CNN started to suck when Ted Turner sold it. And he knew it shortly there-after. Can anyone remember way-back then? When Turner went on a rant about CNN? It wasn't a Liberal vs Conservative point. He knew that they had become Corporate-minded.
The common news has no business being corporate minded. This is not an anti-business philosophy. It's like saying; "we don't need charity for the rich."
Donahue used to be a popular, liberal talk show. I used to get annoyed by some of his rants. But, the fundamental difference with that (not any more accurate media) and todays media, is that Donahue got people empowered to "stop this abuse". Now the message is; "go along." The "toxic sludge is good for you" message is pervasive now. That, ideology is the number one difference -- not the irrelevant conservative vs. liberal paper tiger.
I think the main difference is that the "Press", and a lot of this was newspapers -- looked at itself has helping out "the common man". Sensational or not, the concept of a "debt to the public" is gone.
The News is an outlet for corporations. A little fact here and there to pad between the infomercials. The antis-scientist movement is similar to the tactics of "big tobacco". They hired a lot of pulmonary specialists to say what the Tobacco industry wanted. In a more indirect way, this is happening (at least to the leadership) of science. Science that supports the corporate goals is passed on. Anti-science makes it hard to prove anything, which means you can do anything if you have the power.
This will result in a big loss for business in the end. Confidence in food, drugs and the safety of products will erode. Personal experience with friends and relatives who've been damaged by bad products will end up permeating peoples consciousness, such that almost everything will be in doubt. I think that once that subconscious meme hits a tipping point, the effects will be drastic, overnight, and widespread. People will want to hibernate and wait for the BS-storm to pass on.
There really is good profit to be made with environmentalism, conservation and consumer advocacy. Too bad that too few have learned that lesson. We are repeating the stupid, greedy profit taking that caused the US to lose the automobile market.
Actually, having learned to "read between the lines"... I've found "The Daily Show" is the best source for me to get an idea of what is going on. When I watch a "regular" news show, the current pundit/shill that is making his/her rounds on the talk circuit is blathering on. And sometimes this just numbs my brain. So, I when I see the "ironic twist" of the same blather on the daily show, usually the "true point" will come tom me. Sometimes we all get bogged down in the facts. When really the "facts" on the news are merely a vehicle to deliver the "emotional content". It was very poignant last night to see the joke about (forget shill's name), holding up a dish from Gitmo to prove how well people are treated. John Stewart cries; "we are exonerated!". Somehow the weak rationalizations are even worse than the torture. The reclassifications of people into "non-combatants" is worse than just saying; "we'll ignore the Geneva convention because we're OK with someone torturing American troops" (well, not really).
But I've gotten to where I can't even watch CNN, or Fox or take your pick, another weak-kneed reporter in front of an overpaid shill. After the "Jessica Lynch" over-produced "rescue", where our special agents fire into the air at an enemy that isn't even there--I lost all interest in the insults to my intelligence.
So, call me ignorant, but I only get my news now from the internet and the Daily Show and Air America -- and I'm a guy who voted for Ross Perot. Without those two breathes of fresh air, I believe I might have fallen into an irreversible depression.
One thing I liked about the 50's science fiction, is that a smart, level headed guy (usually a scientist), would be the one to identify a problem and the goto guy to fix it.
Over time, the Dr. Frankenstein plots seemed to take over. We became cynical of the "cure for everything" mentality. So, the knowitall became a myopic danger. Most plot lines revolved around the hubris of the scientist and his eventual downfall.
In the 80's, he got a bad Russian accent.
Now on to the 90's and the scientist can be a stand-in for the "take your pick of villains", either drug lord, megalomaniac business tycoon, or scientist.
The problem is, that most heroes have devolved from someone who is an expert at "something". To the average joe. Then below the average joe, to the guy who has no use for all that "figur'in stuff". Seemingly endowed by God with the right instincts. Usually there is a plot device to make sure the hero proves just how not-intellectual he is. The main plot point in these action pictures seems to be, that the hero is the only one smart enough to use a bigger gun. I liked Indian Jones, but the shadows of that character got to be annoying.
Having grown up a smart kid in an anti-intellectual environment. I'm ready for a return to the great scientist hero--or at least a little McGyver. McGyver proves my point by how much he was the butt of jokes (OK, sometimes quite a stretch to NOT use a gun). The moral compass is great for dealing with family issues, but the modern world really requires some brains to unravel what actually a person can do to effect positive change. Setting an example is a great hero. But fighting crime and international intrigue definitely requires brains. I think the popularity of the "Borne Identity" shows that a smart character doesn't have to be a geek and can really win box office.
That's why I really LIKE the back story and message of the Star Wars saga. I've read complaints that "he changed the meaning from simple Good vs Evil". But you have the simple message and then the adult message. Driving home the simple message gets boring. But what is really different about Star Wars, that I now MORE appreciate (even though I hated the rushed acting in the past three films), is that Star Wars big message is that Power does not win the day. Luke wins in the end where Anakin fails because he stays true to his faith in good and not in his own power. Darth basically plays with Luke, trying to anger him, and is totally the dominator. But it is Luke's reaching out to his fathers compassion that is more powerful than the death stars and all the weaponry.
Darth could have killed Luke at many times, but he wanted to corrupt him more. That was his weakness. He had to prove that nobody could withstand the lust for power that warped him. When he looked at Luke's ruined mechanical stump, he realized that his son would gain nothing from more power, than to become a clockwork machine of destruction. I've always thought that, that moment when he turns on the Emperor was one of the most satisfying in a movie.
George Lucas has two massively powerful death stars that get wiped out by a few people. An empire toppled by one moment of compassion. So, in a sense, it is a very hopeful epic. The "bad guys" can seem to have everything in their favor, to be all powerful, and then, they get tripped up by someone less powerful and good.
If I protested something, the police might stop me and get my ID. I then get on "the list". I won't be surprised if, after we get a National ID, that people on "the list" find themselves audited by the IRS more, or turned down for jobs with surprising frequency. There won't be anything to prove --just like with voting machines. And anyone saying; "hey, I think that I'm on a bad list somewhere" will just be conspiracy theorists.
We just had hearings on effects of the Patriot Act. But when it was time to have people come up and witness any abuses --the mics were cut off and the speaker ended the meeting --against all precedent. There are no examples of abuse of these extra powers because the use of the powers is secret.
Perfect tracking of people means perfect control. I don't want a controlled populace. The government rules at the "will of the people". If voting fails -- then revolt is the only thing left. A good government doesn't fear revolt -- but our government seems to.
I think the problem with the British Labour group is that they are just pretending to be on the side of labour like here in the states. Our Democratic party is pretty much bought out (almost as much as the Repbulicans but at least they are still embarassed about it). So they are busy preteding to be the Republicans of 20 years ago.
Howard Dean and a handful of others like Nancy Pillosi are some of the few real Democrats (now called Progressives but without the Nanny mentality) left.
I liken pollitical debate as to a kids play with sock puppets. It may seem to be an important arguement, but its the same person with their hand up both skirts.
I'm thinking about leaving the US too. I'm afraid about what will happen when the propping up of our phoney dollar finally fails and I don't want to be the one paying the bill, because the people who ran up the debt will be on offshore yachts.
I look at the war on terroism as an excuse --because the only changes that have been made are targeted towards controlling citizens.
Our only chance right now is if the "Downing Street Memo" gets followed with some backbone in congress. If that has the impeachment it deservces, then maybe we can kick out the crooks running the voting machines. But doubting the voting machines that are run by secretive, private corporations who have given money to the resident president is somehow proof that I wear a tinfoil hat.
But if they don't get rid of this incompetent and ruthless bunch of crooks that we call a government --then I don't know where to go. That is really the topic that I want on Slashdot --good alternatives to the US. Good jobs and not a government controlled by corporations. Any suggestions?
Yes, and next, everyone who wants Pr0n can wear an arm band--to recognize their concern. No big deal.
Then, we herd everyone into box cars-- no big deal.
Like this law isn't going to be used to list people? I'm all for protecting kids, but does anyone think that this isn't to stop all Pr0n? Those of you already drinking the koolaide don't count.
and why are we using Pr0n if we felt know fear?
Re:Not unless they fab brainwashing nanomachines..
on
Fab
·
· Score: 1
Most scarcity in the world is on purpose. The economic conditions are often the result of paying off a debt that the government of a country encurred without the will of the people and not to benefit them. Also, poverty and starvation are a good means of countrol.
If poverty and starvation were ended, you could not have the disparity and strife that is so profitable for the elites who profit from it. Maid service and yacht prices would go up.
Everyone really needs to read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to understand how the world really works.
It hasn't been about a shortage of resources for at least 50 years.
I'm also sure that having a "Fab anything device" will be illegal if it did not include a copyright infringement prevention database and oversight connection that would allow users to pay the appropriate fee to reproduce someone elses design. All designs in the future will be owned by someone -- and if you do have a unique design, it will have to be registered with the patent office (with a yearly maintenance fee) before you could use it.
The world is controlled by oil and copyrights, in the future it will be copyrighted genes and water. Copyright pirates will be shown in movies as the most dangerous and evil of scum--oh, well they already are. But in the future, they will be synonimous with terrorists.
While I do think there are astro-turf protests, I don't think that this happens nearly as often as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Neal Bortz would lead you to believe.
A friends, friend I heard of makes Millions of $ protesting the destruction of the spotted owl.
I am just as annoyed by phony race-bating and throwing dye on fur coats. The best example of professional protester I can think of is Al Sharpton. He is now a product of CNN and any newsytainment company that wants to pretend it has a Liberal to talk to. But he doesn't represent real Liberals--and he isn't the one protesting on this issue. So let's be specific with what why you don't think they have a point to make. You are just attacking them as "hippie protesters" in general.
There are a lot of real problems going on that are going to effect you. You idea that people would take off work, submit themselves to ridicule and possibly jail time and then not even know what they are protesting does not jibe with my understanding of human nature.
Great point about Molecule shape changing its properties. The problem is the perception that Gold and Carbon are nice things we live with every day, so that making a Nano structure from them should be "no big deal" needs to change.
I think when you say "nanotubes make... electric insulators or better than the best superconductors", you are saying that they are "room temperature superconductors". They are better because they don't need refrigeration and that they can also serve as support structures.
I am very frustrated by some of the automatic attitudes on this subject; While some people protest a lot of things, there is another faction that sees any protest against a new technology as being anti-business or socialist. I am very pro-progress, pro-science and pro-business. But I am even more pro-health. I can live without pants that don't wrinkle if they are going to send me or my kid to the grave 10 years early.
Lets have some perspective. Studying the effects of things and ensuring the public well being is a very profitable long-term strategy. Quality of life is not the same as how many toys we have to play with.
I represent the group; "Stalanists United for Strong Copyrights" and you have misrepresented us. Indeed, you have infringed on our copyright on our Acronym. We do not need confusion in the market place.
We must have 200 year copyrights in order to stamp out new ideas. This is necessary for our work towards bringing about the Apocalypse and to support our yearly tithes to the 700 Club.
SUfoSCo lawyers will be calling on you if you persist in your slander.
A public hotspot needs some sort of encryption with a guest. You may not be doing anything important, but what most people do on the web is check email. A login, or an important bit of info can get grabbed.
The only reason this is not an issue is that there aren't a lot of crooks taking advantage of it. But let this become a widespread utility of business by people thinking "the security issue is overhyped", and then you only have people reacting after they have been badly stung.
I can easily see a lot of corporate security as over-hyped. They could get rid of usernames and passwords and IP addresses on most intranets. But the traffic between the network and the rest of the world should be encrypted. They shouldn't make it easy for "man in the middle" attacks and packet sniffers or they will create a new fertile ground for crooks. Just ignore the issue, make it part of your infrastructure and then wait for the parasites.
Please add to this list "Rob Enderle" -- of, the "Enderle Group". This one guy is a committee.
You often see a press release with "The Enderle Group has determined that our new product is great." On the new product page, of course.
It seems to be a lucrative job these days repeating crap.
Overall, I do think there is an over paranoia about security on some of these wireless networks. With the poor security of major organizations that already have all your important data (like Wachovia), anyone who wanted to get your bank ID or Social Security Number has probably already bought it from a stolen list. So, in this regard, having poor security over wireless transmissions really isn't a big deal anymore. We all have to be patient and wait our turn for identity theft.
I also wonder, where all these telephone lists of stars are coming from... perhaps off of cracked Blackberry transmissions?
Sounds like any of thousands of protests going on world-wide. Protesters who haven't a clue about what they're protesting, but protesting it none the less. It makes them feel important. Facts don't enter into the equation.
Or, the only protests getting reported on are the silly ones. Have you ever talked to one of these "Tree huggers" or are you going by what you hear on CNN and Fox? I don't think these protesters feel important exposing their unattractive bodies --but maybe a little less powerless. It's pretty hard to get off work and then do something that you know is going to be ridiculed. There could be a culture of people where this is just the "thing to do". Or it could just be people who care enough to act. I'm too selfish making a living for my family --but at least I realize that I am the one who is not doing enough.
Note; It may not be nanotechnology being protested, but the pollution created in the process. I have heard a bit about how the BuckyBall carbon molecules don't break down and react strangely with the body. So nano tech is hardly inert. The BuckyBall issue, while made from simple carbon, is a different shaped molecule. And could result in another health issue like asbestos fibers. While I doubt the Nano-fibers on these pants use Carbon nanotubes (but I don't know that they don't), they can have a very different environmental impact. Just having tiny particulates creates a health hazard for workers breathing it. You have a much higher risk for lung cancer by just inhaling fibers from insulation --which is essentially just glass. So health impacts aren't always so simple to predict --in fact, they never are.
By taking off their clothes, these protestors got the Michael Jackson fixated press to cover it. If they had a thousand people with signs that said; "micro particulates can cause lung cancer, so we need to study this." nobody would have covered the protest. You have to say; "NanoTech" because the insipid media is so dumbed-down that they only cover the "hot button" words. CNN would not cover "particulates" or "fibers" --but if it had been Nano Stem Cells, they'd be on Fox. They couldn't go to the factory where it is made, because that is either overseas or in a poor neighborhood in Alabama --so again, nobody would cover it. So in this regard, they were successful. Of course, getting anyone to actually find out more about the issues when the Pavlovian response is to say; "idiots" to any protest is a very depressing prospect. But at least they were successful in getting the media to actually cover it. It will be of more interest when we cover cancer or birth defects ten years from now. Of course, the message then will be "old story, time to move on."
What is an example of a stupid protest that you've seen? I admit that some of the people have been a little too fluffy animal extreme. But many of the issues I've seen protested like the World Bank, G7/G8 Summit, lumber clear cutting and strip mining operations have actually made a lot of sense, because the damage from some of these operations has been extensive, while the benefits have only helped a few.
People who protest are probably always going to be a little extreme and on the edge--even unbalanced. I've never protested in my life. But I have benefitted from those with the courage, or even the craziness, who have given up their time to change the status quo.
Or would you prefer to continue separatism, child labor, or black lung? I'm impressed by people who can overcome their own hangups, and selfishness to try and make the world a little bit better. Often, these protesters can get jail time and I don't know of anyone who has made a living of going out and getting arrested --except for maybe a few rock stars. They could be wrong about what they are protesting, but how can any of us say we are better than they?
There is nothing about these security checks that is going to stop a real threat. It is a chance to spend money (power) and hire people (influence) to keep up employment (but not a public works program because its security and military--wink, wink). Making people wait in line is just training for our glorious future. Does it matter what you call your government if it just plane sucks?
I see absolutely NO concern about terrorism from this government. I just see window dressing. Terrorism should be treated as a crime--not by attacking the innocent and creating a greater threat. We have to change conditions that we have created (not all of this is our fault, but a good bit is under our control --like propping up the Saudis).
Do you think people who worry about being shot care if they are in a totalitarian or a communist country? But somehow we have spent $Billions to ensure that Iraqis can call the new tyranny a Democracy rather than a Tyranny. "Yeah. Can somebody turn on the candle?"
Nothing addressed the fact that Dick Cheney and Bush sat on their ass for 2.5 hours waiting for a plane to hit, without telling the jets to take them out. Compared with an average of 15 minute intercepts for 99 planes before 9/11 which went off their transponders.
The next horrible thing that happens-- I can guarantee that there will be an investigation. I just want a refund. Get rid of all this useless window dressing and give me my kids money back. Nothing has been done to secure cargo holds, chemical plants or other targets. Only to secure the government from the people. Tracking what I buy or what I read doesn't stop terrorism. But it does stop people from being empowered to make change -- or improve targeted campaigning.
Whatever. Those who get it already understand. And those idiots that voted for Bush -- well, by the time they get out of denial, it will be too late to care what is in their heads. Doesn't really matter if they vote against Bush next time or not, unless there is a 75% majority, anything less will be swept under the carpet.
I think the only remedy here is that all the Slashdotters move to a state (leave the Trolls behind) and declare independents.
We won't recognize other countries patents or copyright and we will be full of top tier geeks. And, political campaigns will be paid for by the government in exchange for never receiving any compensation from a lobbyist or ever receiving any remuneration from a company you presided over in a committee.
Anyone recommending a "decency law" will be shot. The first solution to any problem will be education. The second will be Rules that apply to everyone, equally. Executives will be liable for corporate misdeeds in criminal court. Teachers and Doctors will not be liable --but the boards who license them will (apply that to every licensing body for real accountability). On your tax return, you get to choose towards which government programs you put your money --reducing the need for appropriations bills, and providing taxpayers with at least some entertainment. OK, scratch income and sales taxes, and get back to taxing ownership and not people working for a living --like we used to. I'll probably have to start an education Gulag to get everyone to realize again what actually is good for them.
Let's start small with something like Rhode Island. Then we take New York with us as they see how well we manage.
Harming small inventors makes sense. I thought I'd woken up and all of a sudden, congress was doing something for the people.
More likely, this is a "pot stirring bill". Every now and then, congress submits something that would protect consumers. Inevitably, lobbyists earn their pay and make sure, through huge donations (bribes), that the bill goes away. If they didn't threaten to do something right, lobbyists would get complacent and would forget why they are shelling out millions.
Heck, even the Spam bill got converted into something that legitimized spam.
For average computer users, maybe getting rid of folders makes sense. But for those of us who are organized--it would be a curse.
I've used Spotlight and for me it is an annoyance. I actually have a good idea what things are called based on what they are and the project. So, if I look up a job number, I don't want to find that there was a similar number in 5000+ emails on my drive. Spotlight needs to be dumber at times and just find files that contain "X" in the name, or "Start with X" --you know, kind of function like the previous find command. I like the new GREP-like functionality on occasion. But 90% of the time, I know kind of what I am looking for.
And spotlight needs a way to search within results. It returns too much data. Like trying to drink from a fire hose if you ask me.
I organize by drives on whether something is a Project, a Resource, Application, or Information/Personal. Then by client or project type. Then by job # and date (like a folder for 2004). The main thing I need find for is to look in my projects and tell me if I created graphics for the web that I could use in a presentation. Or, I might look in Resources and find some stone texture to map on a 3D object. Searching for me helps find redundancy and things that could be in more than one category. Spotlight actually makes redundancy, versioning and synchronizing projects MORE difficult. Hopefully Tiger, might have something to synchronize my Projects with my FireWire drive. I could also wish for a "Smart Synchronize" which could realize that File X in Folder Y is newer than File X in Folder Z and that this could be a moved or redundant file so what would I like to do about it; A; replace old with new. B; increment the newer name and move to folder Z or Y, or C; create an alias to the alternate file in Z and/or Y folder. Backing up and working on more than one computer is still a big headache (especially since most often we are behind firewalls and most of the gee-wiz goodness of Backup doesn't work for all the preferences and bookmarks). But that is another topic.
I agree. Hackers harm the "protected class" -- so they must be vilified and thrown in prison.
But compare this to the damage of the CEO of Enron and all the people who have lost retirement due to "Kenny Boy".
Though his hacking might not have been for a good reason, I personally think that companies and government agencies should be more on the hook for securing their own data. Banks don't use a little string with a taped sign to say; "don't enter our secure vault". Someone tripping over the line could get a life sentence. Yet, we've had CD copy protection that is broken by holding down a shift key on PCs.
My bank, Wachovia, lost a lot of records and data about personal accounts. What benefit is it to me, that if, by some small chance, they actually grab the hacker that got that data? It's probably already been sold. But relying on penalties leaves me at risk--not Wachovia. Especially since they and Chase and Citibank are gobbling up every other bank. Oh, and those two other megabanks have also lost account data. So where is my "consumer power"? Why don't we make the penalty 300 years and a public spanking? Or maybe, more bad TV shows that show "evil hackers". Something starring Bruce Willis and a hot babe. Then the hero saves the day with armor piercing bullets. Make sure the hacker is shown on the computer shredding 3d Data barriers with logarithm-claws that draw blood.
Anyway, I could go on. People and businesses need to protect themselves where they have the control. Where we don't have the control, like when giving our Social Security Number to a bank-- we'll it seems the onus is still on the citizen. It isn't really off topic if you consider that the SSN acts as both Login and password.
Anyway, I think this guy should have some consequences. But $1Billion in damages is probably 90% stupidity for whoever didn't create a secure backup system. I'd say the most any hacker should get is one year jail, 5 years probation plus 10% damages. If someone hacked a system that effect actual physical safety then they are criminally liable for any harm to PEOPLE. Like shutting down air traffic control. Of course, spammers should actually be given jail time--which also isn't happening because once again, this isn't damaging the "protected class".
People should get long jail times for harming people -- not equipment and profit. People who raid pensions are hurting other people -- so they should be given 20 years to life. Since these white collar criminals plan ahead-- deterrence will work better on this group than say, a 16 year old computer geek. Of course, my priorities are skewed towards the good of the people. And I still imagine a future where a hacker is going to save our bacon by finding out something that the people really need to know. So, for my own selfish interest, I hope that penalties like this will be reduced, because when the media, courts and legislature have grabbed all the power, the last line of defense will be people who can hack, not people who can shoot. It is the information age after all.
And how are Liberals silent about Chinese abuse? Most Liberals are distracted by current, local power grabs and an anti-science movement in the states. So, it makes sense that people are going to be concerned for their own self interest first. If we can't preserve dissent and free speech in the US, then we are going to be no help to China. The lack of criticism of China might be due to our being on a lot of Amnesty International reports--which we used to use to point out problems in China. So, the parents have to behave better than the kids if they want the kids to listen. We aren't setting an example right now of good conduct, so it is probably better if we remain quiet. At least, as an adult, that's what I think.
I only think that some people might say "go China"! because they are angry and feel pretty helpless. Plus, it gets people who voted for Bush excited and angry. There is always someone who is going to do that--it's called Trolling. To be honest, as I feel more and more disenfranchised, I have to fight the urge myself to give up on discussion and just piss somebody off.
All I see on the TV is the Michael Jackson case--so that might be what you are talking about when you say there is no concern about China. Or maybe, not much of what concerns Liberals is being heard, and people in bright, colored costumes talking on TV are being confused with Liberals. Of course, I never elected anyone at CNN or Fox--so I can't control what they report. This is why most of my news is gleaned from the Internet.
I don't think the US sucks yet. Liberals have been so successful pushing civil rights that they forgot to quit criticizing people who had already changed from Archie Bunker. We still have room to backslide so there is hope. Archie has come a long way, but he is not ready for Meathead to shack up with George Wilson. So, maybe we should just pat old Archie on the back and say; "You done good, old boy." Of course, Archie JR is buying a chastity belt for mothers day--so we have a whole new set of problems to contend with.
But as a Progressive, I want my country to be the best and I will criticize it when it doesn't live up to its potential. I'll compliment the country--not the leadership. And I'm sort of not pro-corruption. I'd like to be able to say; "that losing $8 Billion is corrupt" -- and not be told that I'm hating America--usually by those committing the corrupt deeds. At least Bill Clinton, when accused of fooling around, didn't have the temerity to say; "how dare you say America is perverted!" Of course, I am, but I'm not everyone in America.
Now, if I were offered a choice right now between Richard Nixon and Bush (who by the way, is NOT America), I'd have to go with old Dick. If it were between Socks the cat and Bush, I'd have to ask you to show me the cat's test scores, or if the cat could be compromised with bribes of tuna. Still, those are tough choices.
The need to extend copyright to 100 years is due to the Golden Rule.
Anyone who needs the Golden Rule explained to them can just sit in the corner and "assume the position"--then wait patiently and a Golden Rule expert will be along to attend to your question. Hint; it's kind of like Charades with one word and one middle finger.
Slashdot Mirror
CNN started to suck when Ted Turner sold it. And he knew it shortly there-after. Can anyone remember way-back then? When Turner went on a rant about CNN? It wasn't a Liberal vs Conservative point. He knew that they had become Corporate-minded.
The common news has no business being corporate minded. This is not an anti-business philosophy. It's like saying; "we don't need charity for the rich."
Donahue used to be a popular, liberal talk show. I used to get annoyed by some of his rants. But, the fundamental difference with that (not any more accurate media) and todays media, is that Donahue got people empowered to "stop this abuse". Now the message is; "go along." The "toxic sludge is good for you" message is pervasive now. That, ideology is the number one difference -- not the irrelevant conservative vs. liberal paper tiger.
I think the main difference is that the "Press", and a lot of this was newspapers -- looked at itself has helping out "the common man". Sensational or not, the concept of a "debt to the public" is gone.
The News is an outlet for corporations. A little fact here and there to pad between the infomercials. The antis-scientist movement is similar to the tactics of "big tobacco". They hired a lot of pulmonary specialists to say what the Tobacco industry wanted. In a more indirect way, this is happening (at least to the leadership) of science. Science that supports the corporate goals is passed on. Anti-science makes it hard to prove anything, which means you can do anything if you have the power.
This will result in a big loss for business in the end. Confidence in food, drugs and the safety of products will erode. Personal experience with friends and relatives who've been damaged by bad products will end up permeating peoples consciousness, such that almost everything will be in doubt. I think that once that subconscious meme hits a tipping point, the effects will be drastic, overnight, and widespread. People will want to hibernate and wait for the BS-storm to pass on.
There really is good profit to be made with environmentalism, conservation and consumer advocacy. Too bad that too few have learned that lesson. We are repeating the stupid, greedy profit taking that caused the US to lose the automobile market.
What market is going to fail next?
Actually, having learned to "read between the lines"... I've found "The Daily Show" is the best source for me to get an idea of what is going on. When I watch a "regular" news show, the current pundit/shill that is making his/her rounds on the talk circuit is blathering on. And sometimes this just numbs my brain. So, I when I see the "ironic twist" of the same blather on the daily show, usually the "true point" will come tom me. Sometimes we all get bogged down in the facts. When really the "facts" on the news are merely a vehicle to deliver the "emotional content". It was very poignant last night to see the joke about (forget shill's name), holding up a dish from Gitmo to prove how well people are treated. John Stewart cries; "we are exonerated!". Somehow the weak rationalizations are even worse than the torture. The reclassifications of people into "non-combatants" is worse than just saying; "we'll ignore the Geneva convention because we're OK with someone torturing American troops" (well, not really).
But I've gotten to where I can't even watch CNN, or Fox or take your pick, another weak-kneed reporter in front of an overpaid shill. After the "Jessica Lynch" over-produced "rescue", where our special agents fire into the air at an enemy that isn't even there--I lost all interest in the insults to my intelligence.
So, call me ignorant, but I only get my news now from the internet and the Daily Show and Air America -- and I'm a guy who voted for Ross Perot. Without those two breathes of fresh air, I believe I might have fallen into an irreversible depression.
One thing I liked about the 50's science fiction, is that a smart, level headed guy (usually a scientist), would be the one to identify a problem and the goto guy to fix it.
Over time, the Dr. Frankenstein plots seemed to take over. We became cynical of the "cure for everything" mentality. So, the knowitall became a myopic danger. Most plot lines revolved around the hubris of the scientist and his eventual downfall.
In the 80's, he got a bad Russian accent.
Now on to the 90's and the scientist can be a stand-in for the "take your pick of villains", either drug lord, megalomaniac business tycoon, or scientist.
The problem is, that most heroes have devolved from someone who is an expert at "something". To the average joe. Then below the average joe, to the guy who has no use for all that "figur'in stuff". Seemingly endowed by God with the right instincts. Usually there is a plot device to make sure the hero proves just how not-intellectual he is. The main plot point in these action pictures seems to be, that the hero is the only one smart enough to use a bigger gun. I liked Indian Jones, but the shadows of that character got to be annoying.
Having grown up a smart kid in an anti-intellectual environment. I'm ready for a return to the great scientist hero--or at least a little McGyver. McGyver proves my point by how much he was the butt of jokes (OK, sometimes quite a stretch to NOT use a gun). The moral compass is great for dealing with family issues, but the modern world really requires some brains to unravel what actually a person can do to effect positive change. Setting an example is a great hero. But fighting crime and international intrigue definitely requires brains. I think the popularity of the "Borne Identity" shows that a smart character doesn't have to be a geek and can really win box office.
That's why I really LIKE the back story and message of the Star Wars saga. I've read complaints that "he changed the meaning from simple Good vs Evil". But you have the simple message and then the adult message. Driving home the simple message gets boring. But what is really different about Star Wars, that I now MORE appreciate (even though I hated the rushed acting in the past three films), is that Star Wars big message is that Power does not win the day. Luke wins in the end where Anakin fails because he stays true to his faith in good and not in his own power. Darth basically plays with Luke, trying to anger him, and is totally the dominator. But it is Luke's reaching out to his fathers compassion that is more powerful than the death stars and all the weaponry.
Darth could have killed Luke at many times, but he wanted to corrupt him more. That was his weakness. He had to prove that nobody could withstand the lust for power that warped him. When he looked at Luke's ruined mechanical stump, he realized that his son would gain nothing from more power, than to become a clockwork machine of destruction. I've always thought that, that moment when he turns on the Emperor was one of the most satisfying in a movie.
George Lucas has two massively powerful death stars that get wiped out by a few people. An empire toppled by one moment of compassion. So, in a sense, it is a very hopeful epic. The "bad guys" can seem to have everything in their favor, to be all powerful, and then, they get tripped up by someone less powerful and good.
National ID would kill protesting.
If I protested something, the police might stop me and get my ID. I then get on "the list". I won't be surprised if, after we get a National ID, that people on "the list" find themselves audited by the IRS more, or turned down for jobs with surprising frequency. There won't be anything to prove --just like with voting machines. And anyone saying; "hey, I think that I'm on a bad list somewhere" will just be conspiracy theorists.
We just had hearings on effects of the Patriot Act. But when it was time to have people come up and witness any abuses --the mics were cut off and the speaker ended the meeting --against all precedent. There are no examples of abuse of these extra powers because the use of the powers is secret.
Perfect tracking of people means perfect control. I don't want a controlled populace. The government rules at the "will of the people". If voting fails -- then revolt is the only thing left. A good government doesn't fear revolt -- but our government seems to.
I think the problem with the British Labour group is that they are just pretending to be on the side of labour like here in the states. Our Democratic party is pretty much bought out (almost as much as the Repbulicans but at least they are still embarassed about it). So they are busy preteding to be the Republicans of 20 years ago.
Howard Dean and a handful of others like Nancy Pillosi are some of the few real Democrats (now called Progressives but without the Nanny mentality) left.
I liken pollitical debate as to a kids play with sock puppets. It may seem to be an important arguement, but its the same person with their hand up both skirts.
I'm thinking about leaving the US too. I'm afraid about what will happen when the propping up of our phoney dollar finally fails and I don't want to be the one paying the bill, because the people who ran up the debt will be on offshore yachts.
I look at the war on terroism as an excuse --because the only changes that have been made are targeted towards controlling citizens.
Our only chance right now is if the "Downing Street Memo" gets followed with some backbone in congress. If that has the impeachment it deservces, then maybe we can kick out the crooks running the voting machines. But doubting the voting machines that are run by secretive, private corporations who have given money to the resident president is somehow proof that I wear a tinfoil hat.
But if they don't get rid of this incompetent and ruthless bunch of crooks that we call a government --then I don't know where to go. That is really the topic that I want on Slashdot --good alternatives to the US. Good jobs and not a government controlled by corporations. Any suggestions?
Yes, and next, everyone who wants Pr0n can wear an arm band--to recognize their concern. No big deal.
Then, we herd everyone into box cars-- no big deal.
Like this law isn't going to be used to list people? I'm all for protecting kids, but does anyone think that this isn't to stop all Pr0n? Those of you already drinking the koolaide don't count.
and why are we using Pr0n if we felt know fear?
Most scarcity in the world is on purpose. The economic conditions are often the result of paying off a debt that the government of a country encurred without the will of the people and not to benefit them. Also, poverty and starvation are a good means of countrol.
If poverty and starvation were ended, you could not have the disparity and strife that is so profitable for the elites who profit from it. Maid service and yacht prices would go up.
Everyone really needs to read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to understand how the world really works.
It hasn't been about a shortage of resources for at least 50 years.
I'm also sure that having a "Fab anything device" will be illegal if it did not include a copyright infringement prevention database and oversight connection that would allow users to pay the appropriate fee to reproduce someone elses design. All designs in the future will be owned by someone -- and if you do have a unique design, it will have to be registered with the patent office (with a yearly maintenance fee) before you could use it.
The world is controlled by oil and copyrights, in the future it will be copyrighted genes and water. Copyright pirates will be shown in movies as the most dangerous and evil of scum--oh, well they already are. But in the future, they will be synonimous with terrorists.
Can we just start simple?
How about one portable motor + batteries. That will have attachments like a weed wacker to a chain saw, or even a car scrubber.
Every device in my garage has a separate motor.
I agree with previous post, but I'd like to chime in a bit...
The anti wrinkle pants use a nano fiber that resists staining and keeps off moisture that would otherwise create wrinkles.
So, yes, it is considered a nano-technology. I've read an article about "nano tech fiber to end wrinkles in clothing".
So, what do you know about it's effect on health?
I think stripping, while funny, is the right message. First, it gets on CNN. Metaphorically, it says; "I'll wear nothing before I wear these clothes."
While I do think there are astro-turf protests, I don't think that this happens nearly as often as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Neal Bortz would lead you to believe.
A friends, friend I heard of makes Millions of $ protesting the destruction of the spotted owl.
I am just as annoyed by phony race-bating and throwing dye on fur coats. The best example of professional protester I can think of is Al Sharpton. He is now a product of CNN and any newsytainment company that wants to pretend it has a Liberal to talk to. But he doesn't represent real Liberals--and he isn't the one protesting on this issue. So let's be specific with what why you don't think they have a point to make. You are just attacking them as "hippie protesters" in general.
There are a lot of real problems going on that are going to effect you. You idea that people would take off work, submit themselves to ridicule and possibly jail time and then not even know what they are protesting does not jibe with my understanding of human nature.
Great point about Molecule shape changing its properties. The problem is the perception that Gold and Carbon are nice things we live with every day, so that making a Nano structure from them should be "no big deal" needs to change.
... electric insulators or better than the best superconductors", you are saying that they are "room temperature superconductors". They are better because they don't need refrigeration and that they can also serve as support structures.
I think when you say "nanotubes make
I am very frustrated by some of the automatic attitudes on this subject; While some people protest a lot of things, there is another faction that sees any protest against a new technology as being anti-business or socialist. I am very pro-progress, pro-science and pro-business. But I am even more pro-health. I can live without pants that don't wrinkle if they are going to send me or my kid to the grave 10 years early.
Lets have some perspective. Studying the effects of things and ensuring the public well being is a very profitable long-term strategy. Quality of life is not the same as how many toys we have to play with.
I represent the group; "Stalanists United for Strong Copyrights" and you have misrepresented us. Indeed, you have infringed on our copyright on our Acronym. We do not need confusion in the market place.
We must have 200 year copyrights in order to stamp out new ideas. This is necessary for our work towards bringing about the Apocalypse and to support our yearly tithes to the 700 Club.
SUfoSCo lawyers will be calling on you if you persist in your slander.
Any links to some great web sites?
A public hotspot needs some sort of encryption with a guest. You may not be doing anything important, but what most people do on the web is check email. A login, or an important bit of info can get grabbed.
The only reason this is not an issue is that there aren't a lot of crooks taking advantage of it. But let this become a widespread utility of business by people thinking "the security issue is overhyped", and then you only have people reacting after they have been badly stung.
I can easily see a lot of corporate security as over-hyped. They could get rid of usernames and passwords and IP addresses on most intranets. But the traffic between the network and the rest of the world should be encrypted. They shouldn't make it easy for "man in the middle" attacks and packet sniffers or they will create a new fertile ground for crooks. Just ignore the issue, make it part of your infrastructure and then wait for the parasites.
Please add to this list "Rob Enderle" -- of, the "Enderle Group". This one guy is a committee.
You often see a press release with "The Enderle Group has determined that our new product is great." On the new product page, of course.
It seems to be a lucrative job these days repeating crap.
Overall, I do think there is an over paranoia about security on some of these wireless networks. With the poor security of major organizations that already have all your important data (like Wachovia), anyone who wanted to get your bank ID or Social Security Number has probably already bought it from a stolen list. So, in this regard, having poor security over wireless transmissions really isn't a big deal anymore. We all have to be patient and wait our turn for identity theft.
I also wonder, where all these telephone lists of stars are coming from... perhaps off of cracked Blackberry transmissions?
Sounds like any of thousands of protests going on world-wide. Protesters who haven't a clue about what they're protesting, but protesting it none the less. It makes them feel important. Facts don't enter into the equation.
Or, the only protests getting reported on are the silly ones. Have you ever talked to one of these "Tree huggers" or are you going by what you hear on CNN and Fox? I don't think these protesters feel important exposing their unattractive bodies --but maybe a little less powerless. It's pretty hard to get off work and then do something that you know is going to be ridiculed. There could be a culture of people where this is just the "thing to do". Or it could just be people who care enough to act. I'm too selfish making a living for my family --but at least I realize that I am the one who is not doing enough.
Note; It may not be nanotechnology being protested, but the pollution created in the process. I have heard a bit about how the BuckyBall carbon molecules don't break down and react strangely with the body. So nano tech is hardly inert. The BuckyBall issue, while made from simple carbon, is a different shaped molecule. And could result in another health issue like asbestos fibers. While I doubt the Nano-fibers on these pants use Carbon nanotubes (but I don't know that they don't), they can have a very different environmental impact. Just having tiny particulates creates a health hazard for workers breathing it. You have a much higher risk for lung cancer by just inhaling fibers from insulation --which is essentially just glass. So health impacts aren't always so simple to predict --in fact, they never are.
By taking off their clothes, these protestors got the Michael Jackson fixated press to cover it. If they had a thousand people with signs that said; "micro particulates can cause lung cancer, so we need to study this." nobody would have covered the protest. You have to say; "NanoTech" because the insipid media is so dumbed-down that they only cover the "hot button" words. CNN would not cover "particulates" or "fibers" --but if it had been Nano Stem Cells, they'd be on Fox. They couldn't go to the factory where it is made, because that is either overseas or in a poor neighborhood in Alabama --so again, nobody would cover it. So in this regard, they were successful. Of course, getting anyone to actually find out more about the issues when the Pavlovian response is to say; "idiots" to any protest is a very depressing prospect. But at least they were successful in getting the media to actually cover it. It will be of more interest when we cover cancer or birth defects ten years from now. Of course, the message then will be "old story, time to move on."
What is an example of a stupid protest that you've seen? I admit that some of the people have been a little too fluffy animal extreme. But many of the issues I've seen protested like the World Bank, G7/G8 Summit, lumber clear cutting and strip mining operations have actually made a lot of sense, because the damage from some of these operations has been extensive, while the benefits have only helped a few.
People who protest are probably always going to be a little extreme and on the edge--even unbalanced. I've never protested in my life. But I have benefitted from those with the courage, or even the craziness, who have given up their time to change the status quo.
Or would you prefer to continue separatism, child labor, or black lung? I'm impressed by people who can overcome their own hangups, and selfishness to try and make the world a little bit better. Often, these protesters can get jail time and I don't know of anyone who has made a living of going out and getting arrested --except for maybe a few rock stars. They could be wrong about what they are protesting, but how can any of us say we are better than they?
Absolutely.
There is nothing about these security checks that is going to stop a real threat. It is a chance to spend money (power) and hire people (influence) to keep up employment (but not a public works program because its security and military--wink, wink). Making people wait in line is just training for our glorious future. Does it matter what you call your government if it just plane sucks?
I see absolutely NO concern about terrorism from this government. I just see window dressing. Terrorism should be treated as a crime--not by attacking the innocent and creating a greater threat. We have to change conditions that we have created (not all of this is our fault, but a good bit is under our control --like propping up the Saudis).
Do you think people who worry about being shot care if they are in a totalitarian or a communist country? But somehow we have spent $Billions to ensure that Iraqis can call the new tyranny a Democracy rather than a Tyranny. "Yeah. Can somebody turn on the candle?"
Nothing addressed the fact that Dick Cheney and Bush sat on their ass for 2.5 hours waiting for a plane to hit, without telling the jets to take them out. Compared with an average of 15 minute intercepts for 99 planes before 9/11 which went off their transponders.
The next horrible thing that happens-- I can guarantee that there will be an investigation. I just want a refund. Get rid of all this useless window dressing and give me my kids money back. Nothing has been done to secure cargo holds, chemical plants or other targets. Only to secure the government from the people. Tracking what I buy or what I read doesn't stop terrorism. But it does stop people from being empowered to make change -- or improve targeted campaigning.
Whatever. Those who get it already understand. And those idiots that voted for Bush -- well, by the time they get out of denial, it will be too late to care what is in their heads. Doesn't really matter if they vote against Bush next time or not, unless there is a 75% majority, anything less will be swept under the carpet.
I think the only remedy here is that all the Slashdotters move to a state (leave the Trolls behind) and declare independents.
We won't recognize other countries patents or copyright and we will be full of top tier geeks. And, political campaigns will be paid for by the government in exchange for never receiving any compensation from a lobbyist or ever receiving any remuneration from a company you presided over in a committee.
Anyone recommending a "decency law" will be shot. The first solution to any problem will be education. The second will be Rules that apply to everyone, equally. Executives will be liable for corporate misdeeds in criminal court. Teachers and Doctors will not be liable --but the boards who license them will (apply that to every licensing body for real accountability). On your tax return, you get to choose towards which government programs you put your money --reducing the need for appropriations bills, and providing taxpayers with at least some entertainment. OK, scratch income and sales taxes, and get back to taxing ownership and not people working for a living --like we used to. I'll probably have to start an education Gulag to get everyone to realize again what actually is good for them.
Let's start small with something like Rhode Island. Then we take New York with us as they see how well we manage.
Harming small inventors makes sense. I thought I'd woken up and all of a sudden, congress was doing something for the people.
More likely, this is a "pot stirring bill". Every now and then, congress submits something that would protect consumers. Inevitably, lobbyists earn their pay and make sure, through huge donations (bribes), that the bill goes away. If they didn't threaten to do something right, lobbyists would get complacent and would forget why they are shelling out millions.
Heck, even the Spam bill got converted into something that legitimized spam.
For average computer users, maybe getting rid of folders makes sense. But for those of us who are organized--it would be a curse.
I've used Spotlight and for me it is an annoyance. I actually have a good idea what things are called based on what they are and the project. So, if I look up a job number, I don't want to find that there was a similar number in 5000+ emails on my drive. Spotlight needs to be dumber at times and just find files that contain "X" in the name, or "Start with X" --you know, kind of function like the previous find command. I like the new GREP-like functionality on occasion. But 90% of the time, I know kind of what I am looking for.
And spotlight needs a way to search within results. It returns too much data. Like trying to drink from a fire hose if you ask me.
I organize by drives on whether something is a Project, a Resource, Application, or Information/Personal. Then by client or project type. Then by job # and date (like a folder for 2004). The main thing I need find for is to look in my projects and tell me if I created graphics for the web that I could use in a presentation. Or, I might look in Resources and find some stone texture to map on a 3D object. Searching for me helps find redundancy and things that could be in more than one category. Spotlight actually makes redundancy, versioning and synchronizing projects MORE difficult. Hopefully Tiger, might have something to synchronize my Projects with my FireWire drive. I could also wish for a "Smart Synchronize" which could realize that File X in Folder Y is newer than File X in Folder Z and that this could be a moved or redundant file so what would I like to do about it; A; replace old with new. B; increment the newer name and move to folder Z or Y, or C; create an alias to the alternate file in Z and/or Y folder. Backing up and working on more than one computer is still a big headache (especially since most often we are behind firewalls and most of the gee-wiz goodness of Backup doesn't work for all the preferences and bookmarks). But that is another topic.
I agree. Hackers harm the "protected class" -- so they must be vilified and thrown in prison.
But compare this to the damage of the CEO of Enron and all the people who have lost retirement due to "Kenny Boy".
Though his hacking might not have been for a good reason, I personally think that companies and government agencies should be more on the hook for securing their own data. Banks don't use a little string with a taped sign to say; "don't enter our secure vault". Someone tripping over the line could get a life sentence. Yet, we've had CD copy protection that is broken by holding down a shift key on PCs.
My bank, Wachovia, lost a lot of records and data about personal accounts. What benefit is it to me, that if, by some small chance, they actually grab the hacker that got that data? It's probably already been sold. But relying on penalties leaves me at risk--not Wachovia. Especially since they and Chase and Citibank are gobbling up every other bank. Oh, and those two other megabanks have also lost account data. So where is my "consumer power"? Why don't we make the penalty 300 years and a public spanking? Or maybe, more bad TV shows that show "evil hackers". Something starring Bruce Willis and a hot babe. Then the hero saves the day with armor piercing bullets. Make sure the hacker is shown on the computer shredding 3d Data barriers with logarithm-claws that draw blood.
Anyway, I could go on. People and businesses need to protect themselves where they have the control. Where we don't have the control, like when giving our Social Security Number to a bank-- we'll it seems the onus is still on the citizen. It isn't really off topic if you consider that the SSN acts as both Login and password.
Anyway, I think this guy should have some consequences. But $1Billion in damages is probably 90% stupidity for whoever didn't create a secure backup system. I'd say the most any hacker should get is one year jail, 5 years probation plus 10% damages. If someone hacked a system that effect actual physical safety then they are criminally liable for any harm to PEOPLE. Like shutting down air traffic control. Of course, spammers should actually be given jail time--which also isn't happening because once again, this isn't damaging the "protected class".
People should get long jail times for harming people -- not equipment and profit. People who raid pensions are hurting other people -- so they should be given 20 years to life. Since these white collar criminals plan ahead-- deterrence will work better on this group than say, a 16 year old computer geek. Of course, my priorities are skewed towards the good of the people. And I still imagine a future where a hacker is going to save our bacon by finding out something that the people really need to know. So, for my own selfish interest, I hope that penalties like this will be reduced, because when the media, courts and legislature have grabbed all the power, the last line of defense will be people who can hack, not people who can shoot. It is the information age after all.
Who wanted Kim from Korea?
And how are Liberals silent about Chinese abuse? Most Liberals are distracted by current, local power grabs and an anti-science movement in the states. So, it makes sense that people are going to be concerned for their own self interest first. If we can't preserve dissent and free speech in the US, then we are going to be no help to China. The lack of criticism of China might be due to our being on a lot of Amnesty International reports--which we used to use to point out problems in China. So, the parents have to behave better than the kids if they want the kids to listen. We aren't setting an example right now of good conduct, so it is probably better if we remain quiet. At least, as an adult, that's what I think.
I only think that some people might say "go China"! because they are angry and feel pretty helpless. Plus, it gets people who voted for Bush excited and angry. There is always someone who is going to do that--it's called Trolling. To be honest, as I feel more and more disenfranchised, I have to fight the urge myself to give up on discussion and just piss somebody off.
All I see on the TV is the Michael Jackson case--so that might be what you are talking about when you say there is no concern about China. Or maybe, not much of what concerns Liberals is being heard, and people in bright, colored costumes talking on TV are being confused with Liberals. Of course, I never elected anyone at CNN or Fox--so I can't control what they report. This is why most of my news is gleaned from the Internet.
I don't think the US sucks yet. Liberals have been so successful pushing civil rights that they forgot to quit criticizing people who had already changed from Archie Bunker. We still have room to backslide so there is hope. Archie has come a long way, but he is not ready for Meathead to shack up with George Wilson. So, maybe we should just pat old Archie on the back and say; "You done good, old boy." Of course, Archie JR is buying a chastity belt for mothers day--so we have a whole new set of problems to contend with.
But as a Progressive, I want my country to be the best and I will criticize it when it doesn't live up to its potential. I'll compliment the country--not the leadership. And I'm sort of not pro-corruption. I'd like to be able to say; "that losing $8 Billion is corrupt" -- and not be told that I'm hating America--usually by those committing the corrupt deeds. At least Bill Clinton, when accused of fooling around, didn't have the temerity to say; "how dare you say America is perverted!" Of course, I am, but I'm not everyone in America.
Now, if I were offered a choice right now between Richard Nixon and Bush (who by the way, is NOT America), I'd have to go with old Dick. If it were between Socks the cat and Bush, I'd have to ask you to show me the cat's test scores, or if the cat could be compromised with bribes of tuna. Still, those are tough choices.
The need to extend copyright to 100 years is due to the Golden Rule.
Anyone who needs the Golden Rule explained to them can just sit in the corner and "assume the position"--then wait patiently and a Golden Rule expert will be along to attend to your question. Hint; it's kind of like Charades with one word and one middle finger.