This is a good question, comment though. Most of my female friends can't really get into the other more "hardcore" consoles, but love my game cube. I actually lured a girlfriend of mine into gaming through Animal Crossing, since it is more "chick friendly" (no sexism meant). Nintendo is good at this, they go for kids, girls, and casual gamers (like me). Nintendo is going for the Mac strategy with the GC and Wii it seems, it is a gaming appliance, I say this because most of the girls I know prefer Macs.
Most technology is sold as an e-penis, it seems. And this obviously isn't a selling point to girls.
I'm getting a Wii, btw, because I think I've outgrown "Hardcore", and want fun. Same reason I finally got a Mac, I really stopped giving a crap about system specs, and would rather have ease of use.
I'm getting sick of the stock market(s) being the be-all-end-all indicator of the economy. Of all the 20 somethings I know, I doubt a single one of them has anything tied up in investments, outside of 401ks. But then again all of the 20 somethings I know are roughly 1 paycheck from being homeless, in debt up to their eye-balls, working low paying jobs, struggling. Most of them know damn well that their poor, market aside. I'm glad the upper class are doing well, but it often seems that this is at the detriment to the lower and middle classes. When the market tanked there was more people with money, that I knew, its really sad that the richer population (with enough money for hype-based tech firms, and other badly based start-ups) got hurt, but it didn't hurt many people beside them.
Unemployment and mean income are better indicators, especially when compared to inflation and cost of living. With this metric we're doing MUCH worse than we were in 2000.
Yeah, the war has changed, but that does not increase its odds of winning. With the VHS/DVD switch, I actually WANTED to, DVDs were a superior technology in everyway. Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD are just the same thing as DVDs but on crack. With DVDs, I didn't have to go out and cough up a couple grand on a new TV to notice the difference, either. Also the DVD/VHS switch WAS NOT about quality, it was more about ease to most people. DVDs are somewhat prettier, especially with age (which is arguable, since damage pwns DVDs, but slightly degrades VHS, but most people switched to save shelf-space, and save rewinding, have special features, and such, and as a bonus, ALL WITH THE SAME TV! With the next gen you have a slight (I really can't tell the difference from sofa distance) increase in quality, and a massive increase in price, with no other benefits.
I'm sure the biggest selling point is being on the cutting edge, for being on the cutting edges' sake. Which is a game most people are smarter than playing, or at least too poor to be playing. Keeping up with the Joneses is a pretty weak motivation for a 3 grand upgrade, with only minor benefits.
In a short phrase: DVD ain't broke. (unless you count in DRM, which is a benefit to me and most other/.ers anyways)
Wrong. The united states is a representational democracy, while the UK is a parliamentary democracy, with the remnants of a monarchy (what power does the queen actually have, I ask, why is it always Blair on the news, and not her?). The united states is ALSO a republic, which is something else. Democracy means rule by the public (demos), pure and simple, we have a vote.
But what about acts of speach that are made to actively harm an individual, or misrepresent them, as in this case? In this specific case I doubt that harm was the intented motive, and I do doubt that any harm is even potential, but that is not the point, it is why verbal threats are still assault under the law, even if not every threat leads to assault or is actually intent. You can't tell. I understand that there is a difference here, I'm just citing it as another example of limited speach.
If I stole the/. name Fyngyrz, and started posting some odd GNAA spam crap here, I'm guessing you would be quite pissed off, but here, at least, we have anonyminity, so it is little damage to change your UID. But if I stole your actual name, likeness, etc... the potential of harm enters into the picture, just by the fact of being faulsly represented. More and more people are being judged on their online presence, employers are checking MySpace, and other social networking sites, for information to judge future, and current, employees. Granted saying "Hi, I'm Bob Smith, and I'm gay" probably isn't going to have repercussions, but now that a false identity, or presence, is established the potential for abuse grows. With this capability, the students could now post "Hi, I'm Bob Smith, and I molest children", which would be harming, even if caught and fixed after the fact. Look at identity fraud, even AFTER you put an end to it, and fix the situation, you have years of fighting with credit companies and banks ahead of you. Nothing on the internet goes away, or at least this is how we should act, meaning even a superfuous allegation, quickly caught and fixed, might live on and continue to be hurtful.
Now that these kids have to potential towards genuine harm, we should sit and wait until they actually CAUSE irreversable harm? This eeems rather absurd, to be blunt.
No one is limiting the freedom of speach here, just enforcing RESPONSIBILITY of speach, which is something we in modern America forgot.
An inmportant philosophical principle that was fundamental to our founders have long since been forgotten. Your rights end where someone elses begin. These people over reached their rights and started infringing on someone elses.
But this? This was the last excuse I had for my desktop PC. Heck, this case has changed it's innards so often, I've had to change its host name TWICE (just for kicks, really... but I realized, twice, that the insides had been completely reworked, and it warranted a name change).
I'm glad I'm not the only geeky one. My first computer (of my own) was Cheese, and thus moved up to my current one (Petit Fromage [Cheese 8.2], a MacMini). Every small revision (RAM, Video, etc) kicks up the decimal, every new big thing (Mobo, processor, OS) kicks up the main number, and warrents a name change.
I'm just glad I'm not the only person who does that. Though I do ponder people who name their car, but not their computer. Lord, how would I yell at it if it didn't have a name?
So.. what is going to happen when someome steals your identity? Is it okay to faulsy represent yourself, esepcially to the conscious harm of another party?
Creativity is wonderful, but if you're only capable of writing something inspiring, or incapable of following simple rules, you're just not much of a writer.
I disagree, I think that if you can forget imposed style, and develop your own you are a great writer. Look at authors such as Kerouac whose greatness comes from the fact that they bucked contemporary styles, and blazed their own paths. Sure, for news, science, and corporate writing your statement holds true, but not in the more creative (by-nature) fields. These are people writing with no external rules imposed upon them, unless there is some hidden blogger style book, so writing by formula would actually decrease their writing skills.
I think many people forget the arbitary rules by the time they get a year or two out of highschool or college since they really have no real world application, especially in "free" writing (meaning without someone explicitly holding you to rules).
I'm not saying your catagorically wrong, mind. Just that bloggers are not used to it, and have probably forgotten how to, since it has no bearing on their lives, there is no reason to follow rules in their day to day existence.
As with all things creative, it boils down to personal taste though.
This does highlight how silly the very concept of this test is, though. They are not testing how well their blog writing is, their testing how well they can follow the rules of a high school level test. People entering college need to know these rules, as that some of them are somewhat applicable to what their professors will expect (at least early on, I noticed a slackening of written structure the higher level I got, it became content over form).
Obviously it wasn't reverse psychology, since I am marked as a troll.
I think people say it more as a sign that their bucking the/. groupthink. Generally when I say it I *do* get modded as troll, as above. Basically I am saying "yes, it is unpopular, I know this, and I will still say it." I'm sure some people do use it as a ploy.
Back on topic. I DO agree with you, Apple could make their DRM more restrictive than it is, I rather doubt they would by choice, it would the RIAA which causes this caveat, and not some evil mind at Apple, since it is in their own best interest to keep DRM as light as it is now. The potential is there though, but the words of the day will still be caveat emptor, especially as long as there are non-DRMed alternatives.
DarkJG: Note that the person you're replying to is not referring to songs specifically bought by the iTunes store.
Mr2001: Which other software can play Apple's protected AAC files?
Your arguing at cross-puroses, about different things, I don't think that will solve much.
My take on this is, that no one forces you to actually buy music from iTMS, you do so of free-will, and knowing that it is protected, and propably will not play elsewhere. Therefore, if you do, you only have you to blaim, not EVIL DRM.
IMO, iTunes DRM (FairPlay) is probably the best DRM scheme on the market right now, I don't know a single person who has run into a DRM problem (I'm at 3/5 machines, and unregging one is simple). It is optional. Rather unabtrusive. No real problems, but then again I don't have a problem with rational DRM schemes, ones that don't hinder function.
If it was JUST the **AAs, then no, it wouldn't be enough. Its the government complicity with them that is a symptom of the time to flee, while one is still free to do so. When corporate entities can endanger freedom, there is a serious problem beyond which corporations, and which freedoms. The "Why?" behind this might be the reason to flee, though I DO think that fleeing might be a wee bit ethically irresponsible, since you aren't doing anything to FIX the problems. People who leave, or don't care are partly the problem.
My parents were not generally bad, they read to me, bought me computers, and didn't even get too mad when I dissected them. But in full vacation mode they are FEARFUL to behold. They try to cram a full locality into the shortest time, mostly look at large landmarks so "they can prove they've been there", which always seemed kind of silly. You've been there, why would on need to prove it?
I remember going to Washington DC with my father when I was young. So many idiotic monuments. So many dull office buildings. I'm a terrible person for being bored to tears! Enter the Natural History Museum (and the Smithsonian in general)... Old dead things... History. A rock, from the Moon. Much to his dislike I insisted I spend the remaining 4 days in the Museum. I think he still (20 some years later) bitter about that. I don't remember the library of congress, or some silly old paper in the National Archives, but I remember that little grey moon-pebble like it was yesterday.
When we did the Bay Area, I really couldn't give to lumps about China Town, or some bridges... But Muir Woods... Sitting under a tree... The Game Boy was completely forgotten.
Sadly they decided to say I had ADHD because I didn't really care about most stuff, that they thought I should have. But if they would have locked me in a museum (not a kid-friendly interactive one), or put me in the middle of the woods...
I guess this was a long winded way of agreeing with you.
Wake up. The poor are ignorant. What the hell do you expect, they don't get much of an education. They can barely survive. So yeah some of thier ideas are going to be backwards. But they do know they don't like things the way they are.
I really would like to agree with you, since this seems to be the general trend in the poor (and not in 3rd world nations only, venture to the USs bible belt, or deep south some time). But there is a problem with this view, your giving a universal attribute to a HUGE number of people with no evidence that this is ever broadly applicable. The truth behind your statement lies in the fact that we SEE the violent and ignorant ones, more than we see the ones who keep their heads down and try to improve their lots.
To use a local (if you are from the US) example, when we think of the bible belt, we think of abortion bombings, and attempts at banning science. But in fact this is a minority excersize, the majority of people are just trying to live their lives, and raise their families, in the best possible way, pretty much ignoring the greater "idealogical" bullshit.
We can look to Palestine for this too. While a small but very visual/vocal amount of them run around blowing up things, the vast majority of them are NOT terrorists (or whatever other biased term you want to insert), but just poor people being oppressed by big people, mostly for the actions of the minority. The whole of the current hot spot (the Middle East, arab nations, whatnot) falls into this perception trap too. We see the Osama Bin Laden's, but not the 99% of the rest of them who are just trying to make do with the life their allowed.
There is an app out there that will unify all of the OS X apps (even Firefox) with a common skin. It skins them to be a pretty standard OS X-ish feel, a much like Mail.app (w/o unified buttons), exept slightly darker. It also stips the brushed metal from brushed apps. I haven't ran it in awhile, so can't say if it works with the new iTunes. Its called UNO.
If the interface schizophrenia is getting to you, it might be the best solution, until Apple at least realized that their getting slightly off base with the "a style per app" philosophy. How hard is it to just use some stardardized Aqua on everything? Do individual apps really need to stand out, can function speak for them? I damn well know I'm running iTunes (sound coming from speakers, etc), and don't need it to be styled in such a way to let me know that "yep, thats itunes" when I look at it. Its annoying that they screw up their own standards.
I found the AfD page after posting, and it was kind of sad. The main proponents of deletion seemed to have a serious, and unconcealed bias against the site for personal reasons, yet got born out. As much as I really do like the theory behind Wikipedia, the more I know about it, the more it seems a flawed implication of the idea, perhaps it has to be, perhaps there is no ideal solution. But this is such an OBVIOUS and blantant case of pure vindictivness wining over, it seems... to through the whole plausability of the project in doubt. Might be slightly over-reacting, granted, but it isn't quite as isolated as it seems (reading the article on Ayn Rand shows how NPOV is arbitrary, for example).
Odd thing, the full Encyclopeida Dramatica site is down, and even more strange is that the Wikipedia article for it is deleted and protected, along with the talk page, and there is no explanation, it has been down since august. Does anyone have any idea why this is?
Did it get slashdotted, or purposely removed? Also whats up with the Wikipedia page. I would like to at least know what the Encyclopedia Dramatica is, the only source I could really find was from Urban Dictionary, which really isn't the best source of anything.
Before I got my 20g iPod I went through a couple SD players, and found them less convenient than a CD. I don't like having to sort or what I really plan on listening to over the next week, hunting down the files, transfering them, and then realizing 20 miles away that I really wasn't in the mood for whatever I was thinking at at home. I have 3 SD players sitting in a closet somewhere, and when my iPod dies (3g, with three years of use, no problems as of yet), I'm not going to be taking them out of the closet either. I'm not recomending an iPod, per se, but a large (15+ gigs) HD player is about as good as yur going to get, and they really aren't to expensive, I've found comparible players (not Apple) for $100-$150.
My problem with non-Apple players is my own fault. Half of my music is AAC now, and a good 10 disks worth is in iTMS protected AAC, which doesn't seem to play on many vanilla MP3 players. I might be mistaken.
I don't get you, please clarify. I don't see why this would influence Macs over PCs. PCs are good enough, pretty much the default computers, and for most people their aren't enough glaring problems to even warrant thinking of an alternative. Its pretty much the same deal, with a different topic. People like your average slashdotter, who mostly use alt OSs, got to a point where they realized a problem in the status-quo, and were then motivated to find solutions.
Please don't take this as an attack on your explanation, which I find exemplary.
But the average person is just as enabled to find the facts as the average slashdotter. Googling DCMA has the same results for Joe Six-Pack, as it does to some geek in his parent's basement. Perhaps we have more reason to question DCMA than they do, it might just be a symptom that DRM and such does not affect their lives in any way signifigant enough to motivate them to research, or even care. Us geeks really like copying things (both legally, as in fair-use, and illegally), we like burning DVDs, or ripping them, most people don't care. We are a fringe group, and shouldn't forget it, our interests don't line up with the common Joe, interested in no more than finding the cheapest, and most convenient, copy of Tom Cruise's new movie. The implications do not overtly hurt or restrict them, as it does us.
DCMA, DRM, and copyright are among my biggest interests (yes, higher than out current wars), but I still can't manage to get a single lay person I know interested in IP, nor can I even cite a single example that effects THEM. It really doesn't, much. Yes, there are very esoteric arguements about the good of the public and such, but these don't wash since they aren't immediate, nor obviously. Culture has been doing pretty good, even under the infinitely prolonged copyright, it could be better, but that is an unprovable abstraction.
I'm going to get modded/flamed to hell for this, but...
At a certain level isn't it a purpose of government to insure a fair and equal treatment to all? To at least try to minimize discrimination? Sure, I think there is a limit to this, and I think it is a problem of law to think in universals, in certain cases it is absurd to enforce equality (affirmative action comes to mind).
I'm not going to do the cliche race argument that has been done in this thread to the point of absurdity (it was already there), but at a certain level I can't see whats wrong with bringing online law to a state of parity with physical law. Your business must accept people in wheel chairs, blind people, etc... Going from this (and ignoring its truth value) whats much different from forcing online entities into the same compliance? As long as there is some room for compromise, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh, and interesting comment on /.?
This is a good question, comment though. Most of my female friends can't really get into the other more "hardcore" consoles, but love my game cube. I actually lured a girlfriend of mine into gaming through Animal Crossing, since it is more "chick friendly" (no sexism meant). Nintendo is good at this, they go for kids, girls, and casual gamers (like me). Nintendo is going for the Mac strategy with the GC and Wii it seems, it is a gaming appliance, I say this because most of the girls I know prefer Macs.
Most technology is sold as an e-penis, it seems. And this obviously isn't a selling point to girls.
I'm getting a Wii, btw, because I think I've outgrown "Hardcore", and want fun. Same reason I finally got a Mac, I really stopped giving a crap about system specs, and would rather have ease of use.
I'm getting sick of the stock market(s) being the be-all-end-all indicator of the economy. Of all the 20 somethings I know, I doubt a single one of them has anything tied up in investments, outside of 401ks. But then again all of the 20 somethings I know are roughly 1 paycheck from being homeless, in debt up to their eye-balls, working low paying jobs, struggling. Most of them know damn well that their poor, market aside. I'm glad the upper class are doing well, but it often seems that this is at the detriment to the lower and middle classes. When the market tanked there was more people with money, that I knew, its really sad that the richer population (with enough money for hype-based tech firms, and other badly based start-ups) got hurt, but it didn't hurt many people beside them.
Unemployment and mean income are better indicators, especially when compared to inflation and cost of living. With this metric we're doing MUCH worse than we were in 2000.
Yeah, the war has changed, but that does not increase its odds of winning. With the VHS/DVD switch, I actually WANTED to, DVDs were a superior technology in everyway. Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD are just the same thing as DVDs but on crack. With DVDs, I didn't have to go out and cough up a couple grand on a new TV to notice the difference, either. Also the DVD/VHS switch WAS NOT about quality, it was more about ease to most people. DVDs are somewhat prettier, especially with age (which is arguable, since damage pwns DVDs, but slightly degrades VHS, but most people switched to save shelf-space, and save rewinding, have special features, and such, and as a bonus, ALL WITH THE SAME TV! With the next gen you have a slight (I really can't tell the difference from sofa distance) increase in quality, and a massive increase in price, with no other benefits.
/.ers anyways)
I'm sure the biggest selling point is being on the cutting edge, for being on the cutting edges' sake. Which is a game most people are smarter than playing, or at least too poor to be playing. Keeping up with the Joneses is a pretty weak motivation for a 3 grand upgrade, with only minor benefits.
In a short phrase: DVD ain't broke. (unless you count in DRM, which is a benefit to me and most other
PS3: The Neo Geo for a new generation.
Wrong. The united states is a representational democracy, while the UK is a parliamentary democracy, with the remnants of a monarchy (what power does the queen actually have, I ask, why is it always Blair on the news, and not her?). The united states is ALSO a republic, which is something else. Democracy means rule by the public (demos), pure and simple, we have a vote.
But what about acts of speach that are made to actively harm an individual, or misrepresent them, as in this case? In this specific case I doubt that harm was the intented motive, and I do doubt that any harm is even potential, but that is not the point, it is why verbal threats are still assault under the law, even if not every threat leads to assault or is actually intent. You can't tell. I understand that there is a difference here, I'm just citing it as another example of limited speach.
/. name Fyngyrz, and started posting some odd GNAA spam crap here, I'm guessing you would be quite pissed off, but here, at least, we have anonyminity, so it is little damage to change your UID. But if I stole your actual name, likeness, etc... the potential of harm enters into the picture, just by the fact of being faulsly represented. More and more people are being judged on their online presence, employers are checking MySpace, and other social networking sites, for information to judge future, and current, employees. Granted saying "Hi, I'm Bob Smith, and I'm gay" probably isn't going to have repercussions, but now that a false identity, or presence, is established the potential for abuse grows. With this capability, the students could now post "Hi, I'm Bob Smith, and I molest children", which would be harming, even if caught and fixed after the fact. Look at identity fraud, even AFTER you put an end to it, and fix the situation, you have years of fighting with credit companies and banks ahead of you. Nothing on the internet goes away, or at least this is how we should act, meaning even a superfuous allegation, quickly caught and fixed, might live on and continue to be hurtful.
If I stole the
Now that these kids have to potential towards genuine harm, we should sit and wait until they actually CAUSE irreversable harm? This eeems rather absurd, to be blunt.
No one is limiting the freedom of speach here, just enforcing RESPONSIBILITY of speach, which is something we in modern America forgot.
An inmportant philosophical principle that was fundamental to our founders have long since been forgotten. Your rights end where someone elses begin. These people over reached their rights and started infringing on someone elses.
I'm glad I'm not the only geeky one. My first computer (of my own) was Cheese, and thus moved up to my current one (Petit Fromage [Cheese 8.2], a MacMini). Every small revision (RAM, Video, etc) kicks up the decimal, every new big thing (Mobo, processor, OS) kicks up the main number, and warrents a name change.
I'm just glad I'm not the only person who does that. Though I do ponder people who name their car, but not their computer. Lord, how would I yell at it if it didn't have a name?
So.. what is going to happen when someome steals your identity? Is it okay to faulsy represent yourself, esepcially to the conscious harm of another party?
It gets funnier than just Slashdot?
Oh god, save us.
Creativity is wonderful, but if you're only capable of writing something inspiring, or incapable of following simple rules, you're just not much of a writer.
I disagree, I think that if you can forget imposed style, and develop your own you are a great writer. Look at authors such as Kerouac whose greatness comes from the fact that they bucked contemporary styles, and blazed their own paths. Sure, for news, science, and corporate writing your statement holds true, but not in the more creative (by-nature) fields. These are people writing with no external rules imposed upon them, unless there is some hidden blogger style book, so writing by formula would actually decrease their writing skills.
I think many people forget the arbitary rules by the time they get a year or two out of highschool or college since they really have no real world application, especially in "free" writing (meaning without someone explicitly holding you to rules).
I'm not saying your catagorically wrong, mind. Just that bloggers are not used to it, and have probably forgotten how to, since it has no bearing on their lives, there is no reason to follow rules in their day to day existence.
As with all things creative, it boils down to personal taste though.
This does highlight how silly the very concept of this test is, though. They are not testing how well their blog writing is, their testing how well they can follow the rules of a high school level test. People entering college need to know these rules, as that some of them are somewhat applicable to what their professors will expect (at least early on, I noticed a slackening of written structure the higher level I got, it became content over form).
Obviously it wasn't reverse psychology, since I am marked as a troll.
/. groupthink. Generally when I say it I *do* get modded as troll, as above. Basically I am saying "yes, it is unpopular, I know this, and I will still say it." I'm sure some people do use it as a ploy.
I think people say it more as a sign that their bucking the
Back on topic. I DO agree with you, Apple could make their DRM more restrictive than it is, I rather doubt they would by choice, it would the RIAA which causes this caveat, and not some evil mind at Apple, since it is in their own best interest to keep DRM as light as it is now. The potential is there though, but the words of the day will still be caveat emptor, especially as long as there are non-DRMed alternatives.
DarkJG: Note that the person you're replying to is not referring to songs specifically bought by the iTunes store.
Mr2001: Which other software can play Apple's protected AAC files?
Your arguing at cross-puroses, about different things, I don't think that will solve much.
My take on this is, that no one forces you to actually buy music from iTMS, you do so of free-will, and knowing that it is protected, and propably will not play elsewhere. Therefore, if you do, you only have you to blaim, not EVIL DRM.
IMO, iTunes DRM (FairPlay) is probably the best DRM scheme on the market right now, I don't know a single person who has run into a DRM problem (I'm at 3/5 machines, and unregging one is simple). It is optional. Rather unabtrusive. No real problems, but then again I don't have a problem with rational DRM schemes, ones that don't hinder function.
Mark me troll at will.
If it was JUST the **AAs, then no, it wouldn't be enough. Its the government complicity with them that is a symptom of the time to flee, while one is still free to do so. When corporate entities can endanger freedom, there is a serious problem beyond which corporations, and which freedoms. The "Why?" behind this might be the reason to flee, though I DO think that fleeing might be a wee bit ethically irresponsible, since you aren't doing anything to FIX the problems. People who leave, or don't care are partly the problem.
My 2c.
Here here!
My parents were not generally bad, they read to me, bought me computers, and didn't even get too mad when I dissected them. But in full vacation mode they are FEARFUL to behold. They try to cram a full locality into the shortest time, mostly look at large landmarks so "they can prove they've been there", which always seemed kind of silly. You've been there, why would on need to prove it?
I remember going to Washington DC with my father when I was young. So many idiotic monuments. So many dull office buildings. I'm a terrible person for being bored to tears! Enter the Natural History Museum (and the Smithsonian in general)... Old dead things... History. A rock, from the Moon. Much to his dislike I insisted I spend the remaining 4 days in the Museum. I think he still (20 some years later) bitter about that. I don't remember the library of congress, or some silly old paper in the National Archives, but I remember that little grey moon-pebble like it was yesterday.
When we did the Bay Area, I really couldn't give to lumps about China Town, or some bridges... But Muir Woods... Sitting under a tree... The Game Boy was completely forgotten.
Sadly they decided to say I had ADHD because I didn't really care about most stuff, that they thought I should have. But if they would have locked me in a museum (not a kid-friendly interactive one), or put me in the middle of the woods...
I guess this was a long winded way of agreeing with you.
I really would like to agree with you, since this seems to be the general trend in the poor (and not in 3rd world nations only, venture to the USs bible belt, or deep south some time). But there is a problem with this view, your giving a universal attribute to a HUGE number of people with no evidence that this is ever broadly applicable. The truth behind your statement lies in the fact that we SEE the violent and ignorant ones, more than we see the ones who keep their heads down and try to improve their lots.
To use a local (if you are from the US) example, when we think of the bible belt, we think of abortion bombings, and attempts at banning science. But in fact this is a minority excersize, the majority of people are just trying to live their lives, and raise their families, in the best possible way, pretty much ignoring the greater "idealogical" bullshit.
We can look to Palestine for this too. While a small but very visual/vocal amount of them run around blowing up things, the vast majority of them are NOT terrorists (or whatever other biased term you want to insert), but just poor people being oppressed by big people, mostly for the actions of the minority. The whole of the current hot spot (the Middle East, arab nations, whatnot) falls into this perception trap too. We see the Osama Bin Laden's, but not the 99% of the rest of them who are just trying to make do with the life their allowed.
Apple is in your car
Am I the only person who misread this as:
Apple is in your cat?
Oops... /. ate my link:
http://gui.interacto.net/
There is an app out there that will unify all of the OS X apps (even Firefox) with a common skin. It skins them to be a pretty standard OS X-ish feel, a much like Mail.app (w/o unified buttons), exept slightly darker. It also stips the brushed metal from brushed apps. I haven't ran it in awhile, so can't say if it works with the new iTunes. Its called UNO.
If the interface schizophrenia is getting to you, it might be the best solution, until Apple at least realized that their getting slightly off base with the "a style per app" philosophy. How hard is it to just use some stardardized Aqua on everything? Do individual apps really need to stand out, can function speak for them? I damn well know I'm running iTunes (sound coming from speakers, etc), and don't need it to be styled in such a way to let me know that "yep, thats itunes" when I look at it. Its annoying that they screw up their own standards.
Sorry for the rant, preaching to the choir.
Best pedantic post on /. EVER!
Thank you,
the mgt
I found the AfD page after posting, and it was kind of sad. The main proponents of deletion seemed to have a serious, and unconcealed bias against the site for personal reasons, yet got born out. As much as I really do like the theory behind Wikipedia, the more I know about it, the more it seems a flawed implication of the idea, perhaps it has to be, perhaps there is no ideal solution. But this is such an OBVIOUS and blantant case of pure vindictivness wining over, it seems... to through the whole plausability of the project in doubt. Might be slightly over-reacting, granted, but it isn't quite as isolated as it seems (reading the article on Ayn Rand shows how NPOV is arbitrary, for example).
Odd thing, the full Encyclopeida Dramatica site is down, and even more strange is that the Wikipedia article for it is deleted and protected, along with the talk page, and there is no explanation, it has been down since august. Does anyone have any idea why this is?
Did it get slashdotted, or purposely removed? Also whats up with the Wikipedia page. I would like to at least know what the Encyclopedia Dramatica is, the only source I could really find was from Urban Dictionary, which really isn't the best source of anything.
Before I got my 20g iPod I went through a couple SD players, and found them less convenient than a CD. I don't like having to sort or what I really plan on listening to over the next week, hunting down the files, transfering them, and then realizing 20 miles away that I really wasn't in the mood for whatever I was thinking at at home. I have 3 SD players sitting in a closet somewhere, and when my iPod dies (3g, with three years of use, no problems as of yet), I'm not going to be taking them out of the closet either. I'm not recomending an iPod, per se, but a large (15+ gigs) HD player is about as good as yur going to get, and they really aren't to expensive, I've found comparible players (not Apple) for $100-$150.
My problem with non-Apple players is my own fault. Half of my music is AAC now, and a good 10 disks worth is in iTMS protected AAC, which doesn't seem to play on many vanilla MP3 players. I might be mistaken.
I don't get you, please clarify. I don't see why this would influence Macs over PCs. PCs are good enough, pretty much the default computers, and for most people their aren't enough glaring problems to even warrant thinking of an alternative. Its pretty much the same deal, with a different topic. People like your average slashdotter, who mostly use alt OSs, got to a point where they realized a problem in the status-quo, and were then motivated to find solutions.
Please don't take this as an attack on your explanation, which I find exemplary.
But the average person is just as enabled to find the facts as the average slashdotter. Googling DCMA has the same results for Joe Six-Pack, as it does to some geek in his parent's basement. Perhaps we have more reason to question DCMA than they do, it might just be a symptom that DRM and such does not affect their lives in any way signifigant enough to motivate them to research, or even care. Us geeks really like copying things (both legally, as in fair-use, and illegally), we like burning DVDs, or ripping them, most people don't care. We are a fringe group, and shouldn't forget it, our interests don't line up with the common Joe, interested in no more than finding the cheapest, and most convenient, copy of Tom Cruise's new movie. The implications do not overtly hurt or restrict them, as it does us.
DCMA, DRM, and copyright are among my biggest interests (yes, higher than out current wars), but I still can't manage to get a single lay person I know interested in IP, nor can I even cite a single example that effects THEM. It really doesn't, much. Yes, there are very esoteric arguements about the good of the public and such, but these don't wash since they aren't immediate, nor obviously. Culture has been doing pretty good, even under the infinitely prolonged copyright, it could be better, but that is an unprovable abstraction.
I'm going to get modded/flamed to hell for this, but...
At a certain level isn't it a purpose of government to insure a fair and equal treatment to all? To at least try to minimize discrimination? Sure, I think there is a limit to this, and I think it is a problem of law to think in universals, in certain cases it is absurd to enforce equality (affirmative action comes to mind).
I'm not going to do the cliche race argument that has been done in this thread to the point of absurdity (it was already there), but at a certain level I can't see whats wrong with bringing online law to a state of parity with physical law. Your business must accept people in wheel chairs, blind people, etc... Going from this (and ignoring its truth value) whats much different from forcing online entities into the same compliance? As long as there is some room for compromise, of course.