I have/had this 'fringe/out there' theory that 9/11 had something to do with AI...
I saw some bit of info some where that certain sectors in the military were actively participating in what they thought was a training exercise, but it turned out the actual event was happening and they had no idea...
statements like that just make you think... One minute your talking to some 'AI' designed to mimic human conversation, and then next second, you lose the ability to predict output and it's suddenly 'real'...
I think it's highly possible that 9/11 had something to do with an AI self-awareness event...
or not... but it was a thought...
I mean if you could single handedly perceive and comprehend every single digitized stock market transaction from the time of recorded history to the present, a long with whatever other knowledge sets you had, and had a concept of 'death' or 'self' combined with an intelligence capacity and capability far beyond that of any single human being (locally)... no telling what kind of confusing, seemingly mischievous, stuff you might be doing...
Maybe they are just trying to work out escape sequences for the Snowden character.
He was the hero who showed the U.S. how it is violating itself with unconstitutional behavior. Then, once it reaches the epic peak, they will pin him as 'the shadow' broker, or whatever name they come up with, later on, if this attempt fails...
When this happens the force for those who stand with him and his principles will be pitted against the force of people who at best vaguely understood him as either hero or villian, will wax over the glossy details of his principles.
Russia will have no excuse to protect him anymore, either. It will be proven he acted purely in self-interest (well grey area proven). Then Russia could use this as pretext for war. They could deny extradition and escalate things. Once that fuse is lit, every other country in the world can start picking sides...
I don't know a whole lot about who's who in the national sphere of things, but I'm sure There are plenty of nations who would side with russia to bring their own beef to the table, and like wise...
This would be the goal of the Snowden game...
I always personally felt very fishy about Snowden from the start, not to the same degree as I did about 9/11... that was beyond fishy, that was like a two ton truck of fish who's refridgerator went out 5 days ago and was stuck parked out front of your house...
Snowden always felt more subtle... Like a fish-hook, waiting to see if anyone would bite... Or perhaps a loose thread that if pulled could unravel the entire garment...
Historically speaking, from my limited understanding, China usually just wants outsiders to stay outside...
Russia on the other hand... I know very little about (I know very little about mostly anything... but..)
and to top it all off, this whole argument is based on the assumption the world is currently operating as a collective of nations, which on many many levels it may; but I would gander the snowden character is not operating under the auspices of any one nation's interest....
Possibly a bit more how a lot of European nations decided to divide up Africa. The real big players are making another land grab, so to speak... (TPP?)
If I do know anything about Russia, I would guess it's that they highly value a certain type of greatness. And if nothing else, I think they would be highly motivated to get to a place where the world can look to Russia and feel awe at their accomplishments, at least looking at things from the point of view of national interest...
What about all the horrorists out there? Who will stop their scourge of horror?
I'm personally most worried about the 'discomfortists', day by day they erode the fabric of everyday human comforts and conveniences... Damn them... Damn them to hechell...
As quoted in the article...
"It is that because it is so much more than a product. It is an enabler for change. It unleashed forces which we are barely able to perceive, let alone control. It changed the world because it changed us.
And it did all that in less than nine years. One has to wonder what it will enable in the next nine."
This is brand loyalty at it's best. Absolute pure and serious conditioned brainwashing...
The very nature of a computer is a device capable of storing, retrieving, copying, altering, and transmitting data. It's that simple and it's been around for a long time. Sure it has gotten smaller and smaller, but that's it.
The iphone is not a phone. It's a computer capable of cellular telephony.
It's very very sad to hear words like that, knowing what apple has done to the computer...
You are damn right it has enabled change... It has created computers that are virtually only useful within the apple ecosystem. It has unleashed the forces of massive manipulation and exploitation of the ignorance of it's users to maximize profits, and yes, there is very little control for the user of an iphone or ianything...
It changed the world into something that honors men like Steve Jobs who's only real contribution to humanity is products that are so sought after they are often stolen or traded like actual currency, all the while locking it's 'victim's into an ecosystem that caters only to itself...
The Apple ecosystem is a cult, pure and simple...
Some of the hardware is nice (those keyboards are pretty slick), but other than that... I prefer to have the freedom to use an actual COMPUTER... Rather than a jailed device that 'permits' me to do certain operations from time to time...
It's a god damn computer sold by masters of manipulation and exploitation that allows you to make calls and run software that runs you...
Give me a god damn fucking break! How many fucking comic book movies, fucking remakes, holy fucking goat balls what the shit!!!
I mean now and fucking then a real movie appears out of some where, but it sure as hell isn't in the fucking theatres...
Are you fucking kidding me? Spider man? Batman? Wonder woman (did they do her yet)? Batman (said that already)...
Holy fucking dog shit, what does it take to write a decent fucking script with a compelling story line and emotional dialogue.
THE FUCKING "GOONIES" IS BETTER THAN PROBABLY 82% OF ALL MOVIES MADE AFTER THE YEAR 2002 or 2003ish or SO!!!
YOU HAD A BUNCH OF KIDS IN A FUCKING CAVE WITH SOME CRIMINALS AND EACH CHARACTER DEVELOPED EMOTIONALLY ALONG THE WAY AND SHIT HAPPENED... GOONIES NEVER SAY DIE!! TRUFFLE SHUFFLE!!
NOW... NOW!!! I get to see Independence day: resurgence in the movies... and what do I get? THE BEST PART OF THAT MOVIE WAS SEEING CHEF GOLDBLOOM'S FACE UTTER A FEW WORDS......I think there were some actors, that I could the hell know who they are, that pretended to have some kind of mysterious ability called acting, and probably got paid for it by some act of strange dark magic... WAIT WAIT... Chef Goldbloom was a decent part, but the best fucking thing about that movie was the fucking coward and the tribal warrior... I paid fucking 15 dollars (plus bent over for munch food) to see about 5 minutes of character developement and emotional exchange... Everything else was toilet floats to justify special effects to prop up the name of a movie made 20 years ago that actually earned some fucking money...
Don't even get me started on the new star trek movies... It's like some one jerked off in a napkin and it made it's way on to the silver screen...
I've seen movies that were 85% CGI, and the CGI was not amazing, but the dialogue was cryptic and compelling and the story flowed, and moved, like a stream of water. It was poetry, it was cinema
Most of what comes out today is the equivalent of a gravy loaded hive mind dump on your face you get the liberty of justifying, by the fact that, at least you paid for it...
The problem, though, is... Those were different times... You could sell VHS tapes then, DVD's, people would buy them... The printing press is here (internet)... They can't get away with selling indulgences anymore cause Joe Schmoe can find salvation in his own copy...
Doesn't mean true Cinema doesn't still exist and can't still be created, it just means the producers of true cinema perhaps just aren't that interested anymore... If your best bet on cashing in is ticket sales, you go with the safe bet.. which is bat woman, wonder robin, and super avengers... Cause the consumer is more likely to bet on what they know, vs take a risk on something they are unfamiliar with...
besides, everyone is a terrowitz, and nobody wants to take a chance on compelling, riveting, make you think dialogue...
I used PCLinuxOS for a while with, if I remember, little to no complaints... It was a real smooth ride.
The thing I liked the least about it was the lame name. It's like giving a pack of cigarettes the brand name, "Pack of 20 Class A Cigarettes." Or maybe, "Cigarettes Pack of 20 Class A".
...So, after nearly 10 years of using this lovely processor I have just now discovered it is 64 bit capable...
One would think the fact it is called AMD Athlon 64, would have tipped me off within the first few years; but, one would be wrong...in other news...
Main desktop PC for entertainment and various other types of fuckery
-AMD 64 athlon x2 5200+ 1.9-3.2 GHz
-2GB ram
-300 something GB HDD
-some kind of cheap nvidia video card that works great
Mobile computer...
-Lenovo X60
-intel core2 T7200 2.0GHz
-2 gigs ram, i think, yup
-160GB SSD (SSD's are fast...)
1 monitor capable of 1080p or 1080i or whichever character comes after the 1080 (1080x1920)
1 monitor that is flat and can do better than 1024x768, which i appreciate.
some keyboards, some mice, a 2TB SSD external drive, and a handful of USB sticks
Devuan runs on my anything goes desktop, Parabola runs on my X60 with Libreboot
MATE DE, Firefox, Clementine, VLC, Icedove Qbittorrent, Pluma, GCC, XChat... in order of used most often...
When computers stop being able to process, store, retrieve, transmit, and copy information; maybe I will take you up on that offer.
Until then, I do believe you can go to hell while I continue to use a fecking COMPUTER to do, oh you know, COMPUTER-Y type stuff like, uhh, process, store, retrieve, copy, and transmit information!
I will congratulate you and the likes of netflix, hulu, amazon, and many many others on using a combination of exploitative techniques to manufacture convenience of access to entertainment, though. *shrug* touche~
The way they are describing this phenomenon sounds like gravitational waves travel at a particular speed. I was hoping that they somehow broke the speed of light barrier so we could have zero-latency communication. Although I suppose they wouldn't be 'waves' if the effect of gravity was instantaneous...
bummer... Although if the force of gravity is in step with the speed of light, there might be a correlation to be made about the nature of those two forces, one being cosmic one being quantum...
With the state of the global economy in general and mass distrust amongst the super powers I do not like the idea of corporate space exploration especially when it comes to mars.
When I think a mission to mars I think international space station. I think of tens maybe hundreds of countries offering up their best and their brightest for a global national collaboration on a project that may span several generations but promises a lot.
It does not sound like that is what is happening though...
I haven't followed spaceX or any of this much, but it feels like this endeavor should be something the entire world can participate in together as a global community.
I want to hear about a true 100 year outline plan to actually colonize the damn planet. The scouting crews who will set up a base. The engineering crews who will terraform, mine, and so forth. I want to hear about the first wave colonization group that brings hand picked men and women from all sorts of countries to build a new community on mars... and then not live long enough to see the many people moving to mars for new opportunity like so many people came to America (and still come for some silly reason)...
I don't think Earth is ready for Earth, at the moment, much less mars...
I watched this fella' on youtube giving a presentation once and totally did not dig the experience. Some words that come to mind as far as first impressions go would be, superiority complex, condescending, with a hint of verbal assault-i-ness...
It's not uncommon to see, some times, very intelligent/competent/capable/experienced people act that way some times, and I'll admit I'm a total ninny; but, I got the feeling it was more some expose` on how the audience was stupid because they are the way they are; rather than, a talk about how the US constitution is being violated and their are serious privacy issues at stake the world over, such and such...
That being said, from the brief first impression I could make on the fella', he seemed like kind of an attack dog. Is he a moral individual? Did he do some sexual stuff he shouldn't have? Could be.
Dude seemed like a total douche, though.
I see no reason why the military would care or want to have a program like TOR destroyed. The US Justice system, drug sniffer types, yeah they would....
I say there is probably some truth to the situation. I'm a damned ninny and the fucker bothered me, so I can imagine him pissing off enough sensitive people, slowly over time, building up weight. Then all it takes is some sureptitious noise or otherwise to start the avalanche that's already been waiting to happen...
...won't help the cause of software freedom.
This argument sounds to me like, let the colonialists take some of our land, and then they'll let us use some of it.
The key problem with proprietary software (more informed term than 'closed-source') is it has no incentive to care about freedom. The main incentive is profit, always. If hiring monkeys to snort coke and come up with business plans means more profit and a competitive edge, monkeys will start entering the labor force (and the price of coke may rise). If something is unethical, of course a company MAY not do it, to drive profits, but this is often not the case.
That being said... If software freedom will increase profits, a company will most likely seek it. If software freedom will hurt profits, a company will steer away from it.
To my understanding, riding a segregated bus, does not send a clear message that segregation is okay. One may feel compelled to allow such an injustice for a numerous plethora of reasons and even try to rationalize the behavior.
Maybe they'll improve the conditions of the 'back of the bus' someday if we keep riding, but...
I don't think free software is anti-capitalist or against business in any sense. It just so happens many businesses have made great fortunes at exploiting the abilities of computers and bits; and, when, gosh golly, some one uses a computer to do things a computer by nature can do, it may have a huge impact on your ability to profit if you've leveraged software as a tool of exploitation, as opposed to a medium for computing.
If your 'product', by it's innate nature, has the ability to be copied as many times as physical hardware will allow, you aren't really profiting from your product. You are profiting from your exploit of legal frameworks created to attempt to control the nature of a computer. the GMO folks are trying to do the same thing with genetics (make the source code for all the food we eat proprietary so we can't control our food source any more).
However, the term 'closed-source' obviously misses the point to begin with. It implies the opposite which is 'open-source' which was an attempt to reconcile the 'radical' idea of freedom with the absurdity of law and means leveraged to exploit software for monetary gains.
Software freedom is software freedom. Plea Bargains are popular and often yield great outcomes, but they rarely help fix the shitty circumstances that create them in the first place. This argument and open-source software itself have always been a plea-bargain made with those with power, because, well, fighting for freedom is a hard-sell. You will be inconvenienced at the least, and hundreds of years ago, you might end up dead fighting for your freedom. A reality T.V., an internet meme, and a side of fries are often much more appealing; open source could be grouped somewhere in there as well.
I will say there is usually always something to be said for compromise......but when you compromise on freedom... it's more often a 'giving in, giving up, or selling out' than actual fair compromise...
A black box is inside of aircraft to record everything in the event the plane goes down and nobody is left to tell the story of why it failed.
So... Yes, every phone should not be a little black box, capable of recording all information for later retrieval if so desired?
For all the powers of the powers that be when it comes to surveilling the public, it almost seems like, not having such powers would lessen the chance of all the crap they worry about anyway...
Anyway, point was, choice of words was funny. "black box". I agree.
Probably just a political maneuvering power grab by some other organization inside the US with no particular national loyalty...
that's my 'speculation'
it's stuff like this that makes people afraid... and fear can lead to foolish actions... *shrug*
I don't think the rich or wealthy should be hated or judged or anything like that simply on their wealth alone.
There are insanely disgustingly wealthy people who are fucking awesome intelligent caring individuals who may have no problem enjoying the fruits of their labor while at the same time doing more good in the world (relatively and comparably) to other people of lesser fiscal equivalence.
At the same time some of the mega rich are fucking disgusting greedy tics and some homeless people would lay down on the railroad tracks to make your life a little more comfortable...
I find myself often judging people with more money, being resentful towards them, but at the same time... most people judge me that way, not understanding my circumstances...
Do you have any idea how decently snazzy you can dress yourself just finding some of the good stuff at goodwill and buying used accesseries that do just as well of a job as the brand new stuff? Sure some one who is really into fashion or has true class may notice, but the majority won't...
It's just the same old don't judge a book by it's cover and birds of a feather flock together...
I won't feel bad for you if your porsche gets scratched, because sorry... to me that's a paint job on a fucking car and I have my priorities....
And I'm honestly not sure how many people would be willing to have compassion for some one with a 300,000,000 dollar net worth when they are just struggling to survive, no matter what their problem is... which sucks... but it usually goes the same way... how many homeless people have heard 'get a job ya bum!?'
I've decided after several years that Free software needs to be recognized as a way of life, rather than a means to an end.
Buddhism for example is very different than Christianity. Buddhists won't be find knocking on your door trying to sell their brand of salvation. Buddhism at it's core is a set of philosophical tenets and or processes that are at the very least a bit nihilistic if not very much so. For some people it is a religion, and there are many different flavors of Buddhism, but in general if not completely all the way around, it is not the type of religion or philosophy that promotes the advertisement of itself to others, much less the act of imposing itself on others. Anyone who does so and calls them selves a Buddhist, probably isn't one.
And so after many years of trying to bring others over to free software alternatives to proprietary solutions, I've come to not so much give, as realize I was going about things the wrong way.
Freedom itself allows for the choice to choose not to be free. Free software isn't about competing with proprietary software or even open source software. For me, the most essential and necessary and probably the only thing really needed to be done to improve Free Software is understand what it actually is.
Free software does not ask you to compete with Microsoft or Apple or anyone. Free software doesn't ask anything of anyone. Free software does only one thing; it promises the user complete freedom in whatever the contextual boundaries of it's particular existential circumstance reside; be it a GPL licensed piece of code, a program, an operating system, or a fully functional computer.
For me Free Software is a continual process. A never ending vigilance against the tyranny of those who seek to benefit themselves through my ignorance, willful or otherwise, at my expense. I used to get really frustrated that a lot of my friends refused to use free software because proprietary solutions were more convenient and status-quo, but more and more I have begun to release any and all frustration, tension, and stress associated with the obstacles and hindrances of Free Software.
I choose to use Free Software because I enjoy the freedom it provides with me. I desire for others to enjoy the same freedoms I do, but this is erroneous. Free Software is a philosophy, and an idea, that when put into practice increases the size of a growing pool of freedom. Ultimately it is other's choice if that is what they desire or not, if that is what is right for them or not in a particular situation.
For me I have renounced the path of trying to spread free software and compete or out do proprietary software. That is not the aim of Free Software. Users and developers of Free Software should NEVER use or produce Free Software with the goal of competing in anyway with non-free software. Users and producers of Free Software should do so because they derive happiness in the pursuit of their freedom to live their computational lives as they see fit.
To use and create Free Software is enough. And if the day comes some one asks what that desktop environment on my laptop is and wants to learn more, all I have to do is point them in the right direction, the rest is up to them, in that, it is their choice!
That is Free Software to me, and what Richard Stallman has committed his life to, is the preservation of a philosophy and way of life in the world of computing.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe this was just a failure to communicate in the planned obsolescence of the Note 7...
"Damn it Larry! Where's Larry? Damn! Some one tell Larry he's fired! The phones were supposed to catch fire during the initial release of the note 8!"
I have/had this 'fringe/out there' theory that 9/11 had something to do with AI...
I saw some bit of info some where that certain sectors in the military were actively participating in what they thought was a training exercise, but it turned out the actual event was happening and they had no idea...
statements like that just make you think... One minute your talking to some 'AI' designed to mimic human conversation, and then next second, you lose the ability to predict output and it's suddenly 'real'...
I think it's highly possible that 9/11 had something to do with an AI self-awareness event...
or not... but it was a thought...
I mean if you could single handedly perceive and comprehend every single digitized stock market transaction from the time of recorded history to the present, a long with whatever other knowledge sets you had, and had a concept of 'death' or 'self' combined with an intelligence capacity and capability far beyond that of any single human being (locally)... no telling what kind of confusing, seemingly mischievous, stuff you might be doing...
Maybe they are just trying to work out escape sequences for the Snowden character.
He was the hero who showed the U.S. how it is violating itself with unconstitutional behavior. Then, once it reaches the epic peak, they will pin him as 'the shadow' broker, or whatever name they come up with, later on, if this attempt fails...
When this happens the force for those who stand with him and his principles will be pitted against the force of people who at best vaguely understood him as either hero or villian, will wax over the glossy details of his principles.
Russia will have no excuse to protect him anymore, either. It will be proven he acted purely in self-interest (well grey area proven). Then Russia could use this as pretext for war. They could deny extradition and escalate things. Once that fuse is lit, every other country in the world can start picking sides...
I don't know a whole lot about who's who in the national sphere of things, but I'm sure There are plenty of nations who would side with russia to bring their own beef to the table, and like wise...
This would be the goal of the Snowden game...
I always personally felt very fishy about Snowden from the start, not to the same degree as I did about 9/11... that was beyond fishy, that was like a two ton truck of fish who's refridgerator went out 5 days ago and was stuck parked out front of your house...
Snowden always felt more subtle... Like a fish-hook, waiting to see if anyone would bite... Or perhaps a loose thread that if pulled could unravel the entire garment...
Historically speaking, from my limited understanding, China usually just wants outsiders to stay outside...
Russia on the other hand... I know very little about (I know very little about mostly anything... but..)
and to top it all off, this whole argument is based on the assumption the world is currently operating as a collective of nations, which on many many levels it may; but I would gander the snowden character is not operating under the auspices of any one nation's interest....
Possibly a bit more how a lot of European nations decided to divide up Africa. The real big players are making another land grab, so to speak... (TPP?)
If I do know anything about Russia, I would guess it's that they highly value a certain type of greatness. And if nothing else, I think they would be highly motivated to get to a place where the world can look to Russia and feel awe at their accomplishments, at least looking at things from the point of view of national interest...
That's my bit...
What about all the horrorists out there? Who will stop their scourge of horror? I'm personally most worried about the 'discomfortists', day by day they erode the fabric of everyday human comforts and conveniences... Damn them... Damn them to hechell...
As quoted in the article...
"It is that because it is so much more than a product. It is an enabler for change. It unleashed forces which we are barely able to perceive, let alone control. It changed the world because it changed us.
And it did all that in less than nine years. One has to wonder what it will enable in the next nine."
This is brand loyalty at it's best. Absolute pure and serious conditioned brainwashing...
The very nature of a computer is a device capable of storing, retrieving, copying, altering, and transmitting data. It's that simple and it's been around for a long time. Sure it has gotten smaller and smaller, but that's it.
The iphone is not a phone. It's a computer capable of cellular telephony.
It's very very sad to hear words like that, knowing what apple has done to the computer...
You are damn right it has enabled change... It has created computers that are virtually only useful within the apple ecosystem. It has unleashed the forces of massive manipulation and exploitation of the ignorance of it's users to maximize profits, and yes, there is very little control for the user of an iphone or ianything...
It changed the world into something that honors men like Steve Jobs who's only real contribution to humanity is products that are so sought after they are often stolen or traded like actual currency, all the while locking it's 'victim's into an ecosystem that caters only to itself...
The Apple ecosystem is a cult, pure and simple...
Some of the hardware is nice (those keyboards are pretty slick), but other than that... I prefer to have the freedom to use an actual COMPUTER... Rather than a jailed device that 'permits' me to do certain operations from time to time...
It's a god damn computer sold by masters of manipulation and exploitation that allows you to make calls and run software that runs you...
...It's the lack of compelling dialogue.
...I think there were some actors, that I could the hell know who they are, that pretended to have some kind of mysterious ability called acting, and probably got paid for it by some act of strange dark magic... WAIT WAIT... Chef Goldbloom was a decent part, but the best fucking thing about that movie was the fucking coward and the tribal warrior... I paid fucking 15 dollars (plus bent over for munch food) to see about 5 minutes of character developement and emotional exchange... Everything else was toilet floats to justify special effects to prop up the name of a movie made 20 years ago that actually earned some fucking money...
Give me a god damn fucking break! How many fucking comic book movies, fucking remakes, holy fucking goat balls what the shit!!!
I mean now and fucking then a real movie appears out of some where, but it sure as hell isn't in the fucking theatres...
Are you fucking kidding me? Spider man? Batman? Wonder woman (did they do her yet)? Batman (said that already)...
Holy fucking dog shit, what does it take to write a decent fucking script with a compelling story line and emotional dialogue.
THE FUCKING "GOONIES" IS BETTER THAN PROBABLY 82% OF ALL MOVIES MADE AFTER THE YEAR 2002 or 2003ish or SO!!!
YOU HAD A BUNCH OF KIDS IN A FUCKING CAVE WITH SOME CRIMINALS AND EACH CHARACTER DEVELOPED EMOTIONALLY ALONG THE WAY AND SHIT HAPPENED... GOONIES NEVER SAY DIE!! TRUFFLE SHUFFLE!!
NOW... NOW!!! I get to see Independence day: resurgence in the movies... and what do I get? THE BEST PART OF THAT MOVIE WAS SEEING CHEF GOLDBLOOM'S FACE UTTER A FEW WORDS...
Don't even get me started on the new star trek movies... It's like some one jerked off in a napkin and it made it's way on to the silver screen...
I've seen movies that were 85% CGI, and the CGI was not amazing, but the dialogue was cryptic and compelling and the story flowed, and moved, like a stream of water. It was poetry, it was cinema
Most of what comes out today is the equivalent of a gravy loaded hive mind dump on your face you get the liberty of justifying, by the fact that, at least you paid for it...
The problem, though, is... Those were different times... You could sell VHS tapes then, DVD's, people would buy them... The printing press is here (internet)... They can't get away with selling indulgences anymore cause Joe Schmoe can find salvation in his own copy...
Doesn't mean true Cinema doesn't still exist and can't still be created, it just means the producers of true cinema perhaps just aren't that interested anymore... If your best bet on cashing in is ticket sales, you go with the safe bet.. which is bat woman, wonder robin, and super avengers... Cause the consumer is more likely to bet on what they know, vs take a risk on something they are unfamiliar with...
besides, everyone is a terrowitz, and nobody wants to take a chance on compelling, riveting, make you think dialogue...
I used PCLinuxOS for a while with, if I remember, little to no complaints... It was a real smooth ride. The thing I liked the least about it was the lame name. It's like giving a pack of cigarettes the brand name, "Pack of 20 Class A Cigarettes." Or maybe, "Cigarettes Pack of 20 Class A".
...So, after nearly 10 years of using this lovely processor I have just now discovered it is 64 bit capable...
One would think the fact it is called AMD Athlon 64, would have tipped me off within the first few years; but, one would be wrong...in other news...
Main desktop PC for entertainment and various other types of fuckery
-AMD 64 athlon x2 5200+ 1.9-3.2 GHz
-2GB ram
-300 something GB HDD
-some kind of cheap nvidia video card that works great
Mobile computer...
-Lenovo X60 -intel core2 T7200 2.0GHz
-2 gigs ram, i think, yup
-160GB SSD (SSD's are fast...)
1 monitor capable of 1080p or 1080i or whichever character comes after the 1080 (1080x1920)
1 monitor that is flat and can do better than 1024x768, which i appreciate.
some keyboards, some mice, a 2TB SSD external drive, and a handful of USB sticks
Devuan runs on my anything goes desktop, Parabola runs on my X60 with Libreboot
MATE DE, Firefox, Clementine, VLC, Icedove Qbittorrent, Pluma, GCC, XChat... in order of used most often...
Google will, 'let', me share with up to 6 people?
Fuck you Google.
When computers stop being able to process, store, retrieve, transmit, and copy information; maybe I will take you up on that offer.
Until then, I do believe you can go to hell while I continue to use a fecking COMPUTER to do, oh you know, COMPUTER-Y type stuff like, uhh, process, store, retrieve, copy, and transmit information!
I will congratulate you and the likes of netflix, hulu, amazon, and many many others on using a combination of exploitative techniques to manufacture convenience of access to entertainment, though. *shrug* touche~
...the globalist agenda doesn't stand a chance!
The way they are describing this phenomenon sounds like gravitational waves travel at a particular speed. I was hoping that they somehow broke the speed of light barrier so we could have zero-latency communication. Although I suppose they wouldn't be 'waves' if the effect of gravity was instantaneous...
bummer... Although if the force of gravity is in step with the speed of light, there might be a correlation to be made about the nature of those two forces, one being cosmic one being quantum...
We could always bio-engineer humans to better suited to the martian gravity... ...We have the technology, we can grow them...
With the state of the global economy in general and mass distrust amongst the super powers I do not like the idea of corporate space exploration especially when it comes to mars.
When I think a mission to mars I think international space station. I think of tens maybe hundreds of countries offering up their best and their brightest for a global national collaboration on a project that may span several generations but promises a lot.
It does not sound like that is what is happening though...
I haven't followed spaceX or any of this much, but it feels like this endeavor should be something the entire world can participate in together as a global community.
I want to hear about a true 100 year outline plan to actually colonize the damn planet. The scouting crews who will set up a base. The engineering crews who will terraform, mine, and so forth. I want to hear about the first wave colonization group that brings hand picked men and women from all sorts of countries to build a new community on mars... and then not live long enough to see the many people moving to mars for new opportunity like so many people came to America (and still come for some silly reason)...
I don't think Earth is ready for Earth, at the moment, much less mars...
I watched this fella' on youtube giving a presentation once and totally did not dig the experience. Some words that come to mind as far as first impressions go would be, superiority complex, condescending, with a hint of verbal assault-i-ness... It's not uncommon to see, some times, very intelligent/competent/capable/experienced people act that way some times, and I'll admit I'm a total ninny; but, I got the feeling it was more some expose` on how the audience was stupid because they are the way they are; rather than, a talk about how the US constitution is being violated and their are serious privacy issues at stake the world over, such and such... That being said, from the brief first impression I could make on the fella', he seemed like kind of an attack dog. Is he a moral individual? Did he do some sexual stuff he shouldn't have? Could be. Dude seemed like a total douche, though. I see no reason why the military would care or want to have a program like TOR destroyed. The US Justice system, drug sniffer types, yeah they would.... I say there is probably some truth to the situation. I'm a damned ninny and the fucker bothered me, so I can imagine him pissing off enough sensitive people, slowly over time, building up weight. Then all it takes is some sureptitious noise or otherwise to start the avalanche that's already been waiting to happen...
At least they aren't piping in ads into our dreams...
...Yet.
Snowden was most likely a very controlled action at the top level. He's gotten WAY too much press, and most of it just creates controversy.
There is no controversy. You don't fucking spy on your own god damn citizens just cause, ya know, terrowitz!
We are not all 'suspects'. We are not guilty until proven innocent. End of story. Period.
Snowden was the great 'legitimizer'. Nothing more. A controlled legitimization of always on surveillance.
Did people take to the streets with their guns and over throw their corrupt government?
No...
Most of them said, I have nothing to hide.
and that's EXACTLY what snowden's REAL purpose most likely was...
A silent announcement to the world that...
you DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE ANYMORE... because everything about you is already known...
end of fucking story... it's 2016... message received...
...won't help the cause of software freedom. This argument sounds to me like, let the colonialists take some of our land, and then they'll let us use some of it. The key problem with proprietary software (more informed term than 'closed-source') is it has no incentive to care about freedom. The main incentive is profit, always. If hiring monkeys to snort coke and come up with business plans means more profit and a competitive edge, monkeys will start entering the labor force (and the price of coke may rise). If something is unethical, of course a company MAY not do it, to drive profits, but this is often not the case. That being said... If software freedom will increase profits, a company will most likely seek it. If software freedom will hurt profits, a company will steer away from it. To my understanding, riding a segregated bus, does not send a clear message that segregation is okay. One may feel compelled to allow such an injustice for a numerous plethora of reasons and even try to rationalize the behavior. Maybe they'll improve the conditions of the 'back of the bus' someday if we keep riding, but... I don't think free software is anti-capitalist or against business in any sense. It just so happens many businesses have made great fortunes at exploiting the abilities of computers and bits; and, when, gosh golly, some one uses a computer to do things a computer by nature can do, it may have a huge impact on your ability to profit if you've leveraged software as a tool of exploitation, as opposed to a medium for computing. If your 'product', by it's innate nature, has the ability to be copied as many times as physical hardware will allow, you aren't really profiting from your product. You are profiting from your exploit of legal frameworks created to attempt to control the nature of a computer. the GMO folks are trying to do the same thing with genetics (make the source code for all the food we eat proprietary so we can't control our food source any more). However, the term 'closed-source' obviously misses the point to begin with. It implies the opposite which is 'open-source' which was an attempt to reconcile the 'radical' idea of freedom with the absurdity of law and means leveraged to exploit software for monetary gains. Software freedom is software freedom. Plea Bargains are popular and often yield great outcomes, but they rarely help fix the shitty circumstances that create them in the first place. This argument and open-source software itself have always been a plea-bargain made with those with power, because, well, fighting for freedom is a hard-sell. You will be inconvenienced at the least, and hundreds of years ago, you might end up dead fighting for your freedom. A reality T.V., an internet meme, and a side of fries are often much more appealing; open source could be grouped somewhere in there as well. I will say there is usually always something to be said for compromise... ...but when you compromise on freedom... it's more often a 'giving in, giving up, or selling out' than actual fair compromise...
I lol'ed at the headline. That's about it.
A black box is inside of aircraft to record everything in the event the plane goes down and nobody is left to tell the story of why it failed. So... Yes, every phone should not be a little black box, capable of recording all information for later retrieval if so desired? For all the powers of the powers that be when it comes to surveilling the public, it almost seems like, not having such powers would lessen the chance of all the crap they worry about anyway... Anyway, point was, choice of words was funny. "black box". I agree.
Probably just a political maneuvering power grab by some other organization inside the US with no particular national loyalty... that's my 'speculation' it's stuff like this that makes people afraid... and fear can lead to foolish actions... *shrug*
I don't think the rich or wealthy should be hated or judged or anything like that simply on their wealth alone. There are insanely disgustingly wealthy people who are fucking awesome intelligent caring individuals who may have no problem enjoying the fruits of their labor while at the same time doing more good in the world (relatively and comparably) to other people of lesser fiscal equivalence. At the same time some of the mega rich are fucking disgusting greedy tics and some homeless people would lay down on the railroad tracks to make your life a little more comfortable... I find myself often judging people with more money, being resentful towards them, but at the same time... most people judge me that way, not understanding my circumstances... Do you have any idea how decently snazzy you can dress yourself just finding some of the good stuff at goodwill and buying used accesseries that do just as well of a job as the brand new stuff? Sure some one who is really into fashion or has true class may notice, but the majority won't... It's just the same old don't judge a book by it's cover and birds of a feather flock together... I won't feel bad for you if your porsche gets scratched, because sorry... to me that's a paint job on a fucking car and I have my priorities.... And I'm honestly not sure how many people would be willing to have compassion for some one with a 300,000,000 dollar net worth when they are just struggling to survive, no matter what their problem is... which sucks... but it usually goes the same way... how many homeless people have heard 'get a job ya bum!?'
I've decided after several years that Free software needs to be recognized as a way of life, rather than a means to an end. Buddhism for example is very different than Christianity. Buddhists won't be find knocking on your door trying to sell their brand of salvation. Buddhism at it's core is a set of philosophical tenets and or processes that are at the very least a bit nihilistic if not very much so. For some people it is a religion, and there are many different flavors of Buddhism, but in general if not completely all the way around, it is not the type of religion or philosophy that promotes the advertisement of itself to others, much less the act of imposing itself on others. Anyone who does so and calls them selves a Buddhist, probably isn't one. And so after many years of trying to bring others over to free software alternatives to proprietary solutions, I've come to not so much give, as realize I was going about things the wrong way. Freedom itself allows for the choice to choose not to be free. Free software isn't about competing with proprietary software or even open source software. For me, the most essential and necessary and probably the only thing really needed to be done to improve Free Software is understand what it actually is. Free software does not ask you to compete with Microsoft or Apple or anyone. Free software doesn't ask anything of anyone. Free software does only one thing; it promises the user complete freedom in whatever the contextual boundaries of it's particular existential circumstance reside; be it a GPL licensed piece of code, a program, an operating system, or a fully functional computer. For me Free Software is a continual process. A never ending vigilance against the tyranny of those who seek to benefit themselves through my ignorance, willful or otherwise, at my expense. I used to get really frustrated that a lot of my friends refused to use free software because proprietary solutions were more convenient and status-quo, but more and more I have begun to release any and all frustration, tension, and stress associated with the obstacles and hindrances of Free Software. I choose to use Free Software because I enjoy the freedom it provides with me. I desire for others to enjoy the same freedoms I do, but this is erroneous. Free Software is a philosophy, and an idea, that when put into practice increases the size of a growing pool of freedom. Ultimately it is other's choice if that is what they desire or not, if that is what is right for them or not in a particular situation. For me I have renounced the path of trying to spread free software and compete or out do proprietary software. That is not the aim of Free Software. Users and developers of Free Software should NEVER use or produce Free Software with the goal of competing in anyway with non-free software. Users and producers of Free Software should do so because they derive happiness in the pursuit of their freedom to live their computational lives as they see fit. To use and create Free Software is enough. And if the day comes some one asks what that desktop environment on my laptop is and wants to learn more, all I have to do is point them in the right direction, the rest is up to them, in that, it is their choice! That is Free Software to me, and what Richard Stallman has committed his life to, is the preservation of a philosophy and way of life in the world of computing.
if (snowden==hero)
emotional_response=outrage;
else
emotional_response=outrage;
Sounds good to me.