I'm not so sure. It seems to me that the blind enthusiasm that preceded Win95 won't occur for Longhorn. The desktop market is much more saturated now than it was in 1994, and people like me are still getting by on 400MHz PCs. Some sources say that even Windows XP has only one-third of the market share and is split with Windows 98 (a five year old OS).
When a person is faced with a $200 purchase, my hope is they look at what they already have and say, "Okay, Microsoft, now's your chance to win my $200 and the odds are stacked against you."
What about the damage Microsoft Word has done to information interchange? How about those early proprietary TCP/IP alternatives? Pretty much any example of a proprietary data exchange protocol is an example of how proprietary is bad.
This is one area where Sun Micro actually gets it with J2EE and their Sun ONE stuff. They aren't interested in information lock-in as a way to keep customers.
Just once I'd like to hear "results so far lead us to believe that these brain-machine interfaces hold enormous promise for increased programmer productivity."
So, what happens to people who go through invasive surgery only to find that their favorite IDE had already gone out of fashion?
Implanting technology for only short-term gain is a very dangerous road to follow. For disabled people, there is much less of a moral problem, when they can have a few years of being less disabled. A programmer might have a few years of being more productive but then have permanent yet obselete technology embedded in his brain.
IMO, it's almost as bad as risking death just to take in a sagging chin or inflate those boobies.
So, monopolies aren't in themselves a limiter. Properties of the market can make natural monopolies (a tap water provider) or monopolies which inheriently create a large burden to new comers.
Yes they are, in the context of a libertarian government.
Expensive tap water --> opportunities for bottled water or efficient humidity catchers (a la Frank Herbert).
Expensive oil --> real opportunities for alternative energy (solar, fuel cells, etc.).
The problem is that politicians have no convictions to the Constituion and they bend over every time for special interests and corporate interests. The irony is that if the voters voted in a canidate that didn't actually promise cozy enemas twice a day "for the children" (aka a libertarian), the voters would be much better off for it, because the policing resources of the government would be refocused in attacking real corruption rather than arbitrary things like drugs, school patrols, and Cops episodes.
That would explain how a smell is so powerful it actually manages to get transmitted through my web browser into my office....well, that's the excuse I use.
we actually give government a method to limit everybody's free speech.
Because, as more children are protected by "for the children" legislation, eventually everyone becomes a child (both in law and in the mind, due to having no responsibility whatsoever).
The most scary thing I've heard him say to date is (effectively) "Don't point out a thorn in my eye if you have a log in your own" (referring to homosexuals).
A president of shouldn't be so blatantly passing a moral judgement on his constituents. It simply isn't professional, and it reinforces that if he could create a theocracy tomorrow by executive order he probably would. Of course, he would create this theocracy in his own image, due to blind arrogance.
I wonder if he would assert that a Dean administration would be no different from the Bush administration?
The only differences would be the buzzwords used to push their agendas for consolidating power in the government. The end result is the same, regardless.
Slashdot, as far as I have seen, is either party-neutral or at the most slightly pro-right.
Well, the extremes get fair representation, too. I've had my libertarian rants get modded up occasionally, and some snivling socialist ones get modded up highly, as well.
Remember, it takes only three mods to be "+5, Insightful." It's actually a minority voting system, in a way.
I get the biggest tickle out of people who have internal unresolved conflicts, such as wanting both low taxes but with nationalized health care or wanting to keep jobs but blocking free trade. Highly, reactionary and short-sighted, IMO. The best ones recently are people who think freedom of speech and protection of property can be preserved in light of integrated databases, surviellence AI systems, and cameras on every street corner.
I desperately hope the checks built into our government can balance things out, eventually. Otherwise, we'll just end up in a dictatorship, effectively, where the to main parties converge and political diversity becomes mythical.
This is true, but the result will be even worse. We'll have a Democrat.
Democrats are enemies of Freedom in their naive quest for social justice. Nationalized health care is simply the last stake in the heart of the free markets that brought us to the top of the world. The world economies are simply too immature to support any socialistic systems without relying on government intervention of tyrannical scale. The Dems should shut up and wait another 400 years for technology to make their idealism reality by default.
Obviously there are some moderators who just don't understand the subtlety of humour.
I'm not so sure. I found it amuzing (well, painfully amuzing) that someone stuck it to me with a genuine "-1 Troll" moderation.
So, how do we mod up a troll mod as funny? I think we need a moeration system for the moderations. It'll be great, I'm sure of it...well, until someone uses the second-level of moderation for humor...of course, we can just keep adding more levels of moderation!
...I can't tell if you're kidding or serious when you claim English is good enough because it's perfectly unambiguous.
I'm kidding, seriously. For example, in my original post, what does the pronoun "they" refer to, "who" or "anyone"? I'd have to rewrite the sentence to be really clear about it.
Isn't that per engine? Now if I could only figure out how to fit one of these on top of my car... Ah, finally something to drown out those 1300-watt trash mobiles.
Yeah, maybe these parents are very health conscious...
It seems many suburban moms think they are health-conscious, but in reality they are in denial about their kids passing 130 lb. in the sixth grade.
If you look in the grocery store at food marketed to suburban teens, it's clear that kids are eating crap daily (that 15% fruit "juice" peeves me to no end, and it has to be good if it says "with calcium").
fatty, chemical-laced foods.... Yet you still managed to grow up to get a PhD.
Fatty foods are good for children (up to a point, of course). I'm worried that modern kids might be put on low-fat diets by stupid parents and grow up retarded.
And by fatty, I mean things like whole meats, peanuts, etc. and not moon pies and french fries.
It does the same thing with my cordless phone. Once I learned that, I tend to stand a bit further away from my microwave while it's on (inverse square is our friend).
I'm predicting the school will back out and turn off their wireless devices.
Don't worry, other special interest groups will ban this case from the school's future history books, so once you forget this happened everything will be just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, a 10 pound laptop brings new meaning to "drag and drop".
Longhorn will be what Windows 95 was.
I'm not so sure. It seems to me that the blind enthusiasm that preceded Win95 won't occur for Longhorn. The desktop market is much more saturated now than it was in 1994, and people like me are still getting by on 400MHz PCs. Some sources say that even Windows XP has only one-third of the market share and is split with Windows 98 (a five year old OS).
When a person is faced with a $200 purchase, my hope is they look at what they already have and say, "Okay, Microsoft, now's your chance to win my $200 and the odds are stacked against you."
Adopt Macs. Fire ignorant IT staff.
Windows administrators are the Model T mechanics of today.
Proprietary does not mean bad or unsuccessful.
In the context of communications it is bad.
What about the damage Microsoft Word has done to information interchange? How about those early proprietary TCP/IP alternatives? Pretty much any example of a proprietary data exchange protocol is an example of how proprietary is bad.
This is one area where Sun Micro actually gets it with J2EE and their Sun ONE stuff. They aren't interested in information lock-in as a way to keep customers.
Just once I'd like to hear "results so far lead us to believe that these brain-machine interfaces hold enormous promise for increased programmer productivity."
So, what happens to people who go through invasive surgery only to find that their favorite IDE had already gone out of fashion?
Implanting technology for only short-term gain is a very dangerous road to follow. For disabled people, there is much less of a moral problem, when they can have a few years of being less disabled. A programmer might have a few years of being more productive but then have permanent yet obselete technology embedded in his brain.
IMO, it's almost as bad as risking death just to take in a sagging chin or inflate those boobies.
So, monopolies aren't in themselves a limiter. Properties of the market can make natural monopolies (a tap water provider) or monopolies which inheriently create a large burden to new comers.
Yes they are, in the context of a libertarian government.
Expensive tap water --> opportunities for bottled water or efficient humidity catchers (a la Frank Herbert).
Expensive oil --> real opportunities for alternative energy (solar, fuel cells, etc.).
The problem is that politicians have no convictions to the Constituion and they bend over every time for special interests and corporate interests. The irony is that if the voters voted in a canidate that didn't actually promise cozy enemas twice a day "for the children" (aka a libertarian), the voters would be much better off for it, because the policing resources of the government would be refocused in attacking real corruption rather than arbitrary things like drugs, school patrols, and Cops episodes.
The unwashed masses sit on slashdot all day.
...well, that's the excuse I use.
That would explain how a smell is so powerful it actually manages to get transmitted through my web browser into my office.
(just kidding, I did in fact shower this week)
we actually give government a method to limit everybody's free speech.
Because, as more children are protected by "for the children" legislation, eventually everyone becomes a child (both in law and in the mind, due to having no responsibility whatsoever).
Tell us all again who is the facist?
Whoever happens to be the president at any given moment.
Power corrupts.
Bush is someone who believe he's right.
The most scary thing I've heard him say to date is (effectively) "Don't point out a thorn in my eye if you have a log in your own" (referring to homosexuals).
A president of shouldn't be so blatantly passing a moral judgement on his constituents. It simply isn't professional, and it reinforces that if he could create a theocracy tomorrow by executive order he probably would. Of course, he would create this theocracy in his own image, due to blind arrogance.
I wonder if he would assert that a Dean administration would be no different from the Bush administration?
The only differences would be the buzzwords used to push their agendas for consolidating power in the government. The end result is the same, regardless.
Slashdot, as far as I have seen, is either party-neutral or at the most slightly pro-right.
Well, the extremes get fair representation, too. I've had my libertarian rants get modded up occasionally, and some snivling socialist ones get modded up highly, as well.
Remember, it takes only three mods to be "+5, Insightful." It's actually a minority voting system, in a way.
I get the biggest tickle out of people who have internal unresolved conflicts, such as wanting both low taxes but with nationalized health care or wanting to keep jobs but blocking free trade. Highly, reactionary and short-sighted, IMO. The best ones recently are people who think freedom of speech and protection of property can be preserved in light of integrated databases, surviellence AI systems, and cameras on every street corner.
I desperately hope the checks built into our government can balance things out, eventually. Otherwise, we'll just end up in a dictatorship, effectively, where the to main parties converge and political diversity becomes mythical.
there is no restriction on accessing the website.
Website logs contain your IP address and a timestamp leading to your ISP. Your ISP has DHCP logs with your username leading to YOU.
Yeah, no chilling effect at all. This is why anonymity is a requirement for free speech.
E.g. he prolly won't be voted back in...
This is true, but the result will be even worse. We'll have a Democrat.
Democrats are enemies of Freedom in their naive quest for social justice. Nationalized health care is simply the last stake in the heart of the free markets that brought us to the top of the world. The world economies are simply too immature to support any socialistic systems without relying on government intervention of tyrannical scale. The Dems should shut up and wait another 400 years for technology to make their idealism reality by default.
Obviously there are some moderators who just don't understand the subtlety of humour.
I'm not so sure. I found it amuzing (well, painfully amuzing) that someone stuck it to me with a genuine "-1 Troll" moderation.
So, how do we mod up a troll mod as funny? I think we need a moeration system for the moderations. It'll be great, I'm sure of it...well, until someone uses the second-level of moderation for humor...of course, we can just keep adding more levels of moderation!
...I can't tell if you're kidding or serious when you claim English is good enough because it's perfectly unambiguous.
I'm kidding, seriously. For example, in my original post, what does the pronoun "they" refer to, "who" or "anyone"? I'd have to rewrite the sentence to be really clear about it.
(sob)
98000 lbf
Isn't that per engine? Now if I could only figure out how to fit one of these on top of my car... Ah, finally something to drown out those 1300-watt trash mobiles.
Who cares why anyone should bother with Esperanto, when they have a language of perfect unambiguity, such as English.
I might care more about this if the district had a legitimate use for wifi.
They plan to use it so parents can access students' grades on an unsecured webserver (remember that one?).
Yeah, maybe these parents are very health conscious...
It seems many suburban moms think they are health-conscious, but in reality they are in denial about their kids passing 130 lb. in the sixth grade.
If you look in the grocery store at food marketed to suburban teens, it's clear that kids are eating crap daily (that 15% fruit "juice" peeves me to no end, and it has to be good if it says "with calcium").
fatty, chemical-laced foods.... Yet you still managed to grow up to get a PhD.
Fatty foods are good for children (up to a point, of course). I'm worried that modern kids might be put on low-fat diets by stupid parents and grow up retarded.
And by fatty, I mean things like whole meats, peanuts, etc. and not moon pies and french fries.
My microwave kills my wifi network dead.
It does the same thing with my cordless phone. Once I learned that, I tend to stand a bit further away from my microwave while it's on (inverse square is our friend).
The power output of radar of various types dwarfs either...
If you don't believe him, just ask the testicles of early radar technicians.
I'm predicting the school will back out and turn off their wireless devices.
Don't worry, other special interest groups will ban this case from the school's future history books, so once you forget this happened everything will be just fine.