Laws that turn innocent self-protection into the grounds for suspicion or investigation drive in further the wedge that the over-legislation of America (and not just America) drives between the People and the Keepers.
If it's 'grounds for suspicion' when you wear sunglasses as you drive (I'm not sure, but I bet that this is on some of the various profiles that Polizei use to us overpullen), then what's next?
Control, control, control. The State always wants more, whether you call it left-wing, right-wing or centrist. Some government is a good thing, but if the question is How Much? the answer is always Less less less.
Aside: I suppose I will vote libertarian, since my preference for GWBush is only marginal and relative. Gore is a power-hungry, unimaginative, statist busy-body with a pro-censorship wife, who went along with the sleaze of Mr. Bill for the past 6 years (7 if you count the campaign). So any vote at all is reluctant. Bush seems a less sleazy character than Clinton, and smarter than Gore, but not worth the satisfaction of the libertarians.
PS It is extremely hilarious to read this board when a lot of people use the word "communist" as the worst possible derogatory term. I think you've been watching too many "educational" films from the 50's and not honing your critical thinking abilities enough. I think you should travel around the world and read a few books.
Actually, I think there might be a few terms equally insulting, but I think communist is a fine derogatory term, as applied to those who favor wide-spread government coercion in order that we might "share equally." Remember, some animals are more equal than others.
Usually, those in favor of communism say "Hey, you can't base your criticism of communism / Marxism on the failed experiments thus far -- true communism has never been tried! Just wait till we establish it, real soon now." But since the harangue is to "travel around the world and read a few books," I would suggest a few destinations for your tour:
Places: - Poland and Hungary. Ask people how they liked living under communism, and how they liked being in the Soviet Sphere of Influence.
- Dresden: It's still reeling, with piles of WWII rubble that in the Western part of Germany were long ago displaced by new construction. In fact, go anywhere in the former East Germany and Compare it with cities in the former West Germany. Which would you rather have been in 15 years ago?
- Korea: North vs. South. Again -- what argument for communism?
- Hong Kong. Ask how many people left to avoid living under the beneficient Chinese government.
- Tianemen Square. Ask the students who were slaughtered how communism kept them free. They might be a little quiet, but they won't mind being asked. (Also speak to the women forced to undergo abortions under the one-child policy).
- Siberia.
- San Francisco. Picture it shades of gray, with gay people persecuted and with only high officials enjoying the seashore. Oh, and cut out most internet startups and venture capitalists, and forget having DSL service.
Books: The Road to Serfdom -- Hayek 1984, Animal Farm - Orwell Atlas Shrugged - Rand
That government is best which governs least, and the more numerous the laws the more corrupt the state. States also tend to protect themselves from prosecution - so ask yourself whether you'd rather have an industrial accident happen because Exxon wrecks a ship, or because your government designs a dangerous nuclear reactor. There will never be a harm-free world, but at least you can sue Exxon.
It's been said before, but BadlandZ's metaphor is apt -- If you can't use crypto in electronic communications, your email is there for the taking. I send a lot of postcards in the mail, but I usually put my blackmail demands (kidding!) and bill payments in envelopes. Context, personal preference, likelihood of interception -- lots of things go into individuals' choice of security level, and they should be allowed to decide what the outcome is.
No crypto is absolute (like no lock is absolute), but that's not an argument against crypto (or locks).
The bigger point is about attitude. Many people seem to have an attitude that I will call "Permissionism" -- that the government should officially *approve* what you do / say / want, and that nearly everything be subject to a needs test.
Often the premise is true ("Nobody needs to drive a bright red car...") but the conclusion is a flying leap away ("... therefore no one ought be allowed to.") In reality, the *right* to choose ones destiny (pursue happiness) is more important than the validity in the eyes of any observer of the validity of the path chosen in the pursuit.
Because this Permissionist attitude is prevalent, many people don't seem to mind restrictions until they hit them personally. I have heard many people say with a strange mixture of pride and unctuousness that they actually *invite* inspection of their email, because they've got "nothing to hide."
Spread the envelope / postcard metaphor widely! And of course, point out that the NSA regularly scans email domestic and otherwise... so far, the overhead it would take to do handwriting recognition on postcards means they can read far fewer of those...
blocked wrote "Freedoms are preserved by institutions that help prevent their encroachment."
The right to bear arms, as noted in the US Constitution's 2nd Amdt, is an institution that gives teeth to informational institutions like the Internet. It means a lot less to be informed if the govt. has a monopoly on guns (and crypto, and information on how to improvise munitions...)
Guns: Go buy a few today! Note: IANAAD (I am not an arms dealer )
This kid is obviously intelligent and independent. We must stop him before he becomes a threat to our stable and predictable society."
Put him in American public schools for a few years, let him know that cleverness, intuition, curiosity and bravery are not in keeping with the community values propagated therein.
Anyone interested in separating School and State (and especially anyone who thinks the gub'mint should hold the market captive when it comes to education) should look into the Separation movement. Read a bit at sepschool.org, and think about the principles that make Free software so good and so powerful -- why not apply the same logic to the topic of education?
Glass half empty / glass half full... obviously, we see things a little differently, but I don't understand what would prevent you from using fvwm and 8 xterms, no matter what else was available...
One of my favorite things about my Linux system is the Gimp; it's a very high-class program and it's pretty and graphical. I'm sure there are a lot of people who might like the Free OS philosophy (not to mention better stability etc) but who don't realize how good some of the graphics programs are.
a) As someone else pointed out, the claim that w2k will be a better server needs some substantiation and context. Which will be a better server given cheap commodity components and other than high-end RAM configs? An open question, but consider that right now a 4 year old computer -- say a 486 with 32 megs of RAM -- can happily run X86 Linux in most of its splendor (barring Pentium-optimized distribs), but how fast does a 486/32 seem under Windows 98?
b) Open source and cheaper are more than what the little people like. I don't know much about coding, require frequent help from my housemates to do certain trivial things on my own machine, and am unlikely in the forseeable future to be contributing much code to the kernel;) -- all that said, the fact that other people can and will extend and improve the operating system, and that the result will be on CheapBytes a couple weeks after (or ready for ftp that evening) is a huge plus! Much better than occasional, expensive, grudging, un-satisfying "service packs" for Windows. If I were running a business, I know which model of development I'd prefer.
A cheaper OS is more than just mildly good too. There are a lot of snide comments about corporate blindness and inertia on Slashdot, and I've even been the source of several -- but that's mostly with bigger businesses, as Middle Management Cancer sets in, and even then companies occasionally make smart decisions. But if a company has thousands of desktops seats served by a substantial data center, they could be saving a huge amount in licenses with Linux. Of course, that's not the only cost, far from it, but companies really like to see lower tangible costs, and service / maintenance costs often get lumped into "Oh, well, we'll spend money on IT people anyhow."
I guess it does take an anonymous coward to rip into the asker of an apparently sincere and legitimate question with "You are clearly a moron."
Wow.
I guess it's an interesting form of entertainment (random vitriol), and that I did ask for it by clicking on the 'X answers beneath your current threshold,' but c'mon! Why the incivility?! My theory that Western Civ. is sinking like bricks in oil wants to be proved wrong, not backed at every turn.
Why not end the monopoly on the mail? Because the postal service does not exhibit monopoly pricing. Do you think that your company could (profitably) deliver first class mail for 33 cents per letter in two days with a pretty damned good deal of reliability?
Glad you're not a PW;)...
I promise not to get into the rant I'd like to, but all I'm asking (in this forum, anyhow), is why prohibit new entrants in the field of first-class mail delivery? "Monopoly pricing" is the pricing offered by a monopoly; Keynesian / Interventionist definitions of monopoly pricing are strictly self-serving and circular. Attempts to deliver mail more cheaply by free-market means have been squashed in the past by the USPS, and *that* is the behavior of a monopolist.
Anyhow, wrong point to belabor in the Firecracker thread, so this is my last paragraph (save the sig) on the matter until it is raised in a more relevant area.
I decided to use the 800 number rather than the online form.
The wait was mind-numbing: nearly half an hour of "Your call is important to us. We are experiencing longer than normal wait times. Please stay on the line and your call will be answered by the first available operator. All calls are answered in the order received." I think the frequewncy of the message increased as the wait stretched out, too.
When I did get a person, I mentioned that I'd been on hold for a long time, but for once I didn't let my temper get the better of me and try to take it out on her.
She explained that the sales floor closes for the weekend, so all orderes go to her area, which is actually tech support, and that they were two people short (of an unspecified total) in tech support anyhow.
She asked whether I had an email address to which she could send a reeeipt, and then I provided one... but a minute or two later, she pointed out that people don't like to provide this sometimes "because of the..." (she fumbled, and I suggested, "spam?") "Yeah, Spam." So she kindly removed my email address and provided my order number by voice instead. Kudos!
Delivery time: she said their warehouse was behind on orders, but that it should arrive in under two weeks. Also that they usually ship UPS, but for this deal they're shipping USPS instead.
I noticed that a CA Slashdotter was charged state tax, so I guess they have some of their operation there, but the woman I spoke with was in New Jersey. Any other states get hit with it?
As far as this deal goes, well, you never know, eh? I have no home automation stuff at all, and know even less.;) So this is sheerly an experiment. I read a lot of comments panning the deal and complaining about a few weeks of waiting, but for under USD 6, this seems like a real bargain, since it includes the remote controller. We'll see!
Which is more sickening: that people know some of the horror that could result from a ahuttle accident? Or that this be sanitized and "heroified" to protect NASA?
Does no one besides me have problems with the mindless pushing of a government-run space program that seems based more on propaganda than any rational justification? Like government-run and -funded education, pervasive welfarism both corporate and personal and increasing restrictions of privacy, the idea that we ought to send folks out of Earth's atmosphere on a monthly basis is one that since the 60s has gone from lunacy to obvious.
The Space Shuttle is a royal bauble of the US govt, circus center ring. No doubt there is a lot of neat collateral technology, but all in the pursuit of... what, exactly? Why must many miilions of confiscated money support the meanderings of the space program?
I'm all for space exporation, actually. But if there are economic benefits to be had from going into space, why do we need to pay truckloads of tax money to fund R&D? Wouldn't it make more sense for Morton-Thiokol, or any other company which thinks they can make space profitable, to pay their own start-up costs?
Dying screams are not pleasant, but they illustrate that the pursuit of space is an endeavor with possible grave consequences, and that is a valuable thing to know. Astronauts are much sexier than unmanned explorers, maybe, but that's not how I want my money to be played with. Obscuring the consequences of failure is unfair to those who might want to be astronauts, and to the people who fund the fireworks.
A friend of mine is going to DefCon. He works for a company that makes computer-security related products, but he's been into computer security since long before that job.
He qualifies as a "hacker," and I'd say he even did when he broke ino some systems -- because his actions are done for learning purposes, not malice, and harmed no one.
I don't know all that much about security, but personally I find it fascinating - the psychology and tactics of preventing break-ins must of needs parallel the psychology and tactics of breaking in.
I think your characterization of attendees as all crackers is wrong. Are you trolling?
Maybe you "can't imagine why people would meet for several days on this subject," but that says more about your imagination that it does the people who will be at DefCon.
Maybe one day I'll know enough to justify going there myself.
"a domestic monopoly is a monopoly is a monopoly, it's just bad bad bad and isn't capitalism; patriotism and nationalism but not competitive capitalism.
This sounds right (rose is rose is rose...), but I think has some holes...
1) What is a monopoly? Says the American Heritage Dictionary, "An excluisive ownership or control, as of a given business activity." [emphasis mine.] Not just "the lion's share" (no argument, MS has that in certain markets), but exclusivity.
And even within that, there are at least two senses of exclusion that matter: 1) definitional and 2) normative. (Maybe a legal scholar can offer better words, but I hope these examples show what I mean:)
a) Definitional: If I have the only lemonade stand in the town, I have a monopoly, literally, but with no hard feelings. Maybe the town only has enough people to support one stand, and maybe my only competitor folded after a kick-back scandal. Whyever, I just am the only lemonade game in town.
b) Normative: If my dad is the mayor and I convince him to outlaw any other lemonade stand from opening, then have a normative monopoly. I don't care how many stands the town will support, I have the threat of law protecting mine.
2) When did Microsoft ever have a monopoly, domestic, international, or otherwise? A preponderance, yes, but never has Microsoft held a monopoly. (At least, whenever I ask the question I have never gotten a convincing answer that MS has held a monopoly.)
3) Can govt. regulators know better than competing companies which outcomes would be better for customers? (I pose this as a rhetorical question, but if anyone can make an argument that bureaucrats make better designers than entrepreneurs I'd like to see it.)
A really good book on the topic of monopoly / anti-trust is called (I think I have this title right): Antitrust: A Policy at War with Itself. (By Robert Bork, all-around smart guy.)
Where can you get a Canon XL1 for $1500?! Do tell! I can still go into credit card debt before I die...
BTW, I've often heard video transfer from a digital camera referred to as capturing, even though this is a slightly different use of the word than was accepted a few years ago. Even if it's really only a data transfer rather than a true "capture," the use is analogous, since you are pulling video into your computer.
And even if you're not capturing in the old sense, I don't see how a serial port would be nearly as good as a firewire port... firewire, even USB, are way faster, and as long as both camera and computer are using these interfaces intelligently, you'll get much faster throughput.
Just thoughts,
timothy
Thanking Panasonic - a good idea!
on
DVD-RAM Support
·
· Score: 4
The poster who asked who to thank at Panasonic has a good point!
This (hopefully) is a good way to both foster goodwill by saying "Thanks, guys, we appreciate the gift!" and to let them know how many people would like to use a DVD (/RAM) drive with a Free OS.
I bet they don't get a lot of "thank you"s when they release a new driver for the Windows family of OSes, in part because most users view it as a default, just an integral part of their machine. Sort of like those who are not into automobiles (I'm not) don't care so much about some new engine part.
But those who appreciate the fact that a lot of uncredited hours go into every free / Free program can be more appreciative. It would be great to let Panasonic know they've pleased a lot of people by contributing one of their drives and more important the documentation for it.
So if anyone from Panasonic is reading this, WOOHOO! Thanks!
And again, if we know where to direct better thank yous, I'm sure people will send some.
How can "the economy" be regulated be regulated without regulating individual lives?
All choices in life are (that is, can be seen as, whatever ever else they might be) economic choices. If you are free to be idle, that is an economic choice because it limits the amount you earn or learn. If you are *not* free to be idle, it sounds like an economic regulation: does this mean you're in favor of it? How about the right to dispose of your property as you see fit? To invest in someone else's company? To lend money? To take a new job or quit an old one?
What if you come up with a new product, one that you think people would trade their dollars for? If you believe in freedom of the individual, you ought to; if you believe in economic regulation you ought first consider how your regulators view the thing.
Your summary of the left / right / libertarian positions I think misses the attitude of many libertarians (cannot speak for all, of course) which is that libertarians do not believe that personal and economic freedoms can be separated, that they are part of the same thing.
If you like your economy regulated, you can at least take comfort in the way that rent control ensures the availability of low-cost, high-quality housing in every city it's been introduced to.
Microsoft may do some naughty things (need good evidence, not just competitors moaning that they're at an unfair diadvantage), but the fact that they're so widely accepted is certainly not due to a lack of competition.
There's no way that you can say that they have no competition, because in any market segment you can name (no fair saying 'Products sold by Microsoft');), MS does face competition, even in some cases excellent free / Free products, like apache.
So why is Word / Office everywhere? Because businesses past a certain size --usually! -- don't have the flexibility or creativity to see beyond the status quo, because the cancer of middle management spread and MBAhood has spread into all things. MS benefits from business inertia: to preserve file-compatibility, seems that many businesses think they have to keep an MS-only computing environment. In a sense they're right, because to do otherwise requires installing work-arounds at every turn.
In my place of employ, for example, we frequently receive information from clients in the form of Word, Oulook or Excel files. Hopefully by this time next year they could all be XML data, eh?
In the meantime, management says 'it's safe to buy more MS products, and we'd better get the newest ones because the other people we deal with will get it and we'll need to read their files...' Circular reasoning, self-fulfilling prophecies. Microsoft cannily exploits what amounts to widespread management dysfunction. That's MS being smart... sort of like office supply stores that sell the paper that the lawyers fill with obfuscation and pre-emptions.
But all the vindictive stuff about MS (claims that MS executives should all be in jail, or allegations of corruption, etc) would sound strange if it were applied so casually to other companies or groups of programmers. IBM in the 60s arguably had closer to a true monopoly than MS does at present, and that was for both hardware and software. Maybe, then, in 20 years people can think of MS as an amazing company that still makes good products despite having gone through tough times (ala today's IBM), and then again maybe MS will be a scorned, scoffed-at name, a name synonomous with hubris and failure. We'll see.
I am no fan of MS products, but the fact that MS products dominate the workplace is because people buy them!
Australia, a country founded as a penal colony and long known for independent, self-reliant citizens, is now closer to a gun-free zone than any of the American school districts with the cute signs so declaring.
Brittain, where in WWII handguns were distributed to citizens when German invasion seemed imminent, is even more so. Airguns are very popular there (high-quality airguns, not $30 Walmart guns like Americans typically think of if asked to describe an airgun), but firearms? Tough to own, tough even to find a place to shoot someone else's.
Switzerland has widespread gun ownership; traditionally, on election day the voters march to the polls armed -- as a demonstration that the polity exists by the consent of the people.
Of course, everyone knows Switzerland's reputation as a dangerous place to visit...;)
Point it, only vigilance will protect your rights, but once you take away the means to resist government, government might not see the harm in protecting you from all sorts of nasty things... besides itself.
This sounds like the (unfortunately canned) Atlantis Project, the idea of which was to assemble a country in international waters out of modular floating hexagons. The laws of this country were to be pretty much Randian, 'thou shalt not initiate force,' etc.
I have been asking the same question for a couple of years, though, and haven't found any country better than the US for general respect for rights, despite the constant gnawing threats and diminishing freedoms here. Some parts of the US seem freer than others when it comes to letting people alone, but there are enough Federal laws which crush state sovereignty that this is small comfort.
Anyone want to start lashing rafts together like in Snowcrash?;)
The ubiquitous Anonymous Coward asked me whether I meant something like the Landware keyboards, which I had in fact never heard of before.
Actually, I'd prefer a turn-key solution with a Twiddler. (See the handykey site for more details.
There is a driver available for the Pilot, and wiring instructions on how to make a cable / power-supply for it. So far, both are out of my idiot's grasp of technology. If anyone wants to put together a cable adapter/ battery-power box for these and sell it (with the driver on disc included) for less than 25 bucks, I will take them up on it. One caveat: it should not involved cutting the original cables, because I want to be able to use the Twiddler in both environments.
I don't even have a palm pilot yet, but I would if I could do that with it. I just went on a trip in fact where even my tiny NEC LT 120 laptop would have been too big for my economy-class seat on Delta.
All that aside, these Landware keyboards are a very smart idea, though! I like the integrated cover / angled holder, integrated serial port etc. Only trouble is how small they look. I know some people like the little keyboard, but honestly I hate even the iMac keyboard I'm called upon to use at work, and it's not really *that* little.
I think I'd like a palm pilot (and could call it a serious tool) as long as I have a real keyboard connected to it. (That can mean a Twiddler, which I do have, or one of the tiny add-ons, or anything besides the pen input.)
Bribery is widespread; are you suggesting that Asian and European companies are immune from it?
In fact, Japan and Korea are home to some of the juiciest bribery cases (and accusations); a Japanese woman of my acquaintance says that bribes were a common occurance when she worked for 5 years at a large Japanese computer company, no names named.
In fact, while Microsoft has been accused of many things, some of which are probably true, can you point out news stories where it is accused of bribery per se? I would be interested in reading them, but I haven't seen any yet.
Despite its high price, this has been tempting me to save for it ever since I saw it several months ago.
I am in the unusual situation of moving into a vintage Airstream trailer, 22 feet long. This makes flat panels look especially appealing, because even my short-depth 17" Trinitron will have trouble squeezing in anywhere that I can still work on it.
If I could hook a computer with a Free OS up to this monitor with a DVD player, I would happily jettison my 13" television, which I use mainly for movie-playback anyhow. A 17.3" widescreen would be a much nicer way to watch So I Married an Axe Murderer...
Dislaimer: I work in advertising, but don't usually feel much call to defend advertising with a little a, but sometimes with a big A I want to.
Ads embedded in a BIOS strike me as being pretty dumb (from both end user and advertiser perspective) unless they are designed for compatibility with all operating systems and unobtrusive enough not to cause a backlash of annoyance / resentment. That translates into "pretty dumb."
But it doens't follow that ads are always dumb or bad... would you really mind an ad on your odometer? I'd never thought about one going there, but if I could save $1000 on the price of a car by ocasionally finding a note from coke instead of 3 zeros (after an informative leading digit, that is!), then I'd be pleased with the deal. Would I buy more coke as a result? Well, I don't think so, but if I did the car certainly didn't force me to.
Advertisments can be annoying, but they are both avoidable (by varying what you choose to pay attention to, where you go, etc.) and -- often -- helpful / informative.
You've probably used advertisements to price-shop, or found out about some new product because you saw it advertised. (or perhaps found out because someone else saw the ad, etc.)... you might even derive some satisfaction from watching certain ads, since they can be funny or otherwise pleasing.
Advertisements also allow the establishment of media whose readers / viewers don't necessarily care about the advertising. I enjoy the show Ally McBeal, for instance, and tend to mute the commercials. If you read slashdot, you're benefitting from the fact that advertisers recognize slashdot's appeal. Would the nature of slashdot be different if it were sheerly a 'labor of (unpaid) love'? Maybe. But in that hypothetical world, how many of us would get to read it, and how much could Rob afford to spend on his hobby?
This doesn't mean that fraudulent ads are OK because "advertising is good" or negate claims that ads, like anything else, can foster what I'd consider negative behavior -- I'm just arguing that advertising by itself is a moral neutral, a spectrum containing bad as well as good. Most of it makes you groan, maybe -- so be it. But again, I say that's advertisements, rather than Advertising.
Cantankerously,
timothy
How many times have you rented Bladerunner?
on
DIVX is dead
·
· Score: 1
I'll skip over the fact that there might be some finegally reason why in some cases it actually would be better to rent such a classic movie, but..
OK, maybe you don't mind CC keeping track of what movies and when you watch, etc. (case by case, I might agree with you about a lot of that stuff) but if you rent at typical blockbuster prices, it only takes a few repeats of the same movie to approach the purchase price of a DVD; DVD sales prices are making me cringe / gloat as I replace my aging and oft-watched tapes with DVDs at lower prices than the tapes cost several years ago. If you're renting VHS rather than DVD, you're also settling for lower sound and image quality.
Bladerunner is at present available for about 13 bucks online, and if you find a place with free shipping and in another state (hence no sales tax), that's it. Boom. In Austin, that would get you 3 rentals, a bottle of coke, and change.
Good point about mom-n-pop shops; I think DVD is actually a boon for local video stores, because after a while people will realize that they'd like to spread some of the buyer's remorse risk to stores so they can give discs a test gander. Buying ones you know you like on DVD makes more sense than not knowing; renting provides a good test run.
So rent, buy, play - but not from someone who requires permission each time you want to use it!
Slashdot Mirror
will do anything.
Laws that turn innocent self-protection into the grounds for suspicion or investigation drive in further the wedge that the over-legislation of America (and not just America) drives between the People and the Keepers.
If it's 'grounds for suspicion' when you wear sunglasses as you drive (I'm not sure, but I bet that this is on some of the various profiles that Polizei use to us overpullen), then what's next?
Control, control, control. The State always wants more, whether you call it left-wing, right-wing or centrist. Some government is a good thing, but if the question is How Much? the answer is always Less less less.
Aside: I suppose I will vote libertarian, since my preference for GWBush is only marginal and relative. Gore is a power-hungry, unimaginative, statist busy-body with a pro-censorship wife, who went along with the sleaze of Mr. Bill for the past 6 years (7 if you count the campaign). So any vote at all is reluctant. Bush seems a less sleazy character than Clinton, and smarter than Gore, but not worth the satisfaction of the libertarians.
timothy
Actually, I think there might be a few terms equally insulting, but I think communist is a fine derogatory term, as applied to those who favor wide-spread government coercion in order that we might "share equally." Remember, some animals are more equal than others.
Usually, those in favor of communism say "Hey, you can't base your criticism of communism / Marxism on the failed experiments thus far -- true communism has never been tried! Just wait till we establish it, real soon now." But since the harangue is to "travel around the world and read a few books," I would suggest a few destinations for your tour:
Places:
- Poland and Hungary. Ask people how they liked living under communism, and how they liked being in the Soviet Sphere of Influence.
- Dresden: It's still reeling, with piles of WWII rubble that in the Western part of Germany were long ago displaced by new construction. In fact, go anywhere in the former East Germany and Compare it with cities in the former West Germany. Which would you rather have been in 15 years ago?
- Korea: North vs. South. Again -- what argument for communism?
- Hong Kong. Ask how many people left to avoid living under the beneficient Chinese government.
- Tianemen Square. Ask the students who were slaughtered how communism kept them free. They might be a little quiet, but they won't mind being asked. (Also speak to the women forced to undergo abortions under the one-child policy).
- Siberia.
- San Francisco. Picture it shades of gray, with gay people persecuted and with only high officials enjoying the seashore. Oh, and cut out most internet startups and venture capitalists, and forget having DSL service.
Books:
The Road to Serfdom -- Hayek
1984, Animal Farm - Orwell
Atlas Shrugged - Rand
That government is best which governs least, and the more numerous the laws the more corrupt the state. States also tend to protect themselves from prosecution - so ask yourself whether you'd rather have an industrial accident happen because Exxon wrecks a ship, or because your government designs a dangerous nuclear reactor. There will never be a harm-free world, but at least you can sue Exxon.
just some thoughts,
timothy
It's been said before, but BadlandZ's metaphor is apt -- If you can't use crypto in electronic communications, your email is there for the taking. I send a lot of postcards in the mail, but I usually put my blackmail demands (kidding!) and bill payments in envelopes. Context, personal preference, likelihood of interception -- lots of things go into individuals' choice of security level, and they should be allowed to decide what the outcome is.
... so far, the overhead it would take to do handwriting recognition on postcards means they can read far fewer of those ...
No crypto is absolute (like no lock is absolute), but that's not an argument against crypto (or locks).
The bigger point is about attitude. Many people seem to have an attitude that I will call "Permissionism" -- that the government should officially *approve* what you do / say / want, and that nearly everything be subject to a needs test.
Often the premise is true ("Nobody needs to drive a bright red car...") but the conclusion is a flying leap away ("... therefore no one ought be allowed to.") In reality, the *right* to choose ones destiny (pursue happiness) is more important than the validity in the eyes of any observer of the validity of the path chosen in the pursuit.
Because this Permissionist attitude is prevalent, many people don't seem to mind restrictions until they hit them personally. I have heard many people say with a strange mixture of pride and unctuousness that they actually *invite* inspection of their email, because they've got "nothing to hide."
Spread the envelope / postcard metaphor widely! And of course, point out that the NSA regularly scans email domestic and otherwise
timothy
blocked wrote "Freedoms are preserved by institutions that help prevent their encroachment."
...)
The right to bear arms, as noted in the US Constitution's 2nd Amdt, is an institution that gives teeth to informational institutions like the Internet. It means a lot less to be informed if the govt. has a monopoly on guns (and crypto, and information on how to improvise munitions
Guns: Go buy a few today! Note: IANAAD (I am not an arms dealer )
timothy
Put him in American public schools for a few years, let him know that cleverness, intuition, curiosity and bravery are not in keeping with the community values propagated therein.
Anyone interested in separating School and State (and especially anyone who thinks the gub'mint should hold the market captive when it comes to education) should look into the Separation movement. Read a bit at sepschool.org, and think about the principles that make Free software so good and so powerful -- why not apply the same logic to the topic of education?
When you question reality, use sodium pentathol.
timothy
Glass half empty / glass half full ... obviously, we see things a little differently, but I don't understand what would prevent you from using fvwm and 8 xterms, no matter what else was available ...
One of my favorite things about my Linux system is the Gimp; it's a very high-class program and it's pretty and graphical. I'm sure there are a lot of people who might like the Free OS philosophy (not to mention better stability etc) but who don't realize how good some of the graphics programs are.
a) As someone else pointed out, the claim that w2k will be a better server needs some substantiation and context. Which will be a better server given cheap commodity components and other than high-end RAM configs? An open question, but consider that right now a 4 year old computer -- say a 486 with 32 megs of RAM -- can happily run X86 Linux in most of its splendor (barring Pentium-optimized distribs), but how fast does a 486/32 seem under Windows 98?
b) Open source and cheaper are more than what the little people like. I don't know much about coding, require frequent help from my housemates to do certain trivial things on my own machine, and am unlikely in the forseeable future to be contributing much code to the kernel;) -- all that said, the fact that other people can and will extend and improve the operating system, and that the result will be on CheapBytes a couple weeks after (or ready for ftp that evening) is a huge plus! Much better than occasional, expensive, grudging, un-satisfying "service packs" for Windows. If I were running a business, I know which model of development I'd prefer.
A cheaper OS is more than just mildly good too. There are a lot of snide comments about corporate blindness and inertia on Slashdot, and I've even been the source of several -- but that's mostly with bigger businesses, as Middle Management Cancer sets in, and even then companies occasionally make smart decisions. But if a company has thousands of desktops seats served by a substantial data center, they could be saving a huge amount in licenses with Linux. Of course, that's not the only cost, far from it, but companies really like to see lower tangible costs, and service / maintenance costs often get lumped into "Oh, well, we'll spend money on IT people anyhow."
Just some thoughts --
timothy
I guess it does take an anonymous coward to rip into the asker of an apparently sincere and legitimate question with "You are clearly a moron."
Wow.
I guess it's an interesting form of entertainment (random vitriol), and that I did ask for it by clicking on the 'X answers beneath your current threshold,' but c'mon! Why the incivility?! My theory that Western Civ. is sinking like bricks in oil wants to be proved wrong, not backed at every turn.
Oh, right, anonymity and cowardice.
timothy
Why not end the monopoly on the mail? Because the postal service does not exhibit
...
monopoly pricing. Do you think that your company could (profitably) deliver first
class mail for 33 cents per letter in two days with a pretty damned good deal of
reliability?
Glad you're not a PW;)
I promise not to get into the rant I'd like to, but all I'm asking (in this forum, anyhow), is why prohibit new entrants in the field of first-class mail delivery? "Monopoly pricing" is the pricing offered by a monopoly; Keynesian / Interventionist definitions of monopoly pricing are strictly self-serving and circular. Attempts to deliver mail more cheaply by free-market means have been squashed in the past by the USPS, and *that* is the behavior of a monopolist.
Anyhow, wrong point to belabor in the Firecracker thread, so this is my last paragraph (save the sig) on the matter until it is raised in a more relevant area.
I decided to use the 800 number rather than the online form.
... but a minute or two later, she pointed out that people don't like to provide this sometimes "because of the ..." (she fumbled, and I suggested, "spam?") "Yeah, Spam." So she kindly removed my email address and provided my order number by voice instead. Kudos!
;) So this is sheerly an experiment. I read a lot of comments panning the deal and complaining about a few weeks of waiting, but for under USD 6, this seems like a real bargain, since it includes the remote controller. We'll see!
The wait was mind-numbing: nearly half an hour of "Your call is important to us. We are experiencing longer than normal wait times. Please stay on the line and your call will be answered by the first available operator. All calls are answered in the order received." I think the frequewncy of the message increased as the wait stretched out, too.
When I did get a person, I mentioned that I'd been on hold for a long time, but for once I didn't let my temper get the better of me and try to take it out on her.
She explained that the sales floor closes for the weekend, so all orderes go to her area, which is actually tech support, and that they were two people short (of an unspecified total) in tech support anyhow.
She asked whether I had an email address to which she could send a reeeipt, and then I provided one
Delivery time: she said their warehouse was behind on orders, but that it should arrive in under two weeks. Also that they usually ship UPS, but for this deal they're shipping USPS instead.
I noticed that a CA Slashdotter was charged state tax, so I guess they have some of their operation there, but the woman I spoke with was in New Jersey. Any other states get hit with it?
As far as this deal goes, well, you never know, eh? I have no home automation stuff at all, and know even less.
Good luck to anyone who gets one!
timothy
Which is more sickening: that people know some of the horror that could result from a ahuttle accident? Or that this be sanitized and "heroified" to protect NASA?
... what, exactly? Why must many miilions of confiscated money support the meanderings of the space program?
Does no one besides me have problems with the mindless pushing of a government-run space program that seems based more on propaganda than any rational justification? Like government-run and -funded education, pervasive welfarism both corporate and personal and increasing restrictions of privacy, the idea that we ought to send folks out of Earth's atmosphere on a monthly basis is one that since the 60s has gone from lunacy to obvious.
The Space Shuttle is a royal bauble of the US govt, circus center ring. No doubt there is a lot of neat collateral technology, but all in the pursuit of
I'm all for space exporation, actually. But if there are economic benefits to be had from going into space, why do we need to pay truckloads of tax money to fund R&D? Wouldn't it make more sense for Morton-Thiokol, or any other company which thinks they can make space profitable, to pay their own start-up costs?
Dying screams are not pleasant, but they illustrate that the pursuit of space is an endeavor with possible grave consequences, and that is a valuable thing to know. Astronauts are much sexier than unmanned explorers, maybe, but that's not how I want my money to be played with. Obscuring the consequences of failure is unfair to those who might want to be astronauts, and to the people who fund the fireworks.
timothy
A friend of mine is going to DefCon. He works for a company that makes computer-security related products, but he's been into computer security since long before that job.
He qualifies as a "hacker," and I'd say he even did when he broke ino some systems -- because his actions are done for learning purposes, not malice, and harmed no one.
I don't know all that much about security, but personally I find it fascinating - the psychology and tactics of preventing break-ins must of needs parallel the psychology and tactics of breaking in.
I think your characterization of attendees as all crackers is wrong. Are you trolling?
Maybe you "can't imagine why people would meet for several days on this subject," but that says more about your imagination that it does the people who will be at DefCon.
Maybe one day I'll know enough to justify going there myself.
timothy
This sounds right (rose is rose is rose
1) What is a monopoly? Says the American Heritage Dictionary, "An excluisive ownership or control, as of a given business activity." [emphasis mine.] Not just "the lion's share" (no argument, MS has that in certain markets), but exclusivity.
And even within that, there are at least two senses of exclusion that matter: 1) definitional and 2) normative. (Maybe a legal scholar can offer better words, but I hope these examples show what I mean:)
a) Definitional: If I have the only lemonade stand in the town, I have a monopoly, literally, but with no hard feelings. Maybe the town only has enough people to support one stand, and maybe my only competitor folded after a kick-back scandal. Whyever, I just am the only lemonade game in town.
b) Normative: If my dad is the mayor and I convince him to outlaw any other lemonade stand from opening, then have a normative monopoly. I don't care how many stands the town will support, I have the threat of law protecting mine.
2) When did Microsoft ever have a monopoly, domestic, international, or otherwise? A preponderance, yes, but never has Microsoft held a monopoly. (At least, whenever I ask the question I have never gotten a convincing answer that MS has held a monopoly.)
3) Can govt. regulators know better than competing companies which outcomes would be better for customers? (I pose this as a rhetorical question, but if anyone can make an argument that bureaucrats make better designers than entrepreneurs I'd like to see it.)
A really good book on the topic of monopoly / anti-trust is called (I think I have this title right): Antitrust: A Policy at War with Itself. (By Robert Bork, all-around smart guy.)
Just some thoughts,
timothy
Where can you get a Canon XL1 for $1500?! Do tell! I can still go into credit card debt before I die ...
... firewire, even USB, are way faster, and as long as both camera and computer are using these interfaces intelligently, you'll get much faster throughput.
BTW, I've often heard video transfer from a digital camera referred to as capturing, even though this is a slightly different use of the word than was accepted a few years ago. Even if it's really only a data transfer rather than a true "capture," the use is analogous, since you are pulling video into your computer.
And even if you're not capturing in the old sense, I don't see how a serial port would be nearly as good as a firewire port
Just thoughts,
timothy
The poster who asked who to thank at Panasonic has a good point!
This (hopefully) is a good way to both foster goodwill by saying "Thanks, guys, we appreciate the gift!" and to let them know how many people would like to use a DVD (/RAM) drive with a Free OS.
I bet they don't get a lot of "thank you"s when they release a new driver for the Windows family of OSes, in part because most users view it as a default, just an integral part of their machine. Sort of like those who are not into automobiles (I'm not) don't care so much about some new engine part.
But those who appreciate the fact that a lot of uncredited hours go into every free / Free program can be more appreciative. It would be great to let Panasonic know they've pleased a lot of people by contributing one of their drives and more important the documentation for it.
So if anyone from Panasonic is reading this, WOOHOO! Thanks!
And again, if we know where to direct better thank yous, I'm sure people will send some.
timothy
Huh?!
How can "the economy" be regulated be regulated without regulating individual lives?
All choices in life are (that is, can be seen as, whatever ever else they might be) economic choices. If you are free to be idle, that is an economic choice because it limits the amount you earn or learn. If you are *not* free to be idle, it sounds like an economic regulation: does this mean you're in favor of it? How about the right to dispose of your property as you see fit? To invest in someone else's company? To lend money? To take a new job or quit an old one?
What if you come up with a new product, one that you think people would trade their dollars for? If you believe in freedom of the individual, you ought to; if you believe in economic regulation you ought first consider how your regulators view the thing.
Your summary of the left / right / libertarian positions I think misses the attitude of many libertarians (cannot speak for all, of course) which is that libertarians do not believe that personal and economic freedoms can be separated, that they are part of the same thing.
If you like your economy regulated, you can at least take comfort in the way that rent control ensures the availability of low-cost, high-quality housing in every city it's been introduced to.
timothy
Microsoft may do some naughty things (need good evidence, not just competitors moaning that they're at an unfair diadvantage), but the fact that they're so widely accepted is certainly not due to a lack of competition.
;), MS does face competition, even in some cases excellent free / Free products, like apache.
...' Circular reasoning, self-fulfilling prophecies. Microsoft cannily exploits what amounts to widespread management dysfunction. That's MS being smart ... sort of like office supply stores that sell the paper that the lawyers fill with obfuscation and pre-emptions.
There's no way that you can say that they have no competition, because in any market segment you can name (no fair saying 'Products sold by Microsoft')
So why is Word / Office everywhere? Because businesses past a certain size --usually! -- don't have the flexibility or creativity to see beyond the status quo, because the cancer of middle management spread and MBAhood has spread into all things. MS benefits from business inertia: to preserve file-compatibility, seems that many businesses think they have to keep an MS-only computing environment. In a sense they're right, because to do otherwise requires installing work-arounds at every turn.
In my place of employ, for example, we frequently receive information from clients in the form of Word, Oulook or Excel files. Hopefully by this time next year they could all be XML data, eh?
In the meantime, management says 'it's safe to buy more MS products, and we'd better get the newest ones because the other people we deal with will get it and we'll need to read their files
But all the vindictive stuff about MS (claims that MS executives should all be in jail, or allegations of corruption, etc) would sound strange if it were applied so casually to other companies or groups of programmers. IBM in the 60s arguably had closer to a true monopoly than MS does at present, and that was for both hardware and software. Maybe, then, in 20 years people can think of MS as an amazing company that still makes good products despite having gone through tough times (ala today's IBM), and then again maybe MS will be a scorned, scoffed-at name, a name synonomous with hubris and failure. We'll see.
I am no fan of MS products, but the fact that MS products dominate the workplace is because people buy them!
timothy
Australia, a country founded as a penal colony and long known for independent, self-reliant citizens, is now closer to a gun-free zone than any of the American school districts with the cute signs so declaring.
... ;)
... besides itself.
Brittain, where in WWII handguns were distributed to citizens when German invasion seemed imminent, is even more so. Airguns are very popular there (high-quality airguns, not $30 Walmart guns like Americans typically think of if asked to describe an airgun), but firearms? Tough to own, tough even to find a place to shoot someone else's.
Switzerland has widespread gun ownership; traditionally, on election day the voters march to the polls armed -- as a demonstration that the polity exists by the consent of the people.
Of course, everyone knows Switzerland's reputation as a dangerous place to visit
Point it, only vigilance will protect your rights, but once you take away the means to resist government, government might not see the harm in protecting you from all sorts of nasty things
timothy
This sounds like the (unfortunately canned) Atlantis Project, the idea of which was to assemble a country in international waters out of modular floating hexagons. The laws of this country were to be pretty much Randian, 'thou shalt not initiate force,' etc.
;)
I have been asking the same question for a couple of years, though, and haven't found any country better than the US for general respect for rights, despite the constant gnawing threats and diminishing freedoms here. Some parts of the US seem freer than others when it comes to letting people alone, but there are enough Federal laws which crush state sovereignty that this is small comfort.
Anyone want to start lashing rafts together like in Snowcrash?
timothy
The ubiquitous Anonymous Coward asked me whether I meant something like the Landware keyboards, which I had in fact never heard of before.
Actually, I'd prefer a turn-key solution with a Twiddler. (See the handykey site for more details.
There is a driver available for the Pilot, and wiring instructions on how to make a cable / power-supply for it. So far, both are out of my idiot's grasp of technology. If anyone wants to put together a cable adapter/ battery-power box for these and sell it (with the driver on disc included) for less than 25 bucks, I will take them up on it. One caveat: it should not involved cutting the original cables, because I want to be able to use the Twiddler in both environments.
I don't even have a palm pilot yet, but I would if I could do that with it. I just went on a trip in fact where even my tiny NEC LT 120 laptop would have been too big for my economy-class seat on Delta.
All that aside, these Landware keyboards are a very smart idea, though! I like the integrated cover / angled holder, integrated serial port etc. Only trouble is how small they look. I know some people like the little keyboard, but honestly I hate even the iMac keyboard I'm called upon to use at work, and it's not really *that* little.
timothy
I think I'd like a palm pilot (and could call it a serious tool) as long as I have a real keyboard connected to it. (That can mean a Twiddler, which I do have, or one of the tiny add-ons, or anything besides the pen input.)
timothy
Bribery is widespread; are you suggesting that Asian and European companies are immune from it?
In fact, Japan and Korea are home to some of the juiciest bribery cases (and accusations); a Japanese woman of my acquaintance says that bribes were a common occurance when she worked for 5 years at a large Japanese computer company, no names named.
In fact, while Microsoft has been accused of many things, some of which are probably true, can you point out news stories where it is accused of bribery per se? I would be interested in reading them, but I haven't seen any yet.
timothy
Despite its high price, this has been tempting me to save for it ever since I saw it several months ago.
...
...
I am in the unusual situation of moving into a vintage Airstream trailer, 22 feet long. This makes flat panels look especially appealing, because even my short-depth 17" Trinitron will have trouble squeezing in anywhere that I can still work on it.
If I could hook a computer with a Free OS up to this monitor with a DVD player, I would happily jettison my 13" television, which I use mainly for movie-playback anyhow. A 17.3" widescreen would be a much nicer way to watch So I Married an Axe Murderer
Someday
timothy
OK, you don't seem to have read what I wrote, so I wonder why this is labelled a response.
Your level of materialism, like you say, is your own to choose and more power to you.
Maybe my entire message could be summed up, 'Deceptive advertising is not redundant.'
Speaking is OK, lying is not.
timothy
Dislaimer: I work in advertising, but don't usually feel much call to defend advertising with a little a, but sometimes with a big A I want to.
... would you really mind an ad on your odometer? I'd never thought about one going there, but if I could save $1000 on the price of a car by ocasionally finding a note from coke instead of 3 zeros (after an informative leading digit, that is!), then I'd be pleased with the deal. Would I buy more coke as a result? Well, I don't think so, but if I did the car certainly didn't force me to.
... you might even derive some satisfaction from watching certain ads, since they can be funny or otherwise pleasing.
Ads embedded in a BIOS strike me as being pretty dumb (from both end user and advertiser perspective) unless they are designed for compatibility with all operating systems and unobtrusive enough not to cause a backlash of annoyance / resentment. That translates into "pretty dumb."
But it doens't follow that ads are always dumb or bad
Advertisments can be annoying, but they are both avoidable (by varying what you choose to pay attention to, where you go, etc.) and -- often -- helpful / informative.
You've probably used advertisements to price-shop, or found out about some new product because you saw it advertised. (or perhaps found out because someone else saw the ad, etc.)
Advertisements also allow the establishment of media whose readers / viewers don't necessarily care about the advertising. I enjoy the show Ally McBeal, for instance, and tend to mute the commercials. If you read slashdot, you're benefitting from the fact that advertisers recognize slashdot's appeal. Would the nature of slashdot be different if it were sheerly a 'labor of (unpaid) love'? Maybe. But in that hypothetical world, how many of us would get to read it, and how much could Rob afford to spend on his hobby?
This doesn't mean that fraudulent ads are OK because "advertising is good" or negate claims that ads, like anything else, can foster what I'd consider negative behavior -- I'm just arguing that advertising by itself is a moral neutral, a spectrum containing bad as well as good. Most of it makes you groan, maybe -- so be it. But again, I say that's advertisements, rather than Advertising.
Cantankerously,
timothy
I'll skip over the fact that there might be some finegally reason why in some cases it actually would be better to rent such a classic movie, but ..
OK, maybe you don't mind CC keeping track of what movies and when you watch, etc. (case by case, I might agree with you about a lot of that stuff) but if you rent at typical blockbuster prices, it only takes a few repeats of the same movie to approach the purchase price of a DVD; DVD sales prices are making me cringe / gloat as I replace my aging and oft-watched tapes with DVDs at lower prices than the tapes cost several years ago. If you're renting VHS rather than DVD, you're also settling for lower sound and image quality.
Bladerunner is at present available for about 13 bucks online, and if you find a place with free shipping and in another state (hence no sales tax), that's it. Boom. In Austin, that would get you 3 rentals, a bottle of coke, and change.
Good point about mom-n-pop shops; I think DVD is actually a boon for local video stores, because after a while people will realize that they'd like to spread some of the buyer's remorse risk to stores so they can give discs a test gander. Buying ones you know you like on DVD makes more sense than not knowing; renting provides a good test run.
So rent, buy, play - but not from someone who requires permission each time you want to use it!
timothy