I was looking at an ad for DirectTV DSL and they stated that on their DSL service you can run a web server and/or mail server and they support Linux. And for the service you don't even need a satellite dish.
Personally, I've used the Internet for about 20 years. It has always been about the free exchange of ideas. I also believe that corporations should not be allowed to hold patents or copyrights. Patents and copyrights were a way for people to receive compensation and legal right to sue for infringing on their work. But corporations should not be allowed. That's how a true capitalist society works the state protects the individual from the corporation but the corporation gets no protection from the state. Charging for content should be for the individual artists. I have no problem paying to read a person webpage but I have a problem with a corporation making money off content. While most individuals would probably charge the $.07 for their content I can see corporations wanting to charge $2.00 for the same content.
But why do we have to charge money. Why can't another type of barter system be used. If distributed networks will become more pervasive than why can't I barter my free cpu cycles at times when I'm not home for payment for content?
Well, who didn't see that one coming. Unfortunately, it's only going to hurt the softies more than us Linux bitches. No subscription fees for software - give me free software. Let M$ take control of the web because in the real world the true techies will be living on the bleedin' edge and away from the M$N/AOL controlled web. We'll have Freenet where no one knows ya!
Ever notice how M$N/AOL don't really take you onto the internet because they own you ass!!!
Well, who didn't see that one coming. Unfortunately, it's only going to hurt the softies more than us Linux bitches. No subscription fees for software - give me free software. Let M$ take of the web because in the real world the true techies will be living on the bleedin' edge and away from the M$N/AOL created web. Ever notice how M$N/AOL don't really take you onto the internet because they own you ass!!!
Well, I don't believe that biotech is all that bad but I don't believe that biotech will be all that it's cracked up to be. The question that no biotech scientist has ever truly answered about the products is the long term effects on somethings. Take a look at the corn that needs less pesticide to grow. What happens when nothing can kill the corn and it continues to grow and grow and take over all because it went from the lab to the enviroment and Mother Nature retweaked this little genetic gem into a weed like plant that can't be killed all because there isn't one scientist who can say that he/she knows exactly the outcome of certain changes.
Things my look great in the Lab (DDT) but sometimes it turns out differently in the enviroment (Cancer). BTW: I went the biotech conference here in San Diego and that was brought up. At least one panelist responded that biotech is 80% sure they know what will happen outside of the lab. That to me is a large enough gap to create the ATTACK OF THE KILLER TOMATOES!!!!!!
This is probably the first time that I don't agree with Mr. Katz mainly for his view of who and what Feed, Suck, and Salon were. First of all, they were already homogenized versions of the pamphlet. They tried to create the same Magazine business model on the net. Now I've said this time and time again. The net is/should not be about making money (unless you sell an actual product - which Amazon still can't make a dime doing.)
The net, as the Supreme Court has stated, is still free. You can say what you want when you want. But think about Suck.com. It lasted a year before it's creators sold out. Why? Well, if I was doing something I loved and not making money at it just enjoying the true freedom of the press that the net allows then when someone comes to me and gives me a bag of money for the site - I'll take the money and run because there is no real way the site will generate actual revenue in the long-term. When it was sold it should've have been renamed Suckers.com.
I read all three websites for about two months before leaving. Why? The sites were bland didn't necessarily give any real underground info into tech, or politics, or whatever. They were marginalized fairly quickly because other media were looking at them and marveling over how many people read them. They tried to copy it but really couldn't because Mass Media has to appeal to the Masses and running down the middle isn't what the net is about - that's what newspapers, magazines, and TV News is all about.
The Net is about allowing a single individual a voice to speak his/her/its mind. I predicted that most of the sites would die by 2005. Guess I was wrong - it happened way earlier. Now does that mean Big Media will take over the net. Not really because the net caters to niches and niche people won't necessarily pay for there info, or fun. And niche people can range in the thousands but a business needs a million to thrive. Also, unlike TV, ads can be and usually are ignored. Thats why ad revenue has dropped. How do you get people to click on a banner? I've always said give them money and they will come. But what company is a fool enough to give anyone who clicks their banner a buck to just that. Doesn't make sense.
And as long as the model of the net stays many to many it will stay free or Big Media. Big Media can still take part but it shouldn't be about them making money it should be about them offering themselves up for free so that maybe we'll find that product or service that we will pay for.
But it won't be a niche product or service but that's what has always been free.
I think it's kewl that M$ is taking over computing in every area of the world. I found it interesting that American Airlines uses NT for their movie server. Of course NT crashed, continually, and we never got to see the movie. Which made my laugh. What happens when the entire plane is run by NT and the OS crashing causes the plane to crash. The minute the FAA releases that information I can see a class action suit against M$.
But the real reason is because I use linux and if M$ takes over the Web (which they can have) then it'll be easier for me to and many others to not only live in a secure enviroment on the Net where no softies won't dare to tread.
Unless, of course consumers realize they aren't safe with M$ products and that M$ doesn't care about the consumer just the dollar. Why else would they build another OS (talk about a fragmented OS) that will live on the Net yet doesn't even have basic security built into it and you have to pay every year to use it.
Keep it up because consumers will get wise and a large enough class action (or many of them) the goverment is going to notice the it's society is spending all it's time with M$ in the courts. Of course all the non-spook systems will be using M$ products while the spooks already figured out the *NIX's are not only more secure but practically free.
Hey if they need a SysAdmin with Linux experience I'll take the job. My perfect fantasy job is be isolated from everyone in the middle of nowhere keeping computers up and running. Ever since John Carpenter's The Thing I always thought it'd be kewl working that gig. No bosses to worry about, no people to worry about, just keep the computers from crashing and everyone will be a-ok!!!
Considering with the Net I get all the luxuries UPS to me. If anyone has any leads let me know!!
Well, this should be a good thing if not a great thing for competitors within Open Source. If most of the software world follows this new tradition then the enterprise will be easier for Linux considering the GPL gives the freedom back to the consumer.
So far the media continues to scare us with there might be rolling blackouts. But when it comes time to the actual report there is still no word if that will happen or not.
The problem isn't with engery consumption nor a lack thereof, the problem is with the system. The state controls the power exchange (which is the company that resells the engery) and the state mandates that SDG&E/PG&E/SoCal Edision buy from the HIGHEST BIDDER. The power companies have kept their end of the bargain by not passing the buck to the consumers which is about to bankrupt the power companies and why they've requested to increase rates.
Also, for all those out-of-state companies out there selling the engery the reality is the power exchange can only buy from 1 source (still have no idea why the state does that).
For a deregulated system the state controls most of the process. I'm still wondering if this is deregulation. If you think about it the power exchange is supposedly modeled after Wall Street but does the goverment set the cost of the shares. And does the goverment mandate that only 1 company in Wall Street is the only company you can buy shares from because the cost per share is the highest?!?
If there are rolling blackouts you might start hearing about how Gray Davis should be kicked out of office (with probably everyone in the state congress).
If the power exchange was not controlled by the state I can see how it would work. Since you would have all these potential sellers competing with each other. But since the power exchange only ends up buying from one source where is the competition in that?
For the only source of media that seems to explain better than I can how deregulation was set up read this: http://reason.com/sullum/010901.html and this http://reason.com/ml/ml010401.html.
Most consumers watching the local news down here have yet to be told how deregulation was setup.
Jakee
Why personal transportation
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 1
Everyone thinks it's a personal transportation device but that doesn't fit with the article. Mainly, there are two products of like kind one that will be sold to consumers for about $2000. And the other which seems to be more expensive but would cause people to build entire cities around them.
quantam computer!!! You put the pieces together like legos then fill it up with water and of course the "special" fluids for the computations. IT uses a 9 volt battery for power. And IT doesn't do windows since IT is extremely fast and Windows OS is really too slow to be reliable.
Since I charge every company $100/royalty fee for my personal information I guess that means Microsoft will have to pay me to run their operating system. Too bad I won't run anything but *nix.
This goes to show how Microsoft is trying to make more money. How many window users have more than one box? And doesn't this go against their EULA (don't quote me I haven't read one in 3 years) which allows for their software to be run on 2 systems. Last time I looked that EULA was used for their OS as well.
How long before the US Gov't looks at that and questions MS as to why they are making consumers pay twice for two machines at home? Probably never since lil'George is in office.
This should spurn Windoze users to revolt and not buy any more upgrades.
Okay, I have a cable modem and pay roughly $40 bucks for the service. I assume $20 goes to the cable company for the hardware and $20 goes to the ISP for the connection to the internet. Who has to pay the royalities for viewing content? And once I view a copyrighted web page (which this system would then cause every page copyrighted) what if I return to it and it hasn't been refreshed with new contect. The ISP now has to pay a royality once again for the same content/same consumer? And I'm going to get paid for every person viewing my copyrighted webpage?
It's a nice idea but when millions of people become copyright holders of their own content the company who is charged with paying the royalities will have to then keep track of everyone and then pay them.
Doesn't this coopt the internet which then would make it easier for goverments to tax people for the web pages. And once we are taxed entities for our content couldn't the goverment begin to censor our pages. Because we are no longer private citizens with 1st amendment protections. We are now content providers (or broadcasters) and possibly become subject to FCC rules and regulations?
Business models don't work on the net because of why there is a net. Free expression of ideas between individuals. First research was placed there so that every scientist could review and debate scientific ideas. When people came aboard starting 10 years ago then it was ideas of the people that were freely available and exchanged. And since that time the goverment has tried to pass censorship laws. Banning free speech. None got thru.
But what if the people or no longer people how easy would it be for the goverment to state that anyone receiving a royality for content is a paid broadcaster of information. Then what???
The internet was not designed to make money it was designed to freely exchange ideas!!
10 years ago the internet had a ton of information for students. Those that knew about it would call up gopher and use a simple interface to get to information that would be useful.
Then the web came 5 years ago. HTML was the new way of linking all those documents and formatting them so that they can be viewed and stored. At roughly the same time, the goverment sold off the net to commercial companies - who looked at HTML and saw a way of selling things to consumers. BOOM!! Went the net and it took off. More and more companies came to hawk things.
But what happened to the information. It's not useful to commercial companies to provide free information.
The Supreme Court has twice told the goverment, that they can not restrict what goes onto the net because it is a public forum and is protected by the 1st Amendment. Something that didn't bother companies - just the goverment.
But what happened to the information? Hypesters, hyped the market value of the net so why produce information. Just hawk things!!
The problem is that there are two views of the net. One for useful information, if it still existed. The other to hawk things. Well for the last 5 years many companies have come and gone because they couldn't get enough hype for their products (mostly vaporware for their IPO).
The net has been used for a commercial commodity while hawking the idea that the information still exists. If it truly did exist then why can't we get at it?
Soon comes the time where we have to decide. Do we use the Net for it's original purpose - information and communication? Or do we try to sell things on it? The net is being turned into television and the people are bored with television. The more information disappears the more it becomes just like TV. If the companies stop treating us like consumers and more like people who want information and give it away for free. The more people will use the net. Sell things and it's boring and who wants to log into a market place where you can buy the product but not really get any information to expand ourselves. That was what was being sold to people 5 years ago. Unfortunately, everyone forgot while in the middle of IPO heaven.
And the kids figured that one out. So now their bored. Who wouldn't be? If you click a link to tell you about computer systems and it turns out to be just another company hawking computers.
Wowsers, I've had an e-mail account since 1981 which means it had existed for 10 years already.
What scares me is that I've never known life without a computer/the internet (before it was named as such)/or e-mail. Prior to 1981 my eldest sister's husband brought home a PDP11 that connected to the SDSU's mainframe and I pretty much grew up playing that good ole text game of Star Trek. But it wasn't until Jr High that I got an e-mail account via school and also the PDP11 went bye-bye, but I got my first real computer. Apple II anyone?!?! Being 32 and spending the last 19 connected online via BBS/Online Service/Internet. Does that make me one of the first Kids of the Computer Age?
Object orientation: is this the truly the end all, be all idea that if it doesn't force a programmer to do oop then it's a bad language? I don't think so - there are plenty of languages that don't force oop and are considered excellent. C anyone? or how about VB? They don't force anyone to oop.
Readability: I've yet to see any program that is not in a book that could be deciphered. It's not perl fault if people can't devine regex's.
Standardization: What language is truly standardized across all versions? And how many companies based their business on other languages only to have features disappear? Alot, this isn't a problem with the language but with the process of standardizing anything.
Maintainability: How much code is easy to maintain? Not much, doesn't matter if it's VB (eech!) or COBOL (double eech!). If programmers don't document their program then it isn't easy to maintain.
Overall, everything you mentioned in Perl has already happened to every other language and will continue to happen. Why? Well, that is evolution of a language. To fault one is to fault them all. Nothing is perfect but it's nice to have a language that will forgive you of your trespasses and allow you to complete the work. Large scale or not, Perl always completes it's goals and then some.
Don't like it - Don't use it! But Perl is so that you don't have to be a great programmer to complete great projects. How many languages can do that?
You might want to check out the stats before stating "...most girls of said "entire generation" still don't play video games to any significant extent." According to Fox News about 40% of gamers are girls and they are playing the same games as the boys.
So that means back up the generational revolution.
The problem with you statement is that you say the elderly usually vote conservatively - ie Republican. That is a subtle flaw that to be conservative is to be Republican. The reality to me is it doesn't matter if the elderly vote Republican or Democrat. Both parties (at least these days) are way to much in the center. The democrats have to chipping away at are liberties just as much as the Republicans. There is no difference in either party it seems.
What needs to be done is education of the young of not the two primary parties but of all of the political parties and get them to also understand the electorial college and how both dems and repubs continue to vie for district ownership by continuing to redistrict out either party but especially third parties.
No one needs to kill anyone just to understand how, like the old Soviet Party, both the Dems and Repubs are becoming one central party with just only two choices - Welcome to the Republic for which we are.
If America were truly democratic than no one party, more than likely not even two, would have central control of the Federal Goverment - and that would make it harder for civil liberties to be erased. And the electorial college would mean not be in effect.
I agree. Being an American I've grown up with the fact that everyone tried to teach me that we are a democracy but using the Oxford Dictionary I wasn't seeing it played out here.
Going to Europe as a kid and seeing how much freer the people seemed to be than over here is when I realized that Europe was how a democracy worked.
But be careful because it's not the US gov't that'll expand the Republic to include Europe it's the corporations and Hollywood that'll demonize European politics the fact that Europe is looking to implement a DMCA style copyright isn't coming from the fact that Europe is looking to the US as a leader but that your leaders are looking to US corporations to expand into economy. In which they'll start spending major bucks on the European Goverment to make it the apart of the US Republic!!!
Elements of Programming Perl is really good. I gave it to my 8 year old nephew and loaded ActiveState's Perl Build for Windows and he's writing out Perl Scripts like mad after about a month.
I was truly surprised at how quickly here got up and running.
It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft is trying to censor ideas that are unacceptable to them. I think that if there is information that is quoted from the specification (and if that specification is protected by the DMCA) then only the quoted material be blanked out (possibly with a link to the specification and notes on where the quoted material is found) but the actual comments, and not the quoted material, should be left alone.
Also, I think it would be important that possibly both e-mails be sent to every news organization in the mainstream media so that they are truly aware of the fact that Micro$oft is trying to censor ideas and using the DMCA to do that. Maybe strong public opinion (more likely lobbyists for the mainstream media) can get the Feds to realize that they enacted a law that can be used as censor people's expression of the first amendment. (Fat chance)
The only thing I don't understand is why release a specification if developers can't talk about it!?!
Wasn't Metallica giving away their music years ago? In fact, I have 3 tapes that were actually given to me by Lars at a concert before they were anybody.
I'm very disappointed that they now desire money more than making music. Of course that does explain the short hair and the album S&M.Which sucked!!!
Slashdot Mirror
I was looking at an ad for DirectTV DSL and they stated that on their DSL service you can run a web server and/or mail server and they support Linux. And for the service you don't even need a satellite dish.
Just thought I'd let you guys know.
Personally, I've used the Internet for about 20 years. It has always been about the free exchange of ideas. I also believe that corporations should not be allowed to hold patents or copyrights. Patents and copyrights were a way for people to receive compensation and legal right to sue for infringing on their work. But corporations should not be allowed. That's how a true capitalist society works the state protects the individual from the corporation but the corporation gets no protection from the state. Charging for content should be for the individual artists. I have no problem paying to read a person webpage but I have a problem with a corporation making money off content. While most individuals would probably charge the $ .07 for their content I can see corporations wanting to charge $2.00 for the same content.
But why do we have to charge money. Why can't another type of barter system be used. If distributed networks will become more pervasive than why can't I barter my free cpu cycles at times when I'm not home for payment for content?
Hey that Gorgerous sidekick was none other than the beautiful Erin Gray!!! aka Wilma Deering!!!
Just in case anyone wanted to know!!!
Well, who didn't see that one coming. Unfortunately, it's only going to hurt the softies more than us Linux bitches. No subscription fees for software - give me free software. Let M$ take control of the web because in the real world the true techies will be living on the bleedin' edge and away from the M$N/AOL controlled web. We'll have Freenet where no one knows ya!
Ever notice how M$N/AOL don't really take you onto the internet because they own you ass!!!
Well, who didn't see that one coming. Unfortunately, it's only going to hurt the softies more than us Linux bitches. No subscription fees for software - give me free software. Let M$ take of the web because in the real world the true techies will be living on the bleedin' edge and away from the M$N/AOL created web. Ever notice how M$N/AOL don't really take you onto the internet because they own you ass!!!
Well, I don't believe that biotech is all that bad but I don't believe that biotech will be all that it's cracked up to be. The question that no biotech scientist has ever truly answered about the products is the long term effects on somethings. Take a look at the corn that needs less pesticide to grow. What happens when nothing can kill the corn and it continues to grow and grow and take over all because it went from the lab to the enviroment and Mother Nature retweaked this little genetic gem into a weed like plant that can't be killed all because there isn't one scientist who can say that he/she knows exactly the outcome of certain changes.
Things my look great in the Lab (DDT) but sometimes it turns out differently in the enviroment (Cancer). BTW: I went the biotech conference here in San Diego and that was brought up. At least one panelist responded that biotech is 80% sure they know what will happen outside of the lab. That to me is a large enough gap to create the ATTACK OF THE KILLER TOMATOES!!!!!!
This is probably the first time that I don't agree with Mr. Katz mainly for his view of who and what Feed, Suck, and Salon were. First of all, they were already homogenized versions of the pamphlet. They tried to create the same Magazine business model on the net. Now I've said this time and time again. The net is/should not be about making money (unless you sell an actual product - which Amazon still can't make a dime doing.)
The net, as the Supreme Court has stated, is still free. You can say what you want when you want. But think about Suck.com. It lasted a year before it's creators sold out. Why? Well, if I was doing something I loved and not making money at it just enjoying the true freedom of the press that the net allows then when someone comes to me and gives me a bag of money for the site - I'll take the money and run because there is no real way the site will generate actual revenue in the long-term. When it was sold it should've have been renamed Suckers.com.
I read all three websites for about two months before leaving. Why? The sites were bland didn't necessarily give any real underground info into tech, or politics, or whatever. They were marginalized fairly quickly because other media were looking at them and marveling over how many people read them. They tried to copy it but really couldn't because Mass Media has to appeal to the Masses and running down the middle isn't what the net is about - that's what newspapers, magazines, and TV News is all about.
The Net is about allowing a single individual a voice to speak his/her/its mind. I predicted that most of the sites would die by 2005. Guess I was wrong - it happened way earlier. Now does that mean Big Media will take over the net. Not really because the net caters to niches and niche people won't necessarily pay for there info, or fun. And niche people can range in the thousands but a business needs a million to thrive. Also, unlike TV, ads can be and usually are ignored. Thats why ad revenue has dropped. How do you get people to click on a banner? I've always said give them money and they will come. But what company is a fool enough to give anyone who clicks their banner a buck to just that. Doesn't make sense.
And as long as the model of the net stays many to many it will stay free or Big Media. Big Media can still take part but it shouldn't be about them making money it should be about them offering themselves up for free so that maybe we'll find that product or service that we will pay for.
But it won't be a niche product or service but that's what has always been free.
I think it's kewl that M$ is taking over computing in every area of the world. I found it interesting that American Airlines uses NT for their movie server. Of course NT crashed, continually, and we never got to see the movie. Which made my laugh. What happens when the entire plane is run by NT and the OS crashing causes the plane to crash. The minute the FAA releases that information I can see a class action suit against M$.
But the real reason is because I use linux and if M$ takes over the Web (which they can have) then it'll be easier for me to and many others to not only live in a secure enviroment on the Net where no softies won't dare to tread.
Unless, of course consumers realize they aren't safe with M$ products and that M$ doesn't care about the consumer just the dollar. Why else would they build another OS (talk about a fragmented OS) that will live on the Net yet doesn't even have basic security built into it and you have to pay every year to use it.
Keep it up because consumers will get wise and a large enough class action (or many of them) the goverment is going to notice the it's society is spending all it's time with M$ in the courts. Of course all the non-spook systems will be using M$ products while the spooks already figured out the *NIX's are not only more secure but practically free.
Hey if they need a SysAdmin with Linux experience I'll take the job. My perfect fantasy job is be isolated from everyone in the middle of nowhere keeping computers up and running. Ever since John Carpenter's The Thing I always thought it'd be kewl working that gig. No bosses to worry about, no people to worry about, just keep the computers from crashing and everyone will be a-ok!!!
Considering with the Net I get all the luxuries UPS to me. If anyone has any leads let me know!!
Well, this should be a good thing if not a great thing for competitors within Open Source. If most of the software world follows this new tradition then the enterprise will be easier for Linux considering the GPL gives the freedom back to the consumer.
So far the media continues to scare us with there might be rolling blackouts. But when it comes time to the actual report there is still no word if that will happen or not.
The problem isn't with engery consumption nor a lack thereof, the problem is with the system. The state controls the power exchange (which is the company that resells the engery) and the state mandates that SDG&E/PG&E/SoCal Edision buy from the HIGHEST BIDDER. The power companies have kept their end of the bargain by not passing the buck to the consumers which is about to bankrupt the power companies and why they've requested to increase rates.
Also, for all those out-of-state companies out there selling the engery the reality is the power exchange can only buy from 1 source (still have no idea why the state does that).
For a deregulated system the state controls most of the process. I'm still wondering if this is deregulation. If you think about it the power exchange is supposedly modeled after Wall Street but does the goverment set the cost of the shares. And does the goverment mandate that only 1 company in Wall Street is the only company you can buy shares from because the cost per share is the highest?!?
If there are rolling blackouts you might start hearing about how Gray Davis should be kicked out of office (with probably everyone in the state congress).
If the power exchange was not controlled by the state I can see how it would work. Since you would have all these potential sellers competing with each other. But since the power exchange only ends up buying from one source where is the competition in that?
For the only source of media that seems to explain better than I can how deregulation was set up read this: http://reason.com/sullum/010901.html and this http://reason.com/ml/ml010401.html.
Most consumers watching the local news down here have yet to be told how deregulation was setup.
Jakee
Everyone thinks it's a personal transportation device but that doesn't fit with the article. Mainly, there are two products of like kind one that will be sold to consumers for about $2000. And the other which seems to be more expensive but would cause people to build entire cities around them.
Why build a city around a bicycle??
quantam computer!!! You put the pieces together like legos then fill it up with water and of course the "special" fluids for the computations. IT uses a 9 volt battery for power. And IT doesn't do windows since IT is extremely fast and Windows OS is really too slow to be reliable.
Since I charge every company $100/royalty fee for my personal information I guess that means Microsoft will have to pay me to run their operating system. Too bad I won't run anything but *nix.
This goes to show how Microsoft is trying to make more money. How many window users have more than one box? And doesn't this go against their EULA (don't quote me I haven't read one in 3 years) which allows for their software to be run on 2 systems. Last time I looked that EULA was used for their OS as well.
How long before the US Gov't looks at that and questions MS as to why they are making consumers pay twice for two machines at home? Probably never since lil'George is in office.
This should spurn Windoze users to revolt and not buy any more upgrades.
Okay, I have a cable modem and pay roughly $40 bucks for the service. I assume $20 goes to the cable company for the hardware and $20 goes to the ISP for the connection to the internet. Who has to pay the royalities for viewing content? And once I view a copyrighted web page (which this system would then cause every page copyrighted) what if I return to it and it hasn't been refreshed with new contect. The ISP now has to pay a royality once again for the same content/same consumer? And I'm going to get paid for every person viewing my copyrighted webpage? It's a nice idea but when millions of people become copyright holders of their own content the company who is charged with paying the royalities will have to then keep track of everyone and then pay them. Doesn't this coopt the internet which then would make it easier for goverments to tax people for the web pages. And once we are taxed entities for our content couldn't the goverment begin to censor our pages. Because we are no longer private citizens with 1st amendment protections. We are now content providers (or broadcasters) and possibly become subject to FCC rules and regulations? Business models don't work on the net because of why there is a net. Free expression of ideas between individuals. First research was placed there so that every scientist could review and debate scientific ideas. When people came aboard starting 10 years ago then it was ideas of the people that were freely available and exchanged. And since that time the goverment has tried to pass censorship laws. Banning free speech. None got thru. But what if the people or no longer people how easy would it be for the goverment to state that anyone receiving a royality for content is a paid broadcaster of information. Then what??? The internet was not designed to make money it was designed to freely exchange ideas!!
Agreed. I've been a subscriber for 2 years now. When do I see my 1/4 refund for this quarter that they're not going to print.
10 years ago the internet had a ton of information for students. Those that knew about it would call up gopher and use a simple interface to get to information that would be useful.
Then the web came 5 years ago. HTML was the new way of linking all those documents and formatting them so that they can be viewed and stored. At roughly the same time, the goverment sold off the net to commercial companies - who looked at HTML and saw a way of selling things to consumers. BOOM!! Went the net and it took off. More and more companies came to hawk things.
But what happened to the information. It's not useful to commercial companies to provide free information.
The Supreme Court has twice told the goverment, that they can not restrict what goes onto the net because it is a public forum and is protected by the 1st Amendment. Something that didn't bother companies - just the goverment.
But what happened to the information? Hypesters, hyped the market value of the net so why produce information. Just hawk things!!
The problem is that there are two views of the net. One for useful information, if it still existed. The other to hawk things. Well for the last 5 years many companies have come and gone because they couldn't get enough hype for their products (mostly vaporware for their IPO).
The net has been used for a commercial commodity while hawking the idea that the information still exists. If it truly did exist then why can't we get at it?
Soon comes the time where we have to decide. Do we use the Net for it's original purpose - information and communication? Or do we try to sell things on it? The net is being turned into television and the people are bored with television. The more information disappears the more it becomes just like TV. If the companies stop treating us like consumers and more like people who want information and give it away for free. The more people will use the net. Sell things and it's boring and who wants to log into a market place where you can buy the product but not really get any information to expand ourselves. That was what was being sold to people 5 years ago. Unfortunately, everyone forgot while in the middle of IPO heaven.
And the kids figured that one out. So now their bored. Who wouldn't be? If you click a link to tell you about computer systems and it turns out to be just another company hawking computers.
Wowsers, I've had an e-mail account since 1981 which means it had existed for 10 years already.
What scares me is that I've never known life without a computer/the internet (before it was named as such)/or e-mail. Prior to 1981 my eldest sister's husband brought home a PDP11 that connected to the SDSU's mainframe and I pretty much grew up playing that good ole text game of Star Trek. But it wasn't until Jr High that I got an e-mail account via school and also the PDP11 went bye-bye, but I got my first real computer. Apple II anyone?!?! Being 32 and spending the last 19 connected online via BBS/Online Service/Internet. Does that make me one of the first Kids of the Computer Age?
On each point:
Object orientation: is this the truly the end all, be all idea that if it doesn't force a programmer to do oop then it's a bad language? I don't think so - there are plenty of languages that don't force oop and are considered excellent. C anyone? or how about VB? They don't force anyone to oop.
Readability: I've yet to see any program that is not in a book that could be deciphered. It's not perl fault if people can't devine regex's.
Standardization: What language is truly standardized across all versions? And how many companies based their business on other languages only to have features disappear? Alot, this isn't a problem with the language but with the process of standardizing anything.
Maintainability: How much code is easy to maintain? Not much, doesn't matter if it's VB (eech!) or COBOL (double eech!). If programmers don't document their program then it isn't easy to maintain.
Overall, everything you mentioned in Perl has already happened to every other language and will continue to happen. Why? Well, that is evolution of a language. To fault one is to fault them all. Nothing is perfect but it's nice to have a language that will forgive you of your trespasses and allow you to complete the work. Large scale or not, Perl always completes it's goals and then some.
Don't like it - Don't use it! But Perl is so that you don't have to be a great programmer to complete great projects. How many languages can do that?
You might want to check out the stats before stating "...most girls of said "entire generation" still don't play video games to any significant extent." According to Fox News about 40% of gamers are girls and they are playing the same games as the boys.
So that means back up the generational revolution.
The problem with you statement is that you say the elderly usually vote conservatively - ie Republican. That is a subtle flaw that to be conservative is to be Republican. The reality to me is it doesn't matter if the elderly vote Republican or Democrat. Both parties (at least these days) are way to much in the center. The democrats have to chipping away at are liberties just as much as the Republicans. There is no difference in either party it seems.
What needs to be done is education of the young of not the two primary parties but of all of the political parties and get them to also understand the electorial college and how both dems and repubs continue to vie for district ownership by continuing to redistrict out either party but especially third parties.
No one needs to kill anyone just to understand how, like the old Soviet Party, both the Dems and Repubs are becoming one central party with just only two choices - Welcome to the Republic for which we are.
If America were truly democratic than no one party, more than likely not even two, would have central control of the Federal Goverment - and that would make it harder for civil liberties to be erased. And the electorial college would mean not be in effect.
I agree. Being an American I've grown up with the fact that everyone tried to teach me that we are a democracy but using the Oxford Dictionary I wasn't seeing it played out here.
Going to Europe as a kid and seeing how much freer the people seemed to be than over here is when I realized that Europe was how a democracy worked.
But be careful because it's not the US gov't that'll expand the Republic to include Europe it's the corporations and Hollywood that'll demonize European politics the fact that Europe is looking to implement a DMCA style copyright isn't coming from the fact that Europe is looking to the US as a leader but that your leaders are looking to US corporations to expand into economy. In which they'll start spending major bucks on the European Goverment to make it the apart of the US Republic!!!
Elements of Programming Perl is really good. I gave it to my 8 year old nephew and loaded ActiveState's Perl Build for Windows and he's writing out Perl Scripts like mad after about a month.
I was truly surprised at how quickly here got up and running.
It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft is trying to censor ideas that are unacceptable to them. I think that if there is information that is quoted from the specification (and if that specification is protected by the DMCA) then only the quoted material be blanked out (possibly with a link to the specification and notes on where the quoted material is found) but the actual comments, and not the quoted material, should be left alone.
Also, I think it would be important that possibly both e-mails be sent to every news organization in the mainstream media so that they are truly aware of the fact that Micro$oft is trying to censor ideas and using the DMCA to do that. Maybe strong public opinion (more likely lobbyists for the mainstream media) can get the Feds to realize that they enacted a law that can be used as censor people's expression of the first amendment. (Fat chance)
The only thing I don't understand is why release a specification if developers can't talk about it!?!
Wasn't Metallica giving away their music years ago? In fact, I have 3 tapes that were actually given to me by Lars at a concert before they were anybody.
I'm very disappointed that they now desire money more than making music. Of course that does explain the short hair and the album S&M.Which sucked!!!