Not to be pedantic, but the argument that we should stop using DOS simply because it's "15-20 year old technology" is complete and utter bunk. We should stop using it for the quite a few reasons other than that.:-)
DOS is dead, as well it should be. The concept of a single-user, single-tasking, unprotected memory space OS should have been dead and buried a long, long time ago. The scheduler for DOS is laughable at best, and please don't even mention threading. DOS was never designed to go anywhere but a single PC, unattatched to any network. That's a huge issue today when even your microwave oven has a Net connection. We are becoming a wired society, and the operating systems we use should reflect that.
I guess I just take issue with your assertion that only the "latest and greatest" is worth anything. If you'll recall, the seemingly favorite platform of the majority of Slashdot has it's origins over thirty years ago. Just because something is old, doesn't mean it isn't worth anything. Look at the technical merits of DOS (or anything else, for that matter) before viewing its usefulness in the future.
This is the contact info for the author of the article. I've sent her an email with links to the Slashdot articles concerning the etoy/Etoys battle. Please, no flames.
Ellen Messmer Senior Editor, Enterprise Applications
Well, not to sound silly, but how about talking to your kids? That seems to be the approach that my parents took with me. At a somewhat early age, just before the onset of puberty, ie, actual interest in sex, my parents sat me down and explained a few basic facts to me.
As to sex, the physiological aspects were all explained quite nicely. They rented some Department of Health videos from the local Blockbuster equivalent, brought some educational brochures home from school (My father was a guidance counselor), and had several long discussions with me. The concept of pornography was explained, as well as why it probably wasn't a good idea. The main reasons being that the vast majority of it is exploitative of women, and it does horribly skew one's views and expectations of sex if it's viewed at an early age with little or no real experience. This was all presented rationally and logically, and because of it, I chose to not view pornography of my own accord. Personally, I've never really needed it for purposes of arousal. I've always had a pretty active imagination.
As to violence, my parents took the "rational" approach with that, as well. As a child, and easily impressionable, viewing violence on TV or in the movies had a direct effect on my behavior. I would become more aggressive towards my siblings and friends. I would be surly for days after. My parents simply pointed this fact out to me. There was such a stark difference between my behavior before watching something violent and after, that I couldn't ignore it. I chose not to watch violent movies until I could control myself and my actions. After awhile, I learned to separate what was happening on the screen with my own feelings. It became nothing more than entertainment, not an outlet for my own emotions.
I suppose I'm being idealistic here, but I've always found that the best censorship was not that which is imposed by ignorance, but that which is imposed by oneself because of a rational desire simply not to be exposed to something disagreeable. This doesn't mean that I think we should shut our eyes and ears to things which disturb us. We should always be aware that something exists, just as my parents explained the concepts of porn and violence to me. We should just also be aware that there are some things that really aren't worth wasting time on.
The main guys behind Google are/were Stanford grad students. They included specified google searches of their favorite subjects. Linux and Stanford are the only two I know about. Anyone else have any more? (Aside from the obvious uncle sam, of course.)
>By the way, did you understand how Enoch Root managed to show up in present day after he died in WWII? Yes. He didn't die. If you reread the passage (I had to do it twice) where Enoch supposedly dies, you'll find one sentence where a shrouded figure is escorted out of the doctor's house.
Slashdot Mirror
DOS is dead, as well it should be. The concept of a single-user, single-tasking, unprotected memory space OS should have been dead and buried a long, long time ago. The scheduler for DOS is laughable at best, and please don't even mention threading. DOS was never designed to go anywhere but a single PC, unattatched to any network. That's a huge issue today when even your microwave oven has a Net connection. We are becoming a wired society, and the operating systems we use should reflect that.
I guess I just take issue with your assertion that only the "latest and greatest" is worth anything. If you'll recall, the seemingly favorite platform of the majority of Slashdot has it's origins over thirty years ago. Just because something is old, doesn't mean it isn't worth anything. Look at the technical merits of DOS (or anything else, for that matter) before viewing its usefulness in the future.
This is the contact info for the author of the article. I've sent her an email with links to the Slashdot articles concerning the etoy/Etoys battle.
Please, no flames.
Ellen Messmer
Senior Editor, Enterprise Applications
emessmer@nww.com
(202) 879-6752
Fax: (202) 347-2365
Network World
1331 Pennsylvania Ave., Suite 505
Washington, DC 20004
As to sex, the physiological aspects were all explained quite nicely. They rented some Department of Health videos from the local Blockbuster equivalent, brought some educational brochures home from school (My father was a guidance counselor), and had several long discussions with me. The concept of pornography was explained, as well as why it probably wasn't a good idea. The main reasons being that the vast majority of it is exploitative of women, and it does horribly skew one's views and expectations of sex if it's viewed at an early age with little or no real experience. This was all presented rationally and logically, and because of it, I chose to not view pornography of my own accord. Personally, I've never really needed it for purposes of arousal. I've always had a pretty active imagination.
As to violence, my parents took the "rational" approach with that, as well. As a child, and easily impressionable, viewing violence on TV or in the movies had a direct effect on my behavior. I would become more aggressive towards my siblings and friends. I would be surly for days after. My parents simply pointed this fact out to me. There was such a stark difference between my behavior before watching something violent and after, that I couldn't ignore it. I chose not to watch violent movies until I could control myself and my actions. After awhile, I learned to separate what was happening on the screen with my own feelings. It became nothing more than entertainment, not an outlet for my own emotions.
I suppose I'm being idealistic here, but I've always found that the best censorship was not that which is imposed by ignorance, but that which is imposed by oneself because of a rational desire simply not to be exposed to something disagreeable. This doesn't mean that I think we should shut our eyes and ears to things which disturb us. We should always be aware that something exists, just as my parents explained the concepts of porn and violence to me. We should just also be aware that there are some things that really aren't worth wasting time on.
The main guys behind Google are/were Stanford grad students. They included specified google searches of their favorite subjects. Linux and Stanford are the only two I know about. Anyone else have any more? (Aside from the obvious uncle sam, of course.)
>By the way, did you understand how Enoch Root managed to show up in present day after he died in WWII?
Yes. He didn't die. If you reread the passage (I had to do it twice) where Enoch supposedly dies, you'll find one sentence where a shrouded figure is escorted out of the doctor's house.
-//-