Voter apathy is at an all-time high right now, nobody cares about voting. Because of that, I suspect that most people, even if they hear of this, figure, "Well, I'm not voting, why do I care?"
That isn't the big problem here. The REAL problem is that Diebold is NOT apathetic, but is run by people who are sworn and fanatical supporters of BushCo. I think in the extreme case, they will do whatever they need to do to get the results their friends are paying them for--and that's why they want such flaky systems in the first place. Bad security by obscurity, but just imagine they slip a copy of the source code to a black hat hacker on THEIR side.
[Why won't this system let me log in on yro.slashdot.org with Opera?]
Gee, you think Karl Rove plays fair? There's some limit to what Dubya would do to stay in power? Like not using torture?
Dubya has already blown most of his $200 million stash, and he's at zero now. Kerry is still holding his fire. Now it's possible that Dubya is just going to fade quietly into the sunset, but I don't think so. I think you're going to see the dirtiest and nastiest political campaign in history. (Sadly, that seems to be the historical trend.)
One of the least vicious tactics is going to be DoS attacks against Kerry's Web servers. I hope he is running the best and most secure software available--and that certainly is NOT Microsoft's.
There's no way a small screen experience at home can compare with the large screen. Unfortunately, the big screen version is not even available in this country, and I'm not sure whether to wait it out or try to get the tiny preview.
The sordid truth is that I'm kind of scared of Dubya's giant head looming over me. Even in the theater, I think I want to sit in the back.
It's the difference between selfish greed and enlightened self-interest. Semantically, you could argue they are fundamentally the same thing, but selfish greed doesn't care about destroying other people, while enlightened self-interest involves figuring out what is good for everyone, including yourself (or the other person, when used for persuasion).
BushCo is all about selfish greed, even to the point of killing people for the petrodollars.
Not sure whether or not I can claim to be a "liberal", but I hate intellectual cowards like you. Of course, that goes a long ways to explaining your "expertise" in computer games versus your failures in real life.
But Darl has an anti-gravity gun!
on
Wired on McBride
·
· Score: 1
Their stock price refuses to fall to it's natural level! I tell you it has to be an anti-gravity gun!
Right now it shows they've lost about 50% of their value relative to IBM over the last year. It also shows how volatile the SCO price is relative to IBM's stability. Since the lawsuit started more than a year ago, the one-year view doesn't really capture the entire story, and on the two-year view (one click away) you can see that SCO still has to fall some more to get all the way back to where they were before they started this circus. But only a little more. They're almost there.
Current price is $4.89, but I think they may get into the three dollar range next week.
A lot of this discussion involved the value of goodwill, but SCO should be more concerned about the Goodwill store. They'll need to buy "new" shirts after losing the ones they have now.
> How can ignorance be a cause of evil? Evil requires a motive.
You are confusing causation with motivation. Getting off topic, but two basic mechanisms.
One is by providing the opportunity for someone else to commit evil, which is mostly related to the "selfish greed" of Cause 1. There are many crimes which would fail without an ignorant victim.
The second is by doing something really bad because of ignorance of the consequences. To the victim, it doesn't matter whether there was any intention behind the harm.
You didn't ask about the "laziness", but that's for people who don't act to stop or prevent the evil.
By the way, any simplistic explanation for complicated events is unlikely to capture more than a small fraction of the reality.
And now we are definitely too far from the topic. Trying to draw it back, I'll say that the tools themselves don't care about good or evil. It is the uses to which we put them. In the specific case of Microsoft, it is quite easy to predict how they'll use their tools, including this new MediaPlayer.
Okay, it's asking for the obvious pseudo-insightful comment, so I have to make it... Microsoft is not trying to compete. They just want to cut everyone else's b@lls off.
Anyway, anything from Microsoft has a catch. Music distribution is a minor target, and though they don't want to leave any crumbs on the table, that's not the place to look for interesting hooks. The place I'd look involves the next big target, Web searching. There are probably some interesting new hooks here for Microsoft to tie their search results to. Obvious targeting support here would be offering ways to bypass the Web pages for media-related hits, and just hooking them directly to MediaPlayer. Any gurus looking for those yet?
I really don't see any grounds for optimism in the computer industry these days. If Microsoft crushes Google, they'll just continue their evil ways. If Google survives the onslaught, they'll start abusing their power. Not a certain bet, but close enough.
Today's weird thought: Primary underlying causes of evil.
No one's said anything, but can that possibly be a correct price? Or does he mean he picked them up at a garage sale somewhere? Actually, even at a garage sale, I'd be more than a bit surprised.
Well, I agree there is a mocking tone in a lot of his comments, but they are definitely documentaries. The central aspect is always the hard facts. Actually, the only one I've seen in it's entirety was Bowling for Columbine, but it was very clear there which parts were facts, which parts were his opinion, and which parts were head games.
A lot of people claimed that movie was very anti-gun, but it was hard for me to conclude that. I'm basically kind of neutral on guns, and I didn't feel like the movie really said anything one way or the other on that part of it. I think it did try to make the point that Americans were too violent, even fond of violence, and that guns allow for more serious consequences, but I think we all know that. He clearly didn't like the NRA's political activism, but he didn't really go after the Second Amendment. At least I didn't notice it, and I certainly should have. (I think the Second Amendment was exactly what the Civil War was about--and it lost. Thanks and a tip of the hat to that great Republican Abraham Lincoln.)
It's going to be interesting to see how BushCo tries to spin their way out of this one. It sounds like he's just collected the facts and shown them in an ugly light--but very artistically. Dubya was probably not amused. Maybe it contributed to his little accident over the weekend? If so, BushCo better watch out for the klutz label. It certainly didn't help Ford in his campaign. (Interestingly enough, I never bought it at the time, and still don't. I don't know how a couple of clumsy stumbles got taken so far out of proportion.)
I think the crossing point graph tells the story pretty well. Only thing is that the lawsuit started more a year ago, so the start of the graph is already after SCO had moved up a little bit. If you click for the two year version, it looks like SCO hasn't really bottomed out yet. (I think it's fair to think of it in the relative terms to IBM, since IBM is the big target, and all of SCO's "virtual possible future value" is based on IBM's real value.)
Looks like a measly 9 cents here. Then again, when you're plunging into the penny stock area, 9 cents starts looking like a big deal. However, I recommend considering views such as this one.
What it shows is that in relative terms, SCOX is now hitting the same level they were at a year ago. That's relative to IBM, which should be the benchmark as the primary target of the suit. It's slightly confusing, since the lawsuit started more a year ago, so this 1-year graph actually begins after SCOX had started moving up. If you look at the 2-year view, you'll see that SCOX still has (a little bit) farther to fall before we can say it was all for naught.
Re:Good to see them in headlines again
on
Groklaw Turns One
·
· Score: 1
Modded up as "interesting"? Possibly "funny", but only if you like stupid trolls.
Me, I think they should not be encouraged. Haven't you really got ANY better way to spend your mod points?
Thanks for the reg-free link. Registration won't even work with Opera through my Italian proxy server. Also, the NY Times is getting so weak that I'd have given up without your simplified link. Now regarding the actual content...
I've known about ni-channeru for a while, but the Japanese language as used there is mostly too difficult for me to follow. I judge it more by the reactions of my Japanese friends when I ask them about it, and their reactions are pretty weird. Overall, I think most of them regard it as a kind of national embarrassment--but some of them must be using it. The article basically meshes with what little I think I know. It must be wrong.
Pretty strongly suspect it includes hosting your blog on their servers. I think my blog is pretty active, and moderately read, and also goes back quite a long time, well before the Google acquisition. However, it is FTPed to another system, and so I apparently didn't qualify.
All they need to do is trace the code in the actual Linux kernels. If they can show that all of that code comes from non-copyrighted or properly released sources, then it doesn't matter what code SCO has.
There are basically two lines of analysis without having to see SCO's code. One is to find the corresponding Linux code in previously released code. I should doublecheck my facts on this, but as an example, I believe that most of the old BSD Unix has been publicly released already, so any code from such a source is free and clear.
The other line is to trace the sources of the code to reliable authors. If you can trust those authors when they say that they wrote and did not copy a piece of code, and that they then gave their permission to include that code in Linux, then that code can be trusted.
If this announcement is not just some kind of smoke and mirrors, then SCO should start sinking quickly into the abyss.
At least none of the comments I've seen addressed this issue, so I'll go ahead and state the obvious--though it ought to be rated as insightful if you haven't already thought about it.
The experience of sitting in a movie theater with a big screen, excellent sound, and "social" atmosphere is distinctly different from the experience of watching a tiny little window with lousy sound and heads bobbing around in front of the movie. They are NOT in direct competition. If there is any relationship there, the low quality form is a kind of advertising, but the availability of those versions has very little effect on whether or not I go to see a particular movie. At least in my case, it's almost always the social aspect that causes me to go to a movie theatre. Or to put it more bluntly, I'll be willing to pay the big bucks if my date seems likely to enjoy it.
My basic reaction to this news is the usual "What greedy and aggressive bastards! Why should I contribute to making those rich pigs any richer?" Suffice it to say, I do not count this as an incentive to go see a movie. I'm sure their REAL concern is with making sure people don't spot the lemons before paying for the tickets.
First of all, his plan involves sending as much as possible ahead of the manned mission. Beyond the obvious launch of critical supplies, he describes a very cheap system for generating huge amounts of fuel using the Martian atmosphere. On top of that, we'd send the RETURN vehicle to the surface ahead of a manned mission.
That means you know in advance that you have a return vehicle and fuel already waiting for you -- before you even leave.
Duh... So what do we need the humans for? If we have the remote robotic capability to prepare the return vehicle without shipping any humans there, we surely have the capability to use remote robots to collect all the desired samples, do the experiments, etc., and then just use the return vehicle to ship the stuff back to earth. Sounds like the people are just there as stunt props.
Reminds me of like Dubya and the aircraft carrier in San Diego last year. Just more expensive.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a big fan of real science, and I'd love any chance to go into space on any terms. Heck, I'm crazy enough that I'd probably go on a one-way ride like that guy in Space Cowboys. Depends on the circumstances, I guess. However, I've seen nothing to suggest that there is any real scientific merit for this proposed version of a Mars trip. Seems like someone is just fantasizing about upstaging JFK. "A trip to the moon, eh? Well, we're going to do Mars! How about them apples!"
Re:Supreme Court let voters have their way
on
Weapons in Space
·
· Score: 1
I have read the NORC results. Any consistent standard applied state-wide resulted in a Gore victory. That includes Dubya's own proposed standard for voter intent. However, I personally am most angered by the deliberate, partisan, and sadly effective efforts of Harris to disenfranchise thousands of probable Gore voters.
Bush lost and then managed an amazing coup d'etat. However, repeat your lies often and loudly enough, and maybe you can convince yourself. SOP for BushCo and their patsies.
No skin off my nose. My faith is that in the end the truth is recognized and known. Always.
"That is because even under the most liberal counting system, Bush still won Florida"
As long as you don't worry about the thousands of people, mostly black men, who were "accidentally" labeled as felons and were turned away from the polls.
Don't get confused on this issue. When the NORC results were finally released (and then suppressed and ignored), they showed that using any uniform state-wide standard for counting all of the ballots, Gore did win Florida. The basis for the BushCo claim is that limiting the recount to the few counties where Gore mistakenly focused didn't include enough votes to reveal that truth. Therefore they can claim that Gore "lost" because of his strategic mistake, even though the will of the Florida voters was in his favor.
The disenfranchised Black voters, butterfly ballots, Nader zeolots, and various other bad breaks still didn't change the actual outcome. However, the 5-4 SCOTUS was able to render the "will of the voters" reality moot.
Kind of off-topic, but a meta-comment about/. and controversial issues. I didn't really intend that post to be so controversial, but I see that it collected 14 mod points within a few hours. All of the favorable mod points were as insightful, and there were various negative mod points.
Hopefully it's closer to on-topic to repeat the meta-conclusion that technology is neutral. We use it for good or evil purposes. More important to produce good people and avoid producing evil ones like Osama Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, both of them were, to a great degree, created in their badness by BushCo, with the deliberate intent of using their evil against enemies. Once again, we see that two wrongs don't make a right. (But three lefts do.)
I admit that this next part is controversial, but I think the fantasy of "defensive uses" of space weapons and the general might-makes-right mentality is a failure of education. Hard to be optimistic for the future when public education in America is on the verge of fairly total destruction. Many of Dubya's supporters are pushing for more religious education--like they have in Saudi Arabia. However, Bin Ladin actually reflects the failure of that kind of education system, even as it spreads throughout the Arab world.
Slashdot Mirror
That isn't the big problem here. The REAL problem is that Diebold is NOT apathetic, but is run by people who are sworn and fanatical supporters of BushCo. I think in the extreme case, they will do whatever they need to do to get the results their friends are paying them for--and that's why they want such flaky systems in the first place. Bad security by obscurity, but just imagine they slip a copy of the source code to a black hat hacker on THEIR side.
[Why won't this system let me log in on yro.slashdot.org with Opera?]
Gee, you think Karl Rove plays fair? There's some limit to what Dubya would do to stay in power? Like not using torture?
Dubya has already blown most of his $200 million stash, and he's at zero now. Kerry is still holding his fire. Now it's possible that Dubya is just going to fade quietly into the sunset, but I don't think so. I think you're going to see the dirtiest and nastiest political campaign in history. (Sadly, that seems to be the historical trend.)
One of the least vicious tactics is going to be DoS attacks against Kerry's Web servers. I hope he is running the best and most secure software available--and that certainly is NOT Microsoft's.
There's no way a small screen experience at home can compare with the large screen. Unfortunately, the big screen version is not even available in this country, and I'm not sure whether to wait it out or try to get the tiny preview.
The sordid truth is that I'm kind of scared of Dubya's giant head looming over me. Even in the theater, I think I want to sit in the back.
It's the difference between selfish greed and enlightened self-interest. Semantically, you could argue they are fundamentally the same thing, but selfish greed doesn't care about destroying other people, while enlightened self-interest involves figuring out what is good for everyone, including yourself (or the other person, when used for persuasion).
BushCo is all about selfish greed, even to the point of killing people for the petrodollars.
Not sure whether or not I can claim to be a "liberal", but I hate intellectual cowards like you. Of course, that goes a long ways to explaining your "expertise" in computer games versus your failures in real life.
Their stock price refuses to fall to it's natural level! I tell you it has to be an anti-gravity gun!
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX&d=c&k=c1&c=IB M&a=v&p=s&t=1y&l=off&z=m&q =l
Right now it shows they've lost about 50% of their value relative to IBM over the last year. It also shows how volatile the SCO price is relative to IBM's stability. Since the lawsuit started more than a year ago, the one-year view doesn't really capture the entire story, and on the two-year view (one click away) you can see that SCO still has to fall some more to get all the way back to where they were before they started this circus. But only a little more. They're almost there.
Current price is $4.89, but I think they may get into the three dollar range next week.
A lot of this discussion involved the value of goodwill, but SCO should be more concerned about the Goodwill store. They'll need to buy "new" shirts after losing the ones they have now.
Either you're a VERY brave man or this thing is locked in a closet somewhere. If it's visible from the street, you're in a heap of trouble, boy.
> I actually got a message title "HOT E.E. CUMMINGS POETRY ACTION!"
> That one took me by suprise.
Obviously a fake. The real ee cummings had no key.
> How can ignorance be a cause of evil? Evil requires a motive.
You are confusing causation with motivation. Getting off topic, but two basic mechanisms.
One is by providing the opportunity for someone else to commit evil, which is mostly related to the "selfish greed" of Cause 1. There are many crimes which would fail without an ignorant victim.
The second is by doing something really bad because of ignorance of the consequences. To the victim, it doesn't matter whether there was any intention behind the harm.
You didn't ask about the "laziness", but that's for people who don't act to stop or prevent the evil.
By the way, any simplistic explanation for complicated events is unlikely to capture more than a small fraction of the reality.
And now we are definitely too far from the topic. Trying to draw it back, I'll say that the tools themselves don't care about good or evil. It is the uses to which we put them. In the specific case of Microsoft, it is quite easy to predict how they'll use their tools, including this new MediaPlayer.
Anyway, anything from Microsoft has a catch. Music distribution is a minor target, and though they don't want to leave any crumbs on the table, that's not the place to look for interesting hooks. The place I'd look involves the next big target, Web searching. There are probably some interesting new hooks here for Microsoft to tie their search results to. Obvious targeting support here would be offering ways to bypass the Web pages for media-related hits, and just hooking them directly to MediaPlayer. Any gurus looking for those yet?
I really don't see any grounds for optimism in the computer industry these days. If Microsoft crushes Google, they'll just continue their evil ways. If Google survives the onslaught, they'll start abusing their power. Not a certain bet, but close enough.
Today's weird thought: Primary underlying causes of evil.
- Selfish greed
- Ignorance
- Laziness
And have a nice day.No one's said anything, but can that possibly be a correct price? Or does he mean he picked them up at a garage sale somewhere? Actually, even at a garage sale, I'd be more than a bit surprised.
A lot of people claimed that movie was very anti-gun, but it was hard for me to conclude that. I'm basically kind of neutral on guns, and I didn't feel like the movie really said anything one way or the other on that part of it. I think it did try to make the point that Americans were too violent, even fond of violence, and that guns allow for more serious consequences, but I think we all know that. He clearly didn't like the NRA's political activism, but he didn't really go after the Second Amendment. At least I didn't notice it, and I certainly should have. (I think the Second Amendment was exactly what the Civil War was about--and it lost. Thanks and a tip of the hat to that great Republican Abraham Lincoln.)
It's going to be interesting to see how BushCo tries to spin their way out of this one. It sounds like he's just collected the facts and shown them in an ugly light--but very artistically. Dubya was probably not amused. Maybe it contributed to his little accident over the weekend? If so, BushCo better watch out for the klutz label. It certainly didn't help Ford in his campaign. (Interestingly enough, I never bought it at the time, and still don't. I don't know how a couple of clumsy stumbles got taken so far out of proportion.)
I think the crossing point graph tells the story pretty well. Only thing is that the lawsuit started more a year ago, so the start of the graph is already after SCO had moved up a little bit. If you click for the two year version, it looks like SCO hasn't really bottomed out yet. (I think it's fair to think of it in the relative terms to IBM, since IBM is the big target, and all of SCO's "virtual possible future value" is based on IBM's real value.)
What it shows is that in relative terms, SCOX is now hitting the same level they were at a year ago. That's relative to IBM, which should be the benchmark as the primary target of the suit. It's slightly confusing, since the lawsuit started more a year ago, so this 1-year graph actually begins after SCOX had started moving up. If you look at the 2-year view, you'll see that SCOX still has (a little bit) farther to fall before we can say it was all for naught.
Modded up as "interesting"? Possibly "funny", but only if you like stupid trolls.
Me, I think they should not be encouraged. Haven't you really got ANY better way to spend your mod points?
Thanks for the reg-free link. Registration won't even work with Opera through my Italian proxy server. Also, the NY Times is getting so weak that I'd have given up without your simplified link. Now regarding the actual content...
I've known about ni-channeru for a while, but the Japanese language as used there is mostly too difficult for me to follow. I judge it more by the reactions of my Japanese friends when I ask them about it, and their reactions are pretty weird. Overall, I think most of them regard it as a kind of national embarrassment--but some of them must be using it. The article basically meshes with what little I think I know. It must be wrong.
Die, NY Times!
Pretty strongly suspect it includes hosting your blog on their servers. I think my blog is pretty active, and moderately read, and also goes back quite a long time, well before the Google acquisition. However, it is FTPed to another system, and so I apparently didn't qualify.
Quite a bit. One would guess that's why it took them some months to do the work.
Still can't see any clear reaction on the SCO stock price, though it's back under $8 at last report.
All they need to do is trace the code in the actual Linux kernels. If they can show that all of that code comes from non-copyrighted or properly released sources, then it doesn't matter what code SCO has.
There are basically two lines of analysis without having to see SCO's code. One is to find the corresponding Linux code in previously released code. I should doublecheck my facts on this, but as an example, I believe that most of the old BSD Unix has been publicly released already, so any code from such a source is free and clear.
The other line is to trace the sources of the code to reliable authors. If you can trust those authors when they say that they wrote and did not copy a piece of code, and that they then gave their permission to include that code in Linux, then that code can be trusted.
If this announcement is not just some kind of smoke and mirrors, then SCO should start sinking quickly into the abyss.
At least none of the comments I've seen addressed this issue, so I'll go ahead and state the obvious--though it ought to be rated as insightful if you haven't already thought about it.
The experience of sitting in a movie theater with a big screen, excellent sound, and "social" atmosphere is distinctly different from the experience of watching a tiny little window with lousy sound and heads bobbing around in front of the movie. They are NOT in direct competition. If there is any relationship there, the low quality form is a kind of advertising, but the availability of those versions has very little effect on whether or not I go to see a particular movie. At least in my case, it's almost always the social aspect that causes me to go to a movie theatre. Or to put it more bluntly, I'll be willing to pay the big bucks if my date seems likely to enjoy it.
My basic reaction to this news is the usual "What greedy and aggressive bastards! Why should I contribute to making those rich pigs any richer?" Suffice it to say, I do not count this as an incentive to go see a movie. I'm sure their REAL concern is with making sure people don't spot the lemons before paying for the tickets.
Reminds me of like Dubya and the aircraft carrier in San Diego last year. Just more expensive.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a big fan of real science, and I'd love any chance to go into space on any terms. Heck, I'm crazy enough that I'd probably go on a one-way ride like that guy in Space Cowboys . Depends on the circumstances, I guess. However, I've seen nothing to suggest that there is any real scientific merit for this proposed version of a Mars trip. Seems like someone is just fantasizing about upstaging JFK. "A trip to the moon, eh? Well, we're going to do Mars! How about them apples!"
I have read the NORC results. Any consistent standard applied state-wide resulted in a Gore victory. That includes Dubya's own proposed standard for voter intent. However, I personally am most angered by the deliberate, partisan, and sadly effective efforts of Harris to disenfranchise thousands of probable Gore voters. Bush lost and then managed an amazing coup d'etat. However, repeat your lies often and loudly enough, and maybe you can convince yourself. SOP for BushCo and their patsies. No skin off my nose. My faith is that in the end the truth is recognized and known. Always.
The disenfranchised Black voters, butterfly ballots, Nader zeolots, and various other bad breaks still didn't change the actual outcome. However, the 5-4 SCOTUS was able to render the "will of the voters" reality moot.
Hopefully it's closer to on-topic to repeat the meta-conclusion that technology is neutral. We use it for good or evil purposes. More important to produce good people and avoid producing evil ones like Osama Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, both of them were, to a great degree, created in their badness by BushCo, with the deliberate intent of using their evil against enemies. Once again, we see that two wrongs don't make a right. (But three lefts do.)
I admit that this next part is controversial, but I think the fantasy of "defensive uses" of space weapons and the general might-makes-right mentality is a failure of education. Hard to be optimistic for the future when public education in America is on the verge of fairly total destruction. Many of Dubya's supporters are pushing for more religious education--like they have in Saudi Arabia. However, Bin Ladin actually reflects the failure of that kind of education system, even as it spreads throughout the Arab world.