I understand that i have no right to the lifestyle I live now
True.
But I somehow doubt that all the men and women who fought and died for this great nation did that so their descendants could work for third-world wages.
The truth is that nations exist only for the benefit of their citizens. Otherwise, why have nations at all?
If a nation's government is benefitting only a small elite at the expense of all other citizens (for example, by allowing its corporations to ship jobs to other countries), then it's time to get a new government.
-Joe
Re:Best Series For Learning Java
on
Head First Java
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I'd tried Java back in the 1.1 days, but had no real use for the language at that time so I let it drop. Earlier this year, though, a project dropped in my lap that really needed what Java provides, so I started looking for good books on the subject. After browsing through the tremendous amount of Java books at my local bookstore, I settled on the Core Java series.
By reading the two volumes you mention, I was able to come up to speed quickly. In fact, I finished the project just one month after buying those books.
I highly recommend the Core Java series to anyone who wants to learn the Java programming language.
For example, one of its features is the ability to read headlines from news sources such as Slashdot. While its nice to see the headlines right on your desktop, how useful is it? If you want to read the whole story you have to fire up a browser anyways to read it. So whats the point?
I agree with you. I've never found a use for headline display programs. As you pointed out, you still have to fire up your browser if you want to read any of the articles.
What we really need is a service that downloads whole articles to the desktop. Something that, when run, would go out to Slashdot and download all the articles from the front page. Maybe with some checkboxes on which additional categories you wanted stuff downloaded from (Apple, YRO, etc.)
And then, it could be expanded to download stories from other sites, like cnn.com and nytimes.com and so on. That would be cool.
I should go start a Sourceforge project for this thing. But what to call it? Let's see . . . it sort of turns the web into a broadcast experience, so maybe "Broadcast?" No, that's not quite right.
Oh, I know! It's like broadcasting, but it's point-to-point, so why not call it "Pointcast!" Yeah! What a cool name!
Welp, I'm off to start my pointcast.sourceforge.net project. I sure hope no one beats me to this great idea, though!
In the abstract, there's no particular reason why government should be chosen for this task over, say, private companies or, as you suggest, non-profit charities.
But if we're talking about some form of democratic government, that changes things. Ostensibly, the citizens as a whole are in control of democratic governments, whereas that's not true of private organizations such as businesses or charities. While it's true that you can "vote with your dollars" with such organizations, that distorts the results toward one group (the wealthy) at the expense of all others, whereas the democratic ideal of one person, one vote distributes power more evenly.
So, my answer to your question is that, to the extent that a given government can be held accountable by its people, I'd prefer that it wield power.
fact: government only takes, rarely provides [stimulus to the economy]
The government can, however, stimulate consumption. To do this, it can take money that would otherwise be used for non-consumption purposes and give it to people whose existing cash flows don't meet their needs for food, clothing, shelter, medicine, and other basic necessities.
Since consumption drives the economy, there are times when doing the above makes great sense. Yes, that means the government uses the threat of force to take a fraction of the money onwed by one group and gives it to another group. Libertarians hate that.
But, in the end, it is a better system than the old one, where the middle and lower classes joined together and killed the upper class and redistributed its money when things got really bad. This way, everyone gets to live and, by and large, the wealthy even get to stay wealthy.
Actually, William Higinbotham invented the videogame while working for Brookhaven National Laboratory in Long Island, New York in the 1950s. The game he invented was called "Tennis for Two" and was placed on an oscilliscope.
Interestingly, he was brought into the court battle to testify back when Magnavox (Baer's employer) and the rest were fighting over who owned the patent on the videogame. The court found that Mr. Higinbotham invented the videogame, and that since he was an employee of the U.S. Government at the time and did it as part of his job (it was part of the annual "Visitor's Day" exhibit at the Laboratory), the idea of the videogame couldn't be patented and was owned by the public.
I'm not saying "pay for access" is right, but on the other hand, who should politicians listen to? Someone who controls an industry and affects millions of people (like Microsoft) or Joe L33t who has no perspective beyond his own limited world?
So, you're saying corporations don't have limited perspectives? That they don't work for their own limited, short-term interests? That, in fact, the people who run them aren't mere humans just like "Joe L33T", but some sort of uber-persons who are all-wise, all-knowing, and all-benevolent? Are you saying that corporations are run by gods?
I reject that completely. Let each individual human being represent his or her own interests. We need no one to speak for us.
Furthermore, I would like to see all rights be reserved for human beings alone. Artificial constructs (whether corporations, unions, or special interest groups such as the NRA and the Sierra Club) should have no rights. They have none under natural law, as they have no basis for existence outside of the law. What is a corporation without a government-sanctioned charter? Indeed, what is a government without a person-sanctioned charter?
Artificial constructs may be granted certain priveledges, but only so long as they serve the greater good - as defined by We The People. Pretending that they have rights has led to much that is wrong with the world. Just look at what corporations have done with the free speech right we allowed them to take upon themselves. They've used it to corrupt our politics (by arguing that their political contributions, which very few human beings can match, are protected speech). They've also used it to corrupt our marketplace by rigging the laws in their own favor (collectively and individually).
Let's reserve rights for human beings, and put ourselves back in control.
Perhaps I've been exposed to too many of those "intensive, hands on training" short courses that purport to teach everything about a topic in a few days. Generally, though, I've found such courses to be of little value. Personally, I'd rather learn by reading a book, interacting with peers and trying things out on my own. This style of learning is more incremental -- and I think it leads to better knowledge of the subject.
As a veteran of many, many "hands-on, intensive" courses, I disagree that such courses lack real value. While you're certainly right that reading a book or three will yield much more depth of knowledge, it's also true that well-run classes offer a great way to start learning about a subject.
After taking a good class (which usually means at least 20 hours of instruction, with about half that spent in hands-on activities), I find that I get a lot more out of the books I (later) read on the subject.
I also find them useful when I'm not being given the resources to learn. That is, when the necessary equipment, software, and/or time is not being provided. Good hands-on classes provide all of that as a matter of course.
So, while I agree entirely that hands-on courses are not a panacea, and by themselves aren't sufficient for gaining a usable skill, I've found them to be very good as a first step along the road to building a new skill.
Every year, I get a personal training budget. I can spend that money on whatever technical training I want, from whomever I want. Obviously, if I choose to take courses out of state, the money will go much less far due to travel expenses, so I mostly take them locally. It usually works out to about 4 weeks of training per year.
I guess you could say my company treats me like an adult - or maybe like a member of the family. It gives me the money I need to get good-quality training, then trusts me to decide what training I need, where I should take it, etc.
It's a really good situation, and one of the reasons I've been working at the same company for nearly 10 years now.
Too many people keep saying that existing MacOS owners should get a discount.
This makes absolutely NO sense whatsover!!
Actually, it does make sense. If the cost of an upgrade doesn't vary whether you keep up-to-date or not, then there is no financial incentive to keep up-to-date. In other words, if 10.3 is going to cost me the same price whether I own 10.2 or not, why don't I just save myself some money and wait a year or so for 10.3? Whereas, if I get a discount for 10.3 by buying 10.2, then I have a reason to keep current.
If screwing customers is a good plan for a company to make money and increase its value, you can hardly fault the company beacuse the customers put up with being screwed.
Does anyone else see this philosophy of "get away with as much as you can" as one of the primary problems of our time? Or is it just me that sees this as the source of our Enrons, Worldcoms, and Arthur Andersons, as well as our self-serving politicians, our sue-first-ask-questions-later culture, the general decline in product quality, and the overall malaise among the worldwide population?
What we need is an overhaul of the music distribution chain.
Until something better comes along, I've found that CD Baby is an acceptable way to find new artists. Every CD they sell is by an independent artist, and between $6 and $12 goes to the artist for each CD purchased. Plus, their servers run OpenBSD, they don't share your info with anyone, and they don't keep your credit card number on file.
And their search methods and browse options are really great for helping you find music you'll like among the huge number of bands offering their music through CD Baby.
Thank goodness this testimony became available. Through it, Jack Valenti was finally able to set me straight. Here's one of the truly remarkable things he said:
"I have spent most of my adult life in politics and you learn one thing. Nothing of value is free. "
Now I know I should erase Linux and FreeBSD from my company's servers and install Windows. Because, obviously, if I got something for free, it's worthless. And how can you base a business on something that's worthless?
Thank goodness he set me free. Amazing how prescient he proved to be way back in the early eighties.
At my company, I initiated a policy requiring strong passwords (8+ chars, at least 1 uppercase, 1 lowercase, 1 digit, one punctuation, no dictionary words beyond two characters in length allowed). The policy also requires monthly password audits (using programs like John the Ripper).
I got the policy signed off on by the board, then I wrote a memo that explained the policy and showed how it is easy to come up with and remember good passwords (through the phrase --> password method, for example).
So far, it's worked out well. There was some grumbling at first, but once people came up with their first passwords, they realized how easy it was and it didn't bother them any more.
Umm...is that why, in this season's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," the bad guys have Apple flat panel displays clearly visible in most scenes shot in their "hideout"?
Yup. I can see a rack of these going in at work during the next round of upgrades. ('Course, on the other hand, with the U.S. economy like it is, who knows when that'll be...)
That would be true for general usage. But, obviously, for the specific jargon of *nix geeks, the word "boxen" is the correct word to use when referring to more than one computer.
Subcultures often invent or redefine words in ways that the general culture would fine confusing. That's part of what defines a subculture.
So, if you want to be part of a given subculture, you have to learn its jargon. That's just the way it is (and appropriately so).
That's only true to the extent that the corporation has pricing power. To the extent that it does not, the taxes will come out of the corporation's profits.
I was told that Apple also invented the touch pad - the little pad at the bottom of many laptops that is used as a pointing device. I don't know whether that was a good thing or not, but it's certainly a feature that's used on many laptops these days.
I'm sorry. I thought it was clear I was talking about commercial, shrinkwrapped software (as was the author of the book - thus the context of my comment).
Of course there is a ton of free software for Linux, FreeBSD, etc. I should have stated that more clearly.
Attempts to circumvent the broken way commercial software is treated in the US are, while sometimes amusing, ultimately counterproductive.
The best way to deal with restrictive EULAs is to use alternative software that is without such restrictions. Where there are no alternatives, and where the software is essential to some necessary task, the EULA will have to be accepted (or the task avoided) - at least until a freer alternative is created. But where there are alternatives, use the software with the better, more customer-centric license.
Stunts such as these don't really change anything. The manufacturer still gets the money from the sale, encouraging him or her to continue down the path of greater and greater restrictions of user freedoms. Better never to buy the software at all.
I enjoyed the book, but as a long-time Linux user (and recent Mac convert) some of it seemed overly whiny to me. Sure, it's rough having only a few score software packages for Mac OS in the typical CompUSA, but the total of zero packages for the Linux user makes that seem quite sufficient in comparison. I think he needs to get out more, and realize that there are more operating systems than the Windows and Mac franchises alone.
As for the chapter where he gives childish replies to childish letters written to him as editor of his magazine, I stopped reading it half way through. I don't need that sort of thing to make me feel good about myself or my choice of computer, and reading such displays of immaturity is just painful. Maybe when I was 12 years old it would have been thrilling, but I've grown up since then. I wish he would have, too.
The rest of the book was pretty good, though, and some sections were laugh-out-loud funny. He has a good writing style and a sharp wit that comes out best when he's describing everyday situations he's had to deal with as a Mac user (such as the hostile responses from sales clerks and fellow customers when he asks for Mac hardware or software).
Still, given his whinyness on the one hand, and his vindictiveness toward "pee cee" users on the other, I'm not sure I want to be grouped with him as a "Mac fanatic." I tend to be a lot more forgiving of others than he shows himself to be. If most Mac users have the same extreme siege mentality he does, then I'll be sure to avoid Mac user groups like the plague. I'd much rather enjoy my computer than spend time cutting down others' choices. And I'd much rather let someone use one of my computers and thereby learn what's so great about the Mac than tell them what a crappy OS they use.
So, althoguh my wife and I own three Macs right now (two quicksilvers and one icebook), maybe we should call ourselves "Apple users" instead of "Mac Fantatics." (This, despite his sneering remark about people calling them "Apple" computers intead of "Macs." As a long-time user of Apple ]['s, I'll probably always refer to computers produced by Apple Computer, Inc. as "Apples" out of habit, at least some of the time).
Slashdot Mirror
I understand that i have no right to the lifestyle I live now
True.
But I somehow doubt that all the men and women who fought and died for this great nation did that so their descendants could work for third-world wages.
The truth is that nations exist only for the benefit of their citizens. Otherwise, why have nations at all?
If a nation's government is benefitting only a small elite at the expense of all other citizens (for example, by allowing its corporations to ship jobs to other countries), then it's time to get a new government.
-Joe
I'd tried Java back in the 1.1 days, but had no real use for the language at that time so I let it drop. Earlier this year, though, a project dropped in my lap that really needed what Java provides, so I started looking for good books on the subject. After browsing through the tremendous amount of Java books at my local bookstore, I settled on the Core Java series.
By reading the two volumes you mention, I was able to come up to speed quickly. In fact, I finished the project just one month after buying those books.
I highly recommend the Core Java series to anyone who wants to learn the Java programming language.
For example, one of its features is the ability to read headlines from news sources such as Slashdot. While its nice to see the headlines right on your desktop, how useful is it? If you want to read the whole story you have to fire up a browser anyways to read it. So whats the point?
I agree with you. I've never found a use for headline display programs. As you pointed out, you still have to fire up your browser if you want to read any of the articles.
What we really need is a service that downloads whole articles to the desktop. Something that, when run, would go out to Slashdot and download all the articles from the front page. Maybe with some checkboxes on which additional categories you wanted stuff downloaded from (Apple, YRO, etc.)
And then, it could be expanded to download stories from other sites, like cnn.com and nytimes.com and so on. That would be cool.
I should go start a Sourceforge project for this thing. But what to call it? Let's see . . . it sort of turns the web into a broadcast experience, so maybe "Broadcast?" No, that's not quite right.
Oh, I know! It's like broadcasting, but it's point-to-point, so why not call it "Pointcast!" Yeah! What a cool name!
Welp, I'm off to start my pointcast.sourceforge.net project. I sure hope no one beats me to this great idea, though!
Why does government have to do this?
In the abstract, there's no particular reason why government should be chosen for this task over, say, private companies or, as you suggest, non-profit charities.
But if we're talking about some form of democratic government, that changes things. Ostensibly, the citizens as a whole are in control of democratic governments, whereas that's not true of private organizations such as businesses or charities. While it's true that you can "vote with your dollars" with such organizations, that distorts the results toward one group (the wealthy) at the expense of all others, whereas the democratic ideal of one person, one vote distributes power more evenly.
So, my answer to your question is that, to the extent that a given government can be held accountable by its people, I'd prefer that it wield power.
fact: government only takes, rarely provides [stimulus to the economy]
The government can, however, stimulate consumption. To do this, it can take money that would otherwise be used for non-consumption purposes and give it to people whose existing cash flows don't meet their needs for food, clothing, shelter, medicine, and other basic necessities.
Since consumption drives the economy, there are times when doing the above makes great sense. Yes, that means the government uses the threat of force to take a fraction of the money onwed by one group and gives it to another group. Libertarians hate that.
But, in the end, it is a better system than the old one, where the middle and lower classes joined together and killed the upper class and redistributed its money when things got really bad. This way, everyone gets to live and, by and large, the wealthy even get to stay wealthy.
Actually, William Higinbotham invented the videogame while working for Brookhaven National Laboratory in Long Island, New York in the 1950s. The game he invented was called "Tennis for Two" and was placed on an oscilliscope.
Interestingly, he was brought into the court battle to testify back when Magnavox (Baer's employer) and the rest were fighting over who owned the patent on the videogame. The court found that Mr. Higinbotham invented the videogame, and that since he was an employee of the U.S. Government at the time and did it as part of his job (it was part of the annual "Visitor's Day" exhibit at the Laboratory), the idea of the videogame couldn't be patented and was owned by the public.
-Joe
So, you're saying corporations don't have limited perspectives? That they don't work for their own limited, short-term interests? That, in fact, the people who run them aren't mere humans just like "Joe L33T", but some sort of uber-persons who are all-wise, all-knowing, and all-benevolent? Are you saying that corporations are run by gods?
I reject that completely. Let each individual human being represent his or her own interests. We need no one to speak for us.
Furthermore, I would like to see all rights be reserved for human beings alone. Artificial constructs (whether corporations, unions, or special interest groups such as the NRA and the Sierra Club) should have no rights. They have none under natural law, as they have no basis for existence outside of the law. What is a corporation without a government-sanctioned charter? Indeed, what is a government without a person-sanctioned charter?
Artificial constructs may be granted certain priveledges, but only so long as they serve the greater good - as defined by We The People. Pretending that they have rights has led to much that is wrong with the world. Just look at what corporations have done with the free speech right we allowed them to take upon themselves. They've used it to corrupt our politics (by arguing that their political contributions, which very few human beings can match, are protected speech). They've also used it to corrupt our marketplace by rigging the laws in their own favor (collectively and individually).
Let's reserve rights for human beings, and put ourselves back in control.
Perhaps I've been exposed to too many of those "intensive, hands on training" short courses that purport to teach everything about a topic in a few days. Generally, though, I've found such courses to be of little value. Personally, I'd rather learn by reading a book, interacting with peers and trying things out on my own. This style of learning is more incremental -- and I think it leads to better knowledge of the subject.
As a veteran of many, many "hands-on, intensive" courses, I disagree that such courses lack real value. While you're certainly right that reading a book or three will yield much more depth of knowledge, it's also true that well-run classes offer a great way to start learning about a subject.
After taking a good class (which usually means at least 20 hours of instruction, with about half that spent in hands-on activities), I find that I get a lot more out of the books I (later) read on the subject.
I also find them useful when I'm not being given the resources to learn. That is, when the necessary equipment, software, and/or time is not being provided. Good hands-on classes provide all of that as a matter of course.
So, while I agree entirely that hands-on courses are not a panacea, and by themselves aren't sufficient for gaining a usable skill, I've found them to be very good as a first step along the road to building a new skill.
-Joe
Every year, I get a personal training budget. I can spend that money on whatever technical training I want, from whomever I want. Obviously, if I choose to take courses out of state, the money will go much less far due to travel expenses, so I mostly take them locally. It usually works out to about 4 weeks of training per year.
I guess you could say my company treats me like an adult - or maybe like a member of the family. It gives me the money I need to get good-quality training, then trusts me to decide what training I need, where I should take it, etc.
It's a really good situation, and one of the reasons I've been working at the same company for nearly 10 years now.
-Joe
This makes absolutely NO sense whatsover!!
Actually, it does make sense. If the cost of an upgrade doesn't vary whether you keep up-to-date or not, then there is no financial incentive to keep up-to-date. In other words, if 10.3 is going to cost me the same price whether I own 10.2 or not, why don't I just save myself some money and wait a year or so for 10.3? Whereas, if I get a discount for 10.3 by buying 10.2, then I have a reason to keep current.
-Joe
They were losing money big-time on iTools, because it was far more popular than they expected it to be.
Fortunately, the $100 charge will take care of Apple's popularity problem.
If screwing customers is a good plan for a company to make money and increase its value, you can hardly fault the company beacuse the customers put up with being screwed.
Does anyone else see this philosophy of "get away with as much as you can" as one of the primary problems of our time? Or is it just me that sees this as the source of our Enrons, Worldcoms, and Arthur Andersons, as well as our self-serving politicians, our sue-first-ask-questions-later culture, the general decline in product quality, and the overall malaise among the worldwide population?
Or is it just me?
What we need is an overhaul of the music distribution chain.
Until something better comes along, I've found that CD Baby is an acceptable way to find new artists. Every CD they sell is by an independent artist, and between $6 and $12 goes to the artist for each CD purchased. Plus, their servers run OpenBSD, they don't share your info with anyone, and they don't keep your credit card number on file.
And their search methods and browse options are really great for helping you find music you'll like among the huge number of bands offering their music through CD Baby.
Thank goodness this testimony became available. Through it, Jack Valenti was finally able to set me straight. Here's one of the truly remarkable things he said:
"I have spent most of my adult life in politics and you learn one thing. Nothing of value is free. "
Now I know I should erase Linux and FreeBSD from my company's servers and install Windows. Because, obviously, if I got something for free, it's worthless. And how can you base a business on something that's worthless?
Thank goodness he set me free. Amazing how prescient he proved to be way back in the early eighties.
Thanks, Jack!
-Joe
Oh, so the industry that is effectively controlled by five companies is saying the radio industry is too concentrated?
Oh, boo hoo. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
At my company, I initiated a policy requiring strong passwords (8+ chars, at least 1 uppercase, 1 lowercase, 1 digit, one punctuation, no dictionary words beyond two characters in length allowed). The policy also requires monthly password audits (using programs like John the Ripper).
I got the policy signed off on by the board, then I wrote a memo that explained the policy and showed how it is easy to come up with and remember good passwords (through the phrase --> password method, for example).
So far, it's worked out well. There was some grumbling at first, but once people came up with their first passwords, they realized how easy it was and it didn't bother them any more.
-Joe
Umm...is that why, in this season's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," the bad guys have Apple flat panel displays clearly visible in most scenes shot in their "hideout"?
Yup. I can see a rack of these going in at work during the next round of upgrades. ('Course, on the other hand, with the U.S. economy like it is, who knows when that'll be...)
-Joe
That would be true for general usage. But, obviously, for the specific jargon of *nix geeks, the word "boxen" is the correct word to use when referring to more than one computer.
Subcultures often invent or redefine words in ways that the general culture would fine confusing. That's part of what defines a subculture.
So, if you want to be part of a given subculture, you have to learn its jargon. That's just the way it is (and appropriately so).
That's only true to the extent that the corporation has pricing power. To the extent that it does not, the taxes will come out of the corporation's profits.
I'm thinking the "BSD Is Dying" trolls bribed the /. editors to put this up.
I was told that Apple also invented the touch pad - the little pad at the bottom of many laptops that is used as a pointing device. I don't know whether that was a good thing or not, but it's certainly a feature that's used on many laptops these days.
I'm sorry. I thought it was clear I was talking about commercial, shrinkwrapped software (as was the author of the book - thus the context of my comment).
Of course there is a ton of free software for Linux, FreeBSD, etc. I should have stated that more clearly.
Attempts to circumvent the broken way commercial software is treated in the US are, while sometimes amusing, ultimately counterproductive.
The best way to deal with restrictive EULAs is to use alternative software that is without such restrictions. Where there are no alternatives, and where the software is essential to some necessary task, the EULA will have to be accepted (or the task avoided) - at least until a freer alternative is created. But where there are alternatives, use the software with the better, more customer-centric license.
Stunts such as these don't really change anything. The manufacturer still gets the money from the sale, encouraging him or her to continue down the path of greater and greater restrictions of user freedoms. Better never to buy the software at all.
I enjoyed the book, but as a long-time Linux user (and recent Mac convert) some of it seemed overly whiny to me. Sure, it's rough having only a few score software packages for Mac OS in the typical CompUSA, but the total of zero packages for the Linux user makes that seem quite sufficient in comparison. I think he needs to get out more, and realize that there are more operating systems than the Windows and Mac franchises alone.
As for the chapter where he gives childish replies to childish letters written to him as editor of his magazine, I stopped reading it half way through. I don't need that sort of thing to make me feel good about myself or my choice of computer, and reading such displays of immaturity is just painful. Maybe when I was 12 years old it would have been thrilling, but I've grown up since then. I wish he would have, too.
The rest of the book was pretty good, though, and some sections were laugh-out-loud funny. He has a good writing style and a sharp wit that comes out best when he's describing everyday situations he's had to deal with as a Mac user (such as the hostile responses from sales clerks and fellow customers when he asks for Mac hardware or software).
Still, given his whinyness on the one hand, and his vindictiveness toward "pee cee" users on the other, I'm not sure I want to be grouped with him as a "Mac fanatic." I tend to be a lot more forgiving of others than he shows himself to be. If most Mac users have the same extreme siege mentality he does, then I'll be sure to avoid Mac user groups like the plague. I'd much rather enjoy my computer than spend time cutting down others' choices. And I'd much rather let someone use one of my computers and thereby learn what's so great about the Mac than tell them what a crappy OS they use.
So, althoguh my wife and I own three Macs right now (two quicksilvers and one icebook), maybe we should call ourselves "Apple users" instead of "Mac Fantatics." (This, despite his sneering remark about people calling them "Apple" computers intead of "Macs." As a long-time user of Apple ]['s, I'll probably always refer to computers produced by Apple Computer, Inc. as "Apples" out of habit, at least some of the time).
-Joe
-Joe