privacy isn't about keeping secrets, keeping yourself isolated, but instead about having the power to decide who has access to things you would rather keep "private". very few people keep everything private, in fact most humans, social creatures that we are, need to share otherwise private things with trusted friends and family.
there came a point for me when I realized that the benefits of sharing day to day details of my life with my "friends" outweighed my anxiety over sharing them. to share the types of details that tools like fb allow previously required constant, repetitive physical contact (i.e. being in high school), but online i've strengthened valued social bonds that were very tenuous before due to geography or passage of time (and contrary to popular opinion, you can simply reject those who you would have rejected by not associating with before)
if you have balanced social life you will likely find some use for fb etc, in terms that it increases potential social encounters.
however if you are socially insecure in some way you may
a) become overly dependent of online social tools as a means of reassuring yourself that you are socially relevant
or
b) avoid them all like the plague despite the fact that all your friends are organizing their social lives there (thus reducing your opportunities for social contact and feeding a self fulfilling "bah i'm better than them anyways" attitude)
the main problem with most social web tools is that there is a lack of transparency over how they handle your information on the backend (fb for example, sure you can pretty closely control how your friends see your data, but what about all those annoying apps and fb the company itself? how can i know, in detail, what they're gonna do with my info? heck, it's not even crystal clear who has access to what info wrt applications)
I agree with you completely, the devotees are a bit much, I've never really liked the "work out till you puke" attitude, I understand the value of hitting the wall, but if you're puking you've gone too far IMHO.
I'll back up the unpretentious'ness of the crossfit gyms, you'll generally not find any mirrors in them and lots of whiteboard space, which, if you're like me, is a good sign. I went to my first crossfit in november of last year, i'm 35lbs lighter and a whole lot healthier now. I'm aiming for another 20lbs off and I think I'll have it before my one year of crossfit.
For reference, I could not do a single pullup, had difficulty with the second set of 5 situps, and was generally out of shape when I started. Recently I did my first completely unassisted dead hang pullup (hanging from bar, feet off ground, chin completely over the bar), I've front-squatted my body weight, and yesterday I knocked out more situps than I want to count doing Annie (http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html#Girls).
Just want to put another nod out there for crossfit, I'm going to a crossfit gym but if you're the introvert type and can handle being extra careful to observe good proper form on your own, doing the WOD (workout of the day - scaled to your fitness level) will give you a good all around workout over time.
I watched most of the theory vids before deciding to try it out:
actually scratch that, this line from the original letter kinda negates that theory:
"If I do not hear from you within the next fourteen days, or if I do hear from you but do not receive all of the information requested above, I will assume that you have abandoned these claims and closed your file."
Well I think we haven't heard the last of this, IANAL but I'm pretty sure Monster is obligated to respond to his VERY specific requests. Either by admitting that their initial claim was complete horseshit or coughing up the requested documents and proceeding through with the next steps required to continue the initial threatened lawsuit.
If Monster doesn't, again IANAL, but doesn't Denke (the CEO of the small company) have a claim against monster for threatening frivolous litigation? Maybe even for anti-competitive behaviour considering that Monster (the 362KG gorilla) is trying to threaten a small competitor out of business?
It's more than that, as the CIO he's going to be on the hook for figuring out how to measure those sales (generated by P2P traffic) that they just can't currently measure well. So he might just have some decent pull on the future direction of the label......i hope
While I didn't have six months I did just return from one month in thailand. Since I was lugging my SLR along with me already I opted to do without the laptop and just upload from internet cafes.
That didn't last long, it's too much of a PITA, I ended up buying an eeepc in chiang mai. Here's my recommendation:
- eeePC (light small does everything you need with great battery life) - ditch the optical drive, you really don't need it and it'll be nothing but a liability while on the road. Instead take the money you're saving by buying a cheap laptop and just buy a bunch of memory cards for your camera (as the parent recommends, I really should read more than the subject before starting my own reply =\ ). Buy high capacity, and budget for buying more on the road. Mail complete ones home if you want, but honestly they're light and small and mail from developing world can be unreliable sometimes so I'd recommend hanging on to them until you're in the most developed centres and then UPS/fedex/etc them.
Other than that, non tech tips I'm sure you've heard a thousand times already but here goes. -bring antibiotics for the inevitable case of dehli belly. -remember that you will bring as much stuff as you can possibly fit in your pack. buy a pack smaller than you think you need. -a headlamp will save you so much pain in the ass -you can buy flip-flops when you get there (you will want to hit a beach eventually) and ditch them when you leave. In fact the same goes for just about everything you think you might need for some portion of your trip. Only pack things you'll need for the whole trip, it's worth spending money on the road to save a few kgs.
While S/W patents are... ahem... problematic, patents themselves are a pretty good indicator that a particular person or organization is at least thinking about new and innovative ways to use technology.
Microsoft's problem isn't R&D, it isn't that they don't have smart, cool or interesting people (although I imagine it's getting harder and harder to find new smart/cool/innovative ones)... their problem is the business management.
The management of Microsoft (based purely on my outsider observations) desperately wants to extend their monopoly as long as possible, by any means necessary. Their basic playbook, and it's getting kinda worn by now, is to make (or buy) neat tech and then force you to use their existing tech to use the neat tech. The problem with this approach is that the existing tech (Win & Office) is basically a frankenstein monster at this point and by crippling their new tech to force use of the old tech they ruin the good ideas. All this takes place well after the innovative thinking takes place.
MS shareholders need to do something about the state of that company, otherwise they're just going to continue to piss money away and eventually find themselves just like IBM in the early 90's.
... their problem is translating brilliant R&D (they've got the money to hire really bright people) into good products. Until, as an organization, they stop trying to make each of their individual products further the adoption of all of their other products they will continue to mangle and maim the fruits handed to them by their brilliant R&D.
xbox is a good example of what MS can do when
a) they're forced to compete b) they focus on the product instead of the whole product family
I agree to a point, you're right that most people have some fairly silly ideas about how global econmics works, and what kinds of actions are in the cards, however I think you're guilty of perhaps not giving the chinese credit (no pun intended) where it's due.
China has played the US quite effectively, and they are currently laying the groundwork to lessen their dependence on the US economy, but they likely won't want to take their lips off that teat for another decade or so unless forced to. There are several non-economic issues that could provoke economic retaliation (taiwan most notably) if the US gets too involved. International trade is just a subset of international politics, and it's dangerous to assume that political actions will always be dictated by what is the most rational economic move, I think China is more prepared to weather an economic storm on political principle than the US is. 4 years ago it was economic MAD, but the massive devaluing of the USD I think has tipped the scales in favour of non-US actors. It hasn't helped though that the US elites have sold their country out, they'll be fine no matter what happens to the US economy.
I think the US gov't had the notion that controlling the strategic resources in the mid-east would be an effective counter measure to the growing Chinese power, keeping the economic MAD in place, but we all know how well that has turned out.
But you're right, it's very unlikely that china would dump its usd assets... but they've already moved from a straight peg to the dollar to floating against a basket of currencies while trying to drive up domestic demand significantly. I doubt we'll ever have another consumer society like the USA once it falls (the consumer society not the country), but that's likely a net positive for the global economy once the hangover passes.
Best case scenario from the perspective of western economies (not necessarily from the pov of western economic elites) is internal political upheaval in china, a "made in china" democracy movement would lessen the chances of political decisions causing massive economic harm.
[here ends my set of loosely connected statements on China/US/International economics/politics]
I'm not really in the mood to argue who can and can't do what in terms of China and the USA and economic competition but... seriously? you think number 1 is in the cards? really? even remotely in the scope of possibility?
If the USA decided to stop honouring ANY of it's securities it would be a greater economic disaster than if China decided to dump all it's USD assets. You're talking about effectively telling the world economic markets that every USD asset is worthless and 100% untrustworthy, trading in US issued securities would stop instantly and would really only start again when the US government either went so far into the shitter that the rest of the world forgave its debt (and that's what those securities are, debt owed by the US) or the US gov't decided to start honouring its securities again.
The US accounts are in seemingly permanent deficit to just about everybody in the world, it's only though the continued demand for USD (even now - mostly to buy oil with) that it's economy is ok. Dollars are the major export of the unitied states (the US is certainly not manufacturing much for export) which allow all that import of shiny Chinese manufactured trinkets.
I think that she's building a base upon which to start a series of "Hogwarts" books, the first of which will undoubtlably be focused on slytherin. Snape, Draco, Slughorn, and Narcissa redeemed slytherin enough to inspire curiousity rather than revulsion, and really she probably wanted to leave as many options open for future work, plot wise, as possible.
I'm guessing Albus Severus will be put into slytherin and all sorts of hijinks and adventures will ensue, maybe not all written by JKR, certainly her publisher will have leaned on her will all their might to keep this brand going if at all possible, so if she doesn't have the desire to continue in the vein I'm sure they'll find someone (ie: JK Rowling presents: Albus and the xyz) to keep it up in a light and sufficently easily digestable "true" kids book series style.
I guess we may be thinking of what sustainabity means in different ways. From this statement, "We'd already be out of farmland in the USA if it wasn't sustainable.", I infer that when you're talking about sustainability you're talking about sustainability of the production of food. IE: Can we continue to produce xyz crops and cattle for the foreseeable and reasonable future. And so far the answer to that question has indeed been yes.
What I'm talking about in terms of sustainability is, looking at ecosystems, biomes, and ultimately the whole biosphere, are our current methods of food production sustainable? IE: are we able to produce the food we need without adversely impacting the non-food production elements of the ecosystems within which the food production takes place. Or put another way, do our food production methods help or hinder the other natural systems that support human life?
I'd answer that for the majority of food production in north america, the answer is no because I pretty sure that _most_ industrial production of food (or really industrial production of anything) hasn't even started to think in these terms. It's not that it's impossible to apply modern production techniques towards ecosystem (and ecosphere) sustainability, it's just that up to now no industrialists gave it a thought.
"Modern farming practices are potentially far more sustainable than the more traditional methods.
Sure we could use our very well developed understanding of ecosystem science to make farming sustainable, but what actually happens is that all our fancy science is used to make "food production" profitable. And not even profitable for the farmer necessarily, but profitable to the mass food distribution system conglomerates through high yield monocultures.
Buying local produce from "sustainable practice farms" (I just made that term up, i'm no expert... can't remember the technical term), usually called organic (but you'll want to verify this as the major food conglomerates have moved into "organic mass production") is not only a good way to get tasty food, it's an act of economic protest. Unfortunately, like most protest in the west, it's reserved for the relatively well off.
Of course, the reality probably combines both: Google's leadership is probably interested both in profit and bringing information together, and has found a way to have the two reinforce each other.
I think you have it backwards, remember that google added advertisements long after it had taken on the mission of organizing the worlds information.
What you're arguing, I think, is that Google has since compromised their core mission through the pursuit of profit. Now, I'd argue that Google has done the exact opposite, rather than sacrifice their core mission on the alter of unadulterated capitalism, they've found a decent compromise. They sell eyeballs, but in a way that is nowhere as offensive as how a magazine (or any other traditional media/advert business) does. In fact, it's more often useful, I know I've found good products and services through google ads.
Unless you're of the opinion that delivering commercial messages of any kind is inherently a negative behaviour, and in which case I'd like to know what kind of economy you would support, then I can't see any fault with their money making methods.
Google does do only one thing, and they do it well! That one thing just happens to manifest itself in a myriad of ways, but they're still striving for a single, massive goal.
While the GP may have missed the important, "need to warp" element, he does have a point.
I'm actually playing a 14 day demo now and I'm struggling with that question, what exactly is the point. Sure I can buy a decent ship thanks to my friend who sent me the trial code (it's nice to start with a couple million ISK), but damn it, I STILL CAN'T EVEN SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THE THIRD AGENT MISSION!!! Then I lose a ship and it's 4 jumps to buy one again, and I have to pick weapons, rearm, etc... it's just a pain. I understand from my friends that the medium and long game is much more enjoyable, once you start getting real skills developed and can get good ships to suit your play style, but the short game needs serious work. Is it too much to ask for a series of well designed agent missions or something for novice players?
Rant off, still don't know if I'm going to put down money, 9 days to decide I guess.
You're right of course, but...... Amazon should know better. There are certain risks involved in running an internet shop, once of which is software error giving your product away for free. There are risks involved a traditional shop for that matter, like customers and staff walking out of your shop without paying for merchandise.
Now, you're right, people who took advantage of Amazon's mistake are morally bankrupt when they get all pissed that amazon is trying to correct it's mistake by asking customers to send the merchandise back or face a charge. You could even argue, morally, that those people willfully stole from amazon... but...
A store can't and won't press charges for shoplifting unless it is completely clear, caught red handed if you will. That is not the case, these opportunistic customers, morally bankrupt that they might be, went through the normal transaction process. The mistake is amazon's, they should swallow their pride and swallow the loss. Then find out why the loss happened and fix it so it doesn't again! It's their problem, not their customers.
A better approach would have been to offer a $10 or $20 discount on their next purchase for customers who returned the merchandise. By immediately threatening to do something they can't do (and an unauthorized transaction is illegal), they guarantee that even those who felt bad about taking advantage of a s/w bug will be pissed.
The law, the tests required to prove a claim and just about everything about these two types of "intellectual property" are completely different, please stop confusing the two. Just because RIM eventually learnt the hard way that the system is so broken that it's better to just pay the patent trolls doesn't mean the result of the trademark dispute between Apple Corp vs Apple Inc was in any way a forgone conclusion.
Just because they can fight, doesn't mean they want to, they'd much prefer to sell increased volume of that extremely valuable 40 year old music. Copyrighted music actually... speaking of which copyrights actually expire eventually just about everywhere except the USA, so there is a certain expiry date on that value they need to start cashing in on it now.
As far as Apple vs. Beatles fans... well, sure I like the Beatles and all, but really, nothing is forever, and if Apple Corp can't market their product to the young'uns (and how likely are they to go to a store to buy their parents, nay grandparent's, music?) their future is pretty predictable.
The problem isn't the EULA, although that is a problem of course, the problem is with the technical measures implemented in the software to enforce the EULA.
Unless medical organizations can be 100% assured that installing Vista will not put them at risk of violating the law with regards to patient confidentially (and proper maintenance of medical data for that matter) they cannot install vista.
Having your data sent to MS is a stretch, but having Vista accidentally deleting your app with important medical data stored in the program folder (bad practise but it does happen) because it thinks it is "bad" is a distinct possibility. Heck, doesn't the EULA specifically mention technical measures to delete "illegal" "non-licensed" media? What if the measures incorrectly identify a very high res movie of an echo exam as an illegal movie and deletes it? Who has to pay for the re-exam at that point? the patient? the hospital?
anywho, no enterprise in their right mind will "upgrade" to vista before 2010, if ever...
If we struck pre-emptively with our own nukes, even small tac-nukes on military sites, we could probably cripple them so they couldn't launch even one
Just like Iraq was probably going to be a cake walk eh?
fucking hell, 10000 to 1 odds that US military planners actually think any preemtive plan like that is even feasible. Political planners on the other hand, well, they don't actually pay attention to reality so I wouldn't be surprised, only really fucking sad.
Yeah I know there is some law, but it's not robust law like the treaties that cover international waters, those came after hundreds of years of conflict on the oceans, designed to address conflicted issues. Once we start to have serious space conflict, we'll start to have serious binding space treaties, for now it's the wild west.
Slashdot Mirror
$300 to support an open document format!?!?
privacy isn't about keeping secrets, keeping yourself isolated, but instead about having the power to decide who has access to things you would rather keep "private". very few people keep everything private, in fact most humans, social creatures that we are, need to share otherwise private things with trusted friends and family.
there came a point for me when I realized that the benefits of sharing day to day details of my life with my "friends" outweighed my anxiety over sharing them. to share the types of details that tools like fb allow previously required constant, repetitive physical contact (i.e. being in high school), but online i've strengthened valued social bonds that were very tenuous before due to geography or passage of time (and contrary to popular opinion, you can simply reject those who you would have rejected by not associating with before)
if you have balanced social life you will likely find some use for fb etc, in terms that it increases potential social encounters.
however if you are socially insecure in some way you may
a) become overly dependent of online social tools as a means of reassuring yourself that you are socially relevant
or
b) avoid them all like the plague despite the fact that all your friends are organizing their social lives there (thus reducing your opportunities for social contact and feeding a self fulfilling "bah i'm better than them anyways" attitude)
the main problem with most social web tools is that there is a lack of transparency over how they handle your information on the backend (fb for example, sure you can pretty closely control how your friends see your data, but what about all those annoying apps and fb the company itself? how can i know, in detail, what they're gonna do with my info? heck, it's not even crystal clear who has access to what info wrt applications)
l4h
I agree with you completely, the devotees are a bit much, I've never really liked the "work out till you puke" attitude, I understand the value of hitting the wall, but if you're puking you've gone too far IMHO.
I'll back up the unpretentious'ness of the crossfit gyms, you'll generally not find any mirrors in them and lots of whiteboard space, which, if you're like me, is a good sign. I went to my first crossfit in november of last year, i'm 35lbs lighter and a whole lot healthier now. I'm aiming for another 20lbs off and I think I'll have it before my one year of crossfit.
For reference, I could not do a single pullup, had difficulty with the second set of 5 situps, and was generally out of shape when I started. Recently I did my first completely unassisted dead hang pullup (hanging from bar, feet off ground, chin completely over the bar), I've front-squatted my body weight, and yesterday I knocked out more situps than I want to count doing Annie (http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html#Girls).
Just want to put another nod out there for crossfit, I'm going to a crossfit gym but if you're the introvert type and can handle being extra careful to observe good proper form on your own, doing the WOD (workout of the day - scaled to your fitness level) will give you a good all around workout over time.
I watched most of the theory vids before deciding to try it out:
http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html#Clips
I'd recommend starting with the video "intro to intensity"
l4h
Well I think we haven't heard the last of this, IANAL but I'm pretty sure Monster is obligated to respond to his VERY specific requests. Either by admitting that their initial claim was complete horseshit or coughing up the requested documents and proceeding through with the next steps required to continue the initial threatened lawsuit.
If Monster doesn't, again IANAL, but doesn't Denke (the CEO of the small company) have a claim against monster for threatening frivolous litigation? Maybe even for anti-competitive behaviour considering that Monster (the 362KG gorilla) is trying to threaten a small competitor out of business?
l4h
It's more than that, as the CIO he's going to be on the hook for figuring out how to measure those sales (generated by P2P traffic) that they just can't currently measure well. So he might just have some decent pull on the future direction of the label... ...i hope
l4h
I second the eeePC but from experience...
While I didn't have six months I did just return from one month in thailand. Since I was lugging my SLR along with me already I opted to do without the laptop and just upload from internet cafes.
That didn't last long, it's too much of a PITA, I ended up buying an eeepc in chiang mai. Here's my recommendation:
- eeePC (light small does everything you need with great battery life)
- ditch the optical drive, you really don't need it and it'll be nothing but a liability while on the road. Instead take the money you're saving by buying a cheap laptop and just buy a bunch of memory cards for your camera (as the parent recommends, I really should read more than the subject before starting my own reply =\ ). Buy high capacity, and budget for buying more on the road. Mail complete ones home if you want, but honestly they're light and small and mail from developing world can be unreliable sometimes so I'd recommend hanging on to them until you're in the most developed centres and then UPS/fedex/etc them.
Other than that, non tech tips I'm sure you've heard a thousand times already but here goes.
-bring antibiotics for the inevitable case of dehli belly.
-remember that you will bring as much stuff as you can possibly fit in your pack. buy a pack smaller than you think you need.
-a headlamp will save you so much pain in the ass
-you can buy flip-flops when you get there (you will want to hit a beach eventually) and ditch them when you leave. In fact the same goes for just about everything you think you might need for some portion of your trip. Only pack things you'll need for the whole trip, it's worth spending money on the road to save a few kgs.
ok I'll stop... damn I'm jealous
l4h
While S/W patents are ... ahem... problematic, patents themselves are a pretty good indicator that a particular person or organization is at least thinking about new and innovative ways to use technology.
Microsoft's problem isn't R&D, it isn't that they don't have smart, cool or interesting people (although I imagine it's getting harder and harder to find new smart/cool/innovative ones)... their problem is the business management.
The management of Microsoft (based purely on my outsider observations) desperately wants to extend their monopoly as long as possible, by any means necessary. Their basic playbook, and it's getting kinda worn by now, is to make (or buy) neat tech and then force you to use their existing tech to use the neat tech. The problem with this approach is that the existing tech (Win & Office) is basically a frankenstein monster at this point and by crippling their new tech to force use of the old tech they ruin the good ideas. All this takes place well after the innovative thinking takes place.
MS shareholders need to do something about the state of that company, otherwise they're just going to continue to piss money away and eventually find themselves just like IBM in the early 90's.
l4h
... their problem is translating brilliant R&D (they've got the money to hire really bright people) into good products. Until, as an organization, they stop trying to make each of their individual products further the adoption of all of their other products they will continue to mangle and maim the fruits handed to them by their brilliant R&D.
xbox is a good example of what MS can do when
a) they're forced to compete
b) they focus on the product instead of the whole product family
l4h
I agree to a point, you're right that most people have some fairly silly ideas about how global econmics works, and what kinds of actions are in the cards, however I think you're guilty of perhaps not giving the chinese credit (no pun intended) where it's due.
China has played the US quite effectively, and they are currently laying the groundwork to lessen their dependence on the US economy, but they likely won't want to take their lips off that teat for another decade or so unless forced to. There are several non-economic issues that could provoke economic retaliation (taiwan most notably) if the US gets too involved. International trade is just a subset of international politics, and it's dangerous to assume that political actions will always be dictated by what is the most rational economic move, I think China is more prepared to weather an economic storm on political principle than the US is. 4 years ago it was economic MAD, but the massive devaluing of the USD I think has tipped the scales in favour of non-US actors. It hasn't helped though that the US elites have sold their country out, they'll be fine no matter what happens to the US economy.
I think the US gov't had the notion that controlling the strategic resources in the mid-east would be an effective counter measure to the growing Chinese power, keeping the economic MAD in place, but we all know how well that has turned out.
But you're right, it's very unlikely that china would dump its usd assets... but they've already moved from a straight peg to the dollar to floating against a basket of currencies while trying to drive up domestic demand significantly. I doubt we'll ever have another consumer society like the USA once it falls (the consumer society not the country), but that's likely a net positive for the global economy once the hangover passes.
Best case scenario from the perspective of western economies (not necessarily from the pov of western economic elites) is internal political upheaval in china, a "made in china" democracy movement would lessen the chances of political decisions causing massive economic harm.
[here ends my set of loosely connected statements on China/US/International economics/politics]
I'm not really in the mood to argue who can and can't do what in terms of China and the USA and economic competition but... seriously? you think number 1 is in the cards? really? even remotely in the scope of possibility?
If the USA decided to stop honouring ANY of it's securities it would be a greater economic disaster than if China decided to dump all it's USD assets. You're talking about effectively telling the world economic markets that every USD asset is worthless and 100% untrustworthy, trading in US issued securities would stop instantly and would really only start again when the US government either went so far into the shitter that the rest of the world forgave its debt (and that's what those securities are, debt owed by the US) or the US gov't decided to start honouring its securities again.
The US accounts are in seemingly permanent deficit to just about everybody in the world, it's only though the continued demand for USD (even now - mostly to buy oil with) that it's economy is ok. Dollars are the major export of the unitied states (the US is certainly not manufacturing much for export) which allow all that import of shiny Chinese manufactured trinkets.
l4h
I think that she's building a base upon which to start a series of "Hogwarts" books, the first of which will undoubtlably be focused on slytherin. Snape, Draco, Slughorn, and Narcissa redeemed slytherin enough to inspire curiousity rather than revulsion, and really she probably wanted to leave as many options open for future work, plot wise, as possible.
I'm guessing Albus Severus will be put into slytherin and all sorts of hijinks and adventures will ensue, maybe not all written by JKR, certainly her publisher will have leaned on her will all their might to keep this brand going if at all possible, so if she doesn't have the desire to continue in the vein I'm sure they'll find someone (ie: JK Rowling presents: Albus and the xyz) to keep it up in a light and sufficently easily digestable "true" kids book series style.
l4h
I guess we may be thinking of what sustainabity means in different ways. From this statement, "We'd already be out of farmland in the USA if it wasn't sustainable.", I infer that when you're talking about sustainability you're talking about sustainability of the production of food. IE: Can we continue to produce xyz crops and cattle for the foreseeable and reasonable future. And so far the answer to that question has indeed been yes.
What I'm talking about in terms of sustainability is, looking at ecosystems, biomes, and ultimately the whole biosphere, are our current methods of food production sustainable? IE: are we able to produce the food we need without adversely impacting the non-food production elements of the ecosystems within which the food production takes place. Or put another way, do our food production methods help or hinder the other natural systems that support human life?
I'd answer that for the majority of food production in north america, the answer is no because I pretty sure that _most_ industrial production of food (or really industrial production of anything) hasn't even started to think in these terms. It's not that it's impossible to apply modern production techniques towards ecosystem (and ecosphere) sustainability, it's just that up to now no industrialists gave it a thought.
"Modern farming practices are potentially far more sustainable than the more traditional methods.
Sure we could use our very well developed understanding of ecosystem science to make farming sustainable, but what actually happens is that all our fancy science is used to make "food production" profitable. And not even profitable for the farmer necessarily, but profitable to the mass food distribution system conglomerates through high yield monocultures.
Buying local produce from "sustainable practice farms" (I just made that term up, i'm no expert... can't remember the technical term), usually called organic (but you'll want to verify this as the major food conglomerates have moved into "organic mass production") is not only a good way to get tasty food, it's an act of economic protest. Unfortunately, like most protest in the west, it's reserved for the relatively well off.
I think you have it backwards, remember that google added advertisements long after it had taken on the mission of organizing the worlds information.
What you're arguing, I think, is that Google has since compromised their core mission through the pursuit of profit. Now, I'd argue that Google has done the exact opposite, rather than sacrifice their core mission on the alter of unadulterated capitalism, they've found a decent compromise. They sell eyeballs, but in a way that is nowhere as offensive as how a magazine (or any other traditional media/advert business) does. In fact, it's more often useful, I know I've found good products and services through google ads.
Unless you're of the opinion that delivering commercial messages of any kind is inherently a negative behaviour, and in which case I'd like to know what kind of economy you would support, then I can't see any fault with their money making methods.
l4h
From their about google page:
l4hWhile the GP may have missed the important, "need to warp" element, he does have a point.
I'm actually playing a 14 day demo now and I'm struggling with that question, what exactly is the point. Sure I can buy a decent ship thanks to my friend who sent me the trial code (it's nice to start with a couple million ISK), but damn it, I STILL CAN'T EVEN SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THE THIRD AGENT MISSION!!! Then I lose a ship and it's 4 jumps to buy one again, and I have to pick weapons, rearm, etc... it's just a pain. I understand from my friends that the medium and long game is much more enjoyable, once you start getting real skills developed and can get good ships to suit your play style, but the short game needs serious work. Is it too much to ask for a series of well designed agent missions or something for novice players?
Rant off, still don't know if I'm going to put down money, 9 days to decide I guess.
l4h
You're right of course, but... ... Amazon should know better. There are certain risks involved in running an internet shop, once of which is software error giving your product away for free. There are risks involved a traditional shop for that matter, like customers and staff walking out of your shop without paying for merchandise.
Now, you're right, people who took advantage of Amazon's mistake are morally bankrupt when they get all pissed that amazon is trying to correct it's mistake by asking customers to send the merchandise back or face a charge. You could even argue, morally, that those people willfully stole from amazon... but...
A store can't and won't press charges for shoplifting unless it is completely clear, caught red handed if you will. That is not the case, these opportunistic customers, morally bankrupt that they might be, went through the normal transaction process. The mistake is amazon's, they should swallow their pride and swallow the loss. Then find out why the loss happened and fix it so it doesn't again! It's their problem, not their customers.
A better approach would have been to offer a $10 or $20 discount on their next purchase for customers who returned the merchandise. By immediately threatening to do something they can't do (and an unauthorized transaction is illegal), they guarantee that even those who felt bad about taking advantage of a s/w bug will be pissed.
Trademark != Patent
The law, the tests required to prove a claim and just about everything about these two types of "intellectual property" are completely different, please stop confusing the two. Just because RIM eventually learnt the hard way that the system is so broken that it's better to just pay the patent trolls doesn't mean the result of the trademark dispute between Apple Corp vs Apple Inc was in any way a forgone conclusion.
Just because they can fight, doesn't mean they want to, they'd much prefer to sell increased volume of that extremely valuable 40 year old music. Copyrighted music actually... speaking of which copyrights actually expire eventually just about everywhere except the USA, so there is a certain expiry date on that value they need to start cashing in on it now.
As far as Apple vs. Beatles fans... well, sure I like the Beatles and all, but really, nothing is forever, and if Apple Corp can't market their product to the young'uns (and how likely are they to go to a store to buy their parents, nay grandparent's, music?) their future is pretty predictable.
l4h
The problem isn't the EULA, although that is a problem of course, the problem is with the technical measures implemented in the software to enforce the EULA.
Unless medical organizations can be 100% assured that installing Vista will not put them at risk of violating the law with regards to patient confidentially (and proper maintenance of medical data for that matter) they cannot install vista.
Having your data sent to MS is a stretch, but having Vista accidentally deleting your app with important medical data stored in the program folder (bad practise but it does happen) because it thinks it is "bad" is a distinct possibility. Heck, doesn't the EULA specifically mention technical measures to delete "illegal" "non-licensed" media? What if the measures incorrectly identify a very high res movie of an echo exam as an illegal movie and deletes it? Who has to pay for the re-exam at that point? the patient? the hospital?
anywho, no enterprise in their right mind will "upgrade" to vista before 2010, if ever...
l4h
fucking hell, 10000 to 1 odds that US military planners actually think any preemtive plan like that is even feasible. Political planners on the other hand, well, they don't actually pay attention to reality so I wouldn't be surprised, only really fucking sad.
l4h
dude
You don't rebut a joke like it's an argument, you're just proving his point!
Your GF must be a very patient woman =)
Yeah I know there is some law, but it's not robust law like the treaties that cover international waters, those came after hundreds of years of conflict on the oceans, designed to address conflicted issues. Once we start to have serious space conflict, we'll start to have serious binding space treaties, for now it's the wild west.
l4h