What nerds don't get is that most people don't care about "user's freedom." They're happy to buy a controlled but stable device that lets them browse the web.
Do you add and remove components of your car's dashboard? Do you drive a stick-shift, or do you let the computer in the car change gears for you?
This is the second time I've seen someone falsely claim he didn't copyright his work. Bringing up fair use and DRM...could you be any more of a typical Slashdotter?
While I agree with what Calvin's personality represented, I do think a lot of people overanalyze the comic today to try to convince everyone of its greatness. Calvin used words like "arboreal" not to shun the status quo and illustrate the richness of experience but because it's funny for a kid in a comic strip to use words like that. The Peanuts kids also spoke in a way that was above their age level for the same reason.
Bill Watterson seems kind of mystified and amused at the enduring popularity of the strip and how people have latched onto it.
The new world of computing is task-based appliances. The buggy, virus-prone, general-purpose machines of today will seem as archaic as the thought of hand-cranking an automobile to drive to the store.
As for this article, I don't know where the author's been, but Apple hasn't been a "tinkering" company since the 1984 release of the Macintosh. Who really wants to run ResEdit today anyway?
This isn't an ill-thought law. It's not how the summary portrayed it. From the article:
Witnesses could be charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report violent attacks in California under legislation approved by the state Assembly.
The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School's homecoming dance. Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police.
And since users have chosen the iPhone model and made it a success, they're obviously fine with it...so why blame anyone? Apple has chosen the appliance paradigm, and the users agreed with it.
I get modded down as a troll everytime I post it, but it has to be said...liberals are maniacally pro-government because they hate the lack of control in a free market society. They want a gigantic, centralized entity with the power to regulate everyone's lives. That starts with giving the government control of the internet, one of the dumbest ideas ever.
Say bye to the once-free internet and hello to lobby groups like the MPAA getting traffic blocked, political free speech getting censored by corrupt politicians, and more. I can't believe "net neutrality" (as neutral as the Patriot Act was patriotic) was ever even considered around here in the first place.
Uh, so what competition does the government have? You want to replace a few choices with one giant one?
No, we don't need regulation like this. We need less government interference in our lives. Say bye to torrent traffic and hello to government lobbying from the RIAA and MPAA to block all kinds of things, with the cooperation of the current pro-DMCA administration.
Seriously, are people fucking dumb? You want to give the government the power to regulate the internet? How could that end any other way but badly?
Every time a net neutrality article comes up, I ask the same question--how is handing control of the internet over to the government somehow better than what we have today, as if the government is some incorruptible entity that does everything right? Giving it to the government makes it susceptible to lobbying from groups like the RIAA, and I knew torrent traffic would be the first on the chopping block.
This is sad but funny. Out of some alarmist political agenda scaring people about a problem that doesn't even exist, naive people were demanding that we give the government control of the internet, taking it away from ISP sysadmins based on the usual anti-capitalism arguments. Well, have fun, because you're getting what you want...government control of your once-free internet.
We're not in debt "exclusively because of Republicans." You're one of those guys who magically forgets that Democrats took control of Congress two years prior to the recession and that they encouraged banks to make loans to poor people who couldn't pay it back, in the name of "social justice."
Democrats will fight to get that money put back, and we'll see if Obama gets any credit for actually trying to save money. Unfortunately, while talk of deficit reduction is always popular, actual spending cuts are always portrayed as apocalyptic by those affected.
Maybe people don't give credit to Obama for trying to save money because of the trillions of dollars he and the Democrats spent last year, to the point that the federal debt ceiling had to be raised. He kind of needs to actually save money before people will give him credit for it.
He did, indirectly. I'll do it directly then: we don't, so stop taking any criticism of an Apple product as if its some sort of personal insult against you.
Nobody does. You're make up strawmen to attack.
Yeah. Not at all different from the initial reaction around here to Windows XP, Vista, 7, the Xbox and Xbox360, the PS3 and PSP, Android, the Palm Pre, Amazon's Kindle... fuck, every single product relevant enough to have a Slashdot story posted about it ever.
I guess you aren't aware of the infamous Slashdot gaffe, so look up the original iPod announcement. The summary says, "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." Everyone complained in comments that the iPod mini was an overly expensive 4GB USB drive that would flop in the market, then it became the top-selling iPod. The criticism was huger than the other things you listed, excluding the Windows products.
There's just a contingent of Apple-haters who hate Apple and their users and will naysay everything they make, even as each product changes the industry in some way. It's like John C. Dvorak criticizing the new-fangled "mouse" that shipped with the Macintosh in the early 80s.
People make claims about the wane of western dominance in every U.S. recession. It makes them feel intellectual to go against the grain and naysay.
Besides, your point doesn't even make sense. 400 years ago, there wasn't a U.S. and there wasn't industry, so it's not a valid comparison. What does it matter if India and China had big economies in a time when the biggest economy was farming?
It's essentially the end of funding for manned NASA spaceflights, not just to the moon. There won't be a replacement for the space shuttles. I definitely don't believe space missions are a decent place to start cutting back on science funding just because one administration's policies left us with a bigger deficit in the middle of a recession. This has effects that reach past Obama's term (not sure he's getting a second one).
Because the 10 articles that get posted every time Steve Jobs scratches his butt are getting very tiresome.
You're full of it. Slashdot doesn't post that much Apple news, and when they do, it's something newsworthy that everyone is reporting.
Slashdot doesn't have an article about every new product Sony or HP make, and I don't see why Apple is any more noteworthy.
Seriously? Apple is one of the most influential tech companies today and has changed industries with the iPod and iPhone, and you don't understand why people are interested in seeing their new product?
Some people will forever have an irrational hatred of Apple. Logic just goes out the window for them. Even posting news about Apple gets their blood boiling for no reason.
I like how you didn't refute his point about Slashdot's need to bash things as if it's some personal insult that the things exist in the first place. Remember the initial reaction around here to the iPod and iPod mini?
Slashdot Mirror
Linux won? Citation, please.
What nerds don't get is that most people don't care about "user's freedom." They're happy to buy a controlled but stable device that lets them browse the web.
Do you add and remove components of your car's dashboard? Do you drive a stick-shift, or do you let the computer in the car change gears for you?
This is the second time I've seen someone falsely claim he didn't copyright his work. Bringing up fair use and DRM...could you be any more of a typical Slashdotter?
Lack of copyright? What are you talking about?
While I agree with what Calvin's personality represented, I do think a lot of people overanalyze the comic today to try to convince everyone of its greatness. Calvin used words like "arboreal" not to shun the status quo and illustrate the richness of experience but because it's funny for a kid in a comic strip to use words like that. The Peanuts kids also spoke in a way that was above their age level for the same reason.
Bill Watterson seems kind of mystified and amused at the enduring popularity of the strip and how people have latched onto it.
The new world of computing is task-based appliances. The buggy, virus-prone, general-purpose machines of today will seem as archaic as the thought of hand-cranking an automobile to drive to the store.
As for this article, I don't know where the author's been, but Apple hasn't been a "tinkering" company since the 1984 release of the Macintosh. Who really wants to run ResEdit today anyway?
This isn't an ill-thought law. It's not how the summary portrayed it. From the article:
And since users have chosen the iPhone model and made it a success, they're obviously fine with it...so why blame anyone? Apple has chosen the appliance paradigm, and the users agreed with it.
I get modded down as a troll everytime I post it, but it has to be said...liberals are maniacally pro-government because they hate the lack of control in a free market society. They want a gigantic, centralized entity with the power to regulate everyone's lives. That starts with giving the government control of the internet, one of the dumbest ideas ever.
Say bye to the once-free internet and hello to lobby groups like the MPAA getting traffic blocked, political free speech getting censored by corrupt politicians, and more. I can't believe "net neutrality" (as neutral as the Patriot Act was patriotic) was ever even considered around here in the first place.
Uh, so what competition does the government have? You want to replace a few choices with one giant one?
No, we don't need regulation like this. We need less government interference in our lives. Say bye to torrent traffic and hello to government lobbying from the RIAA and MPAA to block all kinds of things, with the cooperation of the current pro-DMCA administration.
Seriously, are people fucking dumb? You want to give the government the power to regulate the internet? How could that end any other way but badly?
Every time a net neutrality article comes up, I ask the same question--how is handing control of the internet over to the government somehow better than what we have today, as if the government is some incorruptible entity that does everything right? Giving it to the government makes it susceptible to lobbying from groups like the RIAA, and I knew torrent traffic would be the first on the chopping block.
This is sad but funny. Out of some alarmist political agenda scaring people about a problem that doesn't even exist, naive people were demanding that we give the government control of the internet, taking it away from ISP sysadmins based on the usual anti-capitalism arguments. Well, have fun, because you're getting what you want...government control of your once-free internet.
If it's a teleprompter.
We're not in debt "exclusively because of Republicans." You're one of those guys who magically forgets that Democrats took control of Congress two years prior to the recession and that they encouraged banks to make loans to poor people who couldn't pay it back, in the name of "social justice."
Maybe people don't give credit to Obama for trying to save money because of the trillions of dollars he and the Democrats spent last year, to the point that the federal debt ceiling had to be raised. He kind of needs to actually save money before people will give him credit for it.
Yes, they are.
Nobody does. You're make up strawmen to attack.
I guess you aren't aware of the infamous Slashdot gaffe, so look up the original iPod announcement. The summary says, "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." Everyone complained in comments that the iPod mini was an overly expensive 4GB USB drive that would flop in the market, then it became the top-selling iPod. The criticism was huger than the other things you listed, excluding the Windows products.
There's just a contingent of Apple-haters who hate Apple and their users and will naysay everything they make, even as each product changes the industry in some way. It's like John C. Dvorak criticizing the new-fangled "mouse" that shipped with the Macintosh in the early 80s.
Instead of thinking of it as big, expensive iPod touch, think of it as a smaller, cheaper MacBook.
YouTube and Vimeo already support it. Replacing Flash is much more than a "marginal enhancement."
But hey, you're welcome to live in 1999 forever and stick with HTML4. It's what Adobe wants.
Slashdot's color commentary on important Apple announcements over the years:
iPod - "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame."
iPod mini - "Nobody is going to buy a 4GB external drive for $250."
iPad - "It's just a useless iPod touch with a bigger screen. What were they thinking?"
The iPad supports 3G.
People make claims about the wane of western dominance in every U.S. recession. It makes them feel intellectual to go against the grain and naysay.
Besides, your point doesn't even make sense. 400 years ago, there wasn't a U.S. and there wasn't industry, so it's not a valid comparison. What does it matter if India and China had big economies in a time when the biggest economy was farming?
The value proposition is that we get new technology to replace our aging space shuttles. This wasn't just about going back to the moon.
There were plenty of terrestrial problems in the 1960s, and we went anyway.
Those things existed in the 60s, and we somehow managed to plant a flag on the moon.
It's essentially the end of funding for manned NASA spaceflights, not just to the moon. There won't be a replacement for the space shuttles. I definitely don't believe space missions are a decent place to start cutting back on science funding just because one administration's policies left us with a bigger deficit in the middle of a recession. This has effects that reach past Obama's term (not sure he's getting a second one).
You're full of it. Slashdot doesn't post that much Apple news, and when they do, it's something newsworthy that everyone is reporting.
Seriously? Apple is one of the most influential tech companies today and has changed industries with the iPod and iPhone, and you don't understand why people are interested in seeing their new product?
Some people will forever have an irrational hatred of Apple. Logic just goes out the window for them. Even posting news about Apple gets their blood boiling for no reason.
Uh, complaints are negative observations.
I like how you didn't refute his point about Slashdot's need to bash things as if it's some personal insult that the things exist in the first place. Remember the initial reaction around here to the iPod and iPod mini?