without having to do more silly things like go on strike or hold a protest
Not a bad PR tactic, but this line is pretty immature. When negotiations fail, a strike is ultimately the only bargaining chip a union has. If you can't withdraw your labor, what can you do, other than beg?
Yeah kinda like how the Social Security reform debate has turned into "scary republicans want to starve old people".
Kinda like how the Social Security reform debate is based on a false mathematical equation that creates a crisis where is none?
I'm not saying that the Democrats don't use the same tactic (I'm hardly a democrat, just because you're opposed to republicans doesn't mean you're a dem), because they definitely do, but the neo-cons do it really, really well.
References please. PETA does some stupid shit, but I rarely hear of them sponsoring demonstrations (they're much more into billboards and ads), and if they do, their demonstrations are highly marshalled and controlled, and usually pretty small.
So forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about this anecdote, but it smacks of rumor and hearsay.
One of the most important parts of any propaganda war is the concept of defining the terms of the debate. Usually, if you can define the terms of the debate, you win the debate. This is why the neo-conservatives are so good at winning propaganda wars, despite their positions and politics being so sketchy.
Here's an example: Politician A says, "My opponent supported a bill that would increase the number of kill shelters in their district. Therefore, my opponent supports the killing of puppies." Then, an asshole blowhard radio DJ who's probably in the pocket of said politician (although you can't prove it) gets on the air waves and screams "Politician B enjoys killing little puppies! His party is the cult of puppy death!" over and over again.
Politican B spends a good chunk of time refuting this charge, saying no, he doesn't actually support the killing of puppies, that he's very pro-puppy actually. But nobody cares, the debate has been framed, and in such a way that Politican B was destined to lose, unless his strategists are god damn geniuses at getting out of this predicament.
One of the ways to keep this from happening is to not allow your opposition to frame the debate. When they do, don't fall into their traps. When Pro-MS people go crazy saying "The Zealots! The Zealots Are Killing Linux! You Will All Die At The Hands Of The Zealots!" don't play their game and argue as though this were an actual issue in the movement, because it isn't.
I see a lot of people here falling into this trap, and saying 'Yes, they have a point, some people are too pro-free software.' This allows the opposition to frame the debate, and it takes a lot to undo the damage that it does.
As much as sections of the free software movement disagree with each other, it's important that we have unity, because exploiting these disagreements is part of the strategy of framing the debate. Basic divide and conquer. We'll be attacked for the elements among us who are less compromising in their belief in free software, because this is seen as a weakness among us. Not those people or views specifically, but the disagreement between the different factions.
So, all I'm saying is, before you post a big rant about how big of a problem these RMS types are, recognize that your words will be used against all of us.
A few years ago, I wrote a pretty inocuous essay about globalization, and the effects of the IMF on Argentina. I've also written critically about electoral politics.
Is that why I have 7 years of experience in PHP and MySQL, yet I can't find a job? Even when I have examples of code that I've written and a pretty damn decent portfolio?
But does he know when the US Civil War was? What about the Revolutionary War? Who the 1st President was? What the Articles of Confederation were? Has he memorized his multiplication tables? The names of the 8+1 planets, in order? Can he locate all 50 states and most of the European countries on a map?
The real question is, can he google?
I'd rather a kid who was well-rounded, creative and innovative who didn't know those things (but knew exactly how to find out), than somebody who was dull and uninterested, but could spout off useless facts like a machine.
Of course, Wonder Woman has to be some beaty queen type, but let's at least cast an actress that could potentially pull off the whole superhero thing.
Famke Janssen would work, but she's already an X-Man. Just please, not some waif like Kiera Knightley, unless she wants to hit the gym and the beefcake 3000 and gain a good 20 pounds of muscle.
Just saying 'militants' is ignorant reporting. I'm not interested in whether a group is militant or not, I'm interested in what they believe. Why? Because I'm a big fan of critical thinking, of understanding a situation fully, and not just reacting to an emotionally loaded word like 'militants.'
One of these days, we'll have intelligent reporting that doesn't treat the readers like scared, reactionary six year olds.
I think it's a misnomer to sing the praises of corporations like that. Ultimately, people made these things. They happened to be organized in a corporate structure, but they could have been structured any number of ways.
In other words, people could have accomplished this without the use of corporations, but there's no way corporations could have accomplished anything without the use of people.
So, the real question is this: I'm about 10% into coding a major open source project that I've been spec'ing out for a long time. I'm at a point where I could switch to AJAX to handle things (and don't think it's not *super* tempting), but it's a bit daunting of a task.
Should I do that? Or should I stick to using CSS/HTML + PHP and regular server-side coding, and then move to AJAX in version 2.0?
I love GMAIL, and the benefits of saving bandwidth and increasing the speed seem really enticing. As far as I can tell, the only disadvantages are learning a new coding skillset (my javascript is rudimentary), and limiting the browsers that can use my site down to IE and Mozilla, which is really not that big of a problem.
I really hope they don't fuck with the storyline and the politics of this classic. Alan Moore is one of my favorite political writers, and it'd be a shame if this is given the same treatment as "From Hell" was.
If you don't know, V for Vendetta was about an anarchist (in the classical theoretical sense, not the bs modern punk rock sense) revolutionary who uses "terrorist" tactics to save Britain from fascism. It's not something that I see Hollywood understanding, even though I think most people would understand why the tactics were used, and the politics behind them.
In the book, V straddles the line between anarchist and vanguard, taking actions into his own hands, but with the express purpose of encouraging the people to fight back. It's not about an anarcho-socialist utopia, it recognizes the compromises that an anarchist would have to make in dire circumstances.
And ultimately, it's really, really fucking cool. Please, hollywood, please don't fuck it up.
Also on the GMO thing here's a tpoic to think about: We've been practising genetic engineering seince Gregor Medel via selective breeding. Nearly all the plant based food you get in a first world nation, inclding organic, is modified.
This is off-topic, but please explain to me how to get fish genes into a tomato using Mendel's methods. Thank you.
Not true. The demand is there. Have you ever worked in a grocery store? The shrink on vegetarian products is *huge*. Hell, a lot of my vegetarian friends lift that stuff all the time because they can't afford it, but don't want to go back to eating meat. Myself, I just started eating meat, but I'd love to go back to being vegetarian.
There's a lot of vegetarians, but even more importantly, there's a lot of omnivores who like vegan/vegetarian food. There was even a big article about that in, I think, the NY Times, about how foods like that are mainstream, and not a niche anymore because of people who aren't vegetarian, but like to eat veggie burgers.
The demand is there, but the "stupid rich" are keeping the price high because #turning economics lecture mode on# the producers will charge what the market will bear. Nobody would pay $6 for a box of macaroni and cheese, but dumb yuppies will gladly plunk down $6 for a pack of four veggie burgers.
As much as this can create some benefits for those of us who are poor (like dual g4's with 512mb ram on ebay for $400), they cause a lot of problems in the market in places where the goods are a little bit more necessary.
Take food, for instance. I would very much like to buy organically grown, chemical and gmo free vegetables (which my grandfather was able to buy when he was my age), but because those have become yuppie foods, they're priced out of my price range. There's no reason that veggie burgers should be more expensive than real burgers, where you have to raise a whole damn cow as opposed to growing some soybeans, but because they're trendy, people pay a lot of money for them.
The "stupid rich" create benefits for things like technology, because they offset R&D costs when the company overprices when it first comes to market. But for goods that I feel everybody deserves the highest quality, they really make life difficult.
Are we talking about Against Me!? I thought we were talking about Linux.
(Sigh, I used to actually go see Against Me in basement shows and living rooms. I saw them with an audience of 15 people once. Now they're touring with Anti-Flag and tickets are $20. Sucks.)
If you're looking for a perspective from someone other than Slate's editor Jacob Weisberg, Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz writes about the sale
In other news, if you're looking for a different perspective on the two party system and it's ramifications for a healthy democracy other than Republican George Bush, here's Democrat John Kerry.
Re:My problems with GIMP.
on
GIMP 2.2 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
civil rights movement with a black person.
The civil rights movement was a positive thing. The word 'gimp' is a negative slur. How are these related?
My problems with GIMP.
on
GIMP 2.2 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Overall, GIMP is an incredible feat of OSS, so I dno't want it to seem that I'm being completely negative.
But, there's two problems I have with GIMP, and one of them might have been fixed and one definitely hasn't.
First is the interface. Much has been said about it, but it really is not intuitive at all. A UI overhaul would be very helpful, and could go a long way to get a lot of Adobe enthusiasts to check it out. I've been using Mac OS X a lot lately, and it's really pointed out a lot of the really horrid UI decisions that have been made with Linux-grown software. The right-click menu is horribly unintuitive, there's too many options cluttered on one screen instead of giving them a heirarchy of use and seperating them by tabs or other methods. There's a whole bunch of things that could be done to make the the interface better, enough to fill a whole research document, so I'll leave it at that.
Second is the name. It needs to change. This is not about being PC, it's about reaching out to as many people as possible, and getting them to try out the GIMP. Will universities ever teach classes in a program that's called 'the gimp?' Will companies ever take seriously an employee who says that he wants to install 'the gimp' on his computer? Y'all have to have gotten the same weird looks as me when you've suggested that people try 'the gimp'. Have you ever told it to someone who uses a cane or crutches or is in a wheelchair?
If you have, you probably felt like a real jerk right after it slipped out of your mouth.
C'mon, change the name, we're not kids anymore, alright?
His depiction of Charlie, and Wonka to an extent, as a sort of Ubermensch, exalted to rule over the factory. There's also the strong anti-woman messages of a lot of his books. It'd be interesting to see a critique of his work from a more well-read antifascist theorist than myself.
Were his subtexts as blatant as, say, Rudyard Kipling? No. Are they there? Definitely.
Slashdot Mirror
The only failure the unions had in factory jobs moving is that they weren't able to stop it. Blaming globalization on collective bargaining is absurd.
Oh. Shit.
If I were Caltech, I'd watch my back.
without having to do more silly things like go on strike or hold a protest
Not a bad PR tactic, but this line is pretty immature. When negotiations fail, a strike is ultimately the only bargaining chip a union has. If you can't withdraw your labor, what can you do, other than beg?
Yeah kinda like how the Social Security reform debate has turned into "scary republicans want to starve old people".
Kinda like how the Social Security reform debate is based on a false mathematical equation that creates a crisis where is none?
I'm not saying that the Democrats don't use the same tactic (I'm hardly a democrat, just because you're opposed to republicans doesn't mean you're a dem), because they definitely do, but the neo-cons do it really, really well.
References please. PETA does some stupid shit, but I rarely hear of them sponsoring demonstrations (they're much more into billboards and ads), and if they do, their demonstrations are highly marshalled and controlled, and usually pretty small.
So forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about this anecdote, but it smacks of rumor and hearsay.
One of the most important parts of any propaganda war is the concept of defining the terms of the debate. Usually, if you can define the terms of the debate, you win the debate. This is why the neo-conservatives are so good at winning propaganda wars, despite their positions and politics being so sketchy.
Here's an example: Politician A says, "My opponent supported a bill that would increase the number of kill shelters in their district. Therefore, my opponent supports the killing of puppies." Then, an asshole blowhard radio DJ who's probably in the pocket of said politician (although you can't prove it) gets on the air waves and screams "Politician B enjoys killing little puppies! His party is the cult of puppy death!" over and over again.
Politican B spends a good chunk of time refuting this charge, saying no, he doesn't actually support the killing of puppies, that he's very pro-puppy actually. But nobody cares, the debate has been framed, and in such a way that Politican B was destined to lose, unless his strategists are god damn geniuses at getting out of this predicament.
One of the ways to keep this from happening is to not allow your opposition to frame the debate. When they do, don't fall into their traps. When Pro-MS people go crazy saying "The Zealots! The Zealots Are Killing Linux! You Will All Die At The Hands Of The Zealots!" don't play their game and argue as though this were an actual issue in the movement, because it isn't.
I see a lot of people here falling into this trap, and saying 'Yes, they have a point, some people are too pro-free software.' This allows the opposition to frame the debate, and it takes a lot to undo the damage that it does.
As much as sections of the free software movement disagree with each other, it's important that we have unity, because exploiting these disagreements is part of the strategy of framing the debate. Basic divide and conquer. We'll be attacked for the elements among us who are less compromising in their belief in free software, because this is seen as a weakness among us. Not those people or views specifically, but the disagreement between the different factions.
So, all I'm saying is, before you post a big rant about how big of a problem these RMS types are, recognize that your words will be used against all of us.
A few years ago, I wrote a pretty inocuous essay about globalization, and the effects of the IMF on Argentina. I've also written critically about electoral politics.
Is that why I have 7 years of experience in PHP and MySQL, yet I can't find a job? Even when I have examples of code that I've written and a pretty damn decent portfolio?
But does he know when the US Civil War was? What about the Revolutionary War? Who the 1st President was? What the Articles of Confederation were? Has he memorized his multiplication tables? The names of the 8+1 planets, in order? Can he locate all 50 states and most of the European countries on a map?
The real question is, can he google?
I'd rather a kid who was well-rounded, creative and innovative who didn't know those things (but knew exactly how to find out), than somebody who was dull and uninterested, but could spout off useless facts like a machine.
Of course, Wonder Woman has to be some beaty queen type, but let's at least cast an actress that could potentially pull off the whole superhero thing.
Famke Janssen would work, but she's already an X-Man. Just please, not some waif like Kiera Knightley, unless she wants to hit the gym and the beefcake 3000 and gain a good 20 pounds of muscle.
Militants? Militant whats? Militant Communists? Militant Republicans? Militant Anti-Caste activists? Militant Hindu Nationalists? Militant Islamists? Militant Christian Doomsday Fundamentalists? Militant Hello Kitty Fans?
Just saying 'militants' is ignorant reporting. I'm not interested in whether a group is militant or not, I'm interested in what they believe. Why? Because I'm a big fan of critical thinking, of understanding a situation fully, and not just reacting to an emotionally loaded word like 'militants.'
One of these days, we'll have intelligent reporting that doesn't treat the readers like scared, reactionary six year olds.
I think it's a misnomer to sing the praises of corporations like that. Ultimately, people made these things. They happened to be organized in a corporate structure, but they could have been structured any number of ways.
In other words, people could have accomplished this without the use of corporations, but there's no way corporations could have accomplished anything without the use of people.
So, the real question is this: I'm about 10% into coding a major open source project that I've been spec'ing out for a long time. I'm at a point where I could switch to AJAX to handle things (and don't think it's not *super* tempting), but it's a bit daunting of a task.
Should I do that? Or should I stick to using CSS/HTML + PHP and regular server-side coding, and then move to AJAX in version 2.0?
I love GMAIL, and the benefits of saving bandwidth and increasing the speed seem really enticing. As far as I can tell, the only disadvantages are learning a new coding skillset (my javascript is rudimentary), and limiting the browsers that can use my site down to IE and Mozilla, which is really not that big of a problem.
Thoughts?
I really hope they don't fuck with the storyline and the politics of this classic. Alan Moore is one of my favorite political writers, and it'd be a shame if this is given the same treatment as "From Hell" was.
If you don't know, V for Vendetta was about an anarchist (in the classical theoretical sense, not the bs modern punk rock sense) revolutionary who uses "terrorist" tactics to save Britain from fascism. It's not something that I see Hollywood understanding, even though I think most people would understand why the tactics were used, and the politics behind them.
In the book, V straddles the line between anarchist and vanguard, taking actions into his own hands, but with the express purpose of encouraging the people to fight back. It's not about an anarcho-socialist utopia, it recognizes the compromises that an anarchist would have to make in dire circumstances.
And ultimately, it's really, really fucking cool. Please, hollywood, please don't fuck it up.
Also on the GMO thing here's a tpoic to think about: We've been practising genetic engineering seince Gregor Medel via selective breeding. Nearly all the plant based food you get in a first world nation, inclding organic, is modified.
This is off-topic, but please explain to me how to get fish genes into a tomato using Mendel's methods. Thank you.
Not true. The demand is there. Have you ever worked in a grocery store? The shrink on vegetarian products is *huge*. Hell, a lot of my vegetarian friends lift that stuff all the time because they can't afford it, but don't want to go back to eating meat. Myself, I just started eating meat, but I'd love to go back to being vegetarian.
There's a lot of vegetarians, but even more importantly, there's a lot of omnivores who like vegan/vegetarian food. There was even a big article about that in, I think, the NY Times, about how foods like that are mainstream, and not a niche anymore because of people who aren't vegetarian, but like to eat veggie burgers.
The demand is there, but the "stupid rich" are keeping the price high because #turning economics lecture mode on# the producers will charge what the market will bear. Nobody would pay $6 for a box of macaroni and cheese, but dumb yuppies will gladly plunk down $6 for a pack of four veggie burgers.
As much as this can create some benefits for those of us who are poor (like dual g4's with 512mb ram on ebay for $400), they cause a lot of problems in the market in places where the goods are a little bit more necessary.
Take food, for instance. I would very much like to buy organically grown, chemical and gmo free vegetables (which my grandfather was able to buy when he was my age), but because those have become yuppie foods, they're priced out of my price range. There's no reason that veggie burgers should be more expensive than real burgers, where you have to raise a whole damn cow as opposed to growing some soybeans, but because they're trendy, people pay a lot of money for them.
The "stupid rich" create benefits for things like technology, because they offset R&D costs when the company overprices when it first comes to market. But for goods that I feel everybody deserves the highest quality, they really make life difficult.
Yoda, is that you?
Are we talking about Against Me!? I thought we were talking about Linux.
(Sigh, I used to actually go see Against Me in basement shows and living rooms. I saw them with an audience of 15 people once. Now they're touring with Anti-Flag and tickets are $20. Sucks.)
Let's be honest, this guy changed the face of computing. He knows that, now we know that. There are things better than financial reward, y'know.
Maybe he didn't make any money directly off of what he did, but neither did Jesus, Gandhi, or Linus.
If you're looking for a perspective from someone other than Slate's editor Jacob Weisberg, Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz writes about the sale
In other news, if you're looking for a different perspective on the two party system and it's ramifications for a healthy democracy other than Republican George Bush, here's Democrat John Kerry.
civil rights movement with a black person.
The civil rights movement was a positive thing. The word 'gimp' is a negative slur. How are these related?
Overall, GIMP is an incredible feat of OSS, so I dno't want it to seem that I'm being completely negative.
But, there's two problems I have with GIMP, and one of them might have been fixed and one definitely hasn't.
First is the interface. Much has been said about it, but it really is not intuitive at all. A UI overhaul would be very helpful, and could go a long way to get a lot of Adobe enthusiasts to check it out. I've been using Mac OS X a lot lately, and it's really pointed out a lot of the really horrid UI decisions that have been made with Linux-grown software. The right-click menu is horribly unintuitive, there's too many options cluttered on one screen instead of giving them a heirarchy of use and seperating them by tabs or other methods. There's a whole bunch of things that could be done to make the the interface better, enough to fill a whole research document, so I'll leave it at that.
Second is the name. It needs to change. This is not about being PC, it's about reaching out to as many people as possible, and getting them to try out the GIMP. Will universities ever teach classes in a program that's called 'the gimp?' Will companies ever take seriously an employee who says that he wants to install 'the gimp' on his computer? Y'all have to have gotten the same weird looks as me when you've suggested that people try 'the gimp'. Have you ever told it to someone who uses a cane or crutches or is in a wheelchair?
If you have, you probably felt like a real jerk right after it slipped out of your mouth.
C'mon, change the name, we're not kids anymore, alright?
Rush, is that you?
I don't know too much about high-end routers, so I'm just gonna say this:
Begun, the router war has.
Okay, that is all.
His depiction of Charlie, and Wonka to an extent, as a sort of Ubermensch, exalted to rule over the factory. There's also the strong anti-woman messages of a lot of his books. It'd be interesting to see a critique of his work from a more well-read antifascist theorist than myself.
Were his subtexts as blatant as, say, Rudyard Kipling? No. Are they there? Definitely.