I should work this out on paper before posting and possibly looking dumb, but it seems to me that you only need to get rid of all the angular momentum if you need the garbage to go straight to the sun. If you don't mind it spiraling in, it shouldn't be much of a problem.
X is not a GUI. I don't know how many posts above have said this already, but its just not sinking in.
What X does is perhaps more like what people think a video driver does. Its an interface to a display. It lets you draw things etc. The job of presenting a GUI is split between a window manager and a widget set. They talk to the X server to get things displayed.
So, if you don't like the look and feel you see, its the window manager and the widget set.
If things are slow and eating memory, it could be X itself, or it could be your particular X server.
Bundling access with the ISP is unnecessary. Breaking that in two has nothing in common with the "regulation" you decry. Keeping the two bundled would be exactly the same as requiring your 56K modem ISP or your DSL ISP to be the local phone company.
The cable network and the telephone network are different. The telephone network was already set up to connect two arbitrary nodes (caller -> callee). When you dial up an ISP, you're using the telephone network in the normal way. The cable network was set up to connect all nodes to one source. Connecting you to your ISP is not the normal use for this network.
P.S. I would like to choose ISPs to connect to via my cable. But I don't think it is right (in general) for me (or us collectively) to use the government to force companies (or people) to do what I (we) want. (I know I went crazy with parentheses)
While I agree about the unlikelyhood of other companies laying new pipe alongside the old pipe, I don't agree that it would be a bad thing. I'd love to have five pipes to choose from. I'd like for other companies to be allowed to do this if they chose to. Then, at least, I'd know that if I only had one choice it was because the market wasn't big enough and not because the monopoly made a deal with the local government.
Competition produces duplication, but this is not a bad thing. You're not troubled by your choice in supermarkets are you?
This begs the question as to whether or not there should be any such thing as "your info". It's not obvious that information should be owned since it behaves differently than other, physical things which we can own. Specifically, when I get some information from you, you don't lose it.
I think what Tucker clearly demonstrates is that ideas are not like physical things. That being the case, we should not base our laws regarding ideas and such on analogy with laws about ownership of physical things. It may be that some form of copyright/patent etc. is justified by utilitarian arguments of the type we've seen like encouraging invention, but they can't be justified by saying that an idea is like a car. We have to weigh the benefits of accelerated innovation stemming from IP law against the benefits of wider spread use and lower prices of innovations which would come from abolishing IP law. The later is usally missing from the arguments in favor of IP law. I'm not sure where I come down on this yet.
Also, eliminating IP would not force anyone to reveal anything that they want to keep private. If you want to keep your source code a secret and release only binaries, you can. What you lose is the legal right to prevent people from copying the software and possibly reseling it. Though I suppose you could use license agreements: "I will sell you this if you agree... ".
And I think the article was very well written, people just no longer appreciate good writing.
I have/had similar plans, though I still haven't gotten around to it. I planned on starting with the bootdisk HOWTO from the Linux Documentation Project.
Slashdot Mirror
I find most of us set h-bar = c = 1 and forget units.
I should work this out on paper before posting and possibly looking dumb, but it seems to me that you only need to get rid of all the angular momentum if you need the garbage to go straight to the sun. If you don't mind it spiraling in, it shouldn't be much of a problem.
X is not a GUI. I don't know how many posts above have said this already, but its just not sinking in.
What X does is perhaps more like what people think a video driver does. Its an interface to a display. It lets you draw things etc. The job of presenting a GUI is split between a window manager and a widget set. They talk to the X server to get things displayed.
So, if you don't like the look and feel you see, its the window manager and the widget set.
If things are slow and eating memory, it could be X itself, or it could be your particular X server.
The cable network and the telephone network are different. The telephone network was already set up to connect two arbitrary nodes (caller -> callee). When you dial up an ISP, you're using the telephone network in the normal way. The cable network was set up to connect all nodes to one source. Connecting you to your ISP is not the normal use for this network.
P.S. I would like to choose ISPs to connect to via my cable. But I don't think it is right (in general) for me (or us collectively) to use the government to force companies (or people) to do what I (we) want. (I know I went crazy with parentheses)
While I agree about the unlikelyhood of other companies laying new pipe alongside the old pipe, I don't agree that it would be a bad thing. I'd love to have five pipes to choose from. I'd like for other companies to be allowed to do this if they chose to. Then, at least, I'd know that if I only had one choice it was because the market wasn't big enough and not because the monopoly made a deal with the local government.
Competition produces duplication, but this is not a bad thing. You're not troubled by your choice in supermarkets are you?
This begs the question as to whether or not there should be any such thing as "your info". It's not obvious that information should be owned since it behaves differently than other, physical things which we can own. Specifically, when I get some information from you, you don't lose it.
I think what Tucker clearly demonstrates is that ideas are not like physical things. That being the case, we should not base our laws regarding ideas and such on analogy with laws about ownership of physical things. It may be that some form of copyright/patent etc. is justified by utilitarian arguments of the type we've seen like encouraging invention, but they can't be justified by saying that an idea is like a car. We have to weigh the benefits of accelerated innovation stemming from IP law against the benefits of wider spread use and lower prices of innovations which would come from abolishing IP law. The later is usally missing from the arguments in favor of IP law. I'm not sure where I come down on this yet.
... ".
Also, eliminating IP would not force anyone to reveal anything that they want to keep private. If you want to keep your source code a secret and release only binaries, you can. What you lose is the legal right to prevent people from copying the software and possibly reseling it. Though I suppose you could use license agreements: "I will sell you this if you agree
And I think the article was very well written, people just no longer appreciate good writing.
I have/had similar plans, though I still haven't gotten around to it. I planned on starting with the bootdisk HOWTO from the Linux Documentation Project.