I hereby stake a claim to the other half of the unowned property in the known and unknown Universe or Universes, in this public and widely recognized forum.
As long as geeks (and other desperate guys) keep thinking of getting laid as the prime goal of a relationship, they'll fail anywhere but in a bar. The first girl I got anywhere with, things began not as me horny and lonely, but simply as me taking refuge in an interesting conversation from a lot of other females I'd pissed off. Don't seek sex.. seek women.
Me and my suitemates are working on a Counterstrike map of our dorm at NCSU. Never ph34r, though, we'll be the counterterrorists rescuing the poor hostages held by those piratical terrorists here;)
-rahl
Re:What about bitter/loner Sims?
on
Virtual Simerica
·
· Score: 1
I'm a bit miffed that there is a game bias towards interactions with other Sims for rewards. What if you want your Sim to be a bitter loner, who sits around his darkened studio apartment all day, listening to mp3s of jazz 78s...
Astonishing. You have just described our own reproductively-oriented social system without even knowing it. Given the goal of "participating in reproductive activities," a bias most definitely exists towards those players interacting the most with others.
Shouldn't highly dysfunctional/self-destructive life-styles be considered valid too? Uhhh - no. If survival of the fittest, evolution itself discourages this type of lifestyle as non-optimal for continuing the species, then why on Earth should a game modeled on life be different?
If you want a relationship, you've got to treat the woman with respect. However, you can't be so respectful that you fail to assert yourself. If you have no confidence in yourself, eventually your girl will lose her confidence in you, and then you're just friends.
I got Battlegrounds last week, it totally kicks a**. It's even better than AOE2+expansion in terms of forcing you to diversify your armies; every aspect is interesting; and best of all, it's Star Wars. The single player campaigns have some nifty bonus missions too. The only complaint I have with it is that the 6 civilizations aren't different enough in terms of technologies that they get.
Overall, Battlegrounds is an awesome RTS, especially if your computer can't handle Empire Earth. Highly recommended if you're into Star Wars at all.
Well screw the politics. GNU is offering you freedom in your software. Nobody's forcing you to take it. If you'd rather have the shackles of proprietary software, go use the proprietary software, and you may just find out why everybody's been talking about GNU/Linux for so long.
I find it rather funny that, looking past your rhetoric, your last paragraph - intended to be an ultimatum of sorts - is actually the right solution. Freedom to choose. People should be able to choose free software OR proprietary for their own computers - isn't that something that affects 'them' most? What could RMS's defense be if he took this freedom away from them in the name of a different freedom, that to modify their own software? The only conclusion is that he's choosing for them again. No matter how you look at this, RMS is taking away individual freedoms for his warped ideas of same.
You had it right, at the end. Nobody should force anyone to take 'freedom in [their] software'. Don't forget - to be 'free', or not to be 'free', is also a choice that free people get to make.
-rahl
The ends do not justify the means.
on
Freedom or Power?
·
· Score: 1
Or is social progress irrelevant? Is there some legal precept paramount to the greater social good?
The ends do not justify the means. If we sacrifice all our individual freedom - because that's the logical endpoint of what you suggest - to the 'greater social good', then where will we be? We'll have a wonderful 'society', a wonderful, flourishing, ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
People are what matter in this world. If RMS had a chance to inflict his ideas fully upon the world, we would face oblivion of the indivudal.
I have no education in physics, so don't flame my head off if this is way wrong:P If the rate of change of these constants is dependant on time, could the velocity of the expansion of the universe actually give rise to different constant values at different points in space? And by similar relativistic distortion, could fast-moving objects 'bend' the laws of physics, so to speak, by changing constants as they moved?
Listen to this idea that just hit me: people have been speculating about writing a worm, "Code Green" or whatever to go through and patch the vulnerable IIS servers. What if Microsoft writes this worm, releases it, and comes out as saviors? They'd look better than ever because.
The local news programs that dispense opinions to the average folks have a tendency to simplify technological reports WAY past the point of inaccuracy. These news shows are aimed at the kind of user who doesn't know that there IS anything beyond what they do, and they don't really have a clue exactly what it is they're doing, anyway. They just do it, and most of the time, it works well enough for them.
Back to my point, the majority of reports are not going to point out that these email virii only work through MS Outlook - because the news perceives that web-based mail and Outlook make up the totality of their target audience's concept of 'email'. And why should they take the time to be accurate? They might piss off Microsoft, they might alienate some viewers from their "friendly" news service, and it's close enough anyway.
Maybe it's just the fact that I spent 2 hours on the phone with a friend who's a Revolutionary War reenactment person (obsessed, if you ask me, she's in love with the villain in The Patriot, but anyway..), but some of this sounds familiar..
"drones whose sole intellectual input comes from [enemy sources]" --> people influenced by the propaganda of the British crown.
revolutionaries --> the few people who really understood the values and principles the Americans fought for.
I agree - this fight cannot be won without general support.. because that's where the war really is (no, paranoid freaks, AOL/TW does not have the tanks gassed up and good to go 24/7).
And I agree again - the way to win is by showing the average Joe what's wrong with the system.
However - I disagree that we can't do it. Can we do it inside the media system? Nope. Not gonna happen. But there is one other common information channel that the corporations do not control: everyday talk. They'd like to think they do, but they're wrong.
If there's a place in the world where things can be set up to work the way they should, instead of the way they do in America, then we would have something for people to compare to.
------
You know.. I just realized that this wouldn't work after all. US and corporate trade power could destroy damn near any country in the world.
So to beat the corporations, we'd have to take China and turn it into the kind of place we envision as the Proper Order of Reality.
OR.. We could take my approach to life. This kind of capitalism is unstable and will collapse eventually. Yeah, life might suck some, but just concentrate on having a good time and enjoy the revolution when it comes.
Just because you're ripping off a corporation, it doesn't become ok.. nor does it change from an being an illegal activity to a moral anti-capitalist gesture.
Who says it can't be both?
So maybe it would be a good idea to consider exactly *why* you feel teaching children the law is a bad thing...
Because they're not teaching it as the law; they're teaching it as morality. The morality of capitalism: all for money and money for me.
Thats what copying tapes or software is, its stealing.
Some people don't think so - and that's the whole debate. What gives the music industry the right to indoctrinate the next generation (in Brit-land, anyway) to their side instead of letting people weigh the issues on their own?
The music revolution IS over. We won. I can get any music I want still..
But what the RIAA accomplished in it's demolition of Napster was the removal of an icon that people knew about, that they associated with free music. No more Napster? No more free music.
At my high school, everyone used Napster. I have not heard anyone but the geeks mention any of the alternatives on your list. The music industry didn't win the removal of the ability to get free music.. they just removed the one way most people knew about - which is all that matters.
He's talking about current Western society. You're talking about the principles Western society was built with. Do you honestly believe the values of the Founders are guiding factors in our culture today?
What Microsoft is going after is complete control of Joe User. They don't really care about the clever minority that knows about the problems with Microsoft and will find alternatives; we are NOT an important segment of the market. Frankly, it surprised me that the Smart Tags are default OFF.
The reason to encrypt all of your messages is simple. If there's a high volume of encrypted traffic, then the People-Who-Want-to-Read-It are going to have too much on their hands to even bother with. On the other hand, if there's only a few encrypted emails here and there, they can focus on those, and at least know important info is being passed, if not exactly what it was.
Encryption is one of those rare things where too much is not enough.
Slashdot Mirror
I hereby stake a claim to the other half of the unowned property in the known and unknown Universe or Universes, in this public and widely recognized forum.
Thank you and have a nice day.
-Your Rulers
As long as geeks (and other desperate guys) keep thinking of getting laid as the prime goal of a relationship, they'll fail anywhere but in a bar. The first girl I got anywhere with, things began not as me horny and lonely, but simply as me taking refuge in an interesting conversation from a lot of other females I'd pissed off. Don't seek sex.. seek women.
This.. is an EX-Sparrow!
Me and my suitemates are working on a Counterstrike map of our dorm at NCSU. Never ph34r, though, we'll be the counterterrorists rescuing the poor hostages held by those piratical terrorists here ;)
-rahl
I'm a bit miffed that there is a game bias towards interactions with other Sims for rewards. What if you want your Sim to be a bitter loner, who sits around his darkened studio apartment all day, listening to mp3s of jazz 78s...
Astonishing. You have just described our own reproductively-oriented social system without even knowing it. Given the goal of "participating in reproductive activities," a bias most definitely exists towards those players interacting the most with others.
Shouldn't highly dysfunctional/self-destructive life-styles be considered valid too? Uhhh - no. If survival of the fittest, evolution itself discourages this type of lifestyle as non-optimal for continuing the species, then why on Earth should a game modeled on life be different?
-rahl
If you want a relationship, you've got to treat the woman with respect. However, you can't be so respectful that you fail to assert yourself. If you have no confidence in yourself, eventually your girl will lose her confidence in you, and then you're just friends.
-rahl
When you get out of the maze and jump through the window, you become one of the Flying People.
-rahl
I got Battlegrounds last week, it totally kicks a**. It's even better than AOE2+expansion in terms of forcing you to diversify your armies; every aspect is interesting; and best of all, it's Star Wars. The single player campaigns have some nifty bonus missions too. The only complaint I have with it is that the 6 civilizations aren't different enough in terms of technologies that they get. Overall, Battlegrounds is an awesome RTS, especially if your computer can't handle Empire Earth. Highly recommended if you're into Star Wars at all.
Well screw the politics. GNU is offering you freedom in your software. Nobody's forcing you to take it. If you'd rather have the shackles of proprietary software, go use the proprietary software, and you may just find out why everybody's been talking about GNU/Linux for so long.
I find it rather funny that, looking past your rhetoric, your last paragraph - intended to be an ultimatum of sorts - is actually the right solution. Freedom to choose. People should be able to choose free software OR proprietary for their own computers - isn't that something that affects 'them' most? What could RMS's defense be if he took this freedom away from them in the name of a different freedom, that to modify their own software? The only conclusion is that he's choosing for them again. No matter how you look at this, RMS is taking away individual freedoms for his warped ideas of same.
You had it right, at the end. Nobody should force anyone to take 'freedom in [their] software'. Don't forget - to be 'free', or not to be 'free', is also a choice that free people get to make.
-rahl
Or is social progress irrelevant? Is there some legal precept paramount to the greater social good?
The ends do not justify the means. If we sacrifice all our individual freedom - because that's the logical endpoint of what you suggest - to the 'greater social good', then where will we be? We'll have a wonderful 'society', a wonderful, flourishing, ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
People are what matter in this world. If RMS had a chance to inflict his ideas fully upon the world, we would face oblivion of the indivudal.
-rahl
I have no education in physics, so don't flame my head off if this is way wrong :P If the rate of change of these constants is dependant on time, could the velocity of the expansion of the universe actually give rise to different constant values at different points in space? And by similar relativistic distortion, could fast-moving objects 'bend' the laws of physics, so to speak, by changing constants as they moved?
Peace, dude :)
See the subject ;)
Because I sure haven't seen any confirming links..
Listen to this idea that just hit me: people have been speculating about writing a worm, "Code Green" or whatever to go through and patch the vulnerable IIS servers. What if Microsoft writes this worm, releases it, and comes out as saviors? They'd look better than ever because.
Food for thought, no?
The local news programs that dispense opinions to the average folks have a tendency to simplify technological reports WAY past the point of inaccuracy. These news shows are aimed at the kind of user who doesn't know that there IS anything beyond what they do, and they don't really have a clue exactly what it is they're doing, anyway. They just do it, and most of the time, it works well enough for them.
Back to my point, the majority of reports are not going to point out that these email virii only work through MS Outlook - because the news perceives that web-based mail and Outlook make up the totality of their target audience's concept of 'email'. And why should they take the time to be accurate? They might piss off Microsoft, they might alienate some viewers from their "friendly" news service, and it's close enough anyway.
>>"Now, MS is going to effectively block java-based ads for 95% of the browsing market; this will not go unnoticed. "
>hmmm.. Lynx does not display pictures. therefore it does not display GIF ads. Should we sue them now for filtering banner ads?
Dude, what part of 95% didn't you understand?
Maybe it's just the fact that I spent 2 hours on the phone with a friend who's a Revolutionary War reenactment person (obsessed, if you ask me, she's in love with the villain in The Patriot, but anyway..), but some of this sounds familiar..
"drones whose sole intellectual input comes from [enemy sources]" --> people influenced by the propaganda of the British crown.
revolutionaries --> the few people who really understood the values and principles the Americans fought for.
I agree - this fight cannot be won without general support.. because that's where the war really is (no, paranoid freaks, AOL/TW does not have the tanks gassed up and good to go 24/7).
And I agree again - the way to win is by showing the average Joe what's wrong with the system.
However - I disagree that we can't do it. Can we do it inside the media system? Nope. Not gonna happen. But there is one other common information channel that the corporations do not control: everyday talk. They'd like to think they do, but they're wrong.
If there's a place in the world where things can be set up to work the way they should, instead of the way they do in America, then we would have something for people to compare to.
------
You know.. I just realized that this wouldn't work after all. US and corporate trade power could destroy damn near any country in the world.
So to beat the corporations, we'd have to take China and turn it into the kind of place we envision as the Proper Order of Reality.
OR.. We could take my approach to life. This kind of capitalism is unstable and will collapse eventually. Yeah, life might suck some, but just concentrate on having a good time and enjoy the revolution when it comes.
Thanks for listening!
Don't judge the words by the man. Ideas stand on their own.
Just because you're ripping off a corporation, it doesn't become ok.. nor does it change from an being an illegal activity to a moral anti-capitalist gesture.
Who says it can't be both?
So maybe it would be a good idea to consider exactly *why* you feel teaching children the law is a bad thing...
Because they're not teaching it as the law; they're teaching it as morality. The morality of capitalism: all for money and money for me.
Thats what copying tapes or software is, its stealing.
Some people don't think so - and that's the whole debate. What gives the music industry the right to indoctrinate the next generation (in Brit-land, anyway) to their side instead of letting people weigh the issues on their own?
The music revolution IS over. We won. I can get any music I want still..
But what the RIAA accomplished in it's demolition of Napster was the removal of an icon that people knew about, that they associated with free music. No more Napster? No more free music.
At my high school, everyone used Napster. I have not heard anyone but the geeks mention any of the alternatives on your list. The music industry didn't win the removal of the ability to get free music.. they just removed the one way most people knew about - which is all that matters.
He's talking about current Western society. You're talking about the principles Western society was built with. Do you honestly believe the values of the Founders are guiding factors in our culture today?
What Microsoft is going after is complete control of Joe User. They don't really care about the clever minority that knows about the problems with Microsoft and will find alternatives; we are NOT an important segment of the market. Frankly, it surprised me that the Smart Tags are default OFF.
The reason to encrypt all of your messages is simple. If there's a high volume of encrypted traffic, then the People-Who-Want-to-Read-It are going to have too much on their hands to even bother with. On the other hand, if there's only a few encrypted emails here and there, they can focus on those, and at least know important info is being passed, if not exactly what it was.
Encryption is one of those rare things where too much is not enough.