Still here, with my 100 User ID. And for what it's worth, I agree with FASCwhatever that slashdot's changed a LOT, but I still think it's worth reading. I do think that it's more "mainstream" now, and not really worth commenting on most things. Way too much static, way too little chance of having some sort of worthwhile discussion.
Oh, man... we're collectively represented by Chuck D. That's just scary. The man is definately on "our" side, in the respect that he wants a new distribution channel to be successful, and screw the RIAA over. This is good. What's BAD, however, is that he's not the best choice to talk about how Napster parallels NFS, and other distributed systems. Outlawing "technologies like Napster" will royally screw over the internet... I just hope Chuck D. knows how to articulate this along with the "RIAA is a monopolistic parasitic bastard" argument.
Why don't you consider making your copyrighted materials available online YOURSELVES? The sound quality of an MP3 can be easily controlled - you could put up 1:00 clips at a lower quality on your web site. I (and many others like me) don't buy an album until we can listen to at least 3/4 of it via MP3's. Radio singles are great, but that's usually 1 song off of a 12 to 16 song album. Napster proves that people have a HUGE desire to sample music before they buy it. Why don't you make samples available on your web site?
Also, do you realize the amount of live material that Napster users share? I own 9 Metallica CD's, and have no less than 30 mp3's of live concerts, interviews, etc. I'm hardly "ripping you off". However, I am an avid Napster user, because it's a great way to find rare live material. Why don't you make high-quality mp3's of an occasional concert available on your web site?
In your interviews on the subject already available, you assert that Napster is a piracy tool. Are you aware that:
Napster does NOT store or provide files. It simply allows one computer to connect to another. Napster is NOT a music archive, and has NO illegal material stored ANYWHERE on its servers.
Napster is NOT just a find-an-mp3 software. It has chat rooms which allow indie artists to promote their material, fans to discuss material, etc.
It seems to me that the REAL problem is with people putting entire CD's online, THEN connecting to Napster. The REAL crime is when an individual makes copyrighted material available, NOT when the Napster service is abused. It seems to me that a much stronger lawsuit would be one against an individual who makes these materials available. Why aren't you pursuiing individual claims against the biggest perpatrators, rather than Napster? Is it because you're afraid of alienating your fan base?
I read the transcript of your fan chat at artistdirect.com with great interest. And I'm totally disgusted with the answer you gave to the following question: "What do you hope to accomplish with this lawsuit?" Lars responded, "The ideal situation is clear and simple - to put Napster out of business." At a later point, Lars states "We're not saying that bands who want to be part of Napster should not be allowed to."
Lars/Metallica, how on earth can you hold these two ideals, which are POLAR OPPOSITES? You say that it should be an artist's decision whether or not they want to participate in this new medium, yet you also say you want to kill it outright. My question is this: How do you feel that putting Napster out of business and thereby removing that right-to-chose from EVERY other artist is fair to anyone but yourselves? Also, how do you justify this point of view to fans of non-signed bands who depend on Napster for distribution?
I wish I could. But guess what, some piece of shit stole the login "BOredAtWork" already. WHY the hell do people feel compelled to do this kinda thing?
Fair warning to all, anything coming from my name during that chat is NOT me.
There are a few catches: you'll need a bachelor's degree already, and you'll need to be so bright that people put on sunglasses when you walk into a room.
Translation: You need to already have a degree very similar to the one offered, and be willing (and financially able) to go for a year without holding a steady job so you can study to earn what amounts to the same degree you already have. Remind me again why anyone would want to do this? I'm looking forward to graduation so that I can start earning money, and NOT have to study for 12 hours a day anymore. This sounds like a novel idea, but rather useless...
While I'm usually one of your most vocal critics when I bother to read your babbling, I'm finding myself in the rather unusual position of agreeing with you on something... it's probably some sign of the apocolypse, but hey, that's life... Anyways, here's my thoughts (some of them, and quite disorganized) on the steaming pile of bullshit that is WAVE America...
First, the underlying philosophy here has more holes than a donut shop. Think about this, folks. The group that they're attempting to monitor is expected to police ITSELF. This doesn't work in any other facet of society. I can't think of a single instance where a group is trusted to police its own ranks. This is a bad idea from the word GO, no matter what the group.
Next, one must remember that this isn't just ANY group: we're dealing with CHILDREN. How on EARTH does any rational person expect a CHILD to recognize a psychological disorder? Children can't diagnose THEMSELVES, let alone others. A child can't distinguish between Bobby Joe being constipated, and Bobby Joe suffering from emotional turmoil. Hell, most PARENTS can't tell either! You're asking a group of kids to do the job of trained counselors. Not a good idea at all...
Another point to keep in mind is that the students WAVE seeks to single out are those who are different or strange. They can't pinpoint "potential troublemakers", so the next best thing is "those who fit the description of a troublemaker". While this is a great theory, in practice it's total bullshit. As many researchers, counselors, doctors and former "troublemakers" (myself included) will attest, the root of a child's problems is usually isolation and lack of social acceptance. While this program certainly will identify the socially isolated, this will only compound the problem. When I was in school, kids could point and say "he's strange!" With WAVE, kids can force ADULTS to say the same thing. If social isolation is the root of the problem, anything that INCREASES social isolation - such as singling out Joey as "that kid who goes to 'special' sessions three days a week" or "that kid who has to talk to the head doctor" - is bad. Think about it; when you were in middle school, wasn't there someone who had some "different" memorable trait or problem that went away during high school, yet was best remembered by it? Putting a 13 year old into counseling, removing him from his classmates, or making him look anymore "strange" in their eyes will just cement that label onto him.
Now, the BIG point, the REALLY important one, is that WAVE assumes that different==bad. Kids understand what they know... if someone is "different", kids think that's bad. WAVE reinforces this idea. "Call us, and report any suspicious classmates!" To a child, that reads "Call us, and we'll take that weirdo away!" Once they see that this WORKS, that they can get three of their friends to call too and magically Smelly Stan will be in "special" classes, they'll keep calling and calling and calling until they report everyone that's "different". What kids need to learn is that DIFFERENT DOES NOT EQUAL BAD. If anything can be learned from these school shootings, it's that isolation and intolerance of "different" is a bad thing. We should be teaching our kids to recognize differences as a GOOD THING.
Instead of teaching them this, WAVE teaches them to report the "different" kids so they can "be fixed". THIS IS BULLSHIT. Absolute, total and complete bullshit. I look back on myself in high school, and see myself now, and thank God that WAVE was not in place. I'd have been raising every red flag in the system, and singled out for it. Right now, I'm finishing my Junior year of college, and having the time of my life. College is different. Here, people see something about me that's different, and say "dude, that's cool!" Or "man... I wish I could do that!" In high school, it was "dude, that's fucking gay!" Or "man... that's so fucking odd!" Right now, I've got a gorgeous girlfriend, a great job lined up after graduation, decent grades, loads of friends, and the respect of those around me. I couldn't think of anything else to ask for. In high school, I was "different", and persecuted because of it. A program like WAVE would have singled me out, embarassed the hell out of me, and made my life even more miserable. Basically, WAVE really strikes a chord with me. I'm "unstable" by their definitions, and being told that this is a bad thing really, really pisses me off.
In review, WAVE operates on philosophies that can be picked apart and revealed to be nothing more than a fresh steaming pile of shit.
Children and police their own ranks without bias
Children can recognize social disorder, mental illness and dangerous individuals based on their being different
Difference from the norm is a Bad Thing in a child
We should strive to remove the Differences
Singling out Different children and thereby causing them further isolation from their peers will not hurt them
Quite simply, recognizing and helping troubled children is the job of a trained professional. WAVE puts these responsibilities on CHILDREN.
Katz, I think you're a poor writer who's here on slashdot because he had the sense to jump on a growing gravy train, but I think you're also now in the position to make a real difference in the world, and do something useful for a change. I really hope you do a kick ass job when you talk to these people. Please, on behalf of everyone who WAVE might eventually effect, don't use this opportunity to hype your books, or terms (geek profiling), or political ideas. Please, please, please, keep your conversation along the REAL subject, and convince WAVE to take a long hard look at their underlying philosophies...
Most of that free software everyone loves so much was developed at least in part by students. While creating a scholarship fund yourself is probably more work than you're willing to do, I think someone somewhere (redhat, va, fsf, are you listening?) could pull a major PR coup if they created a "developer scholarship fund". This body would take donations from generous souls, and give it to students who have contributed to the community in some worthy fashion. If you're looking to get the most bang for your buck, I think this is the best option. Groups like the FSF and SPI are wonderful causes, but $1000 given to them doesn't mean a fraction of what it would in the hands of a poor undergrad who has to maintain grades, a job or two, and still finds time to give away code or some other contribution.
(disclaimer: I'm a student, so I'm not exactly suggesting this from an impartial point of view)
And they want $38 EVERY TIME you transfer OS's. Or did two years ago. I loved mathematica, but it lives on my windows partition because I'm not paying to transfer to Linux. I have the CD. I should be allowed to install it on whatever OS I wish, without having to pay extra for the priviledge. I'd fill out the stupid form, but I'll be damned if I'm sending a check along with it. Do they still charge for a system transfer?
That question had EVERY reason to appear on the page. I'm not suggesting anything at all about Gore's views. I was asking why they made a site that caters to the masses, when it's not the masses that READ the site. I was asking why they made a site that just regurgitates old news, rather than using the medium to FURTHER explain Gore's plan. Please, explain to me how exactly that is a borderline troll? That site is fluff. There's no content. I'm simply asking WHY they chose to make it vague rather than use it to compliment the more mainstream mediums like TV and newspaper.
Would I have answered differently? You're damn right I would have. Something along the lines of "well, there's details about the example you gave -a- here -/a-," at the very least. If someone were to hit me with that question, I'd be damn good and sure I give a REAL answer, rather than dodge and weave around it.
See, if you want TECHNICAL stuff about running a site, you should interview cnn.com or yahoo.com staff. The unique thing about algore2000.com is it's PURPOSE. Hence the reason people asked questions related to that. There's more than enough "how to run a high traffic web site" stuff out there now, and if that type of question were to be asked, we'd just get the same old answer.
As for me calling half the nation stupid, I DIDN'T. I said that most people aren't interested in politics. Care to show me a voter-turnout rate that proves me wrong?
Well, I'm impressed that my "Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool" question actually got answered. At least Mr. Green took a shot at it, which is more than most would do, I think. I have to completely disagree with the bulk of the answer itself, though.
ME: Algore2000 is a good site. HIM: Well, that's a good start. I like this guy already.
It IS a good site. It's meant to present Al in a favorable light, and it does that quite well.
ME: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? HIM: Hmmmmm. Sounds like he changed his mind. Uh-oh.
Not at all. It IS a good site. It has pretty pictures, quotes, and lots and lots of pages. It looks well done, and presents Al favorably. It also seems to be lacking detailed content, and I get the impression that I'm supposed to be impressed and persuaded by JUST the pictures, and short quotes. It IS a good site, but it DOES seem to treat me like a fool. I didn't change my mind anywhere.
ME: Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. HIM: I disagree.
Well, you're more than entitled to your opinion. But if that's the best response I can get, well, it sure doesn't do much to change MY opinion, which is the one that still needs won over by election time. I was really hoping for at least an example of some detailed content, especially since I provided that link to the "details" of Al's plan to improve the affordability of college. Getting no rebuttal but "I disagree" to the bulk of the main arguement is disappointing.
ME: Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. HIM: To answer this question in all candor, I would remind everyone that the average American is our target audience!
I should certainly hope so. The parties and candidates who forget this go up in smoke.
HIM: However - I for one take exception to your assertion that "average Americans" have little interest in politics or technology. Working on this and other campaigns has shown me that average Americans are driving the demand for technology and therefore are driving the technology industry in this country.
Sorry, you can take exception to it all you like, but every voter turnout rate published backs me up. You're getting roughly HALF of the registered voters turning out for presidential elections lately. And less than that for local and state elections. Not to mention that a large part of America never bothers to even register to vote. If the average american WAS interested in politics, don't you think you'd see more than half of them show up on election day?
As for average americans driving the tech industry, I couldn't agree more. People want better stuff, that much applies to everyone everywhere. But a relatively small portion care HOW that comes about. So long as they can go to Best Buy and buy a machine that'll play Quake III, or hear "You've Got Mail", they don't care how things keep advancing so long as they DO keep advancing. The fact that AOL is so popular supports this - people want technology, but don't care how it works or where it comes from. Plug it in, turn it on, and it damn well better work or most people just aren't interested. That's a long way from having the average american take an active interest in the tech industry.
HIM: The large number of volunteers we have recruited through the site is also and clear indication that we are connecting with people interested in helping the campaign.
Ah, that doesn't necessarily indicate anything. I highly doubt that you've gotten a large number of people who just stumble across the site to say "hey, I wanna help!" My guess (and it is only a guess; I'd be interested in seeing some sort of statistics on it) is that your volunteers came to the site looking for ways to help. People generally go into grocery stores to buy food; the stores don't often say "the large number of bread loaves we sold today is a clear indicator that we make people more hungry".
HIM: algore2000.com is for all everyone - not just geeks like you and me. Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!
Well, first off, I'm not a "geek". Never liked the term, never will like it. I've got a social life, dammit. I don't need hit with that stereotype just because I read a certain web site.
As for algore2000.com being the best of current presidential sites, I agree totally. And that's really sad. You DO have more content, more interactivity and more detailed content than any other candidate site that I've read. And I'm still disappointed in ALL of them. I still want to see numbers, plans and details to accompany the executive summaries on the web sites.
As for the platform the site runs on, that tells me that YOU have a clue. It doesn't speak a word for Al; I'm relatively sure he told you "get the best possible stuff you can for what we budgeted" - not "run it on Linux because I support the ideals of Free Software."
HIM: Hey - don't get me wrong - you and I know that we can always do better with our Web sites - so your point is well taken.
I'm glad. My vote's still up for grabs; but at least I know Al has some decent people working for him. All in all, you managed to bob and weave around most of the question(s) I had, but I'm impressed with the interview overall.
Oh, I almost forgot... if you're in touch with Al fairly often, why don't ya put in a word or two about the evils of UCITA, crypto control, and CDA-like legislation?
Well, here I am, 20 years old, up at 1:30am doing electronics homework (I'm a computer engineering major). I've had job offers that would let me start TOMORROW at $38,000/yr and allow me to finish my degree part time. You know, the only thing that really keeps me here is the fact that I'm around 25,000 people my own age to have fun with. It's sure not the sleepless nights, exam stress or lame labs and projects that keep me here. Let alone the HUGE expense of out-of-state tuition. The degree is nice to have, but really not necessary. The simple fact is, there's an awful lot of good reasons to move to industry rather than stay in school. And there's an awful lack of good reasons to stay in school rather than go to work. So, what HAS to happen in order to keep more people in school, and taking these masochistic degree programs is that it has to be made worth their while. Quite simply, it has to be made either more financially beneficial or more fufilling than an entry level job. I'm here because I find it more fufilling than work. But I'm the notable exception; I'm very social, and that's not the case with a lot of CS/CpE majors out there. To them, the social scene is one more BAD thing about college.
Entry level jobs are less stressful than college. More profitable. Leave one with lots of free time (compared to someone taking 18 credit hours, anyways). And don't involve keeping crazy hours. Lots of people just don't wanna bother, because they don't need to. So... if you really want more people majoring in CS or CpE rather than going to work early, you have to make it more appealing.
As in, damn near FREE.
How about VA using some of it's newfound wealth to set up a scholarship program? IBM gives loads of money to higher education. So does DELL, and even Microsoft. For VA, setting up 10 $2,500/yr scholarships is pennies in a very big bucket. It looks great to the press, and even better to the recipients. You can pick people on whatever criteria you chose; grades, free software experience, advocacy, or most-shameless-grub-for-money (me! me!).
The simple fact is, a non-graduate can be rich by 25 if they're any good and end up getting stock options before their company IPO's. Your best and brightest KNOW this, and it draws a great number of them away from universities, because they COST money, and only reward you with stress, debt, and lost sleep. If you want more people to graduate, make school the better option; one of the easiest ways to do that is to make it cheap. A VA Linux Systems Scholarship Program would certainly help.
And I thought not much could surprise me anymore. You know, if they'd have nominated Dogma for something (best supporting actor for the guy who plays Jay - is his name Mewes...? He did a great job), this would be a show worth watching...
I just want to see what the Christian Coalition and their partner groups think of this. I loved this review of Southpark especially. They also tore apart Dogma, and pretty much everything BUT Merry Poppins.
I'm a 20 year old male; this will be the first time I can vote in a presidential election. I am one of your target demographics. I'm a student; so my time to research the candidates is limited. One of my major sources of information is the web - cnn.com and the various candidate sites in particular. At this point, my vote is up for grabs.
Algore2000 is a good site. I'm sure there was countless hours of thought put into each and every detail, especially the "agenda" page. That page in particular is a work of persuasive art, right down to the picture of Al with a pair of cops (tough on crime), and the (over)use of red, white and blue. The list of catch phrases is an especially nice touch; who could possibly NOT support "Saving Our Schools," "Fighting for America's Seniors" and "Improving Health Care," right?
My question for you, sir, has to be this: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? Am I supposed to be genuinely impressed by the load of press releases and speaches? I hate to break the news to you, but I want to see real content, NOT glazed over executive summaries. Take for instance something VERY relevant to me as a college student - the link from the front page about Al's Plan to Make College More Affordable. It leads here. The extent of the "details" stated is this:
"Gore announced new details of his National Tuition Savings Program, which is designed to help families save for college. The plan allows families to invest funds in an account where their money will be protected from inflation and can be withdrawn to pay for higher education expenses tax-free. The plan will also guarantee the cost of college tuition at any participating college or university in the country."
The rest of the press release is all fluff. No mention of whether this is limited to public or private universities, 2 or 4 year degrees, graduate school, part or full time study, etc. And this is the *basic* stuff. I'm also interested in why this would be a better option than, say, investing in short-term CD's.
That's just ONE example from the many I could have chosen. Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. And shots at Bill Bradley. The simple fact is this does not impress me. Actually, since this site represents Al Gore, I'm inclined to believe Al relatively clueless - if he wasn't, surely he'd tell us HOW he plans to fund his proposed programs, tax cuts, etc. Any politician can CLAIM to support any number of things. Algore2000 picks popular issues, and loads the wording of them such that ANYONE would be nearly forced to agree. Come on, who on earth DOESN'T support "A better educational system?"
What I could like to see from algore2000.com, as well as EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE is DETAILS. I want to know HOW you plan to provide a tax cut - will this come at the expense of the defense budget? Money always comes from somewhere; I want to know what has to be CUT to lower taxes. And don't tell me "unnecessary pork" or some trite answer. I want to see numbers.
And I want a big ass chart, with a column for every candidate, and a row for every issue. "Do you support abortion as it currently stands? y/n" "Do you support the abolition of legal abortion under all circumstances? y/n" "Do you support abortion under limited circumstances? If so, when?" Things like that. REAL questions. Some more: "Do you support the reverse engineering of software for porting and compatibility purposes?" "Do you support CDA in its current form?" And more of the like. I don't want to read "Al Gore supports technology and innovation" - I want to read HOW he supports them.
Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. I think this is a mistake; this audience doesn't read political advocacy web sites on a wide basis. You'd do better to use the web site to provide details and elaborate on Al's statements and ideas rather than just rehash them.
One more side note: I followed Jesse Ventura's campaign slightly - I don't know his stance on most of the issues. I dont live in Minnesota, so I didn't take the time to research him. What I DO know is that I was very impressed when a reporter asked him if he supported some obscure bill I'd never heard of. Ventura replied something like "Well, to be honest, I'm not familiar with that at all. I'm not gonna lie to you; I don't know everything, or have all the answers you wanna hear. But I learn fast; I'll read up on it." When can we expect Al Gore to say something like THAT?
Well, that sounds all well and good, but I'll not believe it until I see it.
Why?
There's no beta. Or even an alpha yet. Sure, Mozilla M-whatever is now considered "alpha", but *that is NOT what Netscape will ship*. Netscape will be adding crypto, java, and whatever other AOL-friendly customizations they decide on, and the simple fact is, these additions warrant a beta cycle. Netscape has never shipped a major release without a several month long beta period. Even if they start *today* we'll likely not see a release until May.
Now, bear in mind that Netscape is no longer controlled by Netscape. AOL will be deciding what's released when, and if their latest and greatest AOL 5.0 fiasco is any indicator, we could expect to see a bug ridden but colorful Netscape 6.0 released with no beta cycle... I just hope this isn't the case...
Classes blow. But hey, such is life I suppose. I still post now and then, but I've been busy with... other interests... (read: guitar, women, soccer, Jack Daniels, the occasional class). I'm still around.:-)
I've misunderstood nothing. I read the article, and I *did* notice that *one* of the flight attendants gave it up willingly. THAT instance was a case of stupid voluntary cooperation. Going into someone's home and taking their personal property against their will is seizure. And that's what happened in the other instances. "Discovery" or "fact finding" includes having to show a judge there's reasonable grounds for granting a warrant if you want files or records from someone - I want to know what that "reasonable grounds" was. It's *not* all very legal - the company's reach may extend as far as it controls the property (the office, desk, computer, right down to the toilet paper) but it DOES NOT extend into the homes of private citizens. Ever. THAT is what the big fuss is over. Unless there was "reasonable grounds" for granting that warrant which have NOT been mentioned in the article, there was NO WAY anyone should have taken those machines. Period.
Sorry folks, but this isn't the complete story. At least, I sure as hell HOPE not. See, in this country we have this thing called the Bill of Rights. This old paper has a clause in it that says citizens shall be protected against "Unreasonable search and seizure of person or property." Now, if someone came to MY door, and said "move, I'm about to search your stuff" and didn't have a search warrant signed by a judge and high in his hand, I'd laugh as I pushed him out the door. I'm just not seeing how this can fly (pun intended).
If these people just stepped aside when a private investigator said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" and it was THEIR personal computer, then they're really, really less informed about their rights than they ought to be.
If these people just stepped aside when a cop said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" and DIDN'T have a warrant, they're really, really less informed about their rights than they ought to be. And somewhere there's a cop who misused his badge and needs disciplined.
If they stepped aside when a cop with a warrant said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" then we've got bigger problems. This is what the article seems to say. The day a company can order a judge to grant a warrant with no evidence is the day we've started a slide into some Orwellian fantasy. It seems to me that either these folks did something dumb to raise suspicion, in which case a warrant could have been issued for correspondance, or this "federally authorized" search is actually not. The fact that they say it's just like taking a deposition makes me wonder if in fact it was authorized. I'm not a lawyer, but hell, I don't think you can enter someone's private residence and take their stuff under the guise of "fact finding".
My question is, WHY THESE PEOPLE? And what was the grounds for granting a warrant for getting their correspondances? Was one actually granted, or is this just a big mess that's slipping under the nose of some local judge who's busy with an overly full docket? Any attorney out there care to tell me if a "search warrant" covers anything and everything, or if a separate order has to be obtained to wiretap or monitor correspondance?
If this is a troll, it's a damn good one. So good that it deserves an answer, because some people might take it seriously.
RMS is anything but a money grubbing whore. The man refuses to take jobs that don't meet his ideals and refuses to take money from groups that don't meet his ideals.
RMS has done MORE real coding than ANYONE in the free software movement. Emacs, gcc, and many, many other small utilities come to mind. So he's not released a major package in a few years. He could retire right now, and go down in history as one of the greatest programmers ever. Now, ESR, as much as I agree with him sometimes, is really a black pot screaming at the kettle here. This is a man who wrote... fetchmail. He didn't single handedly create the foundations of a new operating system. He didn't start a "movement". He wrote a (actually, revised an existing) small but useful utility. And he tried to change the name of the Free Software movement to Open Source.
Anyways, RMS has NOT grabbed hold of the Open Source movement. In fact, he's not fond of the term at all.
I really have to wonder if this isn't an exceptional troll, or someone who's really clueless...
Sure, you can use his words. Copyrighting an article simply says "hey, you can use this, so long as you say where it came from, don't take credit for something you didn't do, and don't change the intent of the author's." And BTW, official GNU software is copyrighted by the Free Software Foundation. They just put it under a very liberal license that makes it *appear* to be non-copyrighted. It's the presence of the coypright that will (hopefully) allow GPL'd program authors to sue should someone decide to steal their work and take it non-free. The copyright on this article serves much the same purpose; it protects RMS's rights to avoid having his name slandered by misquoting.
Slashdot Mirror
--
--
--
--
Also, do you realize the amount of live material that Napster users share? I own 9 Metallica CD's, and have no less than 30 mp3's of live concerts, interviews, etc. I'm hardly "ripping you off". However, I am an avid Napster user, because it's a great way to find rare live material. Why don't you make high-quality mp3's of an occasional concert available on your web site?
--
It seems to me that the REAL problem is with people putting entire CD's online, THEN connecting to Napster. The REAL crime is when an individual makes copyrighted material available, NOT when the Napster service is abused. It seems to me that a much stronger lawsuit would be one against an individual who makes these materials available. Why aren't you pursuiing individual claims against the biggest perpatrators, rather than Napster? Is it because you're afraid of alienating your fan base?
--
Lars/Metallica, how on earth can you hold these two ideals, which are POLAR OPPOSITES? You say that it should be an artist's decision whether or not they want to participate in this new medium, yet you also say you want to kill it outright. My question is this: How do you feel that putting Napster out of business and thereby removing that right-to-chose from EVERY other artist is fair to anyone but yourselves? Also, how do you justify this point of view to fans of non-signed bands who depend on Napster for distribution?
--
Fair warning to all, anything coming from my name during that chat is NOT me.
Gotta go come up with a new account name..
--
--
Translation: You need to already have a degree very similar to the one offered, and be willing (and financially able) to go for a year without holding a steady job so you can study to earn what amounts to the same degree you already have. Remind me again why anyone would want to do this? I'm looking forward to graduation so that I can start earning money, and NOT have to study for 12 hours a day anymore. This sounds like a novel idea, but rather useless...
--
While I'm usually one of your most vocal critics when I bother to read your babbling, I'm finding myself in the rather unusual position of agreeing with you on something... it's probably some sign of the apocolypse, but hey, that's life... Anyways, here's my thoughts (some of them, and quite disorganized) on the steaming pile of bullshit that is WAVE America...
First, the underlying philosophy here has more holes than a donut shop. Think about this, folks. The group that they're attempting to monitor is expected to police ITSELF. This doesn't work in any other facet of society. I can't think of a single instance where a group is trusted to police its own ranks. This is a bad idea from the word GO, no matter what the group.
Next, one must remember that this isn't just ANY group: we're dealing with CHILDREN. How on EARTH does any rational person expect a CHILD to recognize a psychological disorder? Children can't diagnose THEMSELVES, let alone others. A child can't distinguish between Bobby Joe being constipated, and Bobby Joe suffering from emotional turmoil. Hell, most PARENTS can't tell either! You're asking a group of kids to do the job of trained counselors. Not a good idea at all...
Another point to keep in mind is that the students WAVE seeks to single out are those who are different or strange. They can't pinpoint "potential troublemakers", so the next best thing is "those who fit the description of a troublemaker". While this is a great theory, in practice it's total bullshit. As many researchers, counselors, doctors and former "troublemakers" (myself included) will attest, the root of a child's problems is usually isolation and lack of social acceptance. While this program certainly will identify the socially isolated, this will only compound the problem. When I was in school, kids could point and say "he's strange!" With WAVE, kids can force ADULTS to say the same thing. If social isolation is the root of the problem, anything that INCREASES social isolation - such as singling out Joey as "that kid who goes to 'special' sessions three days a week" or "that kid who has to talk to the head doctor" - is bad. Think about it; when you were in middle school, wasn't there someone who had some "different" memorable trait or problem that went away during high school, yet was best remembered by it? Putting a 13 year old into counseling, removing him from his classmates, or making him look anymore "strange" in their eyes will just cement that label onto him.
Now, the BIG point, the REALLY important one, is that WAVE assumes that different==bad. Kids understand what they know... if someone is "different", kids think that's bad. WAVE reinforces this idea. "Call us, and report any suspicious classmates!" To a child, that reads "Call us, and we'll take that weirdo away!" Once they see that this WORKS, that they can get three of their friends to call too and magically Smelly Stan will be in "special" classes, they'll keep calling and calling and calling until they report everyone that's "different". What kids need to learn is that DIFFERENT DOES NOT EQUAL BAD. If anything can be learned from these school shootings, it's that isolation and intolerance of "different" is a bad thing. We should be teaching our kids to recognize differences as a GOOD THING.
Instead of teaching them this, WAVE teaches them to report the "different" kids so they can "be fixed". THIS IS BULLSHIT. Absolute, total and complete bullshit. I look back on myself in high school, and see myself now, and thank God that WAVE was not in place. I'd have been raising every red flag in the system, and singled out for it. Right now, I'm finishing my Junior year of college, and having the time of my life. College is different. Here, people see something about me that's different, and say "dude, that's cool!" Or "man... I wish I could do that!" In high school, it was "dude, that's fucking gay!" Or "man... that's so fucking odd!" Right now, I've got a gorgeous girlfriend, a great job lined up after graduation, decent grades, loads of friends, and the respect of those around me. I couldn't think of anything else to ask for. In high school, I was "different", and persecuted because of it. A program like WAVE would have singled me out, embarassed the hell out of me, and made my life even more miserable. Basically, WAVE really strikes a chord with me. I'm "unstable" by their definitions, and being told that this is a bad thing really, really pisses me off.
In review, WAVE operates on philosophies that can be picked apart and revealed to be nothing more than a fresh steaming pile of shit.
Quite simply, recognizing and helping troubled children is the job of a trained professional. WAVE puts these responsibilities on CHILDREN.
Katz, I think you're a poor writer who's here on slashdot because he had the sense to jump on a growing gravy train, but I think you're also now in the position to make a real difference in the world, and do something useful for a change. I really hope you do a kick ass job when you talk to these people. Please, on behalf of everyone who WAVE might eventually effect, don't use this opportunity to hype your books, or terms (geek profiling), or political ideas. Please, please, please, keep your conversation along the REAL subject, and convince WAVE to take a long hard look at their underlying philosophies...
--
AOL killed the project, in large part due to the slashdot effect. Great job. Assholes.
--
(disclaimer: I'm a student, so I'm not exactly suggesting this from an impartial point of view)
--
--
Would I have answered differently? You're damn right I would have. Something along the lines of "well, there's details about the example you gave -a- here -/a-," at the very least. If someone were to hit me with that question, I'd be damn good and sure I give a REAL answer, rather than dodge and weave around it.
See, if you want TECHNICAL stuff about running a site, you should interview cnn.com or yahoo.com staff. The unique thing about algore2000.com is it's PURPOSE. Hence the reason people asked questions related to that. There's more than enough "how to run a high traffic web site" stuff out there now, and if that type of question were to be asked, we'd just get the same old answer.
As for me calling half the nation stupid, I DIDN'T. I said that most people aren't interested in politics. Care to show me a voter-turnout rate that proves me wrong?
--
ME: Algore2000 is a good site.
HIM: Well, that's a good start. I like this guy already.
It IS a good site. It's meant to present Al in a favorable light, and it does that quite well.
ME: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool?
HIM: Hmmmmm. Sounds like he changed his mind. Uh-oh.
Not at all. It IS a good site. It has pretty pictures, quotes, and lots and lots of pages. It looks well done, and presents Al favorably. It also seems to be lacking detailed content, and I get the impression that I'm supposed to be impressed and persuaded by JUST the pictures, and short quotes. It IS a good site, but it DOES seem to treat me like a fool. I didn't change my mind anywhere.
ME: Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff.
HIM: I disagree.
Well, you're more than entitled to your opinion. But if that's the best response I can get, well, it sure doesn't do much to change MY opinion, which is the one that still needs won over by election time. I was really hoping for at least an example of some detailed content, especially since I provided that link to the "details" of Al's plan to improve the affordability of college. Getting no rebuttal but "I disagree" to the bulk of the main arguement is disappointing.
ME: Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge.
HIM: To answer this question in all candor, I would remind everyone that the average American is our target audience!
I should certainly hope so. The parties and candidates who forget this go up in smoke.
HIM: However - I for one take exception to your assertion that "average Americans" have little interest in politics or technology. Working on this and other campaigns has shown me that average Americans are driving the demand for technology and therefore are driving the technology industry in this country.
Sorry, you can take exception to it all you like, but every voter turnout rate published backs me up. You're getting roughly HALF of the registered voters turning out for presidential elections lately. And less than that for local and state elections. Not to mention that a large part of America never bothers to even register to vote. If the average american WAS interested in politics, don't you think you'd see more than half of them show up on election day?
As for average americans driving the tech industry, I couldn't agree more. People want better stuff, that much applies to everyone everywhere. But a relatively small portion care HOW that comes about. So long as they can go to Best Buy and buy a machine that'll play Quake III, or hear "You've Got Mail", they don't care how things keep advancing so long as they DO keep advancing. The fact that AOL is so popular supports this - people want technology, but don't care how it works or where it comes from. Plug it in, turn it on, and it damn well better work or most people just aren't interested. That's a long way from having the average american take an active interest in the tech industry.
HIM: The large number of volunteers we have recruited through the site is also and clear indication that we are connecting with people interested in helping the campaign.
Ah, that doesn't necessarily indicate anything. I highly doubt that you've gotten a large number of people who just stumble across the site to say "hey, I wanna help!" My guess (and it is only a guess; I'd be interested in seeing some sort of statistics on it) is that your volunteers came to the site looking for ways to help. People generally go into grocery stores to buy food; the stores don't often say "the large number of bread loaves we sold today is a clear indicator that we make people more hungry".
HIM: algore2000.com is for all everyone - not just geeks like you and me. Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!
Well, first off, I'm not a "geek". Never liked the term, never will like it. I've got a social life, dammit. I don't need hit with that stereotype just because I read a certain web site.
As for algore2000.com being the best of current presidential sites, I agree totally. And that's really sad. You DO have more content, more interactivity and more detailed content than any other candidate site that I've read. And I'm still disappointed in ALL of them. I still want to see numbers, plans and details to accompany the executive summaries on the web sites.
As for the platform the site runs on, that tells me that YOU have a clue. It doesn't speak a word for Al; I'm relatively sure he told you "get the best possible stuff you can for what we budgeted" - not "run it on Linux because I support the ideals of Free Software."
HIM: Hey - don't get me wrong - you and I know that we can always do better with our Web sites - so your point is well taken.
I'm glad. My vote's still up for grabs; but at least I know Al has some decent people working for him. All in all, you managed to bob and weave around most of the question(s) I had, but I'm impressed with the interview overall.
Oh, I almost forgot... if you're in touch with Al fairly often, why don't ya put in a word or two about the evils of UCITA, crypto control, and CDA-like legislation?
--
Entry level jobs are less stressful than college. More profitable. Leave one with lots of free time (compared to someone taking 18 credit hours, anyways). And don't involve keeping crazy hours. Lots of people just don't wanna bother, because they don't need to. So... if you really want more people majoring in CS or CpE rather than going to work early, you have to make it more appealing.
As in, damn near FREE.
How about VA using some of it's newfound wealth to set up a scholarship program? IBM gives loads of money to higher education. So does DELL, and even Microsoft. For VA, setting up 10 $2,500/yr scholarships is pennies in a very big bucket. It looks great to the press, and even better to the recipients. You can pick people on whatever criteria you chose; grades, free software experience, advocacy, or most-shameless-grub-for-money (me! me!).
The simple fact is, a non-graduate can be rich by 25 if they're any good and end up getting stock options before their company IPO's. Your best and brightest KNOW this, and it draws a great number of them away from universities, because they COST money, and only reward you with stress, debt, and lost sleep. If you want more people to graduate, make school the better option; one of the easiest ways to do that is to make it cheap. A VA Linux Systems Scholarship Program would certainly help.
--
I just want to see what the Christian Coalition and their partner groups think of this. I loved this review of Southpark especially. They also tore apart Dogma, and pretty much everything BUT Merry Poppins.
--
Algore2000 is a good site. I'm sure there was countless hours of thought put into each and every detail, especially the "agenda" page. That page in particular is a work of persuasive art, right down to the picture of Al with a pair of cops (tough on crime), and the (over)use of red, white and blue. The list of catch phrases is an especially nice touch; who could possibly NOT support "Saving Our Schools," "Fighting for America's Seniors" and "Improving Health Care," right?
My question for you, sir, has to be this: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? Am I supposed to be genuinely impressed by the load of press releases and speaches? I hate to break the news to you, but I want to see real content, NOT glazed over executive summaries. Take for instance something VERY relevant to me as a college student - the link from the front page about Al's Plan to Make College More Affordable. It leads here. The extent of the "details" stated is this:
"Gore announced new details of his National Tuition Savings Program, which is designed to help families save for college. The plan allows families to invest funds in an account where their money will be protected from inflation and can be withdrawn to pay for higher education expenses tax-free. The plan will also guarantee the cost of college tuition at any participating college or university in the country."
The rest of the press release is all fluff. No mention of whether this is limited to public or private universities, 2 or 4 year degrees, graduate school, part or full time study, etc. And this is the *basic* stuff. I'm also interested in why this would be a better option than, say, investing in short-term CD's.
That's just ONE example from the many I could have chosen. Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. And shots at Bill Bradley. The simple fact is this does not impress me. Actually, since this site represents Al Gore, I'm inclined to believe Al relatively clueless - if he wasn't, surely he'd tell us HOW he plans to fund his proposed programs, tax cuts, etc. Any politician can CLAIM to support any number of things. Algore2000 picks popular issues, and loads the wording of them such that ANYONE would be nearly forced to agree. Come on, who on earth DOESN'T support "A better educational system?"
What I could like to see from algore2000.com, as well as EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE is DETAILS. I want to know HOW you plan to provide a tax cut - will this come at the expense of the defense budget? Money always comes from somewhere; I want to know what has to be CUT to lower taxes. And don't tell me "unnecessary pork" or some trite answer. I want to see numbers.
And I want a big ass chart, with a column for every candidate, and a row for every issue. "Do you support abortion as it currently stands? y/n" "Do you support the abolition of legal abortion under all circumstances? y/n" "Do you support abortion under limited circumstances? If so, when?" Things like that. REAL questions. Some more: "Do you support the reverse engineering of software for porting and compatibility purposes?" "Do you support CDA in its current form?" And more of the like. I don't want to read "Al Gore supports technology and innovation" - I want to read HOW he supports them.
Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. I think this is a mistake; this audience doesn't read political advocacy web sites on a wide basis. You'd do better to use the web site to provide details and elaborate on Al's statements and ideas rather than just rehash them.
One more side note: I followed Jesse Ventura's campaign slightly - I don't know his stance on most of the issues. I dont live in Minnesota, so I didn't take the time to research him. What I DO know is that I was very impressed when a reporter asked him if he supported some obscure bill I'd never heard of. Ventura replied something like "Well, to be honest, I'm not familiar with that at all. I'm not gonna lie to you; I don't know everything, or have all the answers you wanna hear. But I learn fast; I'll read up on it." When can we expect Al Gore to say something like THAT?
--
Why?
There's no beta. Or even an alpha yet. Sure, Mozilla M-whatever is now considered "alpha", but *that is NOT what Netscape will ship*. Netscape will be adding crypto, java, and whatever other AOL-friendly customizations they decide on, and the simple fact is, these additions warrant a beta cycle. Netscape has never shipped a major release without a several month long beta period. Even if they start *today* we'll likely not see a release until May.
Now, bear in mind that Netscape is no longer controlled by Netscape. AOL will be deciding what's released when, and if their latest and greatest AOL 5.0 fiasco is any indicator, we could expect to see a bug ridden but colorful Netscape 6.0 released with no beta cycle... I just hope this isn't the case...
--
--
--
If these people just stepped aside when a private investigator said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" and it was THEIR personal computer, then they're really, really less informed about their rights than they ought to be.
If these people just stepped aside when a cop said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" and DIDN'T have a warrant, they're really, really less informed about their rights than they ought to be. And somewhere there's a cop who misused his badge and needs disciplined.
If they stepped aside when a cop with a warrant said "move, I'm searching your stuff on behalf of your boss" then we've got bigger problems. This is what the article seems to say. The day a company can order a judge to grant a warrant with no evidence is the day we've started a slide into some Orwellian fantasy. It seems to me that either these folks did something dumb to raise suspicion, in which case a warrant could have been issued for correspondance, or this "federally authorized" search is actually not. The fact that they say it's just like taking a deposition makes me wonder if in fact it was authorized. I'm not a lawyer, but hell, I don't think you can enter someone's private residence and take their stuff under the guise of "fact finding".
My question is, WHY THESE PEOPLE? And what was the grounds for granting a warrant for getting their correspondances? Was one actually granted, or is this just a big mess that's slipping under the nose of some local judge who's busy with an overly full docket? Any attorney out there care to tell me if a "search warrant" covers anything and everything, or if a separate order has to be obtained to wiretap or monitor correspondance?
--
RMS is anything but a money grubbing whore. The man refuses to take jobs that don't meet his ideals and refuses to take money from groups that don't meet his ideals.
RMS has done MORE real coding than ANYONE in the free software movement. Emacs, gcc, and many, many other small utilities come to mind. So he's not released a major package in a few years. He could retire right now, and go down in history as one of the greatest programmers ever. Now, ESR, as much as I agree with him sometimes, is really a black pot screaming at the kettle here. This is a man who wrote... fetchmail. He didn't single handedly create the foundations of a new operating system. He didn't start a "movement". He wrote a (actually, revised an existing) small but useful utility. And he tried to change the name of the Free Software movement to Open Source.
Anyways, RMS has NOT grabbed hold of the Open Source movement. In fact, he's not fond of the term at all.
I really have to wonder if this isn't an exceptional troll, or someone who's really clueless...
--
--