SkyNet. It wasn't the 'web that gained sentience. The big suprise was that sentience came as a byproduct of a browser that was able to boot and run itself - and do it in clusters and on toasters.
Except - my conversation actually happened. Yours are obviously figments of your jaded imagionation. FYI - Garriot was a big suporter of the Houston Science Fair and was there as a judge (with quite a compliment of games as a prize for one of the winners).
After I kicked my Everquest habit a few years back, playing single-player games seems to be lacking something.
It was sometime in the early 80's when I played two games regularly - Ultima III and Quest for Sorcery. Ultima III is easy enough to understand / look up. Quest for Sorcery was a multi-player text adventure ran on Major BBS systems (the system I played on had 8 lines). Quest had no stats - your ability to interact within the world (and even combat other players) was entirely based on your knowledge of how to use various objects and utter the right commands. Combat was not common but there was a competition to solve all the puzzles in the game.
One day, after playing Quest for a good part of the week, I loaded up Ultima... and it was... flat. It had lost its magic. It just wasn't fun any more. And I suddenly realized why. The night before, I had been playing Quest and was working on one of the puzzles when the following text appeard on my screen:
A strong gust of wind whips through the room.
Simple. But the implications were very important. Someone in the game had just figured out how to do something new. And that was the catch - a world where other people affected your environment was somehow much more... interesting than the static world of single-player games.
A side note to all this... I met Richard Garriot at a science fair that year. I noted to him how Ultima just wasn't as fun despite all its content and graphics. That a (relatively) simple text game had trumped it due to one very important aspect - muti-player environment. And, by the way, wouldn't it be cool if Ultima could be like that? Richard seemed to like the idea and invited me to call him at a later time... but I never did manage to get ahold of him again. Years later, and more likely due to natural progression rather than anything I said, Ultima Online made its debut.
Pity. I have the same general outlook as you do. However, unlike you, in each online game I play I spend the time to look for like-minded people.
It depends on your environment. In environments with community-run servers, you can find the servers where admins don't put up with the shennanigans you described. In company-run environments, there are clans / guilds who demand civil behavior from their members (unfortunately, that means there's still a good amount of idiots in the general population you have to ignore - but then, that's life).
It doesn't take long. But it DOES require at least some effort on your part.
One side note - Blizzard did something interesting with WoW to cut down on the effort you have to spend. They've created PvE, PvP, RP, and RPPvP servers that seem to cater to almost every play style / mentality. That's not to say you won't find a certain population of idiots on any given server. But I've found that RPPvP servers tend to cut down on the Kool Dude population while still providing some good PvP interaction.
I grew up watching the origional. I watched the first episode expecting a re-hash of the old show - but done poorly. I was suprised with what I saw. Other than a few nods to the old series, this is an entirely different show. I ditched the bagage of the old show within the first episode and enjoyed the series so far. I would suggest you do the same.
Having said that - it's hard not to compare the two series. Just for giggles, I'll offer my take on your concerns.
The move from shiny robots is important. They're still around... but don't get as much screen time. The mix of mimic and metal cylons has to do with the story. And the use of mimic cylons, sexual or not, has this BSG dealing with much more interesting concepts than the origional series.
I was also wary of a female Starbuck. But they do a good job with it and Katee Sackhoff pulls off the character well. Starbuck is still brash, gutsy, and hell in a Viper. A female Starbuck is also key to at least one of the subplots.
The religious stuff is there- but even more intense as the cylons are monotheists and the humans are polytheists (Christian God vs the Lords of Kobol, who seem to be Greek analogue instead of Egyptian this time around).
Religion is actually a VERY important aspect of the story. The Cylons are wiping out humans based on their religious beliefs - that Man is wicked and is being brought to task for their sins (very fire-and-brimstone). This also touches on their desire to procreate. They're not simply wanting to reproduce or become a race. They believe that love, and perhapse the ability to procreate, is key to being one with God. This is why they allow humans to exist at all - to try and understand these fundimental aspects of humanity.
And you continue to talk around the point. The point made was that OEMs are able to replace Windows just as easily as processors or hard drives without any additional expense (the so-called "Microsoft tax"). My point is that this is false. Windows licensing is nothing like other component pricing.
Whether this is proof of a monopoly or not is not my claim. Argue all you want - but stay on subject. Granted - the origional discussion is on the existance of a Microsoft monopoly. And the "Microsoft tax" was introduced as some degree of proof to such a monopoly. If you wish to present a counter-argument as to why this business practice isn't proof of a monopoly, feel free to jump in where that point was actually made. You'll note I didn't bring it up.
Thanks for the reminder - but again, that's not the point. The issue was how OEMs are required to license Windows. This works entirely different than other components such as hard drives and processors (given as examples). You might want to note my response of, as you put it, "..but...but...dell" is entirely on topic as the whole issue IS Dell... and HP/Compaq... and Gateway... and any other OEM that's larger than your local whitebox screwdriver shop. This is the state of business in the industry today. Why it is this way is the point of discussion.
Now - your point is a good one, just not a part of this thread. I certainly don't have to shop with Dell. And for personal purchases I avoid them and other large-scale OEMs. Laptops used to be the last bastion of business I had to do with these outfits - but even now alternatives are becoming more and more common. But on a professional scale, my employer tends to need the logistical support a large OEM offers. And that means that we're back to doing business with Dell (and their like). But then - that's an entirely different discussion.
My point isn't that I like or dislike Dell... rather there is a certain way that Dell, among others, must do business. Some either do not understand this or are willfully ignoring the fact.
If Dell decides to make a run of systems with AMD processors, they don't continue to pay Intel for each AMD-based system shipped. This is different from their deal with Microsoft the Windows product where each unit shipped, with or without Windows, invovles a charge for Windows.
But now my local Google rep tells me Google accepts graphical banner content including Macromedia Flash format.
I've already seen them.
I block flash ads. Usually I'm nice enough to not block the ad network outright - but block any.sfw file coming from them. Googles' context didn't include that... but there was enough in the path to identify a multimedia ad and so I blocked based on that. If it gets any more complex, I'll probably just block all ads from Google.
Huh. I hadn't thought of that. I would have thought some of the garbage in that URL was session-specific. I probably should have noticed Slashdot automagiclly turning that in to a link, too. I had pasted it as flat text.
You're comparing apples to oranges. None of the markets you listed are anything like the telco market.
To begin with, the majority of telco tech involves laying down some form of medium. This involves not only the expense of laying down that medium, but access to rights of way and the logistics involved in interupting traffic and damage to the area involved in laying down that medium. I'm curious as to how you expect thousands of little companies to handle this. Or how thousands of companies will access the same infrastructure without regulation that ensures everyone gets access to it.
There are a lot of additional issues involved that I haven't touched on. For example, ensuring basic services are provided to rural locations that do not have the same population density but none the less should be serviced. Without regulation, these populations would be quickly ignored.
There's gold in those downloadable updates people. Makes sense to me why Nessus is no longer open sourcing their new stuff.
Nessus' new engine is closed source and proprietary. The plugins continue to be distributed as they always were (with exception of severan Nessus3-specific plugins). This seems to be completely unlike what you're describing.
But apparently it's not acceptable for users to note among themselves that this feature, of which some feel is rather important, is now missing - with little fanfare.
Having said that - if they showed up on the market with a proprietary product... I doubt I would have heard of them. Proprietary software is no guarantee of business success either.
You've got to wonder. Is Orlowski taking a page from Brandt's playbook? Is he a believer in Brandt's revenge campaign? Or does his own personal beliefs simply mesh up so well with Brandt? The two seem so similar in style - although perhaps Orlowski is a bit more subtle and honest in his approach (which isn't saying much).
No kidding. I poked around this page a bit. It appears to be highly focused on the TOH and Sollag. A critical thinker might even suspect that the whole site is based on Sollag and his battle against Wikipedia. Hardly an objective resource outlining the problems with Wikipedia.
The last time Windows was a major desktop for me at home was Win98. And I was able to keep it relatively stable and virus free. That's not to say Win98 was particularly stable (my day job at the time was largely dealing with broken Win9x systems - I knew better). It's because I knew the care and feeding of the box and took the steps required to do so.
I'm thrilled that you're able to keep your Windows box in one piece too. It doesn't really prove the point, though.
Having said that - I have to admit that since Win2k, the stability gap between Linux and Windows narrowed considerably. And by my judgement, that gap is narrow enough that only purists are going to argue the difference. But hey - why ruin the fun.
Who says Windows won based on quality? And who says it was "Windows" that displaced Apple in the first place?
MS-DOS was a key component in creating the commodity personal computer - or at least commoditizing the hardware piece of it. And because it was a key, Microsoft rode the wave of commodity PCs that washed over the Industry (it should be noted that IBM set that wave in motion). Windows comes in as a partner (and later "replacement") to MS-DOS as a continued key component to cheaper, more open PCs.
Windows may be an important part of history - but it is far from a dominant role. Windows owes a lot to IBM and, even more so, Compaq for the position it is in now.
I appreciate the general sentiment of the comment. I'm not so sure the grandparent's comment makes much of an argument. But if you're going to make pithy remarks about history, it would help to have some perspective and appreciation for the rather interesting and complex set of events that transpired to put us in the place we are today.
Slashdot Mirror
SkyNet. It wasn't the 'web that gained sentience. The big suprise was that sentience came as a byproduct of a browser that was able to boot and run itself - and do it in clusters and on toasters.
Except - my conversation actually happened. Yours are obviously figments of your jaded imagionation. FYI - Garriot was a big suporter of the Houston Science Fair and was there as a judge (with quite a compliment of games as a prize for one of the winners).
Cute dig, though.
It was sometime in the early 80's when I played two games regularly - Ultima III and Quest for Sorcery. Ultima III is easy enough to understand / look up. Quest for Sorcery was a multi-player text adventure ran on Major BBS systems (the system I played on had 8 lines). Quest had no stats - your ability to interact within the world (and even combat other players) was entirely based on your knowledge of how to use various objects and utter the right commands. Combat was not common but there was a competition to solve all the puzzles in the game.
One day, after playing Quest for a good part of the week, I loaded up Ultima... and it was... flat. It had lost its magic. It just wasn't fun any more. And I suddenly realized why. The night before, I had been playing Quest and was working on one of the puzzles when the following text appeard on my screen:
A strong gust of wind whips through the room.
Simple. But the implications were very important. Someone in the game had just figured out how to do something new. And that was the catch - a world where other people affected your environment was somehow much more... interesting than the static world of single-player games.
A side note to all this... I met Richard Garriot at a science fair that year. I noted to him how Ultima just wasn't as fun despite all its content and graphics. That a (relatively) simple text game had trumped it due to one very important aspect - muti-player environment. And, by the way, wouldn't it be cool if Ultima could be like that? Richard seemed to like the idea and invited me to call him at a later time... but I never did manage to get ahold of him again. Years later, and more likely due to natural progression rather than anything I said, Ultima Online made its debut.
Pity. I have the same general outlook as you do. However, unlike you, in each online game I play I spend the time to look for like-minded people.
It depends on your environment. In environments with community-run servers, you can find the servers where admins don't put up with the shennanigans you described. In company-run environments, there are clans / guilds who demand civil behavior from their members (unfortunately, that means there's still a good amount of idiots in the general population you have to ignore - but then, that's life).
It doesn't take long. But it DOES require at least some effort on your part.
One side note - Blizzard did something interesting with WoW to cut down on the effort you have to spend. They've created PvE, PvP, RP, and RPPvP servers that seem to cater to almost every play style / mentality. That's not to say you won't find a certain population of idiots on any given server. But I've found that RPPvP servers tend to cut down on the Kool Dude population while still providing some good PvP interaction.
I grew up watching the origional. I watched the first episode expecting a re-hash of the old show - but done poorly. I was suprised with what I saw. Other than a few nods to the old series, this is an entirely different show. I ditched the bagage of the old show within the first episode and enjoyed the series so far. I would suggest you do the same.
Having said that - it's hard not to compare the two series. Just for giggles, I'll offer my take on your concerns.
The move from shiny robots is important. They're still around... but don't get as much screen time. The mix of mimic and metal cylons has to do with the story. And the use of mimic cylons, sexual or not, has this BSG dealing with much more interesting concepts than the origional series.
I was also wary of a female Starbuck. But they do a good job with it and Katee Sackhoff pulls off the character well. Starbuck is still brash, gutsy, and hell in a Viper. A female Starbuck is also key to at least one of the subplots.
Religion is actually a VERY important aspect of the story. The Cylons are wiping out humans based on their religious beliefs - that Man is wicked and is being brought to task for their sins (very fire-and-brimstone). This also touches on their desire to procreate. They're not simply wanting to reproduce or become a race. They believe that love, and perhapse the ability to procreate, is key to being one with God. This is why they allow humans to exist at all - to try and understand these fundimental aspects of humanity.
And you continue to talk around the point. The point made was that OEMs are able to replace Windows just as easily as processors or hard drives without any additional expense (the so-called "Microsoft tax"). My point is that this is false. Windows licensing is nothing like other component pricing.
Whether this is proof of a monopoly or not is not my claim. Argue all you want - but stay on subject. Granted - the origional discussion is on the existance of a Microsoft monopoly. And the "Microsoft tax" was introduced as some degree of proof to such a monopoly. If you wish to present a counter-argument as to why this business practice isn't proof of a monopoly, feel free to jump in where that point was actually made. You'll note I didn't bring it up.
Thanks for the reminder - but again, that's not the point. The issue was how OEMs are required to license Windows. This works entirely different than other components such as hard drives and processors (given as examples). You might want to note my response of, as you put it, "..but...but...dell" is entirely on topic as the whole issue IS Dell... and HP/Compaq... and Gateway... and any other OEM that's larger than your local whitebox screwdriver shop. This is the state of business in the industry today. Why it is this way is the point of discussion.
Now - your point is a good one, just not a part of this thread. I certainly don't have to shop with Dell. And for personal purchases I avoid them and other large-scale OEMs. Laptops used to be the last bastion of business I had to do with these outfits - but even now alternatives are becoming more and more common. But on a professional scale, my employer tends to need the logistical support a large OEM offers. And that means that we're back to doing business with Dell (and their like). But then - that's an entirely different discussion.
My point isn't that I like or dislike Dell... rather there is a certain way that Dell, among others, must do business. Some either do not understand this or are willfully ignoring the fact.
If Dell decides to make a run of systems with AMD processors, they don't continue to pay Intel for each AMD-based system shipped. This is different from their deal with Microsoft the Windows product where each unit shipped, with or without Windows, invovles a charge for Windows.
My understanding is that Microsoft sold its Apple stock quite a few years ago... at a profit.
I've already seen them.
I block flash ads. Usually I'm nice enough to not block the ad network outright - but block any
If it doesn't matter - why is there so many people making noise detracting SPEWS?
Huh. I hadn't thought of that. I would have thought some of the garbage in that URL was session-specific. I probably should have noticed Slashdot automagiclly turning that in to a link, too. I had pasted it as flat text.
It looks like Google is hosting the banner media on vp.video.google.com. An example pulled from Adblock:
? id=CLbB8ffF-snmNRDYBRhaMgjvgwgnyTtV8w&ai=BP9xKBjio Q8P5K66c4AHH9viPArKisw6w04nLAe6rhY4HABABGAEgm-f2AU iaOVDZ_dnG_v____8BsgENcHZwb25saW5lLmNvbboBCTcyOHg5 MF9hc8gBBJUCOnQ4Cg&clickTAG=http://pagead2.googles yndication.com/pagead/iclk%3Fsa%3Dl%26ai%3DBP9xKBj ioQ8P5K66c4AHH9viPArKisw6w04nLAe6rhY4HABABGAEgm-f2 AUiaOVDZ_dnG_v____8BsgENcHZwb25saW5lLmNvbboBCTcyOH g5MF9hc8gBBJUCOnQ4Cg%26num%3D1%26adurl%3Dhttp://em agin.com/html/consumer_products.htm%26client%3Dca- pub-7548037392593088&videoUrl=http://vp.video.goog le.com/videoplayback%3Fid%3D0%26itag%3D5%26urlcrea ted%3D1135097862%26sigh%3D91kMajmQ58pNgCz8Hh3yq-kL fUk
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/imgad
(Too bad this gets really uggly - but hey, there it is... more or less)
You're comparing apples to oranges. None of the markets you listed are anything like the telco market.
To begin with, the majority of telco tech involves laying down some form of medium. This involves not only the expense of laying down that medium, but access to rights of way and the logistics involved in interupting traffic and damage to the area involved in laying down that medium. I'm curious as to how you expect thousands of little companies to handle this. Or how thousands of companies will access the same infrastructure without regulation that ensures everyone gets access to it.
There are a lot of additional issues involved that I haven't touched on. For example, ensuring basic services are provided to rural locations that do not have the same population density but none the less should be serviced. Without regulation, these populations would be quickly ignored.
Nessus' new engine is closed source and proprietary. The plugins continue to be distributed as they always were (with exception of severan Nessus3-specific plugins). This seems to be completely unlike what you're describing.
But apparently it's not acceptable for users to note among themselves that this feature, of which some feel is rather important, is now missing - with little fanfare.
Having said that - if they showed up on the market with a proprietary product... I doubt I would have heard of them. Proprietary software is no guarantee of business success either.
You've got to wonder. Is Orlowski taking a page from Brandt's playbook? Is he a believer in Brandt's revenge campaign? Or does his own personal beliefs simply mesh up so well with Brandt? The two seem so similar in style - although perhaps Orlowski is a bit more subtle and honest in his approach (which isn't saying much).
Look - some strange woman lyin' in ponds and distributing swords to jungle cats is no basis for a government!
Wow. So you're Danial Brandt? Mr Google-watch? I've always found you to be a rather facinating character.
Honestly - if you didn't have an axe to grind with Google, and then Wikipedia... would you have even bothered to do this?
No kidding. I poked around this page a bit. It appears to be highly focused on the TOH and Sollag. A critical thinker might even suspect that the whole site is based on Sollag and his battle against Wikipedia. Hardly an objective resource outlining the problems with Wikipedia.
The last time Windows was a major desktop for me at home was Win98. And I was able to keep it relatively stable and virus free. That's not to say Win98 was particularly stable (my day job at the time was largely dealing with broken Win9x systems - I knew better). It's because I knew the care and feeding of the box and took the steps required to do so.
I'm thrilled that you're able to keep your Windows box in one piece too. It doesn't really prove the point, though.
Having said that - I have to admit that since Win2k, the stability gap between Linux and Windows narrowed considerably. And by my judgement, that gap is narrow enough that only purists are going to argue the difference. But hey - why ruin the fun.
Who says Windows won based on quality? And who says it was "Windows" that displaced Apple in the first place?
MS-DOS was a key component in creating the commodity personal computer - or at least commoditizing the hardware piece of it. And because it was a key, Microsoft rode the wave of commodity PCs that washed over the Industry (it should be noted that IBM set that wave in motion). Windows comes in as a partner (and later "replacement") to MS-DOS as a continued key component to cheaper, more open PCs.
Windows may be an important part of history - but it is far from a dominant role. Windows owes a lot to IBM and, even more so, Compaq for the position it is in now.
I appreciate the general sentiment of the comment. I'm not so sure the grandparent's comment makes much of an argument. But if you're going to make pithy remarks about history, it would help to have some perspective and appreciation for the rather interesting and complex set of events that transpired to put us in the place we are today.