While I normally try to convince anti-globlization activists of the merits of globalization whenever I can, this time I will hold my tongue. How can plugging a third world country into the internet be seen as anything else but furthering globalization?
I think you're confused.
'Anti-globalization' activists aren't against greater communication and information exchange. Indeed, many are anarchists that would like to see all borders fall and all imposed limits between various peoples disappear.
They are, however, generally against the consolidation of global economic power among a power elite who socialize costs while privatizing benefits. At the moment, globalization seems to be more about extending Western economic power and authority than really improving the lives and freedom of all people.
On their front page and links off of it, I find evidence of seriously anti-capitalist, anti-Semitic and anti-American sentiment.
Anti-capitalist... what's wrong with having a strong political opinion?
Anti-Semitic? Yeah, the open wires get abuse from real racists and Jew-haters, but there's also a lot of criticism strictly related Israeli government policy (sometimes too much, spammed across newswires, as if it's the only thing going on around the world), which only a die-hard Israel supporter would consider anti-Semitic. Heck, Israel has its own IMC, run by Israelis...
Anti-American? God forbid someone question U.S. government policy.
It's imprecise to pin Indymedia down to a single viewpoint. Many of the volunteers are either anarchists; some are Marxists, a few are libertarian in the American sense, some are trade unionists, single-issue activists, et al. The viewpoints expressed generally range from moderately left-wing, to way off the political fringe (like myself). Occasionally, abuse of the open publishing system crops up when racists and Jew-haters try to recruit. Most readers see right through it.
Indymedia's pretty varied. It may seem like a bunch of whiny college kiddies in North America at first glance, but many IMCs such as the ones in Argentina, SF, NYC, and Israel are doing some spectacular coverage of events and issues you'd never hear about via mainstream media.
Yeah, God, mom, and apple pie forbid anyone criticize the actions of the U.S. government. That's just being a traitor to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, that First Amendment crap be damned.
Look at the knee jerk terrorism laws that were suggested after 9/11. Once the MPs looked at them seriously, cooler heads prevailed nothing happened. Same shit all over again.
Wrongo, boyo. C-36 and C-44 passed. C-42 was withdrawn in April, but our version of the USA PATRIOT Act was C-36.
I also suggest you read up on C-24, proposed in March 2001, passed in December.
"The federal government plays an important role in funding basic software research," said a Microsoft representative. "Our interest is in helping to ensure that the government licenses its research in ways that take into account a stated goal of the U.S. government: to promote commercialization of public research."
Translation: we want the Feds to pay for stuff we can package up and sell. God, mom, and apple pie forbid they release anything for free under a license we don't like.
Read another way, it sounds as if Microsoft wants to turn public information into private property for its own benefit.
A lot of people complain that the federal government seems to be bought and owned by numerous corporate interests. Microsoft seems to be saying that's the way it should be, that federally-produced software, made with taxpayer dollars, should be released in such a way that M$ can sell it back to those taxpayers for a healthy profit.
Perhaps I'm overreacting (I do that quite a bit lately), but this seems to be a very arrogant position for a company to take. Then again, this is the same company that invited Peru's president to its headquarters in an effort to fight a Peruvian free-software-in-government law, while that company's government made nasty noises to Peru through its ambassador.
I can understand wishing to impose penalties on drivers who threaten the safety of others by devoting their attention to a cell phone. I don't think the law should be used to punish what are effectively breaches of etiquette, though. It seems like using a sledgehammer to kill an annoying fly.
Normally, I don't reply to trolls, but something I have to point out...
The misspelling is common enough that the trolls even include it for kicks, as I did here. I know quite well the correct spelling. I'm actually shocked at the number of people who consistently misspell loser.
It's not that hard.
(And this posting time limit just bit me in the arse.... lame.)
Windows won't install on Mac hardware, Mac OS X won't install on x86 hardware. This is expressly a Windows-Linux test, though an accompanying option for installing Mac OS X on Mac hardware might be an interesting sideline.
Fortunately, the better distributions include easier tools than fdisk as a primary option for Joe Clueless User.
No, I'm thinking of a pair of users not quite at the level of an administrator who can fart Perl scripts on a good day, but someone who knows the difference between root and Administrator, someone who knows what a partition is and has even set one up, in any favoured OS.
I'm a Lunix-loving looser (tm Trolls, Inc.), but I think this could in no way be called a proper test.
A better test:
2 identical stock computers, fairly recent but not top-of-the-line hardware 1 copy of Windows XP 1 copy of the latest version of Red Hat, Mandrake, or other selected distribution 2 clueless users 2 clueful users 1 administrator to wipe the machines after each test 1 instruction manual per OS No gurus 4 runs - one with the cluebies doing Windows, one with Linux, and one of each with the clued-in pair. Neither user can help the other; both are isolated
We know Joe's a Linux advocate. Let's have a real test.
So instead of running around and burning the dorms, would a college riot involve geeks with HERF guns threatening to wipe out the library unless they get a week to play Nethack?
If everyone is expected to know all the laws and what they mean, then why are there so many lawyers? Our law systems are so confusing and complex that we have to hire special people to interpret and find laws that will help defend us and prosecute others.
This is where things start getting weird.
I noted in another post that "ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it" is a basic tenet of Western law. I'm not aware of any country that lets someone off for claiming "I didn't know that was illegal," otherwise everyone and their mother would use it. You're correct, however, in noting that our legal systems and codes have become so convoluted that it is nearly impossible to know what is illegal without hiring (or being) a trained lawyer. I find this slightly ironic, because I said pretty much the same thing to a fellow potsmoker considering a lone crusade in court.
Every time I think about stuff like this, I understand a little more why I espouse the political ideals I currently do...
I'm in Canada. I took a basic law class in my final year of high school, so I'm not claiming to be an expert, but one thing I clearly remember Mrs. Istl telling us is "IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO DEFENSE." She was a lawyer, and her husband was a local judge.
That said, I'm interested to find out which part of the Criminal Code specifically makes installing mod chips, and presumably other circumvention devices, a felony offense. It sounds rather DMCA-like. I wonder if Parliament passed something DMCA-like with almost no fanfare. The article makes it sound like the mod chip conviction is the important one for being the first of its kind.
It seems our entire business plan was to attract investment dollars. Then puff up to look like a much bigger fish than we were. Hopefully, a much larger fish would see us, decide we were all fat and tasty-looking, and swallow us whole. Everyone would make huge profits. Step Three was almost a certainty.
I normally don't even care about -1 replies, but this one struck me as kinda funny, because in fact I also use the same computer from five years ago. Runs fine.
The problem is, this unencumbered hardware could potentially become illegal, because it doesn't enforce DRM in hardware. As I said, don't think it can't happen? The DMCA got passed, didn't it?
The current unencumbered hardware isn't going to go away unless people stop buying it, or a law is made against it.
Under the DMCA, unencumbered hardware could be considered a circumvention device to avoid the Palladium-based DRM hooks. And if that's not good enough for the attack lawyers, just remember - the DMCA got passed.
You bet your ass unencumbered hardware could go away. Give it five years. Five years is forever in the computer industry - remember what hardware you were using five years ago?
I mean come on guys xf86cfg isn't exactly rocket science, it no harder to use than playing with the control panel in Windows.
It's easy to use, it's just there apparently isn't some kind of control panel item or icon to run it, and no indication that the program even exists. Most Windows programs I've run across also have short, barely-sensical names for their executables, but that's why icons with pretty, fuzzy names exist - so non-geeks who've never heard of man or seen a command line can figure out what to do without calling tech support.
I can't say I'm surprised, but with some geeks installing the more user-friendly distros for their families, couldn't a few get together and figure out how to put together and sell/give away a really solid, usable Linux-based desktop computer? Maybe Wal-Mart's Mandrake PC will be this mythical machine?
Slashdot Mirror
While I normally try to convince anti-globlization activists of the merits of globalization whenever I can, this time I will hold my tongue. How can plugging a third world country into the internet be seen as anything else but furthering globalization?
I think you're confused.
'Anti-globalization' activists aren't against greater communication and information exchange. Indeed, many are anarchists that would like to see all borders fall and all imposed limits between various peoples disappear.
They are, however, generally against the consolidation of global economic power among a power elite who socialize costs while privatizing benefits. At the moment, globalization seems to be more about extending Western economic power and authority than really improving the lives and freedom of all people.
And the problem with that is?
-Plat, an anarchist
On their front page and links off of it, I find evidence of seriously anti-capitalist, anti-Semitic and anti-American sentiment.
Anti-capitalist... what's wrong with having a strong political opinion?
Anti-Semitic? Yeah, the open wires get abuse from real racists and Jew-haters, but there's also a lot of criticism strictly related Israeli government policy (sometimes too much, spammed across newswires, as if it's the only thing going on around the world), which only a die-hard Israel supporter would consider anti-Semitic. Heck, Israel has its own IMC, run by Israelis...
Anti-American? God forbid someone question U.S. government policy.
Indymedia is only moderately left wing.
It's imprecise to pin Indymedia down to a single viewpoint. Many of the volunteers are either anarchists; some are Marxists, a few are libertarian in the American sense, some are trade unionists, single-issue activists, et al. The viewpoints expressed generally range from moderately left-wing, to way off the political fringe (like myself). Occasionally, abuse of the open publishing system crops up when racists and Jew-haters try to recruit. Most readers see right through it.
Indymedia's pretty varied. It may seem like a bunch of whiny college kiddies in North America at first glance, but many IMCs such as the ones in Argentina, SF, NYC, and Israel are doing some spectacular coverage of events and issues you'd never hear about via mainstream media.
Yeah, God, mom, and apple pie forbid anyone criticize the actions of the U.S. government. That's just being a traitor to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, that First Amendment crap be damned.
We live in a democratic system, so any government that takes power was elected, which means that more than 50% of people support them.
Should I point out the obvious, or not?
Look at the knee jerk terrorism laws that were suggested after 9/11. Once the MPs looked at them seriously, cooler heads prevailed nothing happened. Same shit all over again.
Wrongo, boyo. C-36 and C-44 passed. C-42 was withdrawn in April, but our version of the USA PATRIOT Act was C-36.
I also suggest you read up on C-24, proposed in March 2001, passed in December.
But for engineering all Canadian schools (that offer engineering, 40+) are good.
Even Rye High?:)
"The federal government plays an important role in funding basic software research," said a Microsoft representative. "Our interest is in helping to ensure that the government licenses its research in ways that take into account a stated goal of the U.S. government: to promote commercialization of public research."
Translation: we want the Feds to pay for stuff we can package up and sell. God, mom, and apple pie forbid they release anything for free under a license we don't like.
Read another way, it sounds as if Microsoft wants to turn public information into private property for its own benefit.
A lot of people complain that the federal government seems to be bought and owned by numerous corporate interests. Microsoft seems to be saying that's the way it should be, that federally-produced software, made with taxpayer dollars, should be released in such a way that M$ can sell it back to those taxpayers for a healthy profit.
Perhaps I'm overreacting (I do that quite a bit lately), but this seems to be a very arrogant position for a company to take. Then again, this is the same company that invited Peru's president to its headquarters in an effort to fight a Peruvian free-software-in-government law, while that company's government made nasty noises to Peru through its ambassador.
Am I the only one creeped out by this?
Yeah, but you have to repair the damaged wall/floor/table/face afterward. Unnecessary.
I can understand wishing to impose penalties on drivers who threaten the safety of others by devoting their attention to a cell phone. I don't think the law should be used to punish what are effectively breaches of etiquette, though. It seems like using a sledgehammer to kill an annoying fly.
Normally, I don't reply to trolls, but something I have to point out...
The misspelling is common enough that the trolls even include it for kicks, as I did here. I know quite well the correct spelling. I'm actually shocked at the number of people who consistently misspell loser.
It's not that hard.
(And this posting time limit just bit me in the arse.... lame.)
Windows won't install on Mac hardware, Mac OS X won't install on x86 hardware. This is expressly a Windows-Linux test, though an accompanying option for installing Mac OS X on Mac hardware might be an interesting sideline.
Fortunately, the better distributions include easier tools than fdisk as a primary option for Joe Clueless User.
No, I'm thinking of a pair of users not quite at the level of an administrator who can fart Perl scripts on a good day, but someone who knows the difference between root and Administrator, someone who knows what a partition is and has even set one up, in any favoured OS.
I'm a Lunix-loving looser (tm Trolls, Inc.), but I think this could in no way be called a proper test.
A better test:
2 identical stock computers, fairly recent but not top-of-the-line hardware
1 copy of Windows XP
1 copy of the latest version of Red Hat, Mandrake, or other selected distribution
2 clueless users
2 clueful users
1 administrator to wipe the machines after each test
1 instruction manual per OS
No gurus
4 runs - one with the cluebies doing Windows, one with Linux, and one of each with the clued-in pair.
Neither user can help the other; both are isolated
We know Joe's a Linux advocate. Let's have a real test.
So instead of running around and burning the dorms, would a college riot involve geeks with HERF guns threatening to wipe out the library unless they get a week to play Nethack?
BTW, there are no felony offences, they're called indictable.
Thanks. Couldn't remember the exact term.
If everyone is expected to know all the laws and what they mean, then why are there so many lawyers? Our law systems are so confusing and complex that we have to hire special people to interpret and find laws that will help defend us and prosecute others.
This is where things start getting weird.
I noted in another post that "ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it" is a basic tenet of Western law. I'm not aware of any country that lets someone off for claiming "I didn't know that was illegal," otherwise everyone and their mother would use it. You're correct, however, in noting that our legal systems and codes have become so convoluted that it is nearly impossible to know what is illegal without hiring (or being) a trained lawyer. I find this slightly ironic, because I said pretty much the same thing to a fellow potsmoker considering a lone crusade in court.
Every time I think about stuff like this, I understand a little more why I espouse the political ideals I currently do...
I'm in Canada. I took a basic law class in my final year of high school, so I'm not claiming to be an expert, but one thing I clearly remember Mrs. Istl telling us is "IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO DEFENSE." She was a lawyer, and her husband was a local judge.
Ignorance of the law is no defense.
That said, I'm interested to find out which part of the Criminal Code specifically makes installing mod chips, and presumably other circumvention devices, a felony offense. It sounds rather DMCA-like. I wonder if Parliament passed something DMCA-like with almost no fanfare. The article makes it sound like the mod chip conviction is the important one for being the first of its kind.
It seems our entire business plan was to attract investment dollars. Then puff up to look like a much bigger fish than we were. Hopefully, a much larger fish would see us, decide we were all fat and tasty-looking, and swallow us whole. Everyone would make huge profits. Step Three was almost a certainty.
Yeah, if only step 2 had been there...
Step 1: Attract investors.
Step 2:
Step 3: Profit!
I normally don't even care about -1 replies, but this one struck me as kinda funny, because in fact I also use the same computer from five years ago. Runs fine.
The problem is, this unencumbered hardware could potentially become illegal, because it doesn't enforce DRM in hardware. As I said, don't think it can't happen? The DMCA got passed, didn't it?
The current unencumbered hardware isn't going to go away unless people stop buying it, or a law is made against it.
Under the DMCA, unencumbered hardware could be considered a circumvention device to avoid the Palladium-based DRM hooks. And if that's not good enough for the attack lawyers, just remember - the DMCA got passed.
You bet your ass unencumbered hardware could go away. Give it five years. Five years is forever in the computer industry - remember what hardware you were using five years ago?
Better to stop this now, before it can take root.
I mean come on guys xf86cfg isn't exactly rocket science, it no harder to use than playing with the control panel in Windows.
It's easy to use, it's just there apparently isn't some kind of control panel item or icon to run it, and no indication that the program even exists. Most Windows programs I've run across also have short, barely-sensical names for their executables, but that's why icons with pretty, fuzzy names exist - so non-geeks who've never heard of man or seen a command line can figure out what to do without calling tech support.
I can't say I'm surprised, but with some geeks installing the more user-friendly distros for their families, couldn't a few get together and figure out how to put together and sell/give away a really solid, usable Linux-based desktop computer? Maybe Wal-Mart's Mandrake PC will be this mythical machine?
Translation: it's very difficult to stop the free flow of information.
Good.