A good study would provide a description of what the internet would look like without ads. My intuition is that I'd be just fine with the only content available being content that did not seek a revenue stream. I thought the internet was better back then anyway.
It's also a pointless study because it's never going to happen. I'd guess the only reason it was done is to support the idea that ad blockers and no script are "bad". Oh wait it was conducted by an ad platform.
I think an important perspective (that you're missing) is that for most of the decision making contributors commercial success is a minor goal, and for many it's not a goal at all. The don't give two shits about "the business model", they want open, verifiable code or no code at all. The driver model you are complaining about is never ever ever ever ever ever going to change. So, please, use Windows or OSX and get on with your life.
In Linux, there is no ABI. Drivers have to be accepted and included in the kernel source tree. Yes really. It's that well thought out.
This means that you have to have code review from the Linux kernel team. And you have to divulge any amateur or buggy code embodied in the source. Which may compromise the imaginary advantage your marketdroids think they have on other platforms.
Docker has an engine? I haven't actually used Docker yet because I've already been using LXC for some years and just haven't had a "free day" to play with it. But I've always been under the impression that Docker was just a abstraction around LXC making containers easier to create. Is the Docker "engine" actually LXC?
Serious question because the main reason I haven't invested in Docker is my perception that it won't really save (me) time if you already well understand LXC. Is there some other benefit besides "it's easier"?
Difficult tasks are potential bug generators and finding a task difficult is the programming equivalent of going to sleep at the wheel.... ( hmm. Easy tasks are potential bug generators and finding a task easy is the programming equivalent of going to sleep at the wheel... huh. that works too.) ^^ Like all the other sane people I stopped reading at that point. The real reason for doing this is that someone has invested a lot of time and effort in the technology used for this (and has a lab) , and this idea was the best one he came up with.
I don't think you're entirely correct. Feminism -has- done some damage in this area.
People desire status and that is true of all genders. And while I wasn't alive 100 years ago to know with certainty, I do not believe the phrase "...just a house wife" was uttered by same in a self-deprecating tone back then. But I hear it from women on a regular basis in our times. The idea that a woman must have a successful career in order to feel pride is the *fault* of feminism.
The other four points you make seem to be against something other than GP's points. I mean of course we all want to improve society, of course *no one* is telling western women to compare their lot with Iran and gratefully shut up. And come on, central air and vaccinations aren't really on topic are they?
I think feminism ( as I see it around me ) really does have it wrong. I think they are trying to actually make men and women equal and that is a terrible idea. If feminists *really* cared about women generally and not only for themselves specifically they would be out in force correcting the economic problems that force women into the work force. Having a choice is great, and I'm all on board with it, but I truly believe that for most women the choice they really want is no longer available to them.
My non-scientific opinion is that >60% of women would prefer give their full time attention to family --if they have a choice. They rarely do these days.
The other 40% really want a career. And while they may be a minority, they are a *very* vocal minority.
I think if men still had the wages they did 40 years ago there would be a lot more women that choose to be full time mothers, and this is in spite what seems to be an intentional degradation of this role by feminists.
Why do you think it's appropriate for you to come to such a conclusion ( and then give it voice )?
Hmm. I'm not sure how my level of personal preparedness has anything to do with whether or not another persons actions are justified...Or is this just an opportunity for you to feel like you're a better man than you really are? Perhaps from your post I can deduce that you are a (narcissist|bipolar|insecure|compensating) and then say as much?
Seriously. Fuck You for thinking it's your place to leap to a personal judgement like that. You have to be a complete idiot to NOT realize your own lack of perspective (which you still do not have) on MY complete situation at that time.
For anyone thinking of hosting with singlehop: the reason I canceled was because they kept my CC number against my explicit instructions. I found out because they hit my account two days later. They said it was an innocent mistake, the timing of the billing cycle, and refunded me. But they overdrafted my and it cost me hundreds.
I got in an argument with singlehop over canceling my account...I called AND submitted a ticket AND the ticket was acknowledged but some woman in billing claimed I didn't follow the "new process" and that I never really canceled. Just last week I noticed that they have $180 against me on my credit report and now I have to either pay them money I don't owe them or find a lawyer in Chicago. One sided indeed.
FTA: Last week, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, the Tennessee Republican who has received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the cable and telecommunications industry, introduced an amendment to a key appropriations bill that would prevent the FCC from preempting such state laws.
Everyone also understands the difference between creating new wealth and acquiring wealth that already exists.
No one believes the economy is precisely a zero sum game. NO ONE.
The phrase "zero sum economics" is only popular because of the propagandists employed by think tanks made it popular. These are the same people who (brilliantly) made trendy to call democrats 'fascists' back when Bush was in office --because it was inevitable for Bush to be called the same eventually, and they successfully preempted it by appropriation. The same with "class warfare". The moment it begin to dawn on people that supply side (voodoo) economics is effectively a war on the middle class and poor, they also realized the propagandists had already appropriated the phrase.
These are also the people who provided the likes of you with phrases like 'class warfare' , 'statist', etc. etc. "Re-framing" is their specialty, and they actually employ people to come up with juvenile insults and labels that can be used as "argument enders". Phrases like "the theory that an arrow could never hit a moving turtle, because over small enough intervals, it only moves a negligible fraction of the distance"...which of course is a belief that no one holds, and moreover, doesn't remotely address the topic in dispute.
Now, before you get started, I am certainly no democrat, and no fan of Obama. I am interested in the truth, and I know the truth is NOT connected to any kind of 'ism, nor any economic or political THEORY raised to the level of dogma such as "free market capitalism" (there is no such thing). And the truth is, our economy has been based on the "supply side economics theory" since Reagan, without change, under every President including now under Obama. Everyone who --really-- understands it knows it (supply side economics) is a lie and some of them have even admitted it. But it won't change, and they'll continue to perpetuate the lie, continue to manipulate people LIKE YOU, because it ENRICHES them.
We live in an oligarchy where people are irrationally accused of belief in nonsense like "zero sum economics" or of engaging in "class warfare" because the --really-- smart people at the top know it helps prevent otherwise intelligent people from actually engaging in constructive discussion (and ending the oligarchy).
He didn't correct a goddamn thing! Neither have I denied writing anything even once. He made a bunch of assertions that ARE NOT TRUE, and importantly do not alter the points being made. Also, calling me a raving leftist was Step One(tm). And you, you're picking sentences apart trying to find a way to say I'm wrong, and you fail. As if you don't understand what you're reading.
The topic is SCARCITY. I'll simplify it for you: OP=Shit is not scarce. MP=Shit is scarce! MW=The amount of shit in the world can change! You raving leftist.
First, go back to top of this thread and re-read it. Really read it you lunatic. Notice that where I say 'arable land' I also say 'tenement buildings'. My bad mixing arable and livable in the same sentence. Douche.
Second, realize that -I- am trying to make an on-topic point, relevant to the OP. You, you have no point other than to do battle on the internet with 'raving leftists'.
Third, is there an infinite amount of arable land on this planet or is there a finite amount of land on this planet? Or have you invented some kind of boolean loophole?
Fourth, YOU are the one who sees people as leftist or not, I don't have such view and do not self-identify with any kind of 'ism, because I fucking know better. So go question your own 'world view' ideologue.
This is probably where I should call you out on arable being not at all finite, but I'll just ask you this: Do you have point of your own to make here? Besides calling me a raving leftist that is...
I can only counter that the shoe factory in Vietnam exists to serve a demand in the U.S. If this is a global economy without real trade barriers, then my assertion still holds.
Your choice of Ethiopia as a comparison country is interesting in that people in Ethiopia are measurably happier than people in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
I'm not denying that resentment (acrimony, hatred, w/e) exists. I'm denying that it's a generational/cultural phenomenon, or initiated by a propaganda campaign.
People are realizing that the construction job that paid $20/hr 30 years ago STILL pays $20/hr. And the "justifications" given for the situation aren't believed --people seeing our economic system as intentionally rigged, and they're not happy with that realization.
Slashdot Mirror
A good study would provide a description of what the internet would look like without ads. My intuition is that I'd be just fine with the only content available being content that did not seek a revenue stream. I thought the internet was better back then anyway.
It's also a pointless study because it's never going to happen. I'd guess the only reason it was done is to support the idea that ad blockers and no script are "bad". Oh wait it was conducted by an ad platform.
Yup.
Intolerant of fools and slackards maybe, always for very rational and defensible reasons.
I think an important perspective (that you're missing) is that for most of the decision making contributors commercial success is a minor goal, and for many it's not a goal at all. The don't give two shits about "the business model", they want open, verifiable code or no code at all.
The driver model you are complaining about is never ever ever ever ever ever going to change. So, please, use Windows or OSX and get on with your life.
In Linux, there is no ABI. Drivers have to be accepted and included in the kernel source tree. Yes really. It's that well thought out.
This means that you have to have code review from the Linux kernel team. And you have to divulge any amateur or buggy code embodied in the source. Which may compromise the imaginary advantage your marketdroids think they have on other platforms.
FTFY
Docker has an engine? I haven't actually used Docker yet because I've already been using LXC for some years and just haven't had a "free day" to play with it. But I've always been under the impression that Docker was just a abstraction around LXC making containers easier to create. Is the Docker "engine" actually LXC?
Serious question because the main reason I haven't invested in Docker is my perception that it won't really save (me) time if you already well understand LXC. Is there some other benefit besides "it's easier"?
On Amazon Prime the 'Documentary' category is all brainless reality shows, much worse than Netflix for finding a good one.
Difficult tasks are potential bug generators and finding a task difficult is the programming equivalent of going to sleep at the wheel....
( hmm. Easy tasks are potential bug generators and finding a task easy is the programming equivalent of going to sleep at the wheel... huh. that works too.)
^^
Like all the other sane people I stopped reading at that point.
The real reason for doing this is that someone has invested a lot of time and effort in the technology used for this (and has a lab) , and this idea was the best one he came up with.
I don't think you're entirely correct. Feminism -has- done some damage in this area.
People desire status and that is true of all genders. And while I wasn't alive 100 years ago to know with certainty, I do not believe the phrase "...just a house wife" was uttered by same in a self-deprecating tone back then. But I hear it from women on a regular basis in our times. The idea that a woman must have a successful career in order to feel pride is the *fault* of feminism.
The other four points you make seem to be against something other than GP's points. I mean of course we all want to improve society, of course *no one* is telling western women to compare their lot with Iran and gratefully shut up. And come on, central air and vaccinations aren't really on topic are they?
I think feminism ( as I see it around me ) really does have it wrong. I think they are trying to actually make men and women equal and that is a terrible idea. If feminists *really* cared about women generally and not only for themselves specifically they would be out in force correcting the economic problems that force women into the work force. Having a choice is great, and I'm all on board with it, but I truly believe that for most women the choice they really want is no longer available to them.
My non-scientific opinion is that >60% of women would prefer give their full time attention to family --if they have a choice. They rarely do these days.
The other 40% really want a career. And while they may be a minority, they are a *very* vocal minority.
I think if men still had the wages they did 40 years ago there would be a lot more women that choose to be full time mothers, and this is in spite what seems to be an intentional degradation of this role by feminists.
Why do you think it's appropriate for you to come to such a conclusion ( and then give it voice )?
Hmm. I'm not sure how my level of personal preparedness has anything to do with whether or not another persons actions are justified...Or is this just an opportunity for you to feel like you're a better man than you really are? Perhaps from your post I can deduce that you are a (narcissist|bipolar|insecure|compensating) and then say as much?
Seriously. Fuck You for thinking it's your place to leap to a personal judgement like that. You have to be a complete idiot to NOT realize your own lack of perspective (which you still do not have) on MY complete situation at that time.
Jerk.
For anyone thinking of hosting with singlehop: the reason I canceled was because they kept my CC number against my explicit instructions. I found out because they hit my account two days later. They said it was an innocent mistake, the timing of the billing cycle, and refunded me. But they overdrafted my and it cost me hundreds.
I got in an argument with singlehop over canceling my account...I called AND submitted a ticket AND the ticket was acknowledged but some woman in billing claimed I didn't follow the "new process" and that I never really canceled. Just last week I noticed that they have $180 against me on my credit report and now I have to either pay them money I don't owe them or find a lawyer in Chicago. One sided indeed.
Have you ever been to Boston?
Wow you really added to the discussion there.
FTA:
Last week, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, the Tennessee Republican who has received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the cable and telecommunications industry, introduced an amendment to a key appropriations bill that would prevent the FCC from preempting such state laws.
Now THAT is interesting. If everyone who works at Airbus gets national health care, Airbus has lower costs vs Boeing. ?
Everyone understands it.
Everyone understands that wealth can be created.
Everyone also understands the difference between creating new wealth and acquiring wealth that already exists.
No one believes the economy is precisely a zero sum game. NO ONE.
The phrase "zero sum economics" is only popular because of the propagandists employed by think tanks made it popular. These are the same people who (brilliantly) made trendy to call democrats 'fascists' back when Bush was in office --because it was inevitable for Bush to be called the same eventually, and they successfully preempted it by appropriation. The same with "class warfare". The moment it begin to dawn on people that supply side (voodoo) economics is effectively a war on the middle class and poor, they also realized the propagandists had already appropriated the phrase.
These are also the people who provided the likes of you with phrases like 'class warfare' , 'statist', etc. etc. "Re-framing" is their specialty, and they actually employ people to come up with juvenile insults and labels that can be used as "argument enders". Phrases like "the theory that an arrow could never hit a moving turtle, because over small enough intervals, it only moves a negligible fraction of the distance"...which of course is a belief that no one holds, and moreover, doesn't remotely address the topic in dispute.
Now, before you get started, I am certainly no democrat, and no fan of Obama. I am interested in the truth, and I know the truth is NOT connected to any kind of 'ism, nor any economic or political THEORY raised to the level of dogma such as "free market capitalism" (there is no such thing). And the truth is, our economy has been based on the "supply side economics theory" since Reagan, without change, under every President including now under Obama. Everyone who --really-- understands it knows it (supply side economics) is a lie and some of them have even admitted it. But it won't change, and they'll continue to perpetuate the lie, continue to manipulate people LIKE YOU, because it ENRICHES them.
We live in an oligarchy where people are irrationally accused of belief in nonsense like "zero sum economics" or of engaging in "class warfare" because the --really-- smart people at the top know it helps prevent otherwise intelligent people from actually engaging in constructive discussion (and ending the oligarchy).
He didn't correct a goddamn thing! Neither have I denied writing anything even once. He made a bunch of assertions that ARE NOT TRUE, and importantly do not alter the points being made. Also, calling me a raving leftist was Step One(tm). And you, you're picking sentences apart trying to find a way to say I'm wrong, and you fail. As if you don't understand what you're reading.
The topic is SCARCITY. I'll simplify it for you:
OP=Shit is not scarce.
MP=Shit is scarce!
MW=The amount of shit in the world can change! You raving leftist.
First, go back to top of this thread and re-read it. Really read it you lunatic. Notice that where I say 'arable land' I also say 'tenement buildings'. My bad mixing arable and livable in the same sentence. Douche.
Second, realize that -I- am trying to make an on-topic point, relevant to the OP. You, you have no point other than to do battle on the internet with 'raving leftists'.
Third, is there an infinite amount of arable land on this planet or is there a finite amount of land on this planet? Or have you invented some kind of boolean loophole?
Fourth, YOU are the one who sees people as leftist or not, I don't have such view and do not self-identify with any kind of 'ism, because I fucking know better. So go question your own 'world view' ideologue.
Done.
This is probably where I should call you out on arable being not at all finite, but I'll just ask you this: Do you have point of your own to make here? Besides calling me a raving leftist that is...
good points.
I can only counter that the shoe factory in Vietnam exists to serve a demand in the U.S. If this is a global economy without real trade barriers, then my assertion still holds.
Your choice of Ethiopia as a comparison country is interesting in that people in Ethiopia are measurably happier than people in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
I'm just saying that relative wealth matters.
I put the qualifier effectively in that sentence for a reason. Go play Gotcha with someone else.
As a matter of fact it WAS in class at school, maybe your school sucks? Here, this will get you started.
https://www.google.com/webhp?c...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
You posted a list of assertions that accuse me of making assertions, where all of your arguments are simply counter-assertions.
*Technological advances continue to increase land that is arable...
--right, so land is not a finite resource anymore. good to know.
*Currency is only a measurement...blah blah blah,
--which is why it is effectively fixed for christs sake.
*Tax cuts do not cause anything...
--EXACTLY! so let's not use the promise of new factories to justify tax cuts anymore.
Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it for later.
I'm not denying that resentment (acrimony, hatred, w/e) exists. I'm denying that it's a generational/cultural phenomenon, or initiated by a propaganda campaign.
People are realizing that the construction job that paid $20/hr 30 years ago STILL pays $20/hr. And the "justifications" given for the situation aren't believed --people seeing our economic system as intentionally rigged, and they're not happy with that realization.