I'm growing weary of hearing mass media and various political spokespersons blathering about videogames or violence in movies or peer pressure or whatever turning kids to violence, when the only ones to blame are the parents.
Columbine and countless other school shootings if these kids parents would take a bit of responsibility and actually be parents to their children.
Today's parents are content to ship their children off to so called "daycare centers" which are nothing more than holding pens to get rid of kids while the parents are off selfishly furthering their careers. We're treating our children like cattle while we go about climbing the corporate ladder so we can afford that shiny new Beamer. Is that really more important than the wellbeing of our nation's future.
Another thing that bothers me is the lack of traditional Christian morals that are being instilled in today's youth. You never hear about a Reverand's son or a child of a devoutly religious family shooting up a school. It seems like today's family's would rather watch WWF Smackdown than enrich themselves with the wholesome teachings of Jesus Christ.
Neither peer pressure, video games, or violent movies will have any negative affect on children if they are taught how to properly deal with such situations. Children need to be taught the difference between fantasy and reality.
Can't say that I agree. It saddens my heart to see these people got off scotch free. Of course, we're talking about a government that advocates the murder of thousands of unborn children, so making it okay to kill a full-grown adult couldn't have been THAT far off.
It disgusts me when slutty hellbound teenagers would rather murder their own children than spend $12 for a box of fucking condoms. Hell, most colleges and free clinics will give away condoms FOR FREE. But then again, that would be too much effort, so they'd rather wait until they get pregnant and then break out the ol' rusty coathanger and kill their offspring. And we call ourselves a civilised nation, what a fucking joke.
What's even more ironic is that these people who claim to be against the murder of unborn children (who are still living, breathing people, BTW) somehow think it's okay, nay justified, to kill full grown adults. What a sick twisted society we live in.
I'm off to start a website advocating the murder of those who ran the anti-abortion website.
Frankness or sincerity of expression; openness.
Freedom from prejudice; impartiality.
[Middle English from Old French from Latin from candre, to shine; see kand- in Indo-European Roots.] "
Now, Microsoft is not exactly known for being open or forthcoming when it comes to their products and business practices, and I think it's quite respectable for Mr. Miller to agree to do the interview in the first place. Especially considering the large number of blind anti-MS bigots and flame warriors that read Slashdot. Regardless of his responses, the fact that he's even speaking to "the enemy" is a positive step.
First of all, I would like to commend you for your candor in answering all of our questions. Regardless of our opinions of Microsoft as a company, your willingness to respond to "the enemy" in such an open and inviting manner deserves recognition.
And now my question:
Mr. Miller, a quick trip to Netcraft's site shows that Microsoft's IIS is struggling for marketshare among web servers. Considering that corporations and businesses are a large source of Microsoft's revenue, I was wondering what Microsoft has in store in the future to help entice more business customers into using Microsoft's own products. I must admit that I'm impressed with Win2K's stability and uptime, but what else does Microsoft have in store for it's users that would justify spending several thousand dollars on a Microsoft based infrastructure as opposed to a quite capable free alternative?
Try using CloneCD to burn the disc. It's designed to bypass copy protection in CD-ROM discs, and it may also work for these audio discs. It's the only thing I've found that can sucessfully copy The Sims without any problems.
The evaluation version is limited to burning at 2x, but I find it hard to argue any moral dillema against pirating a full version of software that is designed solely for the purpose of piracy.
Dude, if you're going to insist on sailing on Lake Michigan, the LAST thing you should be worrying about is your e-mail. You should be focused on trying to avoid all the industrial waste, fecal matter, and used hypodermic needles floating all around you.
I'm glad to see the Crusoe finally getting used in some devices. It's been available for months now, and this is the first major product I've seen it in. A web tablet or other sub-laptop device will work just perfectly with the Crusoe processor.
The Crusoe isn't nearly powerful enough to suffice for most notebook users, as users are looking for a device that can handle professional applications like MS Office and StarOffice, and most users will also be playing limited games. The Crusoe simply is not powerful enough to meet the processing demands of the latest games and business software, but it should be ideally suited to a web tablet device, that will be used primarailly for web surfing and light text editing.
Cheers to Microsoft for pioneering the Tablet PC, and choosing Transmeta to power the device.
Wow, a TV company selling anonymous statistics to advertisers, this is unheard of! I demand my money back.
But seriously, this is nothing out of the ordinary. Television service providers, mainly networks and cable companies, have been selling viewing habits to advertisers since the television was invented. That's why you see commercials for sugary breakfast cereal during Saturday morning cartoons instead of commercials for 1-800 porn numbers.
Anonymous statistical data is in no way an invasion of anyone's privacy, it just helps to ensure that we see ads that are targetted to our interests.
"LEON was initially developed by Jiri Gaisler while working for ESA, and Gaisler Research is now working under ESA contract to maintain and further enhance the model."
The processor was developed under open-source methods by an independant company for the ESA.
I'm quite aware of the problems facing traditional closed-source processors. I'm not trying to imply that the Celeron or Athlon would provide a suitable alternative either. I remember Intel's problems with the Pentium floating point bug, and problems compiling the Linux kernel on Intel's ill-fated PIII 1.13 Ghz. No, modern PC processors would not make a reliable shuttle processor.
If I recall, the US space shuttle runs on something like a dozen underclocked i286's, each processor with something like 5 way redundancy. Each processor in a set of five will perform the same calculations. The solution presented by the majority of processors is deemed to be failsafe. The 80286 was chosen because it is simplistic, and it's reliability has been proven through years and years of experience in the field. In addition, Intel has spent millions on development and testing of this processor to ensure it is 100% reliable.
I have a few minor reservations about using an open source developed processor for missions in space. Open source is great, and produces some of the most well written, secure code that is available, anywhere, but I'm not sure we should be trusting this technology to aide in piloting a space vehicle. A space flight is a dangerous and EXTREMELY complicated process, and if a single component fails, or produces an error, the results can be catastrophic.
NASA, in the USia, spends literally millions of dollars designing the space shuttle's computing system from the ground up. Their in-house coders pour over each microchip and line of code hundereds of times looking for even the smallest bug. This superior attention to detail is not possible using the limited resources of the open-source method. It is also why NASA can succeed in safe, reliable space flight time, and time again, while other space programs are struggling. Open source has it's advantages, but when 100% reliability is necessary, it may not be the best option.
Not only that, but I would imagine there are very few sites that could even provide 100 mbps of upstream feed to fill out that fat pipe. I've found that even with my 1.5 mbps cable connection, the slowest point in the connection is more often than not the host I am trying to connect to. The Internet's backbone is simply not designed for most users to have a 100mbps pipeline, and cannot provide sufficient bandwidth to support such a connection. It would be frivolous to attempt such a thing.
Thank you so much for the brutal accusations Mr. mattdm. It's always nice to have random strangers flame me for no good reason.
For future references, I'll have you know that I can read approximately 600 words/minute with a reasonable rate of accuracy, and I found the article to be a bit shallow and poorly researched. (Similar to your post, I might add)
While it may be true that science is becoming computer dependant, nearly every line of work today is becoming increasingly dependent on modern technology, whether it be the personal computer improving processing time, the automobile enabling easier commutes, or the microwave oven allowing workers to take shorter lunch breaks. I felt it was a bit forward and presumptuous of the NYTimes author to assume that science is somehow "dependent" upon computing power when some of the greatest scientific advances and discoveries in recorded history have come at a time when devices as primitive and rudimentary as the abacus were not in use.
I'd like to see you tell that to Gallileo or Newton or any of the hundreds of brilliant scientists who were around before computers.
The Aztecs had an advanced number system, and developed many of the algabraic formulas we use today. They were also amazing astronomers who made many wonderous discoveries about the heavens. All without the help of a computer.
"Who should decide what is illegal all over the world? The country with the most guns? The one with the smartest people? The one with the most Internet users? The global mayority? The world ain't exactly a democracy, now."
That's exactly the point of the treaty. It was designed to implement a set of standards to determine what is and is not appropriate. While all governments have differing views regarding legality of various content, the treaty is a global initiative to come to a common agreement and comprimise on a set of universally recognized standards.
"Well, for starters, pornography is still legal on the U.S., as it is on many other countries."
True, some pornography is legal in the us, and other countries, but certain content is almost universally recognized as being obscene. For instance, some Muslim countries would consider a photo of a woman showing her bare face or ankles to be pornography, while some asian countries consider prepubescent girls engaged in sex acts to be allowable. This is precisely why we need to define the boundaries of what can and cannot be displayed on the internet.
"i belive as a first step route ALL your messages through me"
I will decline your offer for the following reasons. I don't know you, and I'm a bit leery about revealing personal information to strangers. OTOH, I feel quite confident that the government I know and love can be entrusted with my personal information. In fact, they probably already have quite a bit of personal information for me. This does not disturb me in the least because I have nothing to hide.
Have you ever seen a movie where the bad guys are constanly looking behind their backs to make sure the police aren't coming after them. Perhaps you're so paranoid because you have something to hide. Meanwhile, those of us who are law abiting upstanding citizens applaud the government for taking the initiative to clean up the Internet.
I think the web cams in all rooms analogy is a bit extreme, but I wouldn't mind having a government operative cruising chat rooms or IRC channels in search of illegal activity. Whether you like it or not, the Internet is a public forum. Your messages are getting broadcast across public lines to the outside world, and anything that you do not want to be released out in public, you probably shouldn't be saying on the Internet. It would be like smoking a joint outside of a police station.
I have two children, ages 5 and 9, and I'd love for them to be able to experience the wealth of knowledge that is available on the Internet, but as it stands, I am hesitent to allow them access because of all the filth and perversion that is present out there.
I think it's a Good Thing (tm) that the USia is trying to organize a crime fighting force with precedence over many nations. One of the major problems we have with controlling crime on the Internet is the fact that what may be illegal in one country is not illegal in another, and an organization that is willing to set international standards for what is and is not against the law will do great justice to the USia, as well as many other nations who sign the treaty.
The only part of the article that concerns me is this statement:
"The primary architect is the United States Department of Justice which is using a foreign forum to create an international law-enforcement regime that favors the interests of the feds over those of ordinary citizens and businesses."
I don't understand how this couldn't benefit citizens and businesses. It seems to me that any law inforcement group that focuses on bring justice and order to the Internet can only be beneficial to ordinary citizens and businesses. Wouldn't you like to see a crackdown on all the pornography, child molesters and fraud that exists on the internet. Unless you're a peddler of fraudulent goods or services, or a pornographer, this could only be helpful to most people.
Slashdot Mirror
Columbine and countless other school shootings if these kids parents would take a bit of responsibility and actually be parents to their children.
Today's parents are content to ship their children off to so called "daycare centers" which are nothing more than holding pens to get rid of kids while the parents are off selfishly furthering their careers. We're treating our children like cattle while we go about climbing the corporate ladder so we can afford that shiny new Beamer. Is that really more important than the wellbeing of our nation's future.
Another thing that bothers me is the lack of traditional Christian morals that are being instilled in today's youth. You never hear about a Reverand's son or a child of a devoutly religious family shooting up a school. It seems like today's family's would rather watch WWF Smackdown than enrich themselves with the wholesome teachings of Jesus Christ.
Neither peer pressure, video games, or violent movies will have any negative affect on children if they are taught how to properly deal with such situations. Children need to be taught the difference between fantasy and reality.
We're just providing a free "durability test" for the hit counter.
It disgusts me when slutty hellbound teenagers would rather murder their own children than spend $12 for a box of fucking condoms. Hell, most colleges and free clinics will give away condoms FOR FREE. But then again, that would be too much effort, so they'd rather wait until they get pregnant and then break out the ol' rusty coathanger and kill their offspring. And we call ourselves a civilised nation, what a fucking joke.
What's even more ironic is that these people who claim to be against the murder of unborn children (who are still living, breathing people, BTW) somehow think it's okay, nay justified, to kill full grown adults. What a sick twisted society we live in.
I'm off to start a website advocating the murder of those who ran the anti-abortion website.
From Dictionary.com:
"candor (kndr) n.
Frankness or sincerity of expression; openness. Freedom from prejudice; impartiality.
[Middle English from Old French from Latin from candre, to shine; see kand- in Indo-European Roots.] "
Now, Microsoft is not exactly known for being open or forthcoming when it comes to their products and business practices, and I think it's quite respectable for Mr. Miller to agree to do the interview in the first place. Especially considering the large number of blind anti-MS bigots and flame warriors that read Slashdot. Regardless of his responses, the fact that he's even speaking to "the enemy" is a positive step.
Sex and *nix geeks are mutually exclusive. Sorry, try again.
Isn't your analogy backwards?
And now my question:
Mr. Miller, a quick trip to Netcraft's site shows that Microsoft's IIS is struggling for marketshare among web servers. Considering that corporations and businesses are a large source of Microsoft's revenue, I was wondering what Microsoft has in store in the future to help entice more business customers into using Microsoft's own products. I must admit that I'm impressed with Win2K's stability and uptime, but what else does Microsoft have in store for it's users that would justify spending several thousand dollars on a Microsoft based infrastructure as opposed to a quite capable free alternative?
The evaluation version is limited to burning at 2x, but I find it hard to argue any moral dillema against pirating a full version of software that is designed solely for the purpose of piracy.
Dude, if you're going to insist on sailing on Lake Michigan, the LAST thing you should be worrying about is your e-mail. You should be focused on trying to avoid all the industrial waste, fecal matter, and used hypodermic needles floating all around you.
Apologies to CowboyNeal for that one.
Of course you are aware that the Sony PCG-C1VN, which was the first, IIRC, Crusoe product, comes with Windows Me pre-installed.
I'm glad to see the Crusoe finally getting used in some devices. It's been available for months now, and this is the first major product I've seen it in. A web tablet or other sub-laptop device will work just perfectly with the Crusoe processor.
The Crusoe isn't nearly powerful enough to suffice for most notebook users, as users are looking for a device that can handle professional applications like MS Office and StarOffice, and most users will also be playing limited games. The Crusoe simply is not powerful enough to meet the processing demands of the latest games and business software, but it should be ideally suited to a web tablet device, that will be used primarailly for web surfing and light text editing.
Cheers to Microsoft for pioneering the Tablet PC, and choosing Transmeta to power the device.
But seriously, this is nothing out of the ordinary. Television service providers, mainly networks and cable companies, have been selling viewing habits to advertisers since the television was invented. That's why you see commercials for sugary breakfast cereal during Saturday morning cartoons instead of commercials for 1-800 porn numbers.
Anonymous statistical data is in no way an invasion of anyone's privacy, it just helps to ensure that we see ads that are targetted to our interests.
A direct quote from the article:
"LEON was initially developed by Jiri Gaisler while working for ESA, and Gaisler Research is now working under ESA contract to maintain and further enhance the model."
The processor was developed under open-source methods by an independant company for the ESA.
If I recall, the US space shuttle runs on something like a dozen underclocked i286's, each processor with something like 5 way redundancy. Each processor in a set of five will perform the same calculations. The solution presented by the majority of processors is deemed to be failsafe. The 80286 was chosen because it is simplistic, and it's reliability has been proven through years and years of experience in the field. In addition, Intel has spent millions on development and testing of this processor to ensure it is 100% reliable.
NASA, in the USia, spends literally millions of dollars designing the space shuttle's computing system from the ground up. Their in-house coders pour over each microchip and line of code hundereds of times looking for even the smallest bug. This superior attention to detail is not possible using the limited resources of the open-source method. It is also why NASA can succeed in safe, reliable space flight time, and time again, while other space programs are struggling. Open source has it's advantages, but when 100% reliability is necessary, it may not be the best option.
That pinball game that comes with Win2K is kind of cool, though.
Karaoke is HUGE in Japan. You haven't lived until you've seen a bunch of drunken Japanese businessmen trying to sing along with pop hits of the 80's.
Not only that, but I would imagine there are very few sites that could even provide 100 mbps of upstream feed to fill out that fat pipe. I've found that even with my 1.5 mbps cable connection, the slowest point in the connection is more often than not the host I am trying to connect to. The Internet's backbone is simply not designed for most users to have a 100mbps pipeline, and cannot provide sufficient bandwidth to support such a connection. It would be frivolous to attempt such a thing.
For future references, I'll have you know that I can read approximately 600 words/minute with a reasonable rate of accuracy, and I found the article to be a bit shallow and poorly researched. (Similar to your post, I might add)
While it may be true that science is becoming computer dependant, nearly every line of work today is becoming increasingly dependent on modern technology, whether it be the personal computer improving processing time, the automobile enabling easier commutes, or the microwave oven allowing workers to take shorter lunch breaks. I felt it was a bit forward and presumptuous of the NYTimes author to assume that science is somehow "dependent" upon computing power when some of the greatest scientific advances and discoveries in recorded history have come at a time when devices as primitive and rudimentary as the abacus were not in use.
The Aztecs had an advanced number system, and developed many of the algabraic formulas we use today. They were also amazing astronomers who made many wonderous discoveries about the heavens. All without the help of a computer.
That's exactly the point of the treaty. It was designed to implement a set of standards to determine what is and is not appropriate. While all governments have differing views regarding legality of various content, the treaty is a global initiative to come to a common agreement and comprimise on a set of universally recognized standards.
"Well, for starters, pornography is still legal on the U.S., as it is on many other countries."
True, some pornography is legal in the us, and other countries, but certain content is almost universally recognized as being obscene. For instance, some Muslim countries would consider a photo of a woman showing her bare face or ankles to be pornography, while some asian countries consider prepubescent girls engaged in sex acts to be allowable. This is precisely why we need to define the boundaries of what can and cannot be displayed on the internet.
I will decline your offer for the following reasons. I don't know you, and I'm a bit leery about revealing personal information to strangers. OTOH, I feel quite confident that the government I know and love can be entrusted with my personal information. In fact, they probably already have quite a bit of personal information for me. This does not disturb me in the least because I have nothing to hide.
Have you ever seen a movie where the bad guys are constanly looking behind their backs to make sure the police aren't coming after them. Perhaps you're so paranoid because you have something to hide. Meanwhile, those of us who are law abiting upstanding citizens applaud the government for taking the initiative to clean up the Internet.
I think the web cams in all rooms analogy is a bit extreme, but I wouldn't mind having a government operative cruising chat rooms or IRC channels in search of illegal activity. Whether you like it or not, the Internet is a public forum. Your messages are getting broadcast across public lines to the outside world, and anything that you do not want to be released out in public, you probably shouldn't be saying on the Internet. It would be like smoking a joint outside of a police station.
I have two children, ages 5 and 9, and I'd love for them to be able to experience the wealth of knowledge that is available on the Internet, but as it stands, I am hesitent to allow them access because of all the filth and perversion that is present out there.
The only part of the article that concerns me is this statement:
"The primary architect is the United States Department of Justice which is using a foreign forum to create an international law-enforcement regime that favors the interests of the feds over those of ordinary citizens and businesses."
I don't understand how this couldn't benefit citizens and businesses. It seems to me that any law inforcement group that focuses on bring justice and order to the Internet can only be beneficial to ordinary citizens and businesses. Wouldn't you like to see a crackdown on all the pornography, child molesters and fraud that exists on the internet. Unless you're a peddler of fraudulent goods or services, or a pornographer, this could only be helpful to most people.
But then again...geeks do like their porn, so it just might work.