The magazine business has about a six-month lead time for most articles. While the online press is able to respond quite quickly, the in-depth reportage available in better magazines is often decided up to a year in advance.
This allows magazines time to do better research on the issues being covered within a calculable budget.
While this would be a great idea from a personal responsibility standpoint, ie., forcing people to take responsibility for their spawn, there's not a chance that this would go through.
Our society requires that middle-class parents maintain jobs, both fathers and mothers, in order to survive. Our entire culture is now centered around this idea. The fallout of the radical change that you suggest would destabilize our society well into the next century.
It would be simpler to shift to a university system for all grades above the sixth (or some other arbitrary level), wherein parents would enroll their children in a particular set of courses depending on the child's interest or (more likely) on parental desires (no escaping that). Furthermore, base all teaching certification not on an Education degree, but on a degree within the field being taught.
This proposal settles several issues: 1) employment for recent graduates within a field, 2) special interests would be better represented, 3) children would not be subjected to courses that their parents did not feel necessary.
Core courses could still be required for all levels of education, by concentrating state funding on those areas, since the State definitely has an interest in having an educated population. A combination of public/private funding could be used for all other areas - thereby allowing parents to put their money where their values are.
Yeah, evidence. It's that thing that some people like to have that proves that someone is up to something BEFORE we convict them.
And yes, you're right - the remedy for past criminal behavior probably won't take this into account because they haven't committed done anything wrong as far as Palladium is concerned.
What is your evidence? You seem to have taken the Microsoft/Linux conflict to a ridiculous extreme in the article.
Having read it, I'm of the opinion that you're being needlessly alarmist. Too many sites run on Apache to suddenly have Microsoft or anyone else lock them out of users PC's.
We're not talking about a very high demand item here. The high price is probably due more to the lack of demand for a very durable good.
hard would it be to connect one of these $6000 machines to a PC
Not very. But how much time do you lose working up that database? Somebody needs to be minding the garage.
you can start charging me what that service is actually worth
Well, how much the service is worth to you depends on how badly you need your car. While it may not cost the mechanic much after your "simple" process, YOU'RE still the one with the broken car. Sure, his job is easier, but you're failing to take into account the rest of the job, like labor, wear, insurance, tools, etc.
I really don't think the car market is based on whether or not the code for the fuel-injection chips is open or not.
People buy cars for the look, the comfort, the convenience, the capacity, or the performance. When was the last time you heard anyone ask if the diagnostic computer code was available?
The car market shrinks and grows based on the economy. As the economy thrives, then the big ticket cars become popular. When it shrinks, buyers get frugal and buy lower-priced cars.
What really kills me is that the topic of whether or not Canada is a capitalist society or not.
Who cares? Canadians? Great! They should!
American? Why? It's their freakin' country - they make their own decisions. What's right for use may or may not be right for them, but it's their freakin' decision!
/. is turning into society of nosy old women, poking their noses in everyone else's business and bitching and moaning when they don't do like/. would.
Whether or not it makes sense depends on how much return for the investment it generates. It's still a tight economy and throwing a couple million at developers and support technicians for a product that doesn't support itself financially is probably not a good idea just yet.
On the other hand, corporations will shell out the big bucks for support just to have the reassurance that if their system starts pushing up daisies, then someone else will be as miserable as they are.
I will be 35. I've been on some form or another of the internet since 1986. Which hardly invalidates your complaint, of course. I have probably made an equal amount or more of inconsiderate, illiterate, or even downright stupid comments online, so I do not relish the idea of those things being resurrected.
However, the question arises: which weighs more - historical record or personal rights?
We have no way of determining, at this time, what may be historically relevant in the future. If we have the means to archive these things for historical purposes it behooves us to do so for future generations to study and pull some pearls of wisdom or knowledge therefrom (perhaps: "Don't do that" might have more meaning because of your statements).
The question of copyright is a specious argument, in my opinion. There is no violation of copyright, since your words have not been altered, no profit is gained by making a copy of your words, and, in fact, no readily apparent benefit has yet arisen from having archived your ill-considered words. Any benefit exists, in potentia, but one can hardly mortgage a potential metaphorical benefit for a gain now. In fact, one can use the same argument that a library would use for keeping books on the shelf. The author may retain the copyright, but the library has the right to take publicly available material and make it available to others. The potential public benefit outweighs the needs of the individual in that case.
I would say that you fail, or at one time did fail, to understand the nature of digital media, in that it is intended to be a permanent medium, one certainly more permanent than paper storage. The truth of this argument falls far short of the dream in most cases, but advances are still being made.
As for your "satisfaction", what satisfaction do you demand? Without a clear definition of your "satisfaction", your moral outrage is mere noise, signifying nothing. Do you demand that your websites and gopher sites be removed from the Wayback Machine? The Wayback Machine makes no attempt to usurp your copyright. You still retain all rights to your material, including the right of removal if you so desire.
I suggest that you start trying to figure out how to explain to your great-great-grandchildren just who the heck Roland De Graaf is.
Nuisance, but not illegal. That is actually a good idea from a personal responsibility standpoint. Are you still willing to stand by words you spoke many years ago? If not, why?
Who know? It might actually get people to talking for a change.
By the same token, if someone doesn't want to be linked to, then by all means, don't link to them. Link to their competitor. If they have no competitor, then link to something that they probably disagree with, as in the example below.
You can't get a current JVM from Microsoft because Sun sued them and made them stop producing newer versions. Then Sun turned around and sued MS because MS wouldn't ship a JVM with XP.
Either way, Sun wins - I hope I never have to do business with them. Write once, run anywhere sounds great, but I have yet to see a Java app that is worth my time.
Well, I see there is no wiggle room in your little world. The same could be said about driving, parenting, or in fact just about any other human activity as well.
My point is - it's meaningless. Define correctly written OS. I'll bet that it is probably impossible. The most you can say about a software product of any kind is that if it is correctly written, it will perform its function correctly with a reasonable margin of error.
Now the term "reasonable margin of error" has a different meaning depending on whose doing the definition. A software coder has a different meaning for it than a bridge builder or an aircraft designer.
You've apparently chosen the most harsh definition. Are YOU capable of living up to that standard, ie., is everything you write bug-free from the release point onward? How do you know?
How does one test against every possible configuration of every possible computer that could conceivably run one's OS?
Microsoft keeps finding bugs - that is true. Some of them are extraordinarily serious - that is also true. But it is impossible to find every bug the first time, or even the hundredth time out.
Remember, they are up against people who are actively searching for exploits. This is not your average user we're talking about finding a hole in the system.
On the whole, Microsoft does a somewhat overpriced, but erratically decent job of doing the tasks I use it for.
If any of you ever check out old sci-fi, read some of Eric Vinicoff's writings for Analog magazine. Specifically, I am thinking of "When the High Lord Arrives" (Analog, Apr. 85). I don't remember the plot, but the technology described in the story was very similar what these guys are doing.
A person would have his/her consciousness measured on a quantum level. The information was then transmitted a great distance and reimplanted into a body that was being speed-cloned specifically for him/her.
This wasn't the only story. There were at least two others that covered some of the social ramifications of dissassemby and re-assembly of one's consciousness.
OK, so these guys are qualified to run the registry - I won't dispute that.
However, how does one determine who a dot org is? Non-profit status is determined by the government according to registration forms filed with the IRS. So, would one be required to show proof of non-profit status by filing a form with the registrar?
Another question comes up: a protest group can be considered a de-facto non-profit organization, but it does not necessarily have to file with the IRS since it is not a formal organization. Do you allow protest groups to have their own namespace within the dot-org TLD?
Which raises the interesting question of: what about individuals? I have my own website in the dot-com space, but I don't make any money off of it. So, I am a de-facto non-profit. Would I be eligible to purchase space in the dot-org domain?
What about non-profits from other countries? How do you recompense the companies who are protecting their trademarks by keeping dot-orgs?
This whole issue raises some really nasty questions that can only end in massive lawsuits.
You know, if you keep saying that, some smartass is going to write one and then the cat will be out of the bag. I don't doubt that somewhere in the world, someone is determined to screw up things for Mac users, because that's humanity for you.
But, please, please, stop giving them a reason. A smug Mac user is a target. A quiet Mac user is less of a target.
Slashdot Mirror
The magazine business has about a six-month lead time for most articles. While the online press is able to respond quite quickly, the in-depth reportage available in better magazines is often decided up to a year in advance.
This allows magazines time to do better research on the issues being covered within a calculable budget.
While this would be a great idea from a personal responsibility standpoint, ie., forcing people to take responsibility for their spawn, there's not a chance that this would go through.
Our society requires that middle-class parents maintain jobs, both fathers and mothers, in order to survive. Our entire culture is now centered around this idea. The fallout of the radical change that you suggest would destabilize our society well into the next century.
It would be simpler to shift to a university system for all grades above the sixth (or some other arbitrary level), wherein parents would enroll their children in a particular set of courses depending on the child's interest or (more likely) on parental desires (no escaping that). Furthermore, base all teaching certification not on an Education degree, but on a degree within the field being taught.
This proposal settles several issues: 1) employment for recent graduates within a field, 2) special interests would be better represented, 3) children would not be subjected to courses that their parents did not feel necessary.
Core courses could still be required for all levels of education, by concentrating state funding on those areas, since the State definitely has an interest in having an educated population. A combination of public/private funding could be used for all other areas - thereby allowing parents to put their money where their values are.
Yeah, evidence. It's that thing that some people like to have that proves that someone is up to something BEFORE we convict them.
And yes, you're right - the remedy for past criminal behavior probably won't take this into account because they haven't committed done anything wrong as far as Palladium is concerned.
What is your evidence? You seem to have taken the Microsoft/Linux conflict to a ridiculous extreme in the article.
Having read it, I'm of the opinion that you're being needlessly alarmist. Too many sites run on Apache to suddenly have Microsoft or anyone else lock them out of users PC's.
Let me know if it works. I'm not going to go out of my way to make a car salesman feel foolish.
And what exactly does HDTV provide that is any better than what we're currently watching? Is the programming going to get any better?
shouldn't have to pay $6000 for that dumb scanner
We're not talking about a very high demand item here. The high price is probably due more to the lack of demand for a very durable good.
hard would it be to connect one of these $6000 machines to a PC
Not very. But how much time do you lose working up that database? Somebody needs to be minding the garage.
you can start charging me what that service is actually worth
Well, how much the service is worth to you depends on how badly you need your car. While it may not cost the mechanic much after your "simple" process, YOU'RE still the one with the broken car. Sure, his job is easier, but you're failing to take into account the rest of the job, like labor, wear, insurance, tools, etc.
None of that stuff is cheap.
I really don't think the car market is based on whether or not the code for the fuel-injection chips is open or not.
People buy cars for the look, the comfort, the convenience, the capacity, or the performance. When was the last time you heard anyone ask if the diagnostic computer code was available?
The car market shrinks and grows based on the economy. As the economy thrives, then the big ticket cars become popular. When it shrinks, buyers get frugal and buy lower-priced cars.
What really kills me is that the topic of whether or not Canada is a capitalist society or not.
/. would.
Who cares? Canadians? Great! They should!
American? Why? It's their freakin' country - they make their own decisions. What's right for use may or may not be right for them, but it's their freakin' decision!
/. is turning into society of nosy old women, poking their noses in everyone else's business and bitching and moaning when they don't do like
Whether or not it makes sense depends on how much return for the investment it generates. It's still a tight economy and throwing a couple million at developers and support technicians for a product that doesn't support itself financially is probably not a good idea just yet.
On the other hand, corporations will shell out the big bucks for support just to have the reassurance that if their system starts pushing up daisies, then someone else will be as miserable as they are.
I will be 35. I've been on some form or another of the internet since 1986. Which hardly invalidates your complaint, of course. I have probably made an equal amount or more of inconsiderate, illiterate, or even downright stupid comments online, so I do not relish the idea of those things being resurrected.
However, the question arises: which weighs more - historical record or personal rights?
We have no way of determining, at this time, what may be historically relevant in the future. If we have the means to archive these things for historical purposes it behooves us to do so for future generations to study and pull some pearls of wisdom or knowledge therefrom (perhaps: "Don't do that" might have more meaning because of your statements).
The question of copyright is a specious argument, in my opinion. There is no violation of copyright, since your words have not been altered, no profit is gained by making a copy of your words, and, in fact, no readily apparent benefit has yet arisen from having archived your ill-considered words. Any benefit exists, in potentia, but one can hardly mortgage a potential metaphorical benefit for a gain now. In fact, one can use the same argument that a library would use for keeping books on the shelf. The author may retain the copyright, but the library has the right to take publicly available material and make it available to others. The potential public benefit outweighs the needs of the individual in that case.
I would say that you fail, or at one time did fail, to understand the nature of digital media, in that it is intended to be a permanent medium, one certainly more permanent than paper storage. The truth of this argument falls far short of the dream in most cases, but advances are still being made.
As for your "satisfaction", what satisfaction do you demand? Without a clear definition of your "satisfaction", your moral outrage is mere noise, signifying nothing. Do you demand that your websites and gopher sites be removed from the Wayback Machine? The Wayback Machine makes no attempt to usurp your copyright. You still retain all rights to your material, including the right of removal if you so desire.
I suggest that you start trying to figure out how to explain to your great-great-grandchildren just who the heck Roland De Graaf is.
And probably Chelsea Clinton.
Has anyone ever considered the effect of boycotting European websites and European goods for as long as they maintain the legislation?
I know it's not very realistic, but hey, it's a start.
Nuisance, but not illegal. That is actually a good idea from a personal responsibility standpoint. Are you still willing to stand by words you spoke many years ago? If not, why?
Who know? It might actually get people to talking for a change.
By the same token, if someone doesn't want to be linked to, then by all means, don't link to them. Link to their competitor. If they have no competitor, then link to something that they probably disagree with, as in the example below.
With all due respect to NPR, I think their policy is shortsighted and arrogant. However, I will not link to NPR, but to their competition instead.
How about something to identify the sender so that one can use appropriate retaliation if SMSM spam is received?
You can't get a current JVM from Microsoft because Sun sued them and made them stop producing newer versions. Then Sun turned around and sued MS because MS wouldn't ship a JVM with XP.
Either way, Sun wins - I hope I never have to do business with them. Write once, run anywhere sounds great, but I have yet to see a Java app that is worth my time.
Nah, but when you get right down to it - what's the point of replying to anything on /.?
Somedays, you just gotta point out that someone's being an idiot. It may be blindingly obvious, but hey, we're all bozos on this bus.
Well, I see there is no wiggle room in your little world. The same could be said about driving, parenting, or in fact just about any other human activity as well.
My point is - it's meaningless. Define correctly written OS. I'll bet that it is probably impossible. The most you can say about a software product of any kind is that if it is correctly written, it will perform its function correctly with a reasonable margin of error.
Now the term "reasonable margin of error" has a different meaning depending on whose doing the definition. A software coder has a different meaning for it than a bridge builder or an aircraft designer.
You've apparently chosen the most harsh definition. Are YOU capable of living up to that standard, ie., is everything you write bug-free from the release point onward? How do you know?
I don't think the intrusion detection system is aimed at your market level. This is not even an average /.'rs level.
This is one of them corporate IT bigwig thingys where the extra expense of an ID system is only a small part of the cost of the overall system itself.
How does one test against every possible configuration of every possible computer that could conceivably run one's OS?
Microsoft keeps finding bugs - that is true. Some of them are extraordinarily serious - that is also true. But it is impossible to find every bug the first time, or even the hundredth time out.
Remember, they are up against people who are actively searching for exploits. This is not your average user we're talking about finding a hole in the system.
On the whole, Microsoft does a somewhat overpriced, but erratically decent job of doing the tasks I use it for.
I thought the whole point of these guys taking over the dot-org registry was to keep it limited to non-profits.
I could be wrong. Worse things have happened.
If any of you ever check out old sci-fi, read some of Eric Vinicoff's writings for Analog magazine. Specifically, I am thinking of "When the High Lord Arrives" (Analog, Apr. 85). I don't remember the plot, but the technology described in the story was very similar what these guys are doing.
A person would have his/her consciousness measured on a quantum level. The information was then transmitted a great distance and reimplanted into a body that was being speed-cloned specifically for him/her.
This wasn't the only story. There were at least two others that covered some of the social ramifications of dissassemby and re-assembly of one's consciousness.
FYI.
Ah, well then, that explains it. Common sense is not something in great supply or demand in modern government.
OK, so these guys are qualified to run the registry - I won't dispute that.
However, how does one determine who a dot org is? Non-profit status is determined by the government according to registration forms filed with the IRS. So, would one be required to show proof of non-profit status by filing a form with the registrar?
Another question comes up: a protest group can be considered a de-facto non-profit organization, but it does not necessarily have to file with the IRS since it is not a formal organization. Do you allow protest groups to have their own namespace within the dot-org TLD?
Which raises the interesting question of: what about individuals? I have my own website in the dot-com space, but I don't make any money off of it. So, I am a de-facto non-profit. Would I be eligible to purchase space in the dot-org domain?
What about non-profits from other countries?
How do you recompense the companies who are protecting their trademarks by keeping dot-orgs?
This whole issue raises some really nasty questions that can only end in massive lawsuits.
You know, if you keep saying that, some smartass is going to write one and then the cat will be out of the bag. I don't doubt that somewhere in the world, someone is determined to screw up things for Mac users, because that's humanity for you.
But, please, please, stop giving them a reason. A smug Mac user is a target. A quiet Mac user is less of a target.
;)