NWO. what does that mean. "new world order" and what people usually mean with that is globalisation and a shift towards a kind of world government.
i would say NWO (the shift towards some kind world government) is more or less inevitable. we will have that in some form or another anyway. the question is not if we want that kind of thing but how we want it to look like.
if national governments do not try to solve global problems on a global scale (and the most important problems are usually global problems) then no one will solve those problems. instead big corporations will more or less rule the world. small countries can not afford to object those big corporations.. "if you do not give us the right to pollute your environment we will take our $$$ elsewhere.." etc.. only very big countries could afford to object here.. the USA comes to mind. but unfortunately the USA is mostly in the hand of big $$$ corporations anyway because the political system allows bribery (lobbying, donating money to senators etc..) and is not really democratic.. so i guess big corporations are not unhappy with the status quo of competing national government. as long as there is no real international political power which could stand up against big corporations then they are the king of the hill...
so to avoid the disadvantages mentioned above we need some political power that can operate on a global scale. we need institutions where these problems are discussed but moreover we also need institutions which have the legal power to do something about the problems. so international organisations are necessary. but we want them to be democratically controlled. until we have world wide voting this could be achieved if the national governments send representatives there and each one has votes..
so when arguing against international organisations like WTO etc: it is important that people argue against the politics this organisation makes in case it is too much oriented towards the interest of corporations but not against the institution as a place where there would be power to do something to control international corporations
an example: international corporation wants to produce something very cheap and the cheapest way to produce it is in a way that pollutes our atmosphere. now they say ask: "which country has no laws to prohibit the pollution about the atmosphere" of course they will find one somewhere.. (bribing a senator in the USA or going 3rd world country..etc.). now each sovereign small country can say: oh but we will not buy these goods from this company because they pollute the environment... but will they really do it? after all it gives them competitive disadvantage compared to the other nations which do not hesitate to buy that goods.. when it is a small country then they can not do but buy.. (maybe they have a little bit more tax on it so they can tell the environmentalists among the voters that they are doing something but most of the time they will just buy it). would there be a powerful organisation then they could just say "producing with this kind of environmental is not allowed."
somehow the reason why we want supernational organisations is the same as the one why we want workers unions => so that the people together are strong against too much capitalism. and i guess most of the resortiments against NWO is actually promoted by big corporations and right wing parties. (together with a few left who are just to stupid to grasp it).
if these people protested against the WTO because they think that it is only in the interest of big corporation why don't these people portent against the USA? the USA is not a real democracy but for the most part is bought by big corporate $$$. (in the USA politicians are payed mostly by private money where in europe a political party gets fund from the budget according to the votes they got at the last election). so the USA is the country which causes most pollution and waste of environmental resources of all..
so hopefully the angry people from seatle will soon turn their anger against the US political system so corporate dictatorship can be replaces with democracy..
when discussing with people from the U.S. i often see a strange fear against anything that has to do with world government. people there seem to uncritically reject anything that has to do with international organisations, UNO, UNICEF, etc, etc,
a lot of this rejections seem to come from right wing people. nationalists fear about their "sovereignty". so i was a bit surprised to hear that "anarchists" protested against the WTO. even thought "free trade" is something that one would think big corporations would like, i think it ultimately are right wing people who nursed those riots.
from my point of view: the USA while claiming to care for environmental protection they do not give a shit about that. the USA is most responsible for the emission of solutions which cause the global warming etc.. when international organisations meet the USA always refused to agree to stronger emission limits.. obviously in the USA where the political system makes bribing of politicians legal and legitim big corporations have too much influence on such matters. capitalism gone out of control.
now i guess these big corporations have an interest to foster any anti "world government" like movements. as long as there are competing and quarrelling national governments these governments do not have enough power to limit the power of international corporations. especially small countries can not afforded to do anything here. and the big country: the USA is already bought by them..
when we look on how the USA is using their "sovereignty": an embargo on cuba then we already know where those people who support this kind of "sovereignty" comes from..
solving global problems needs strong cooperations between democratic countries. international platforms are necessary for that matter. and it needs organisations which also have the power to implement some rules on a global scale not just idle talk. so people should not protest against this organisations but instead should try that their government really sends people to this organisations which support the interest of the people and not the one of big corporations. in the case of the usa, these anarchists should first of all riot against their own government which is largely bought by big $$$$... implementing more democratic models like those we have in most european countries here would be a good start there..
i think the reason not to open source the clinet is rediculus: i guess anyone who knows how to run a disassembler could hack the binary and from the comments here in the article people do. so if their security relies on obscurity it can not be called "scientific" at all.
rather they should think about a way to do the distributed processing that could not produce false error even if open sourced. and then there would not be any reason anymore not top open source it. i do not think it is all to difficult to do:
people who write their own client or modify an existing client should send their source to seti@home and they would put the source on the web page for review by the comunity. the client would get a unique name/versionnumer.
the client would send checksums from all major processing steps back to the server. the server can choose different client or the same client running by different people and verify that the check sums do only differ in minor rounding errors (when comparing results from the same client code on the same maschine archtetcure the result would have to be totaly the same not even including rounding differences)
the seti server would have to remmeber which packet was sent to whom. people who where found cheating would be excluded from the server.
there would be some redundancy because some packte (e.g. 10%) would have to be sent to more then one client to verify. "new" clients would be verified much better and compared more often to make sure there are no siginificatn differences with known good clients..etc.. of people submiting results form the same subnet where a cheating person has already be found would also be controled a bit more..
as soon as people realice that there is no chance for cheating then they will not even try.
the results are much more reliable since the algorithems are truly tested and reviewed by many people...
the additional overhead of having to send package more then once in a few percent of cases would be outwighted by the more optimized speed of the clients..
greetings from vienna, austria.
dermond. (english is not my mother tongue and i have not spellchecked my post)
a few month ago some email virus sent mail addresses to some chinese mailboxes
i think some smart ppl in china realiced who volunarable the west is with windoze on almost every desktop.. as a consequence they invested in cyberwarefare while they switch to something more secureable: linux. they hired a few hacker and one of them (as a proof of concept) wrote the macrovirus that sent that emails to china.. makes perfect sense. and if it helps people here to realize how deep they are in the shit by using windoze then it is only good...
another battlefield where m$ tried to overtake the net was with the launch of win95. they wanted to push a completly different net that would not have been built on tcp/ip: the MSN network. early win95 was shiped with MSN clients but not internet dialup was not integrated very well... what they planed was to completly replace the internet with their network. fortunatly the consumers did not like the idea and the internet was already big enough.. but i do not want to think about how the world today would look like if that MSN would have been a success then.. 95% of people using MSN. the internet almost obsoleted.... after m$ realices they could not kill the internet they started their E&E&E tactics...
when micro$oft wanted to sell windoze to ISP's (DNS, WEB, etc..) and thus to replace unix at ISPS, they called this "operation normandie". this is where in WWII the alied forces landed to beat hitler. so micro$oft has compared unix to hitler long before. so i think it is only fair to do it vice versa. fortunatly ISPs where not very pleaces with an OS that was not stable and not remotely managable..etc..
... you can argue any position you want. important is that you are smart enough to select the one that fits what you want and that you can argue it a bit yourself..it is not rocket science: buy into this technology and you pay for the next 10 years with no end or take this free piece of code and have the future wide open...
well it is a bit waste of badwidth since it does not include gsm like compressione etc..but i still love to type: cat/dev/audio|ssh otherhost.somewhere cat - >/dev/audio
hmmm strange change of mind.. the last albume he put on the web was not available as mp3 but only in the propritary m$ audio and SDMI shit... the last concert was only broadcasted with the realmedia shit.. not mp3 there... and now he talks like he invented mp3...strange...
so it is not that much of a bad a flawed analogy: in fact what you say is that a monopoly is even worse then politcal tyranny... well i would not go that far but it seems you agree in principle with my analogy..
i am a liberal minded person as well and freedom is one of the most important values we have. but unrestricted capitalism does not bring freedom. and if capitailsm brings fruits like a monopoly then it takes away the freedom of many. where is the freedom of the person who wants to use an office packet and she can only choose to use m$ because she needs to share documents with others who had no choice for the same reason? a monoply in a market is like dictatorship in the political realm. of yourse you can say replacing the dictatorship is taking away the right of the dictator but at least it gives rights to millions of people where they had non before. think about it.
you say that "people are voting with their dollars"? lot of people do not like the m$ office shit but they need to buy it to be able to read the shit the get mailed from people who have that crap. they do not like still they have to pay. is that a free vote? no. if you for them to buy something they do not want that is theft. i hope people will sue the hell out of m$ to get their money back.
here in austria political partys get their money according to their votes at the last election, from the state. this means they are to a large degree independent of corporate money. as far as i know this is the case in most european countries..
the US would be wise in establishing a similar system.. but of course all the companys that are bribing the government there now would not find that nice.. and since i think their influence is already too strong this will not happen.
conclusion: the U.S. is not a democracy but already owend by big corporations..
a 24k stream is not that bad at all... at least much better then realaudio (from my subjective point of view). and the network bandwith: one can mirror the mp3 streams at different location using icecast alias feature..
it depends on how fast you want to stream. e.g. 24kbit/s or 128kbit/s (where 24k is better so that people with slow 33.6 modem connections still have a chance to hear you). a faster stream costs you more CPU power.
then the encoding software matters. some software is better optimized and needs less cpu power for the same quality then other. e.g. comercial xing encoder needs less cpu then the free "lame" encoder. recently on freshmeat i have read that someone has improved the lame encoder so that it takes advantages of MMX/3DNow extentions found in newer CPUs: the name is GOGO but i have not tried it yet.
encoders often have a switch where you can choose encoding quality where you can tweak cpu usage...
i use a K6-450 to produce a 24kbit/sec stream with the free LAME encoder (based on the ISO sources..) and it uses about 20% of the CPU time. the stream is then sent to an icecast server and several other icecast server mirror that stream with "alias" defines.
the person who moderated this down is probably only running how the metamoderation would react to this.. so is xENTROPYy a cmdrtaco in disguise? and by the way: i think what is really offtopic are those meta discussions about how something is moderated good or bad. i wish people would not comment on such things. after all this is why there is meta moderation. meta discusions are offtopic. and of course this as being a meta meta discussion is especially offtopic. but since i do not have enough moderator points to modertate all the people down how whine about how something is moderated bad or good i thought i just jump in the discussion and give my $0.02
i think it is good new. i would suspect most of the 3000 employes that where fired will start some job in the linux field.. with their unix know-how they can help the cause of linux...
possible results of the suggested moderation syst.
on
Moderation Ideas
·
· Score: 3
when i moderated i read through an article and if i find one (or 2 really) good posts i moderate them up.. i assume most people do it that way. the result of the new system would be that probably peopel see a good comment and can not moderate them..
so they search for a similar one that does express a similar idea (or simply repeats most of the idea) that they can moderate up.. and the will moderat that up. so the whole moderation process would loose sharpness it would be somehow blurred. it would not help to find the perls form the posts...
on the one hand it is good to see that companys care about the fact wether linux runs on certain hardware or not and that consumers get an easy way to find about that (that certificat that ibm wants). i do not think it is a problem that they want a "red hat" certificate. if it works with red hat it will work with debian and suse as well...
but i hope that they will not get such a certificate from red hat until all their hardware works and that includes that modem..
furthermore i believe it is inportant that no one gets any certificate for binary only drivers. a binary only driver might work now but might be difficult with kernel 3.2 that is released in 2 years...so i hope there will be no certificates for binary only driver hardware. a newbie might not know why a binary only driver is bad for him..and certificates are there for the newbies in the first place...
OTOH: those expensive consultancy hours could be even more expensive if they suggest an unnecessary restructuring of your business just to fit the modules that exist in the SAP software.
for the huge money the software costs and the consultants cost one can pay a lot of programmer hours... btw: of course programmers who do not find accounting boring would be better there.. i did not say that i want to do that stuff..
while that benchmark is good as it telles ppl about the performance of linux i want to say a few words about that SAP.
i am not an SAP expert myself (in fact i think bookkeeping/accounting etc. is something rather boring..) but i have talked with a few persons about that SAP thingy..my impression is that:
it is huge and bloated and expensive and one needs lots of $$$ to pay people who know this huge and bloated thing (consultants) to have a chance to make use of it.
people use it because everyone else uses it and when everyone else uses it it can not be bad (this is one similarity with m$)
maybe there are cases where the use of this thing makes some sense but i guess most ppl would be better of if they hire one ore 2 dedicated programmers who built a custom solution for the company there the company would have the source and would not depend on a propritary solution. after all for most companys the only use is a small number of database tables anyway.. (of course the company would have to take care that the source is well documented so it does not get to much dependent on the programmes who implemented it.. why?:
coders are cheaper then consults their knowledge is not so much spezialised.
if you have to customize sap and you have to code towards possible bad documented interfac/api then it could be more work then doing it all by yourself.
very interesting. if that project would be successfull then it would improve the power of search engines..but also make censorship very easy. one could get a very accurate messarement how much a page is lets say: right wing, left wing, pornographic, critical towards this and that, etc...
the difference to the self censorship mentioned here is that it would be done not be the person who owns the site but the people who link to that..
recently on freshmeat i found an interesting announcment:
the open GRiD project
very interesting. if that project would be successfull then it would improve the power of search engines..but also make censorship very easy. one could get a very accurate messarement how much a page is lets say: right wing, left wing, pornographic, critical towards this and that, etc... and i think people could (and would) use that information for the purpose of censorship...
Slashdot Mirror
with that is globalisation and a shift towards a kind of world government.
i would say NWO (the shift towards some kind world government) is more or
less inevitable. we will have that in some form or another anyway. the
question is not if we want that kind of thing but how we want
it to look like.
scale (and the most important problems are usually global problems) then no
one will solve those problems. instead big corporations will more or less
rule the world. small countries can not afford to object those big
corporations.. "if you do not give us the right to pollute your environment
we will take our $$$ elsewhere.." etc.. only very big countries could afford
to object here.. the USA comes to mind. but unfortunately the USA is mostly
in the hand of big $$$ corporations anyway because the political system
allows bribery (lobbying, donating money to senators etc..) and is not
really democratic.. so i guess big corporations are not unhappy with the
status quo of competing national government. as long as there is no real
international political power which could stand up against big corporations
then they are the king of the hill...
that can operate on a global scale. we need institutions where these
problems are discussed but moreover we also need institutions which have the
legal power to do something about the problems. so international
organisations are necessary. but we want them to be democratically
controlled. until we have world wide voting this could be achieved if the
national governments send representatives there and each one has votes..
so when arguing against international organisations like WTO etc: it is
important that people argue against the politics this organisation makes in
case it is too much oriented towards the interest of corporations but not
against the institution as a place where there would be power to do
something to control international corporations
an example: international corporation wants to produce something very cheap
and the cheapest way to produce it is in a way that pollutes our atmosphere.
now they say ask: "which country has no laws to prohibit the pollution about
the atmosphere" of course they will find one somewhere.. (bribing a senator
in the USA or going 3rd world country..etc.). now each sovereign small
country can say: oh but we will not buy these goods from this company
because they pollute the environment... but will they really do it? after all
it gives them competitive disadvantage compared to the other nations which
do not hesitate to buy that goods.. when it is a small country then they can
not do but buy.. (maybe they have a little bit more tax on it so they can
tell the environmentalists among the voters that they are doing something
but most of the time they will just buy it). would there be a powerful
organisation then they could just say "producing with this kind of
environmental is not allowed."
somehow the reason why we want supernational organisations is the same as
the one why we want workers unions => so that the people together are strong
against too much capitalism. and i guess most of the resortiments against
NWO is actually promoted by big corporations and right wing parties.
(together with a few left who are just to stupid to grasp it).
greetings from vienna, austria.
der mond.
what i do not understand:
if these people protested against the WTO because they think that it is only
in the interest of big corporation why don't these people portent against
the USA? the USA is not a real democracy but for the most part is bought by
big corporate $$$. (in the USA politicians are payed mostly by private money
where in europe a political party gets fund from the budget according to
the votes they got at the last election). so the USA is the country which
causes most pollution and waste of environmental resources of all..
so hopefully the angry people from seatle will soon turn their anger against
the US political system so corporate dictatorship can be replaces with
democracy..
greetings from vienna,
mond.
when discussing with people from the U.S. i often see a strange fear against
anything that has to do with world government. people there seem to
uncritically reject anything that has to do with international
organisations, UNO, UNICEF, etc, etc,
a lot of this rejections seem to come from right wing people. nationalists
fear about their "sovereignty". so i was a bit surprised to hear that
"anarchists" protested against the WTO. even thought "free trade" is
something that one would think big corporations would like, i think it
ultimately are right wing people who nursed those riots.
from my point of view: the USA while claiming to care for environmental
protection they do not give a shit about that. the USA is most responsible
for the emission of solutions which cause the global warming etc.. when
international organisations meet the USA always refused to agree to stronger
emission limits.. obviously in the USA where the political system makes
bribing of politicians legal and legitim big corporations have too much
influence on such matters. capitalism gone out of control.
now i guess these big corporations have an interest to foster any anti
"world government" like movements. as long as there are competing and
quarrelling national governments these governments do not have enough power
to limit the power of international corporations. especially small countries
can not afforded to do anything here. and the big country: the USA is already
bought by them..
when we look on how the USA is using their "sovereignty": an embargo on
cuba then we already know where those people who support this kind of
"sovereignty" comes from..
solving global problems needs strong cooperations between democratic
countries. international platforms are necessary for that matter. and it
needs organisations which also have the power to implement some rules on a
global scale not just idle talk. so people should not protest against this
organisations but instead should try that their government really sends
people to this organisations which support the interest of the people and
not the one of big corporations. in the case of the usa, these anarchists
should first of all riot against their own government which is largely bought
by big $$$$... implementing more democratic models like those we have in
most european countries here would be a good start there..
greetings from vienna, austria.
mond,
rather they should think about a way to do the distributed processing that could not produce false error even if open sourced. and then there would not be any reason anymore not top open source it. i do not think it is all to difficult to do:
greetings from vienna, austria.
dermond. (english is not my mother tongue and i have not spellchecked my post)
i think some smart ppl in china realiced who volunarable the west is with windoze on almost every desktop.. as a consequence they invested in cyberwarefare while they switch to something more secureable: linux. they hired a few hacker and one of them (as a proof of concept) wrote the macrovirus that sent that emails to china.. makes perfect sense. and if it helps people here to realize how deep they are in the shit by using windoze then it is only good...
dermond.
another battlefield where m$ tried to overtake the net was with the launch of win95. they wanted to push a completly different net that would not have been built on tcp/ip: the MSN network. early win95 was shiped with MSN clients but not internet dialup was not integrated very well... what they planed was to completly replace the internet with their network. fortunatly the consumers did not like the idea and the internet was already big enough.. but i do not want to think about how the world today would look like if that MSN would have been a success then.. 95% of people using MSN. the internet almost obsoleted.... after m$ realices they could not kill the internet they started their E&E&E tactics...
when micro$oft wanted to sell windoze to ISP's (DNS, WEB, etc..) and thus to replace unix at ISPS, they called this "operation normandie". this is where in WWII the alied forces landed to beat hitler. so micro$oft has compared unix to hitler long before. so i think it is only fair to do it vice versa. fortunatly ISPs where not very pleaces with an OS that was not stable and not remotely managable..etc..
... you can argue any position you want. important is that you are smart enough to select the one that fits what you want and that you can argue it a bit yourself..it is not rocket science: buy into this technology and you pay for the next 10 years with no end or take this free piece of code and have the future wide open...
mond.
well it is a bit waste of badwidth since it does not include gsm like compressione etc..but i still love to type: cat /dev/audio|ssh otherhost.somewhere cat - > /dev/audio
hmmm strange change of mind.. the last albume he put on the web was not available as mp3 but only in the propritary m$ audio and SDMI shit... the last concert was only broadcasted with the realmedia shit.. not mp3 there... and now he talks like he invented mp3...strange...
so it is not that much of a bad a flawed analogy: in fact what you say is that a monopoly is even worse then politcal tyranny... well i would not go that far but it seems you agree in principle with my analogy..
der mond.
i am a liberal minded person as well and freedom is one of the most important values we have. but unrestricted capitalism does not bring freedom. and if capitailsm brings fruits like a monopoly then it takes away the freedom of many. where is the freedom of the person who wants to use an office packet and she can only choose to use m$ because she needs to share documents with others who had no choice for the same reason? a monoply in a market is like dictatorship in the political realm. of yourse you can say replacing the dictatorship is taking away the right of the dictator but at least it gives rights to millions of people where they had non before. think about it.
you say that "people are voting with their dollars"? lot of people do not like the m$ office shit but they need to buy it to be able to read the shit the get mailed from people who have that crap. they do not like still they have to pay. is that a free vote? no. if you for them to buy something they do not want that is theft. i hope people will sue the hell out of m$ to get their money back.
greetings from vienna. austria.
der mond.
here in austria political partys get their money
according to their votes at the last election, from the state. this means they are to a large degree independent of corporate money. as far as i know this is the case
in most european countries..
the US would be wise in establishing a similar system.. but of course all the companys that are bribing the government there now would not find that nice.. and since i think their influence is already too strong this will not happen.
conclusion: the U.S. is not a democracy but already owend by big corporations..
greetings from vienna,
mond.
a 24k stream is not that bad at all... at least much better then realaudio (from my subjective point of view). and the network bandwith: one can mirror the mp3 streams at different location using icecast alias feature..
i use a K6-450 to produce a 24kbit/sec stream with the free LAME encoder (based on the ISO sources..) and it uses about 20% of the CPU time. the stream is then sent to an icecast server and several other icecast server mirror that stream with "alias" defines.
greetings mond.
postgres and mysql are already very promissing...
i am sure good databases will be here soon..
mond.
the person who moderated this down is probably only running how the metamoderation would react to this.. so is xENTROPYy a cmdrtaco in disguise? and by the way: i think what is really offtopic are those meta discussions about how something is moderated good or bad. i wish people would not comment on such things. after all this is why there is meta moderation. meta discusions are offtopic. and of course this as being a meta meta discussion is especially offtopic. but since i do not have enough moderator points to modertate all the people down how whine about how something is moderated bad or good i thought i just jump in the discussion and give my $0.02
i think it is good new. i would suspect most of the 3000 employes that where fired will start some job in the linux field.. with their unix know-how they can help the cause of linux...
when i moderated i read through an article and if i find one (or 2 really) good posts i moderate them up.. i assume most people do it that way. the result of the new system would be that probably peopel see a good comment and can not moderate them ..
so they search for a similar one that does express a similar idea (or simply repeats most of the idea) that they can moderate up.. and the will moderat that up. so the whole moderation process would loose sharpness it would be somehow blurred. it would not help to find the perls form the posts...
mond.
on the one hand it is good to see that companys care about the fact wether linux runs on certain hardware or not and that consumers get an easy way to find about that (that certificat that ibm wants). i do not think it is a problem that they want a "red hat" certificate. if it works with red hat it will work with debian and suse as well...
but i hope that they will not get such a certificate from red hat until all their hardware works and that includes that modem..
furthermore i believe it is inportant that no one gets any certificate for binary only drivers. a binary only driver might work now but might be difficult with kernel 3.2 that is released in 2 years...so i hope there will be no certificates for binary only driver hardware. a newbie might not know why a binary only driver is bad for him..and certificates are there for the newbies in the first place...
just my ATS 0.02
mond.
OTOH: those expensive consultancy hours could be even more expensive if they suggest an unnecessary restructuring of your business just to fit the modules that exist in the SAP software.
mond.
for the huge money the software costs and the consultants cost one can pay a lot of programmer hours... btw: of course programmers who do not find accounting boring would be better there.. i did not say that i want to do that stuff..
i am not an SAP expert myself (in fact i think bookkeeping/accounting etc. is something rather boring..) but i have talked with a few persons about that SAP thingy..my impression is that:
just my EUR 0.02.
mond.
recently on freshmeat i found an interesting announcment:
the open GRiD project
very interesting. if that project would be successfull then it would improve the power of search engines..but also make censorship very easy. one could get a very accurate messarement how much a page is lets say: right wing, left wing, pornographic, critical towards this and that, etc...
the difference to the self censorship mentioned here is that it would be done not be the person who owns the site but the people who link to that..
mond.
recently on freshmeat i found an interesting announcment:
the open GRiD project
very interesting. if that project would be successfull then it would improve the power of search engines..but also make censorship very easy. one could get a very accurate messarement how much a page is lets say: right wing, left wing, pornographic, critical towards this and that, etc... and i think people could (and would) use that information for the purpose of censorship...
greetings from vienna, austria.
der mond