This scaffolding is reliable and strong because it is lovingly maintained in public by the community of science, not because it is in anyone's self-interest to do so.
If it's not in anyone's self interest to do so, then why does anyone do it? People do it because it *is* in their self-interest. In fact, that's what the rest of the article seemed to be about: that it is in our self-interest to promote openness in science.
I'd have emailed this obvious oversight to the author of the article, but it seems that either him or the publisher do not value openness. A way to reach the author, or a suitable proxy, was not given.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Freenet project is a great idea, but I don't think it would be a good idea, to those of us living in countries where a mass movement of people can make a difference, to go into hiding.
Your opinion only makes sense if one assumes that the best way to reform the government is to work through the government (which is not entirely unreasonable). However, I am of a different opinion. I think that your way of thinking is like asking for freedom. Freedom is not something you ask your neighbor for, it's something you take. Fences, locks, and a willingness to fight back.
The purpose of the FreeNet will be decided by the majority.
I think a better way of looking at it is this:
The purpose of Freenet will be decided by the minimum. It doesn't take a majority to get stuff to propagate through Freenet. It only takes *just enough* to make it stick around. *Just enough* to stay alive in Freenet, waiting for the next person to request it. 'Just enough' will vary, but it's never necessarily 'majority'.
No bill, please. Like all bills, somebody has to pay, and it should be neither you *nor* me.
I don't want companies to use my information without my permission, and I want to be able to give my permission. Hollings' mistake is in thinking that it's his right to tell business owners how they're going to run their business, and telling me, in effect, what business practices I'm allowed to deal with.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think what Microsoft is doing is necessarily illegal or shady, but I do think you'd better care.
This scaffolding is reliable and strong because it is lovingly maintained in public by the community of science, not because it is in anyone's self-interest to do so.
If it's not in anyone's self interest to do so, then why does anyone do it? People do it because it *is* in their self-interest. In fact, that's what the rest of the article seemed to be about: that it is in our self-interest to promote openness in science.
I'd have emailed this obvious oversight to the author of the article, but it seems that either him or the publisher do not value openness. A way to reach the author, or a suitable proxy, was not given.
-Todd
Definitely not Linux in a Nutshell. That's the book I first bought when I decided to go Linux. It didn't help a bit.
Now, Running Linux, on the other hand. Running Linux helped me tremendously. Running Linux was such a cure for my newbie-ness.
-Todd
I hardly heard a single American accent in DC!
Americans don't have accents! It's everybody else that has accents, of course.
-lousyd
How many people on slashdot would want to get cable just for TechTV?
I don't know. Why are you asking me?
-todd
Don't get me wrong, I think the Freenet project is a great idea, but I don't think it would be a good idea, to those of us living in countries where a mass movement of people can make a difference, to go into hiding.
Your opinion only makes sense if one assumes that the best way to reform the government is to work through the government (which is not entirely unreasonable). However, I am of a different opinion. I think that your way of thinking is like asking for freedom. Freedom is not something you ask your neighbor for, it's something you take. Fences, locks, and a willingness to fight back.
-Todd
The purpose of the FreeNet will be decided by the majority.
I think a better way of looking at it is this:
The purpose of Freenet will be decided by the minimum. It doesn't take a majority to get stuff to propagate through Freenet. It only takes *just enough* to make it stick around. *Just enough* to stay alive in Freenet, waiting for the next person to request it. 'Just enough' will vary, but it's never necessarily 'majority'.
-Todd
Ho-hum...
-Todd
"Debian is so great because..."
"Debian is just fantastic because..."
"Debian does this right: ..."
Gentoo
-Todd
Read my lips, Boucher. No new laws.
-todd
The government is asking for defense support. Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?
Good Bill? Bad Bill?
No bill, please. Like all bills, somebody has to pay, and it should be neither you *nor* me.
I don't want companies to use my information without my permission, and I want to be able to give my permission. Hollings' mistake is in thinking that it's his right to tell business owners how they're going to run their business, and telling me, in effect, what business practices I'm allowed to deal with.
Get off my back!
Somebody governing someone else is what gave us Carnivore, COPA, and the DMCA.