Tell 'em qpt sent you, though, and you'll get the first six months at half off the introductory business-class rate for first-time dedicated leasers, not including set up and take down fees or configuration surcharges and local infrastructure levies.
The EFF is protecting free speech and parody on the Internet, you say?
Well, most of the speech on the Internet seems to be whining. I'm not at all sure that I want whining to be protected. See, it's annoying. Besides whining, the Internet seems to consist mostly of porn, which I don't think is speech, since it doesn't really mean anything. So, I guess they're not protecting porn, even though porn has to be more entertaining than whining. Whatever, though.
As for protecting parodies, I think they have it backwards. I think we need to be protected from the parodies. Parodies on the Internet are really just that bad. If by "protect" them, the EFF locks them away, ne'er again to see the light of day, I suppose I can support that. Anything else, though, and I'm afraid the EFF and I must agree to disagree.
What justification is there for intentionally housing possibly dangerous extra-terrestrial life forms? The curiosity of a few academics is surely not reason enough to put the entire human race at potential risk!
After all, no matter how carefully they may store these organisms, there is always the possibility that they may somehow escape. Once the terrestrial biosphere is contaminated with foreign organisms, who can say what the result will be? History is rife with examples of non-native species decimating populations of unprepared organisms.
I am not worried so much about macroscopic life forms as microscopic ones, such as bacteria and viruses. Having evolved for millions of years apart from terrestrial macro-organisms, these creatures could devastate our maladapted immune systems.
Why is it always about destruction? It seems that the only purpose people see for robots is to fight with other robots.
I find this disturbing, because as an area of research, robotics has great promise to actually contribute to the good of the human race. Robots of the potential to effectively accomplish many dangerous and difficult tasks that are today done by poorly paid overworked people.
Robots should be encouraging the formation of a classless society, where everyone has leisure time and a fulfilling creative job. Instead, robots are being developed primarily as a tool of destruction.
The world is already filled with enough violence and devastation. It is disgusting to see every advance warped to that ugly end. Unfortunately, geeks seem to thrive on violence and don't realize the massive potential that is being thrown away.
While at first glace, this appears to be a defeat for both Slashdot and freedom, perhaps this cloud has a silver lining.
The fact is, the post that prompted the controversy was illegal. You may argue whether or not it should be illegal, but that is a whole separate debate. Perhaps by standing up for legality and order, Rob Malda and Slashdot can server as a shining example for all of us who frequent the site.
I respect Malda for making a firm decisive decision regarding this, and I respect him all the more so for choosing to follow the law. I think that the value of law is often lost on people who post to Slashdot and it is good to see the site stand up for the principles that civilization is founded on.
One can only hope that this one act of courage will filter down throughout all of Slashdot and that we will collectively reconsider the law-breaking that we engage in every day. Perhaps free music and movies are not worth the price we pay by becoming criminals. Perhaps the open source movement is unjustified in stealing profits from commercial enterprises.
I do not pretend to have the answers, but I hope that this event will serve as a catalyst for a universal reconsideration of legality and morality by all that frequent Slashdot.
Yes, the Internet is in a dire state of vulnerability, and nerd parroting "just update BIND" isn't going to help a thing.
DDoS attacks against major web sites, stolen credit cards, hijacked identities - tech news reads like devil's brew of disaster. People need to wake up and face the hard truth.
The private sector has failed.
It was supposed to be a grand experiment in freedom, as academia and the business world allied apart from government control. It was supposed to be an electronic utopia. Instead, it a war zone rife with terrorism.
The governments of the world need to take the Internet back, at least until it can be secured. Desperate times demand desperate measures, and if the Internet doesn't give up freedom for a little while, it will be utterly destroyed.
Despite thousands of geeks clamoring about how obvious the idea was, nobody has been able to produce a usage of one-click shopping prior to Amazon's patent? This strikes me as interesting, to say the least.
What a lot of people appear to forget is that everything looks obvious in hindsight. Hell, even the concepts of advanced physics are pretty straightforward if you don't have to think of them yourself.
Geeks tend to constantly overestimate their own ability in what amounts to severe egotism. They assume that if someone else could create something, then surely it wouldn't been no trouble to them.
This is absurd, and most of the time they can't provide an account of why they didn't create it! Face the facts. One-click shopping is a highly useful but non-obvious idea, and Amazon deserves to reap the sole rewards of the hard work put into developing it.
Some kids posted an obnoxious web page and got into a little trouble. What's the concern?
Like it or not, words and actions have consequences. If you insist on saying stupid things, you might have to pay for it. This is just life.
Geeks like to hide behind the First Amendment, thinking that it gives them the right to say whatever they please without repercussions. This is absurd. Just as you have the right to speak, others have the right to react to your speech.
If you don't want negative reactions, couch your ideas in more pleasant language. This isn't rocket science, folks.
Many of you devoted time and effort to contributing to the CDDB database. It hurts to see your work used in a way you didn't want.
Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished. How is this any different? You both put time and energy into creating something intangible, and you both were denied its control.
You weren't robbed of the information itself, after all. If you wanted to keep a copy of the information that you submitted to CDDB, it would've been a trivial matter to make a backup. No, you were robbed of nothing.
If you use Napster to download copyrighted material and feel ripped off by the CDDB, then you are an utterly despicable hypocrite.
A system such as this has a massive potential for abuse. Is there any guarantee that the video won't fall into the hands of the wrong people?
The police (particularly the British police) are notoriously corrupt. Even though a surveillance system may have expressed goals of reducing crime does not mean it couldn't be adapted to more personal ends.
It would be a great boon to organized crime and stalkers to have information such as will be provided by these cameras. How much (or little) will this information cost them?
Tell me something. If we are in fact a civilized society, why are we so hell-bent on abandoning our children to the adult world as soon as possible? We try children in adult courts, we insist on exposing them to adult content - where does it end?
Mere animals can manage to care for their children until they are ready to be adults. Why can't we? We blindly focus on one tiny aspect of life - the first amendment - and sacrifice everything else.
Why must children in public libraries be able to view every piece of filth availible? They will be adults soon enough; then they will be able to make adult choices. Until then, children need to be protected, though, not used as pawns in a libertarian game.
Software and business methods represent the blood, sweat, and toil of hard-working individuals just as designs (which are patentable) do.
This is a terribly unfair decision, and one that is potentially damaging for businesses. In today's cut-throat economy, businesses need every competitive advantage they can muster. If any two-bit competitor is able to rob a company of all its hard work and R&D monies, companies that innovate will be forced out of business.
Unless software and business method patents are upheld, the future is filled with Microsofts. They operate by stealing the technology of other companies and then repackaging it as their own. Software and business method patents would stop this, and give the profits to the rightful creators.
I hope that the UK reconsiders this course of action.
ICMP packets already account for an absurdly large amount of total Internet trafic. I can't be bothered to find a link, but I believe it was between 15-17%.
Is it really a wise use of limited bandwidth resources to develope new network clogging toys for 'system administrators' to play with? What a lot of geeks tend to forget is that real people are trying to accomplish real work over the Internet. It's no longer just their personal playground.
The entire economy has been transformed to rely on networking and information technology. Bandwidth is a critical resource that mustn't be wasted on 'cool' new toys.
Even worse, systems like Traceloop are always poorly thought out and rife with possible exploits. The last thing we need is yet another platform for hackers to launch malicious attacks on the public and private sector's key information systems.
Basically, if it's not business critical, it doesn't belong on the Internet anymore.
The broadband 'explosion' is crawling to a halt, and many providers are wondering why. It's quite simple, really - everyone has as much pornography as they want.
Pornography has always been the driving force behind Internet innovation, after all. It was for pornography that ever faster connections were demanded, and it was for pornography that the basics of online financial transactions were fleshed out.
However, there's simply a limit to the demand for pornography. To put it bluntly, everyone who uses the stuff is beating themselves sore, and can't possibly consume any more. Thus, the adoption of home broadband connections has dropped off severely.
I predict, though, that our wily friends the pornographers will find a way to stimulate demand. Perhaps they will lobby congress to allow advertisements for pornography on television. Perhaps they will hire a celebrity spokesperson, such as Bob Doll or Heidi Wall. Regardless, once the pornographers get back on their feet, broadband demand will ignite once more.
Well, perhaps I don't love the ads themselves, but I enjoy access to the free content that banner ads pay for.
A lot of Slashdot users are no doubt used not having to pay for software and perhaps not even music. The first can be acquired both easily and legally for free, the second perhaps only easily. It comes as no surprise then, that they would expect free content from over the Internet.
This is a wonderful model for the consumer, obviously, but it's important to realize that someone has to create that content. Further, it's going to take that person valuable time to do so. It is not at all unreasonable that someone should expect to get paid for their effort.
Banner ads round out this situation nicely. They allow content creators to receive payment for their work, and they allow consumers to enjoy free content. However, some people seem to want to spoil the fun.
Not content to tolerate a few tiny banner ads as an exchange for enjoying the content, they pursue various technological means to block them. This practice is damaging to the fundamental model that many free content providers are based on. In effect, people who block banner ads are biting the hand that feeds them in a most immature and selfish manner.
I don't doubt that users of such software as Junkbuster would be more than happy to steal the content just like they steal their music and software, but their behavior negatively affects those of us who do wish to play by the rules.
Remember, if you have any sense of ethics, blocking banner ads is stealing content.
As a model train enthusiast, I have trouble seeing the point of this sort of system.
Much of the appeal of running one's own model railroad is the tactile reality of your line. It isn't digital, it isn't computerized, it's simple analog circuits controlling simple electric models. The joy of running a model railroad is the feeling of connection to a more real era.
I love my trains and my line's dozens of toggle switches. All day I work with the latest networking technology, and when I play, I'm in the mood to take a step back in time, of sorts.
Maybe others will enjoy ethernet controlled trains, but I certainly won't be upgrading my line any time soon.
I'm reminded of The Mote in God's Eye and the poor little Moties trying to escape their planet on a solar sail powered craft.
Although facinating to consider, it seems that a solar sail would be of limited use for a two way trip. A solar sail powered spacecraft can't tack against the 'wind' like a sail boat on the ocean is able to do. However, I find the lack of harmful byproducts to be an appealing advantage for solar sails.
Sailing was the most environmentally healthy way mankind ever developed to traverse large distances, and it seems appropriate that the same techniques be adapted to space travel. I am disturbed when I hear reports of engineers speculating on the construction of atomic weapon powered space craft, or such. We have already despoiled our own planet so utterly; we should keep space in its pristine purity.
This is precisely the sort of work that scientists and engineers should be engaged in. Rather than just asking what we can do, we should ask what we can do cleanly and well, without causing more of an impact to our environment than necessary.
On the one hand, it seems hardly a matter of debate that if people use more bandwidth, they are going to have to start paying more. It is a well accepted economic principle that a large quantity of a good or service will cost more than a small quantity.
On the other hand, bandwidth is an odd sort of resource. Unlike coal, iron or wheat, it is wholly manmade. While it is correct to point out that the physically devices such as routers and switches are in fact made of natural resources, this is not the limiting factor of their production.
Rather, human ability and inginuity is required for the manufacture of IP networks. To build larger networks, effort must be taken from some other task and applied to its construction.
How does this relate to ISP prices? Quite simply, the opportunity cost of network construction goes down as demand for the service rises. Thus, even though more net bandwidth will be used, the total cost will actually be less than it is now. The tradeoff, though, is that some other good or service will lose manufacturing precedence and increase in price and lose market priority. It is anyone's guess what this good or service may be.
I admit, the CueCat was a piece of crap, but it didn't fail because it was a piece of crap.
No, the CueCat failed because well-meaning and curious individuals tore it, and with it DC's business model, to pieces. I am not saying that the hackers were in the wrong, but aside from any statement of blame, the CueCat is dead.
True, the CueCat doesn't matter. It was fairly stupid anyway. Is this going to be a model, though, for future hardware releases? Will well-meaning hackers destroy business model after business model until nobody bothers to innovate in hardware manufacture?
No, nobody has a right to have a particular business model work, but I don't think that we want to destroy the hardware industry just to appease our own curiousity. Sometimes, self control is needed beyond what is required by the law. Do the right thing, not because the law forces you, but for yourself.
Despite the general lackadaisical attitude of your average Joe on the street, the discovery of extra-terrestrial life - if proven - will be the most significant scientific discovery ever.
Mankind has speculated for centuries that earth could not be the sole cradle of life, and proof of this intuition will result in a massive shift in how mankind relates to the cosmos. Instead of regarding ourselves as its sole intelligent organisms, we will be forced to reevaluate our role in the universe.
However, it will be a grave and perilous time for our species, and one made graver still by philosophies that now or subscribed to by our technological elite. Surely we must display unity and purpose as we go to meet or destiny, yet so many among us cling to a model that encourages - nay, demands - fractured individuality.
Yes, I'm talking about open source software. Software represents the pinnacle of man's achievement up to this point. In terms of sheer complexity and operability, it is unparalleled in our history. Yet, we are expected to trust its development to the whims of individuals.
This is not right. May this monumentous discovery of alien life drive us closer together, and force us to reevaluate the destructive and futile practices that open source demands.
Easily and cheaply manufactured super-conductors are the mad scientist's wet dream.
Although often not considered in open source circles, technology has the potential to be incredibly dangerous and should not always be freely shared. Metallic super-conductors in particular can be used to create very lethal devices.
Liquid nitrogen and other cooling methods are already so cheap, that with the advent of these metallic super-conductors, mobile nuetron pulse devices become a real possibility. Ceramics always lacked the strength to fabricate a large enough super-conducting matrix, but this is no longer a problem when using metals.
The open source community often does not consider this, but some information needs to be kept hidden, and this is an excellent example of such information. We do not need terrorists irradiating our cities and children with devices that can fit in the back of a moving truck. Not all information wants to be free. We simply cannot afford it.
Of course programmers and engineers desire a social life. While this fact is obvious, it has been overlooked repeatedly by the open source development community. In fact, it is accurate to say that open source requires that a programmer give up his social life.
Programmers are human. They need to eat, and they need shelter. These things are not free. Thus, to pay for them, programmers must work. Unfortunately, the only way to make money programming is to work for a closed source company.
When is the work supposed to be accomplished on the open source projects, then? The assumption is that the programmers will spend their free time hunched in front of a computer, coding away at something for the 'community'.
This is cruel. People need fresh air, and time with their friends. They need time to unwind and relax. Programmers are no code machines; they are people. Too often this gets lost, though, by proponents of open source methodology.
I'm glad that digital music is finally ready to buck the opression that has been mp3.
While Ogg Vorbis may have a slightly sillier name, it's free (as in pizza, beer, speech, and everything else!) Ogg is a small, but important, part of assuring that we never lose the right and ability to do as we please with the content we purchase.
It will be a difficult battle to gain hardware support for portable Ogg Vorbis players, but I companies such as Diamond have already expressed an interest. Suffice to say, I have faith in the community to produce a digital music format that can compete with mp3 on every level.
However, we must avoid depriving artists of their livelihood. Even though the format is free, we must be willing to pay for the content. I will not weep if the record executive becomes a thing of the past, but the artist must be recompensed for his work.
This is a concept we understand all too little in the open source community, and Ogg Vorbis has the very real potential to destroy pop music as we know it. It can only be with careful and grave consideration that we move forward.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell 'em qpt sent you, though, and you'll get the first six months at half off the introductory business-class rate for first-time dedicated leasers, not including set up and take down fees or configuration surcharges and local infrastructure levies.
Think about e-commerce, too.
Well, most of the speech on the Internet seems to be whining. I'm not at all sure that I want whining to be protected. See, it's annoying. Besides whining, the Internet seems to consist mostly of porn, which I don't think is speech, since it doesn't really mean anything. So, I guess they're not protecting porn, even though porn has to be more entertaining than whining. Whatever, though.
As for protecting parodies, I think they have it backwards. I think we need to be protected from the parodies. Parodies on the Internet are really just that bad. If by "protect" them, the EFF locks them away, ne'er again to see the light of day, I suppose I can support that. Anything else, though, and I'm afraid the EFF and I must agree to disagree.
Is that a television show?
What justification is there for intentionally housing possibly dangerous extra-terrestrial life forms? The curiosity of a few academics is surely not reason enough to put the entire human race at potential risk!
After all, no matter how carefully they may store these organisms, there is always the possibility that they may somehow escape. Once the terrestrial biosphere is contaminated with foreign organisms, who can say what the result will be? History is rife with examples of non-native species decimating populations of unprepared organisms.
I am not worried so much about macroscopic life forms as microscopic ones, such as bacteria and viruses. Having evolved for millions of years apart from terrestrial macro-organisms, these creatures could devastate our maladapted immune systems.
Red Had provides you with a service and convenience and you pay for it.
This isn't news. It's how our economy works.
- qpt
Why is it always about destruction? It seems that the only purpose people see for robots is to fight with other robots.
I find this disturbing, because as an area of research, robotics has great promise to actually contribute to the good of the human race. Robots of the potential to effectively accomplish many dangerous and difficult tasks that are today done by poorly paid overworked people.
Robots should be encouraging the formation of a classless society, where everyone has leisure time and a fulfilling creative job. Instead, robots are being developed primarily as a tool of destruction.
The world is already filled with enough violence and devastation. It is disgusting to see every advance warped to that ugly end. Unfortunately, geeks seem to thrive on violence and don't realize the massive potential that is being thrown away.
- qpt
While at first glace, this appears to be a defeat for both Slashdot and freedom, perhaps this cloud has a silver lining.
The fact is, the post that prompted the controversy was illegal. You may argue whether or not it should be illegal, but that is a whole separate debate. Perhaps by standing up for legality and order, Rob Malda and Slashdot can server as a shining example for all of us who frequent the site.
I respect Malda for making a firm decisive decision regarding this, and I respect him all the more so for choosing to follow the law. I think that the value of law is often lost on people who post to Slashdot and it is good to see the site stand up for the principles that civilization is founded on.
One can only hope that this one act of courage will filter down throughout all of Slashdot and that we will collectively reconsider the law-breaking that we engage in every day. Perhaps free music and movies are not worth the price we pay by becoming criminals. Perhaps the open source movement is unjustified in stealing profits from commercial enterprises.
I do not pretend to have the answers, but I hope that this event will serve as a catalyst for a universal reconsideration of legality and morality by all that frequent Slashdot.
- qpt
Yes, the Internet is in a dire state of vulnerability, and nerd parroting "just update BIND" isn't going to help a thing.
DDoS attacks against major web sites, stolen credit cards, hijacked identities - tech news reads like devil's brew of disaster. People need to wake up and face the hard truth.
The private sector has failed.
It was supposed to be a grand experiment in freedom, as academia and the business world allied apart from government control. It was supposed to be an electronic utopia. Instead, it a war zone rife with terrorism.
The governments of the world need to take the Internet back, at least until it can be secured. Desperate times demand desperate measures, and if the Internet doesn't give up freedom for a little while, it will be utterly destroyed.
- qpt
Despite thousands of geeks clamoring about how obvious the idea was, nobody has been able to produce a usage of one-click shopping prior to Amazon's patent? This strikes me as interesting, to say the least.
What a lot of people appear to forget is that everything looks obvious in hindsight. Hell, even the concepts of advanced physics are pretty straightforward if you don't have to think of them yourself.
Geeks tend to constantly overestimate their own ability in what amounts to severe egotism. They assume that if someone else could create something, then surely it wouldn't been no trouble to them.
This is absurd, and most of the time they can't provide an account of why they didn't create it! Face the facts. One-click shopping is a highly useful but non-obvious idea, and Amazon deserves to reap the sole rewards of the hard work put into developing it.
- qpt
Some kids posted an obnoxious web page and got into a little trouble. What's the concern?
Like it or not, words and actions have consequences. If you insist on saying stupid things, you might have to pay for it. This is just life.
Geeks like to hide behind the First Amendment, thinking that it gives them the right to say whatever they please without repercussions. This is absurd. Just as you have the right to speak, others have the right to react to your speech.
If you don't want negative reactions, couch your ideas in more pleasant language. This isn't rocket science, folks.
- qpt
Many of you devoted time and effort to contributing to the CDDB database. It hurts to see your work used in a way you didn't want.
Yet, you take the work of musicians and distribute and use it against their expressed wished. How is this any different? You both put time and energy into creating something intangible, and you both were denied its control.
You weren't robbed of the information itself, after all. If you wanted to keep a copy of the information that you submitted to CDDB, it would've been a trivial matter to make a backup. No, you were robbed of nothing.
If you use Napster to download copyrighted material and feel ripped off by the CDDB, then you are an utterly despicable hypocrite.
- qpt
A system such as this has a massive potential for abuse. Is there any guarantee that the video won't fall into the hands of the wrong people?
The police (particularly the British police) are notoriously corrupt. Even though a surveillance system may have expressed goals of reducing crime does not mean it couldn't be adapted to more personal ends.
It would be a great boon to organized crime and stalkers to have information such as will be provided by these cameras. How much (or little) will this information cost them?
- qpt
Tell me something. If we are in fact a civilized society, why are we so hell-bent on abandoning our children to the adult world as soon as possible? We try children in adult courts, we insist on exposing them to adult content - where does it end?
Mere animals can manage to care for their children until they are ready to be adults. Why can't we? We blindly focus on one tiny aspect of life - the first amendment - and sacrifice everything else.
Why must children in public libraries be able to view every piece of filth availible? They will be adults soon enough; then they will be able to make adult choices. Until then, children need to be protected, though, not used as pawns in a libertarian game.
- qpt
Software and business methods represent the blood, sweat, and toil of hard-working individuals just as designs (which are patentable) do.
This is a terribly unfair decision, and one that is potentially damaging for businesses. In today's cut-throat economy, businesses need every competitive advantage they can muster. If any two-bit competitor is able to rob a company of all its hard work and R&D monies, companies that innovate will be forced out of business.
Unless software and business method patents are upheld, the future is filled with Microsofts. They operate by stealing the technology of other companies and then repackaging it as their own. Software and business method patents would stop this, and give the profits to the rightful creators.
I hope that the UK reconsiders this course of action.
- qpt
ICMP packets already account for an absurdly large amount of total Internet trafic. I can't be bothered to find a link, but I believe it was between 15-17%.
Is it really a wise use of limited bandwidth resources to develope new network clogging toys for 'system administrators' to play with? What a lot of geeks tend to forget is that real people are trying to accomplish real work over the Internet. It's no longer just their personal playground.
The entire economy has been transformed to rely on networking and information technology. Bandwidth is a critical resource that mustn't be wasted on 'cool' new toys.
Even worse, systems like Traceloop are always poorly thought out and rife with possible exploits. The last thing we need is yet another platform for hackers to launch malicious attacks on the public and private sector's key information systems.
Basically, if it's not business critical, it doesn't belong on the Internet anymore.
- qpt
The broadband 'explosion' is crawling to a halt, and many providers are wondering why. It's quite simple, really - everyone has as much pornography as they want.
Pornography has always been the driving force behind Internet innovation, after all. It was for pornography that ever faster connections were demanded, and it was for pornography that the basics of online financial transactions were fleshed out.
However, there's simply a limit to the demand for pornography. To put it bluntly, everyone who uses the stuff is beating themselves sore, and can't possibly consume any more. Thus, the adoption of home broadband connections has dropped off severely.
I predict, though, that our wily friends the pornographers will find a way to stimulate demand. Perhaps they will lobby congress to allow advertisements for pornography on television. Perhaps they will hire a celebrity spokesperson, such as Bob Doll or Heidi Wall. Regardless, once the pornographers get back on their feet, broadband demand will ignite once more.
- qpt
Well, perhaps I don't love the ads themselves, but I enjoy access to the free content that banner ads pay for.
A lot of Slashdot users are no doubt used not having to pay for software and perhaps not even music. The first can be acquired both easily and legally for free, the second perhaps only easily. It comes as no surprise then, that they would expect free content from over the Internet.
This is a wonderful model for the consumer, obviously, but it's important to realize that someone has to create that content. Further, it's going to take that person valuable time to do so. It is not at all unreasonable that someone should expect to get paid for their effort.
Banner ads round out this situation nicely. They allow content creators to receive payment for their work, and they allow consumers to enjoy free content. However, some people seem to want to spoil the fun.
Not content to tolerate a few tiny banner ads as an exchange for enjoying the content, they pursue various technological means to block them. This practice is damaging to the fundamental model that many free content providers are based on. In effect, people who block banner ads are biting the hand that feeds them in a most immature and selfish manner.
I don't doubt that users of such software as Junkbuster would be more than happy to steal the content just like they steal their music and software, but their behavior negatively affects those of us who do wish to play by the rules.
Remember, if you have any sense of ethics, blocking banner ads is stealing content.
- qpt
As a model train enthusiast, I have trouble seeing the point of this sort of system.
Much of the appeal of running one's own model railroad is the tactile reality of your line. It isn't digital, it isn't computerized, it's simple analog circuits controlling simple electric models. The joy of running a model railroad is the feeling of connection to a more real era.
I love my trains and my line's dozens of toggle switches. All day I work with the latest networking technology, and when I play, I'm in the mood to take a step back in time, of sorts.
Maybe others will enjoy ethernet controlled trains, but I certainly won't be upgrading my line any time soon.
- qpt
I'm reminded of The Mote in God's Eye and the poor little Moties trying to escape their planet on a solar sail powered craft.
Although facinating to consider, it seems that a solar sail would be of limited use for a two way trip. A solar sail powered spacecraft can't tack against the 'wind' like a sail boat on the ocean is able to do. However, I find the lack of harmful byproducts to be an appealing advantage for solar sails.
Sailing was the most environmentally healthy way mankind ever developed to traverse large distances, and it seems appropriate that the same techniques be adapted to space travel. I am disturbed when I hear reports of engineers speculating on the construction of atomic weapon powered space craft, or such. We have already despoiled our own planet so utterly; we should keep space in its pristine purity.
This is precisely the sort of work that scientists and engineers should be engaged in. Rather than just asking what we can do, we should ask what we can do cleanly and well, without causing more of an impact to our environment than necessary.
- qpt
On the one hand, it seems hardly a matter of debate that if people use more bandwidth, they are going to have to start paying more. It is a well accepted economic principle that a large quantity of a good or service will cost more than a small quantity.
:)
On the other hand, bandwidth is an odd sort of resource. Unlike coal, iron or wheat, it is wholly manmade. While it is correct to point out that the physically devices such as routers and switches are in fact made of natural resources, this is not the limiting factor of their production.
Rather, human ability and inginuity is required for the manufacture of IP networks. To build larger networks, effort must be taken from some other task and applied to its construction.
How does this relate to ISP prices? Quite simply, the opportunity cost of network construction goes down as demand for the service rises. Thus, even though more net bandwidth will be used, the total cost will actually be less than it is now. The tradeoff, though, is that some other good or service will lose manufacturing precedence and increase in price and lose market priority. It is anyone's guess what this good or service may be.
I suppose we could always hope it is Microsoft
- qpt
I admit, the CueCat was a piece of crap, but it didn't fail because it was a piece of crap.
No, the CueCat failed because well-meaning and curious individuals tore it, and with it DC's business model, to pieces. I am not saying that the hackers were in the wrong, but aside from any statement of blame, the CueCat is dead.
True, the CueCat doesn't matter. It was fairly stupid anyway. Is this going to be a model, though, for future hardware releases? Will well-meaning hackers destroy business model after business model until nobody bothers to innovate in hardware manufacture?
No, nobody has a right to have a particular business model work, but I don't think that we want to destroy the hardware industry just to appease our own curiousity. Sometimes, self control is needed beyond what is required by the law. Do the right thing, not because the law forces you, but for yourself.
- qpt
Despite the general lackadaisical attitude of your average Joe on the street, the discovery of extra-terrestrial life - if proven - will be the most significant scientific discovery ever.
Mankind has speculated for centuries that earth could not be the sole cradle of life, and proof of this intuition will result in a massive shift in how mankind relates to the cosmos. Instead of regarding ourselves as its sole intelligent organisms, we will be forced to reevaluate our role in the universe.
However, it will be a grave and perilous time for our species, and one made graver still by philosophies that now or subscribed to by our technological elite. Surely we must display unity and purpose as we go to meet or destiny, yet so many among us cling to a model that encourages - nay, demands - fractured individuality.
Yes, I'm talking about open source software. Software represents the pinnacle of man's achievement up to this point. In terms of sheer complexity and operability, it is unparalleled in our history. Yet, we are expected to trust its development to the whims of individuals.
This is not right. May this monumentous discovery of alien life drive us closer together, and force us to reevaluate the destructive and futile practices that open source demands.
- qpt
Easily and cheaply manufactured super-conductors are the mad scientist's wet dream.
Although often not considered in open source circles, technology has the potential to be incredibly dangerous and should not always be freely shared. Metallic super-conductors in particular can be used to create very lethal devices.
Liquid nitrogen and other cooling methods are already so cheap, that with the advent of these metallic super-conductors, mobile nuetron pulse devices become a real possibility. Ceramics always lacked the strength to fabricate a large enough super-conducting matrix, but this is no longer a problem when using metals.
The open source community often does not consider this, but some information needs to be kept hidden, and this is an excellent example of such information. We do not need terrorists irradiating our cities and children with devices that can fit in the back of a moving truck. Not all information wants to be free. We simply cannot afford it.
- qpt
Of course programmers and engineers desire a social life. While this fact is obvious, it has been overlooked repeatedly by the open source development community. In fact, it is accurate to say that open source requires that a programmer give up his social life.
Programmers are human. They need to eat, and they need shelter. These things are not free. Thus, to pay for them, programmers must work. Unfortunately, the only way to make money programming is to work for a closed source company.
When is the work supposed to be accomplished on the open source projects, then? The assumption is that the programmers will spend their free time hunched in front of a computer, coding away at something for the 'community'.
This is cruel. People need fresh air, and time with their friends. They need time to unwind and relax. Programmers are no code machines; they are people. Too often this gets lost, though, by proponents of open source methodology.
- qpt
I'm glad that digital music is finally ready to buck the opression that has been mp3.
While Ogg Vorbis may have a slightly sillier name, it's free (as in pizza, beer, speech, and everything else!) Ogg is a small, but important, part of assuring that we never lose the right and ability to do as we please with the content we purchase.
It will be a difficult battle to gain hardware support for portable Ogg Vorbis players, but I companies such as Diamond have already expressed an interest. Suffice to say, I have faith in the community to produce a digital music format that can compete with mp3 on every level.
However, we must avoid depriving artists of their livelihood. Even though the format is free, we must be willing to pay for the content. I will not weep if the record executive becomes a thing of the past, but the artist must be recompensed for his work.
This is a concept we understand all too little in the open source community, and Ogg Vorbis has the very real potential to destroy pop music as we know it. It can only be with careful and grave consideration that we move forward.
- qpt