I don't think I've ever really had problems with mine. Every once in a while, I'd worry about it, but it usually came through in the end. Surprisingly, it seems I have some sort of appeal to hardware - my stuff usually works for me, even if it gives me problems in spells (lately my computer likes to crash itself, but we'll have a nice chat about it...). I got one of the letters today about the rebate, though, and I thought it was quite exciting. I probably won't send in to get it though, but I know I'll check my drive first, before I decide to just toss the opportunity.
The world will be destroyed 5 minutes before the completion of the backup of all heretofore created data, just as the dolphins predicted, and the little white mice will be upset that they didn't get to look at all our comic strips and juicy emails...
Are the record companies planning to put cute little labels on all of the "burnproof" CDs... so we'll be able to easily side-step them,.. or will there be a posted list of participating artists, or am I to envision a blacklist propogating across the 'net listing all the bad CDs we should avoid?
It's certainly quite easy to say "Just don't buy those CDs" but if you don't know what you're getting til you've got it.. then where are you? Some stores don't return CDs after the seals have been broken. Most don't, actually, I'm sure.
On the other hand... I see what you mean. Certainly, we're free (I think, but, heh, IANAL) to listen to our CDs that we've bought on whatever player we have.. but we've got to keep in mind that this foolproof cd thing could either spark a whole new line of CD playing products, or we've got to be able to prove their malicious intent that caused record companies/artists to choose CDs that would play in some CD playing devices and not in others. This.. shouldn't be too hard, given a sufficient amount of $ to maintain the case against the record companies, et al... but.. we'll end up back at square one if we win. Not that we should just give up now.. no.. we shouldn't.
On a somewhat random note... was there this much upheaval when VCRs came out? I mean... one could say the same kinds of things about VCRs, but they're everywhere now, and there is still lots of money to be found in selling and renting VHS tapes... *sigh* This world gets greedier and greedier and greedier.
Besides the fact that I doubt they're going to find anything.. you'd certainly get closer to taking over the world than they would to finding something worthwhile, with all of their computing. Even if they can say that they're not wasting unclaimed processor cycles.
This is probably completely wrong and random, but my guess about the 40+ hour week is that bosses tend to think that their programmer, not having the incredible stress of working with PR, or managing the entire show (though, yes, it actually is a bit stressful working with the public, but of course we all know that programming is stressful, too), is actually being blessed with a lighter workload even though they're working such long hours. I mean, also look at it this way - if that programmer gets a bug on the server fixed or a new webpage up, who notices? Not many, probably... I mean, some bugs, like security issues, won't always trickle down to be noticed by the lower levels of the bureacracy. I guess I'm also saying that programmers get treated poorer (sometimes) because what they produce is not exactly tangible. Sure, if you're producing the latest PlayStation game, it's really noticeable, but if you're just one of many people on the team producing some big suite for a new client, no one sees the part you produce in the whole. They would if it weren't there, but since you worked all those long hours, it is there.
But since I'm not speaking from actual experience, I'm probably way off...
As people have mentioned, you have to consider location and context. Jesus was not rich. Plus, a lot of the people back then didn't have golden cups. Maybe it was made of pottery, or maybe just wood. I don't know.
But, going back to your catholic reference... surely you don't think that just because the Catholics think it's gold (or show it as such), it is so. They have no hold on the truth of the past, no more than you or I.
Then again, I realize you were really just mentioning it for reference's sake, and to show the flip side of the coin, but now you know where I'm coming from.
All of our common heritage and culture has been created by someone, and the concept of claiming ownership to it is a fairly recent invention.
I'd say that things can also be viewed fairly correctly like this:
There is so much common knowledge in this world that an invention/creation a person makes is, besides being in part, or maybe even majority, their own work, a collaboration of many things they know that they have learned as a result of long years of many other people learning through first-hand and handed-down experience. So one certaintly can't claim that anything they've ever done was done solely with their own power and resourses (intellectual and otherwise), and so therefore, on a fundamental level, copyrights violate themselves. They're protecting other people from something they, in essence, already have. And to simplify it even further, it goes back to the infinite monkeys idea: given infinite people and reusable (infinite) resources, they'll create something... and it will be duplicated.
So, unfortunately for copyright holders, all copyrights are hereby voided.
That leaves a person with the unanswerable question of who created God. The religionists say, "He always existed," and find that acceptable, while simultaneously finding unacceptable the idea of universe (or metaverse) always existing. Whatever.
But remember what you said earlier, and what we are all talking about: the universe was created and what we are talking about is how it was created. Unless you're going by what was mentioned in the article (namely that, according to the multiverse theory, the universe always existed because it is one in an infinite series of universes being created from the same material, universes stretching infinitely in their existence before ours, and infinitely stretching on after it), you're missing the point. We can believe in an eternal, infinite, omnipresent God because we believe it on faith (just as you may believe we do not have one) and we don't have to worry about looking stupid because just as long as he got there before the universe did, we have our support that [we believe] he built it. Then again, I loved the way Descartes put it when he said "Cogito ergo sum."
But going back to the multiverse theory, even if the universes were all made from the same original material, the very fact that those universes were created implies to me that the universe is not and never has been always-existing. The Big Bang theory presents the same situation: for something to be created, there had to be a point in time when it did not exist, so that it could come into being.
Plese, don't make a martyr of yourself. We all suffer. Look at your arguments:
We have no freedom of speech
Maybe so, but in the same way, if a regular user "trolls", as you mentioned, they will get their own punishment. See, the thing with trolling is that you're not talking about what the topic at hand is. If you want to create a forum where you can say whatever the hell you want to say, why don't you form something like, trolldot.org and then you can post topics and then post all the first posts you want. In a similar turn, we logged in users don't get the right to ever troll on first posting because you dang ACs usually get there first. What happened to sharing?
, suffer cruel and unusual punishment
Cruel and unusual? Has anyone ever chopped off your head for this? And you can always create another account, or merely post again. But seeing as how this whole discussion forum you're complaining about was built by someone else, I think that the builder has his own rights to say what goes here and what doesn't. Do you systematically (or usually, if you will) allow people free reign to decide, say, what you eat and wear everyday? If you don't, then don't go around saying what Rob Malda & Co. should do with their website.
, and no right to assemble. While they can presently hang out in a hidden sid, they have no gaurantee that sid will be around tomorrow. They also have no sahred history, the hidden sids expire posts every few weeks.
The same, therefore, applies to logged in users. If we tried to start a sid, it'd get gone no sooner or later than yours. And along the same lines, you are as much a part of a discussion as you make yourself. So if you go around pushing people, and they push back, don't whine that you're not liked. Lighten up. or Calm down. But if you choose to be a part of a discussion, then you have assembled - with all of the other minds of that discussion. You want seperatism (your "right to assemble"), but you also want acceptance and insertion into the whole (your "freedom of speech").
So you've just got to find a way to fix the problem yourself, but don't whine like you need some sort of affirmative action or anything. Geez.
I *really* doubt that there will be a tactile element to this, star trek gee whiz factors aside.
I thnk you're right, mainly because there are so many sensations that are involved that I'm not sure scientists will be able to create. I at least think it will take a long time before they do, and do well.
Think about it:
Granted, tactile sensations are merely electrical impulses sent along your nervous system to your brain, one must remember that,
There are almost infinite tactile sensations that a human can encounter. On the porn side of things (not that I'm looking forward to this, I hope it doesn't happen), how are you going to simulate the texture of someone's skin, down to the feeling of the hair that usually covers the human body? and what about feelings of wet as opposed to dry, and different consistencies of fluids (or should I say, different viscosities)? And the list goes on, because we are not merely skin, we are inside as well, and if you try exploring people in other ways you've got to be able to recreate that as well. But what about the person you're touching? How are they going to feel that you are touching them? For that matter, could you simply make a "record" of a person, and then let others peruse it at their leisure, and then the object person doesn't have to be there while you "play" with them.
Bandwidth. Bandwidth, bandwidth, bandwidth. As has already been mentioned, you're going to need tons of it if you're going to make this a good show, especially if you can ever manage to get it to work with tactile information
How, if you are able to simulate tactile sensations (i.e., from a predetermined state), are you going to be able to find out what something feels like to transmit that information? Are you going to have some sort of "laser bath" that bathes the object in its light and somehow picks up on the dimensoins and perhaps surface texture of that thing? Or perhaps sonic resonance (or whatever it is called) will work. Or, perhaps....
I don't like the idea, though I can easliy see how many would. And yes, it could transform not only porn but also horror movies, ad naseum.
It's a cool site, though, really. I posted some stuff this morning after seeing it on Slashdot, and aloready it's been claimed. But, eayh, it needs some more people to honestly and sincerely post stuff, because a lot of categories are a bit empty.
Eh, well, we'll see. It's got a good start, though. Seems like their PHP3 needs a bit of work, though first.
I think you have a nice point going here, but, you can only prosecute someone when you know that they have taken the information. Therefore, as I'm sure you know, you've got to catch them. It follows that, to catch them, you have to have some sort of mechanism, some sort of trigger, that will notice when they do try something on you. Of course, that's what the rest of the (non-troll) posts on/. are about in this discussion. They'll figure out the best way to do that (well, they're trying, anyway), so that you can employ their ideas behind your prosecution scheme).
I see your point, and it's an excellent one, because I know that if, say, my 50 yr-old mother suddenly had a 100 mbps connection, she's not going to suddenly start dl stuff like crazy, because she doesn't know how. And the thing is, some will argue that people will get smarter and will use their connections more. Well, yes. Of course. We got smarter too. The thing is, by the time they all figure things out - while they are figuring things out - the technology and speed driving the internet will increase and very likely be able to handle them, no? If not, well j.... we've made it this far, who's to stop us from making in farther still?
I think it's interesting to hear the things that Transmeta is up to. I'm all in favor of thom and their efforts, and I hope to see some product from them soon....
Exactly. The human eye can decipher, at least as far as cgi has been used in movies, that it is used. I mean, when I was watching "Gladiator" and they were doing the grand sweeping view of the Colliseum, etc. I could tell it was all computer generated. It screams "fake!" And I personally prefer real people. I don't like to think that someday I'll watch a movie where emotions are being acted out and portrayed and shown to me by things that have no inkling of such.. you know ?
you wouldn't really need a "full-featured, normal distribution." We all know why - you only need what's necessary. I mean, maybe not a completely stripped down version (like, say, uCLinux), but you won't need xbill where that distro's going to be, you know ?
In this case, given the way he treated everyone around him, I am not suprised that they snagged him. There is no excuse for treating other human beings without respect.
True, very true.
And the thing is, and as others have mentioned, he wanted to get arrested (apparently so). So great. But I'm sure there are ways to get arrested without personally mistreating someone. Those cops were acting on the prompt he gave them (his mode of dress/outward appearance). He was screaming 'rampant person' so naturally they're going to ask questions. It's their job. If they didn't, I wouldn't want to be paying taxes to support their lives as delinquint cops who don't investigate suspicious things. But I propose there's got to be a way to cause one's self to be arrested without injuring another's personhood. And for pete's sake, if you're wanting to be any sort of martyr, don't use cursing. Not only is it unnecessary, it's vulgar, ignorant, and just generally doesn't present you as a justifiably supportable individual. It'd make me want to chunk you out in the garbage, especially dressed as you were. Sure, you're not going to wear a suit out there to protest, but Martin Luther King Jr. sure didn't walk around with flak jackets and dirty, soggy clothes, and harnesses. (Were you going mountain climbing or something.... ?)
In general, perhaps the whole of "activism" should be rewritten. It seems a popular culture within its ranks, but a slighty pungent one without.
It is also possible that they rely on a niche product (real estate listing software, legal assistance software, etc.) for which no Linux analog exists.
But could they not use Wine to let them run those programs under Linux? If so, I would think that a cheaper and more appealing alternative...
I'm not an anime fan, never have been, and don't think I ever can be. But, I will admit that I have great respect for the talents of the many wonderful artists who work on all the anime that is out there.
One thing I noticed about this article was that it was poorly written. Grammatical errors abound, and on a more general level, stylistically it was written so that my first thought was not of what exact point they were trying to portray (which I presume, by now, was merely doling out information about Toonami, which must be an anime company), but rather was "this is crack!"
But, I noted that the article did mention "Reboot" - which, if I'm understanding this correctly, is/was a CGI (am I correct? - has to be..) cartoon that I watched every Saturday for a long time. I loved that show.
Anyway, I guess the point of my post was to comment that they need to work on their journalism... ermm... hmm.. uh...
I think the record companies would be best to try to hurry up and embrace this instead of spending so many of their resources trying to fight it.
Spending so much of their resources? Think about the article for a minute, and what you yourself said: Record companies make tons of money off of CD sales - in profit, that is. And when they're "spending all of their resources fighting it," they're doing two things:
Skimming just a tid bit off of the top of their iced cake of profit money.
Spending our resources - because we, the public, are the ones who will/might have to pay more for CDs so that they can rethicken the fat lining of their pockets.
But yes, I think that something must be done. I think for one thing it would be nice if they'd give up harrassing Napster, but for another thing, I wish there was something we could do to save the independent artists.
As an aside, I feel quite certain that Transmeta will not be left behind in the 64 bit world... (well, actually, that's mainly what I'm posting about..). What I feel like is that we're assuming, suddenly, that the 64 bit chip is going to come thundering in and take over and everything will either be 64 bit or nothing from now own. I'm not trying to be a slow poke and say that we're not going to move to 64 bit, but I am trying to be realistic and point out that we've not gotten there yet and I figure we're a long way because even though we may get those 64 bit chips next year, everyone will not be getting them. There are still millions of processors out there that are not 64 bit and those users who have them are not going to up and switch right then and there. Many will never switch. I'm sure that it's not that crucial to computing. We've sure done well without them. (Though I will admit I wouldn't mind having one at all.;-)
Just.. don't.. jump the gun with this thing.. (err... whatever.)
The Removal of maladies such as Cancer, HIV and AIDS will inherently create a X-superior race. If we eliminate such diseases, other, potentially more dangerous ones will surface.
You're right... and the case is also similar, in some way, to the situation found with antibiotics and bacteria. The antibiotic will kill most of the bacteria except for the few mutated ones who are immune to it, which will merely procreate and form a giant colony of radically stronger and more devious bacteria.
Going back to the original poster in this thread, if you presume to make "designer kids," you're going to expose their flaws that are normally masked by the "averageness" of genetically un-manipulated people to the world, and those flaws will be the death of them. They'll stick out like sore thumbs and instead of being the only parents on the block with a brilliant, "beautiful" (ha! - here, you really do kid yourself) child, you've just got another old Joe. Think about it, if you have this careless attitude of wanting "designer kids," think about how many other ignorant souls on the face of this planet that will have that thought as well. You could even try to argue that we all have different ideas of perfect, and you're right, I'm sure, but there are going to develop major categories that most people will fall into:
Physically perfect - this is the category of children that will develop from parents whose main concern is that their child be free from physical defects and have certain characteristics that they think are beautiful. Imagine actually having a human Barbie - and watching its health problems stack up indefinitely.
Intellectually perfect - this category will likely rise from "higher-minded" groups whose main goal is to create the next Einstein and thereby gain lots of fame and fortune and take over the world.
Physically and Intellectually perfect - an obvious step as well that will consume lots of middle class people who want children that are sexy and have a brain to go with it so that if they can't get by with their looks, they'll always have an invention or two tucked away in their heads.
Militaristically perfect - this category will likely rise from people who probably have one or more majorly classified mental diseases and who (to qualify for this categorization) also have a desire to take control and seek revenge by force. These are people to beware as well. Think Incredible Hulk, but think not protagonist, think antagonist.
Emotionally perfect - a category of people who are perfectly happy all the time, or have some other strange problem. I'm also thinking that someone might create a set of people who can be the servant class; people willing to work and love it. For nothing at all in return, or minimal return.
I'm sure there is a category I've left out, but you get my point.
Of course, one might argue that I'm taking a highly critical point of view but I must merely argue that I have not other choice right now because I agree that our society, and in fact the entire World, is not prepared for what a discovery we have made. Of course, perhaps we will be fortunate and nothing will come of all of this, and perhaps genetic manipulation will not be possible, but I would have to be kidding myself to believe that, especially after such reports as have been made, recently and in the past. With what we do, and the blinding speed at which we do it - without thinking it through first - I think we're in for a big, bad, evil surprise. And I can only hope that I do not live long enough to see it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think I've ever really had problems with mine. Every once in a while, I'd worry about it, but it usually came through in the end. Surprisingly, it seems I have some sort of appeal to hardware - my stuff usually works for me, even if it gives me problems in spells (lately my computer likes to crash itself, but we'll have a nice chat about it...). I got one of the letters today about the rebate, though, and I thought it was quite exciting. I probably won't send in to get it though, but I know I'll check my drive first, before I decide to just toss the opportunity.
The world will be destroyed 5 minutes before the completion of the backup of all heretofore created data, just as the dolphins predicted, and the little white mice will be upset that they didn't get to look at all our comic strips and juicy emails...
When OSS does it, it's called copyright violation!
Are the record companies planning to put cute little labels on all of the "burnproof" CDs... so we'll be able to easily side-step them,.. or will there be a posted list of participating artists, or am I to envision a blacklist propogating across the 'net listing all the bad CDs we should avoid?
It's certainly quite easy to say "Just don't buy those CDs" but if you don't know what you're getting til you've got it.. then where are you? Some stores don't return CDs after the seals have been broken. Most don't, actually, I'm sure.
On the other hand... I see what you mean. Certainly, we're free (I think, but, heh, IANAL) to listen to our CDs that we've bought on whatever player we have.. but we've got to keep in mind that this foolproof cd thing could either spark a whole new line of CD playing products, or we've got to be able to prove their malicious intent that caused record companies/artists to choose CDs that would play in some CD playing devices and not in others. This.. shouldn't be too hard, given a sufficient amount of $ to maintain the case against the record companies, et al... but.. we'll end up back at square one if we win. Not that we should just give up now.. no.. we shouldn't.
On a somewhat random note... was there this much upheaval when VCRs came out? I mean... one could say the same kinds of things about VCRs, but they're everywhere now, and there is still lots of money to be found in selling and renting VHS tapes... *sigh* This world gets greedier and greedier and greedier.
while you're at it, get paranoid about your gasoline tank spontaneously exploding too...
I want to make a SETI@Home virus...
Besides the fact that I doubt they're going to find anything.. you'd certainly get closer to taking over the world than they would to finding something worthwhile, with all of their computing. Even if they can say that they're not wasting unclaimed processor cycles.
This is probably completely wrong and random, but my guess about the 40+ hour week is that bosses tend to think that their programmer, not having the incredible stress of working with PR, or managing the entire show (though, yes, it actually is a bit stressful working with the public, but of course we all know that programming is stressful, too), is actually being blessed with a lighter workload even though they're working such long hours. I mean, also look at it this way - if that programmer gets a bug on the server fixed or a new webpage up, who notices? Not many, probably... I mean, some bugs, like security issues, won't always trickle down to be noticed by the lower levels of the bureacracy. I guess I'm also saying that programmers get treated poorer (sometimes) because what they produce is not exactly tangible. Sure, if you're producing the latest PlayStation game, it's really noticeable, but if you're just one of many people on the team producing some big suite for a new client, no one sees the part you produce in the whole. They would if it weren't there, but since you worked all those long hours, it is there.
But since I'm not speaking from actual experience, I'm probably way off...
As people have mentioned, you have to consider location and context. Jesus was not rich. Plus, a lot of the people back then didn't have golden cups. Maybe it was made of pottery, or maybe just wood. I don't know.
But, going back to your catholic reference... surely you don't think that just because the Catholics think it's gold (or show it as such), it is so. They have no hold on the truth of the past, no more than you or I.
Then again, I realize you were really just mentioning it for reference's sake, and to show the flip side of the coin, but now you know where I'm coming from.
All of our common heritage and culture has been created by someone, and the concept of claiming ownership to it is a fairly recent invention.
I'd say that things can also be viewed fairly correctly like this:
There is so much common knowledge in this world that an invention/creation a person makes is, besides being in part, or maybe even majority, their own work, a collaboration of many things they know that they have learned as a result of long years of many other people learning through first-hand and handed-down experience. So one certaintly can't claim that anything they've ever done was done solely with their own power and resourses (intellectual and otherwise), and so therefore, on a fundamental level, copyrights violate themselves. They're protecting other people from something they, in essence, already have. And to simplify it even further, it goes back to the infinite monkeys idea: given infinite people and reusable (infinite) resources, they'll create something... and it will be duplicated.
So, unfortunately for copyright holders, all copyrights are hereby voided.
That leaves a person with the unanswerable question of who created God. The religionists say, "He always existed," and find that acceptable, while simultaneously finding unacceptable the idea of universe (or metaverse) always existing. Whatever.
But remember what you said earlier, and what we are all talking about: the universe was created and what we are talking about is how it was created. Unless you're going by what was mentioned in the article (namely that, according to the multiverse theory, the universe always existed because it is one in an infinite series of universes being created from the same material, universes stretching infinitely in their existence before ours, and infinitely stretching on after it), you're missing the point. We can believe in an eternal, infinite, omnipresent God because we believe it on faith (just as you may believe we do not have one) and we don't have to worry about looking stupid because just as long as he got there before the universe did, we have our support that [we believe] he built it. Then again, I loved the way Descartes put it when he said "Cogito ergo sum."
But going back to the multiverse theory, even if the universes were all made from the same original material, the very fact that those universes were created implies to me that the universe is not and never has been always-existing. The Big Bang theory presents the same situation: for something to be created, there had to be a point in time when it did not exist, so that it could come into being.
- We have no freedom of speech
- , suffer cruel and unusual punishment
- , and no right to assemble.
So you've just got to find a way to fix the problem yourself, but don't whine like you need some sort of affirmative action or anything. Geez.Maybe so, but in the same way, if a regular user "trolls", as you mentioned, they will get their own punishment. See, the thing with trolling is that you're not talking about what the topic at hand is. If you want to create a forum where you can say whatever the hell you want to say, why don't you form something like, trolldot.org and then you can post topics and then post all the first posts you want. In a similar turn, we logged in users don't get the right to ever troll on first posting because you dang ACs usually get there first. What happened to sharing?
Cruel and unusual? Has anyone ever chopped off your head for this? And you can always create another account, or merely post again. But seeing as how this whole discussion forum you're complaining about was built by someone else, I think that the builder has his own rights to say what goes here and what doesn't. Do you systematically (or usually, if you will) allow people free reign to decide, say, what you eat and wear everyday? If you don't, then don't go around saying what Rob Malda & Co. should do with their website.
While they can presently hang out in a hidden sid, they have no gaurantee that sid will be around tomorrow. They also have no sahred history, the hidden sids expire posts every few weeks.
The same, therefore, applies to logged in users. If we tried to start a sid, it'd get gone no sooner or later than yours. And along the same lines, you are as much a part of a discussion as you make yourself. So if you go around pushing people, and they push back, don't whine that you're not liked. Lighten up. or Calm down. But if you choose to be a part of a discussion, then you have assembled - with all of the other minds of that discussion. You want seperatism (your "right to assemble"), but you also want acceptance and insertion into the whole (your "freedom of speech").
I thnk you're right, mainly because there are so many sensations that are involved that I'm not sure scientists will be able to create. I at least think it will take a long time before they do, and do well.
Think about it:
I don't like the idea, though I can easliy see how many would. And yes, it could transform not only porn but also horror movies, ad naseum.
It's a cool site, though, really. I posted some stuff this morning after seeing it on Slashdot, and aloready it's been claimed. But, eayh, it needs some more people to honestly and sincerely post stuff, because a lot of categories are a bit empty.
Eh, well, we'll see. It's got a good start, though. Seems like their PHP3 needs a bit of work, though first.
I think you have a nice point going here, but, you can only prosecute someone when you know that they have taken the information. Therefore, as I'm sure you know, you've got to catch them. It follows that, to catch them, you have to have some sort of mechanism, some sort of trigger, that will notice when they do try something on you. Of course, that's what the rest of the (non-troll) posts on /. are about in this discussion. They'll figure out the best way to do that (well, they're trying, anyway), so that you can employ their ideas behind your prosecution scheme).
And hopefully it will all "work out in the end."
I see your point, and it's an excellent one, because I know that if, say, my 50 yr-old mother suddenly had a 100 mbps connection, she's not going to suddenly start dl stuff like crazy, because she doesn't know how. And the thing is, some will argue that people will get smarter and will use their connections more. Well, yes. Of course. We got smarter too. The thing is, by the time they all figure things out - while they are figuring things out - the technology and speed driving the internet will increase and very likely be able to handle them, no? If not, well j.... we've made it this far, who's to stop us from making in farther still?
I think it's interesting to hear the things that Transmeta is up to. I'm all in favor of thom and their efforts, and I hope to see some product from them soon....
yay Transmeta...
Most of the crowd there was fake. And it shows.
Exactly. The human eye can decipher, at least as far as cgi has been used in movies, that it is used. I mean, when I was watching "Gladiator" and they were doing the grand sweeping view of the Colliseum, etc. I could tell it was all computer generated. It screams "fake!" And I personally prefer real people. I don't like to think that someday I'll watch a movie where emotions are being acted out and portrayed and shown to me by things that have no inkling of such.. you know ?
you wouldn't really need a "full-featured, normal distribution." We all know why - you only need what's necessary. I mean, maybe not a completely stripped down version (like, say, uCLinux), but you won't need xbill where that distro's going to be, you know ?
In this case, given the way he treated everyone around him, I am not suprised that they snagged him. There is no excuse for treating other human beings without respect.
.... ?)
True, very true.
And the thing is, and as others have mentioned, he wanted to get arrested (apparently so). So great. But I'm sure there are ways to get arrested without personally mistreating someone. Those cops were acting on the prompt he gave them (his mode of dress/outward appearance). He was screaming 'rampant person' so naturally they're going to ask questions. It's their job. If they didn't, I wouldn't want to be paying taxes to support their lives as delinquint cops who don't investigate suspicious things. But I propose there's got to be a way to cause one's self to be arrested without injuring another's personhood. And for pete's sake, if you're wanting to be any sort of martyr, don't use cursing. Not only is it unnecessary, it's vulgar, ignorant, and just generally doesn't present you as a justifiably supportable individual. It'd make me want to chunk you out in the garbage, especially dressed as you were. Sure, you're not going to wear a suit out there to protest, but Martin Luther King Jr. sure didn't walk around with flak jackets and dirty, soggy clothes, and harnesses. (Were you going mountain climbing or something
In general, perhaps the whole of "activism" should be rewritten. It seems a popular culture within its ranks, but a slighty pungent one without.
It is also possible that they rely on a niche product (real estate listing software, legal assistance software, etc.) for which no Linux analog exists.
But could they not use Wine to let them run those programs under Linux? If so, I would think that a cheaper and more appealing alternative...
I'm not an anime fan, never have been, and don't think I ever can be. But, I will admit that I have great respect for the talents of the many wonderful artists who work on all the anime that is out there.
One thing I noticed about this article was that it was poorly written. Grammatical errors abound, and on a more general level, stylistically it was written so that my first thought was not of what exact point they were trying to portray (which I presume, by now, was merely doling out information about Toonami, which must be an anime company), but rather was "this is crack!"
But, I noted that the article did mention "Reboot" - which, if I'm understanding this correctly, is/was a CGI (am I correct? - has to be..) cartoon that I watched every Saturday for a long time. I loved that show.
Anyway, I guess the point of my post was to comment that they need to work on their journalism... ermm... hmm.. uh...
Can you not watch VHS on your computer if you have a tv card in it?
Spending so much of their resources? Think about the article for a minute, and what you yourself said: Record companies make tons of money off of CD sales - in profit, that is. And when they're "spending all of their resources fighting it," they're doing two things:
- Skimming just a tid bit off of the top of their iced cake of profit money.
- Spending our resources - because we, the public, are the ones who will/might have to pay more for CDs so that they can rethicken the fat lining of their pockets.
But yes, I think that something must be done. I think for one thing it would be nice if they'd give up harrassing Napster, but for another thing, I wish there was something we could do to save the independent artists.*sigh*
As an aside, I feel quite certain that Transmeta will not be left behind in the 64 bit world... (well, actually, that's mainly what I'm posting about..). What I feel like is that we're assuming, suddenly, that the 64 bit chip is going to come thundering in and take over and everything will either be 64 bit or nothing from now own. I'm not trying to be a slow poke and say that we're not going to move to 64 bit, but I am trying to be realistic and point out that we've not gotten there yet and I figure we're a long way because even though we may get those 64 bit chips next year, everyone will not be getting them. There are still millions of processors out there that are not 64 bit and those users who have them are not going to up and switch right then and there. Many will never switch. I'm sure that it's not that crucial to computing. We've sure done well without them. (Though I will admit I wouldn't mind having one at all. ;-)
Just.. don't.. jump the gun with this thing.. (err... whatever.)
You're right... and the case is also similar, in some way, to the situation found with antibiotics and bacteria. The antibiotic will kill most of the bacteria except for the few mutated ones who are immune to it, which will merely procreate and form a giant colony of radically stronger and more devious bacteria.
Going back to the original poster in this thread, if you presume to make "designer kids," you're going to expose their flaws that are normally masked by the "averageness" of genetically un-manipulated people to the world, and those flaws will be the death of them. They'll stick out like sore thumbs and instead of being the only parents on the block with a brilliant, "beautiful" (ha! - here, you really do kid yourself) child, you've just got another old Joe. Think about it, if you have this careless attitude of wanting "designer kids," think about how many other ignorant souls on the face of this planet that will have that thought as well. You could even try to argue that we all have different ideas of perfect, and you're right, I'm sure, but there are going to develop major categories that most people will fall into:
I'm sure there is a category I've left out, but you get my point.
Of course, one might argue that I'm taking a highly critical point of view but I must merely argue that I have not other choice right now because I agree that our society, and in fact the entire World, is not prepared for what a discovery we have made. Of course, perhaps we will be fortunate and nothing will come of all of this, and perhaps genetic manipulation will not be possible, but I would have to be kidding myself to believe that, especially after such reports as have been made, recently and in the past. With what we do, and the blinding speed at which we do it - without thinking it through first - I think we're in for a big, bad, evil surprise. And I can only hope that I do not live long enough to see it.