribe should show that immaturity is one thing the Linux community definately does NOT have a monopoly on. Why do the press of all sorts mention the rudeness of Linux advocates, yet fail to do the same for Windows advocates? This is hardly unusual. Any discussion on zd-net or elsewhere features similar mindless rants, yet they are ignored.
Perhaps the next time some 'journalist' mentions how Linux advocates act, they could merely be sent the URL and quote of something like the above to prove that it works both ways. At the same time send some of the essays written by ESR, Linus, Alan Cox, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc to show that there an equally large (if not greater) number of intelligent, rational, well-meaning Linux advocates.
And if that doesn't work, we could just use this guy's ICQ number, find out what his 'puter's IP is, and crack away>;)
I think AMD no longer gives a rat's patoot what overclockers do. When they needed every sale they could, of course they glommed on and 'allowed' hackers to OC their chips. Now that they have just enough respectibility (again:) and just enough OEM contracts (again:) they no longer need you. Don't worry: should the sales swing to Intel as a result of this or Merced, or whatever, AMD will once again be trying to court the OC crowd.
(BTW, for those who care: I tend to be chip on the processor and spend money on the graphics, network, and disk subsystems. Works for me.)
You are mostly correct.
- of-black-helicopters")
I would say that people with an aptitude might learn the technical skills of computers from exposure. I've seen countless classmates go into a computer class and learn:
A) Nothing.
B) How to type a report in Write or Word.
C) How to play solitaire.
D) How to pay me in order to get anything productive done on a computer.
Unfortunately, most instruction is either too simple, or too advanced for most people. And, unfortunately, most people seem to fall into a trap of making the machine too difficult to use. I'd like it if people were taught how mail works rather than how to use AOL/Pine/Mutt/Outlook only. But it just doesn't seem to work that well. Maybe because I'm dealing (and have dealt) with older people (by that meaning those who have graduated high school:) and the same thing doesn't carry over for kids who have had more exposure and don't automatically have an image of a computer in their mind that it is "impossible to learn how to use".
But on the other point, you are 100% correct. I've seen several schools spend tons of money on computers only to have the teachers say "what the hell am I supposed to do with this?" Especially at the elementary level, computers just add another degree of frustration and instruction. Teaching a child to read with a book is simple. Open. Flip back and forth. Same with writing: put pointy stick to paper. Move stick.
Now, of course, there are good teachers who can teach with computers at the lower levels, and there are students who learn better with them, but in my experience, teachers, administrators, school boards, and legislators have yet to figure out how to put the pieces together.
And on another rant: What is the deal with every school being wired? I'd have been happy if we had history books that talked about how the gas crisis turned out (the one in the 1970's, young'uns:). (And yeah, sure, you might find that information on the web, but either "Sponsored by Shell" or "the gas crisis was a conspiracy to track down the militias/tree-huggers/"those-of-us-living-in-fear