First the "separation of church and state" is debatable. Secondly, it because the "home Country of the Mormon religion" because they settled the area. In fact they gave up a lot of territory in order to be granted statehood. So you got your chicken and egg backwards.
Actually there are a lot of community libraries that are not funded by the state. I can't pull up numbers but the two cities I've lived in/near (St. George, UT and Logan, UT) didn't have state funded libraries (for at least part of their history.)
Any "sex-related" web site? What on earth does that mean?
He should have said adult site. Pretty much every community and state in the nation already has laws regarding access of certain materials by minors. Just extend those to the net. Now I wonder what kind of technological advance would be necessary to carry it out since every community has it's own laws.
But my guess is that a tap on the shoulder doesn't count as "a policy to restrict access by minors to Internet" in the eyes of the Utah Legislature....
Actually, if the law isn't written specifically enough then it's out of the legislature's hands once they've voted on it. It would be up to the courts (and the Utah AG is a Democrat, non-Mormon, and a Woman! Woo!)
Looks like you've found the solution to your dilema. But you'll also find that there are community standards that are in conflict with your own interests no matter where you go. Assuming you go to a place where you would want to live.
This isn't necessarily filtering. I think a lot of people are jumping to the incorrect conclusion. It's about a policy. Perfectly reasonable. It's even reasonable if filtering is decided as the policy.
Telling your daughter that it's a "thing" is entirely dependant on how mature and grown she is. Many children do not have the cognitive abilities to understand adult concepts. Particuarily concepts about the future good, etc.
This isn't about filtering the internet. Nor is it censoring the internet. It's about not giving money to public libraries that won't filter internet access points. You still have all the access you want, the state just isn't going to contribute money.
Yes. Librarians are typically very free speech oriented. Plus the local ACLU chapter is certain to get involved (and she's not Mormon for those of you who are conspiracy theorists.)
For fear of being -1; Redundant-ed, you aren't being censored. Just the state doesn't want to pay for your viewing. Just like they don't pay for my HBO, Showtime or Cinemax.
Of course I do realize the technological limitations of filtering, which is why I am against it in general. I also know the network guys and they are very strongly against it. But this isn't a filter on UEN, so it's somewhat moot.
Just to get things out in the air up front, let me say that I am one of the consultants in the labs that the previous poster mentioned. It's a perfectly legit policy. If you have a reason to be looking at objectionable material (ie. human sexuality, art, poly-sci) you are expected to be discreet. There are obviously machines in corners and against walls where you can turn a monitor if you must view that stuff. The lab policy doesn't directly address such material. It's actually covered under the student code.
Viewing porn just for the hell of it? Well you are certainly allowed to do so in Utah, I can attest to that. The state, church, etc. will not stop you from doing so. What they will do is not pay for you to do it, no more than they would pay for a WW II revisionist to put up their propaganda. Or pay for Klan members to march through campus. You have the right to say what you want, but you don't have the right to expect me to provide you the pulpit or to sit and listen.
Go to the main page. Down the right side you'll see a few boxes with headers of Features, Science, Slashdot Poll, Older Stuff, and finally Book Reviews. At the bottom of the book reviews box there is a link to the Book Reviews section. Go there and then you will see the very text that I included in my post. Boo.
With this latest in a string of stories about Amazon and their evil "1-click patent". Not to mention the numerous stories about the evils of software patents, why do we still find this in the book reviews section:
The books here are brought to us in Partnership with Amazon.com.
If you follow the links around here, and eventually buy a book, we get a percentage of the cost!
Why doesn't Rob and friends put their money where their mouth is? Literally.
I'd second you, but I'm not convinced that this guy isn't an honest-to-goodness professional troll. Literally. If I was running a site like slashdot, I'd make damned sure that there was some kind of argument/flamewar going on all the time. No offense guys.
On a side note, I wonder about the "submitted" stories sometimes. Often you see that So-an-So writes "blah blah blah" where blah blah blah has a consistently similar style, often correlated to the individual who stuck the story up on slashdot. But maybe it's just me.
To step across the line for a moment: I think point was not if you have a failure, it's if you have 8-way independant, redundancy that you still have availability even if your boxes have individual chances of falling over at a given rate. So it's not a matter of math, it's a matter of knowing what was meant in the original post.:)
Errr, what time frame are you talking about? No sane person I know would tell you that mainframes are the be-all and end-all of computing. No computer is perfectly suited for all tasks. When was the last time you saw a tape robot hanging off a PC that was acting as something other than a controller? When did you hear about PCs churning out billing statements for a million customers twice a month? (And finishing the actual print job in a day?) It's just a matter of tuning your platform to the task, and mainframes are seriously tuned for big volume.
The whole point of modern mainframes can be summed up in one word: VOLUME. Regardless of the ground that has been covered by intel and co., the different OS developers, and the various efforts to develop high capacity I/O interfaces, your standard PC platform just doesn't have the ability to handle the sheer volume of data that your average mainframe deals with. PC's have a long way to go before they can even begin to encroach on the mainframe realm of computing.
Regardless of his choices about licensing issues, it's still good to have independant development. Let's take a look at your original post: 1) give up 2)quit this Quake Lives shit and join up with the much superior quakeforge project, the opensource team project to further the quake 1 experience Sure point number one is maybe valid, but then again maybe not. If Slade feels he has a valid position then it's valid for him to fight this. Point number two makes you sound like the typical weenie who thinks everybody should be working within the warm bosom of a molting penguin. id released the Quake sources under the GPL, any work that adheres to it's (probably) legal requirements is going to be open source. It's irrelevant whether the project is "sponsored" by some website that hopes to gain hits in return for providing a little CVS and webspace. The fact that you think "that he can modify the source and improve it suggests that he is a talented coder, and that his skills could be better used elsewhere" just indicates that you really are as much of an asshole as you seem to be. The entire free software movement is about sharing and working on what you want to work on. It's not about being assigned to a particular task by some neo-PHB. Why don't you spend less time worrying about what other people are working on and instead putting your code where your mouth is? Or is it that you can't code and managing and proselytizing is the only thing you can do? Nice self +moderation btw. It would be intersting if/. would add a feature as to the moderation history of posts. Oh is that some kind of attack? Sorry if I post relevant enough comments such that people think it might be worth reading what I write.
Bzzt. Wrong answer. Companies like SGI and IBM were using and contributing to the BSD codebase long before Linux ever existed. The reason they are switching to it now is because the see a potential profit to be made because people are willing to buy into a product line because "it's Linux." Not because it has any inherent superiority over it's competition.
Slashdot Mirror
First the "separation of church and state" is debatable. Secondly, it because the "home Country of the Mormon religion" because they settled the area. In fact they gave up a lot of territory in order to be granted statehood. So you got your chicken and egg backwards.
I'm sorry but you are going to have to move along. This rational, reasoned attitude has no place on slash-dot.
Actually there are a lot of community libraries that are not funded by the state. I can't pull up numbers but the two cities I've lived in/near (St. George, UT and Logan, UT) didn't have state funded libraries (for at least part of their history.)
He should have said adult site. Pretty much every community and state in the nation already has laws regarding access of certain materials by minors. Just extend those to the net. Now I wonder what kind of technological advance would be necessary to carry it out since every community has it's own laws.
Actually, if the law isn't written specifically enough then it's out of the legislature's hands once they've voted on it. It would be up to the courts (and the Utah AG is a Democrat, non-Mormon, and a Woman! Woo!)
Looks like you've found the solution to your dilema. But you'll also find that there are community standards that are in conflict with your own interests no matter where you go. Assuming you go to a place where you would want to live.
This isn't necessarily filtering. I think a lot of people are jumping to the incorrect conclusion. It's about a policy. Perfectly reasonable. It's even reasonable if filtering is decided as the policy.
Telling your daughter that it's a "thing" is entirely dependant on how mature and grown she is. Many children do not have the cognitive abilities to understand adult concepts. Particuarily concepts about the future good, etc.
This is not meant to be morality, just info.
Bad Taco! Bad! Dammit Rob, you're getting the hits no need to feed the flames. :)
This isn't about filtering the internet. Nor is it censoring the internet. It's about not giving money to public libraries that won't filter internet access points. You still have all the access you want, the state just isn't going to contribute money.
Err, that is the head of the local ACLU is not Mormon. Doh.
Yes. Librarians are typically very free speech oriented. Plus the local ACLU chapter is certain to get involved (and she's not Mormon for those of you who are conspiracy theorists.)
For fear of being -1; Redundant-ed, you aren't being censored. Just the state doesn't want to pay for your viewing. Just like they don't pay for my HBO, Showtime or Cinemax.
Of course I do realize the technological limitations of filtering, which is why I am against it in general. I also know the network guys and they are very strongly against it. But this isn't a filter on UEN, so it's somewhat moot.
Just to get things out in the air up front, let me say that I am one of the consultants in the labs that the previous poster mentioned. It's a perfectly legit policy. If you have a reason to be looking at objectionable material (ie. human sexuality, art, poly-sci) you are expected to be discreet. There are obviously machines in corners and against walls where you can turn a monitor if you must view that stuff. The lab policy doesn't directly address such material. It's actually covered under the student code.
Viewing porn just for the hell of it? Well you are certainly allowed to do so in Utah, I can attest to that. The state, church, etc. will not stop you from doing so. What they will do is not pay for you to do it, no more than they would pay for a WW II revisionist to put up their propaganda. Or pay for Klan members to march through campus. You have the right to say what you want, but you don't have the right to expect me to provide you the pulpit or to sit and listen.
The text I'm referring to is in a box called "Amazon Info" right at the top of the book reviews home.
Go to the main page. Down the right side you'll see a few boxes with headers of Features, Science, Slashdot Poll, Older Stuff, and finally Book Reviews. At the bottom of the book reviews box there is a link to the Book Reviews section. Go there and then you will see the very text that I included in my post. Boo.
Why doesn't Rob and friends put their money where their mouth is? Literally.
I'd second you, but I'm not convinced that this guy isn't an honest-to-goodness professional troll. Literally. If I was running a site like slashdot, I'd make damned sure that there was some kind of argument/flamewar going on all the time. No offense guys.
On a side note, I wonder about the "submitted" stories sometimes. Often you see that So-an-So writes "blah blah blah" where blah blah blah has a consistently similar style, often correlated to the individual who stuck the story up on slashdot. But maybe it's just me.
To step across the line for a moment: I think point was not if you have a failure, it's if you have 8-way independant, redundancy that you still have availability even if your boxes have individual chances of falling over at a given rate. So it's not a matter of math, it's a matter of knowing what was meant in the original post. :)
Errr, what time frame are you talking about? No sane person I know would tell you that mainframes are the be-all and end-all of computing. No computer is perfectly suited for all tasks. When was the last time you saw a tape robot hanging off a PC that was acting as something other than a controller? When did you hear about PCs churning out billing statements for a million customers twice a month? (And finishing the actual print job in a day?) It's just a matter of tuning your platform to the task, and mainframes are seriously tuned for big volume.
The whole point of modern mainframes can be summed up in one word: VOLUME. Regardless of the ground that has been covered by intel and co., the different OS developers, and the various efforts to develop high capacity I/O interfaces, your standard PC platform just doesn't have the ability to handle the sheer volume of data that your average mainframe deals with. PC's have a long way to go before they can even begin to encroach on the mainframe realm of computing.
Regardless of his choices about licensing issues, it's still good to have independant development. Let's take a look at your original post: 1) give up 2)quit this Quake Lives shit and join up with the much superior quakeforge project, the opensource team project to further the quake 1 experience Sure point number one is maybe valid, but then again maybe not. If Slade feels he has a valid position then it's valid for him to fight this. Point number two makes you sound like the typical weenie who thinks everybody should be working within the warm bosom of a molting penguin. id released the Quake sources under the GPL, any work that adheres to it's (probably) legal requirements is going to be open source. It's irrelevant whether the project is "sponsored" by some website that hopes to gain hits in return for providing a little CVS and webspace. The fact that you think "that he can modify the source and improve it suggests that he is a talented coder, and that his skills could be better used elsewhere" just indicates that you really are as much of an asshole as you seem to be. The entire free software movement is about sharing and working on what you want to work on. It's not about being assigned to a particular task by some neo-PHB. Why don't you spend less time worrying about what other people are working on and instead putting your code where your mouth is? Or is it that you can't code and managing and proselytizing is the only thing you can do? Nice self +moderation btw. It would be intersting if /. would add a feature as to the moderation history of posts. Oh is that some kind of attack? Sorry if I post relevant enough comments such that people think it might be worth reading what I write.
Bzzt. Wrong answer. Companies like SGI and IBM were using and contributing to the BSD codebase long before Linux ever existed. The reason they are switching to it now is because the see a potential profit to be made because people are willing to buy into a product line because "it's Linux." Not because it has any inherent superiority over it's competition.
Fuck. "larger hole." not "large whole."