You should try it on OS X, it has been a persistant (and persistantly ignored) bug on OS X for the last couple version (pre-PR, even). It runs like FireFox did on Windows around 0.5 . I can't cite my own usage right now, because I'm using the G4 Deerpark port, so my memory and processor use will be slightly more in-line than vanilla Firefox.
But with use, and exstensive tab use I will still climb into the hundreds of megs, even with the process idling. (App closed). As said above, the only way to clear up this wasted memory is by killing the process.
On OS X, it becomes almost unusable. I toy with switching to Opera daily, and use Safari for all my small tasks. Sadly, Safari updates kill Pithhelmet, so I lose my adblocker. And Opera seems rather like bloatware.
I'm sure these NSA cookies lead to a massive loss of human life and limb. I'm sure they are also in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, and international law. Right....
Torture is bad, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND!
I'm getting sick of the idiotic political comments (not just here)... "In other news it will be warm and sunny, with highs reaching into the 80s... Like TORTURE, or ILLEGAL wiretaps!"
Please, keep the politics on topic at least. Random outbursts and false analogies doesn't further anyones case, it just makes the presenter look like an idiot.
1. Because it is confiscation. You're taking away someone else's property, that he/she has earned through hard work, long hours, and dedication. In a capitalist economy, anyone can earn enough money to live on, any excess can be saved, invested, or blown on entertainment. What you do with that excess is your choice, and determines how you live.
And the capitalist is taking away the labor of the workers at a lesser cost than it is worth. This can be seen, also, as theft. Without the worker there is no value generated by production, the worker should get his/her FAIR share of capital, meaning more than a living wage. The profits, ideally, would be split amongst workers evenly and fairly, instead of companies paying workers the lowest possible amount to keep retention, as to increase their own capitol.
And obviously not everyone can have this execess capitol. Look around you, how many people actually have that much capitol? Not in the affluent technological world of the average/.er, but in the real world of production in which 90% of the population lives. 90% of the population is living one or two paychecks from the street. The price of labor is related to the cost of living, you pay them enough to keep them alive, and to let them reproduce.
. How do you determine who gets what means of production? I call a share of the biopharm trade for myself, it's a lot more lucrative than the flooring sales I do now. It can't be too tough for me to learn it, our new utopia assures me that I am just as qualified for this as the people who have spent 10 years in post-secondary education learning nothing BUT biopharm.
If you add value via production to the product, then, in a Marxist society, then you are entitled your share. You are not qualified to the biofarm, sorry, unless you work it. This still would happen, it just cuts out the priveledged positions on top, who get more for less work.
If the proletariat has the means of production, they can still do practically nothing with it. They work in a factory, make chairs for themselves, go home with those chairs, and the wife sells them out of the house while the husband is at work. Without capitalism (there's that dirty word again) to hire subordinates to produce more chairs for more production, transportation to move the chairs to a retail shop, retail shops to distribute those chairs, everyone operates individually, and is stunted by all the various operations needed to make a profit. In an industrialized society, people HAVE to perform different functions. How can the means of production be owned by all when not everyone is capable of using it, and it is useless to have everyone use it?
Who said that Marxism precludes market? There still is a market, the workers can still sell their goods. And stores can still exist to distribute these goods. Everything would pretty much be like a worker run factory, which do exist (and are doing wonders in foreign countries where the wonderous capitalist globalization has abandoned them). You never underline why there must be "subordiates" that are hired out. There subordinates would just receive their fare share (linked to the value they add, and not to how little is needed to keep them).
Where does "means of production" end? Does it include retail shops? How do you assign value to these, and make it fair, so that the people working in the retail shops can be exactly as profitable as the people working in the factories?
The means of production don't end. But it can be comparmentalized. When the product is produced, then the means of production are done, or when it is distributed for sale. Sure, the guys who manufacture the hammer is part of the chain leading to the chair, but there is no reason to not treat them as discrete chunks of production.
Again, I am supporting Marxism, as opposed to communism. Marxist Communism is an end point of a dialectic. It isn't something to pick up arms for, we see what happens when you forc
I honestly believe that GAIM looks like garbage. I know the UI stuff is what OSS has been all about sucking at, and this is no departure from what seems like the norm, but c'mon. I am seriously waiting for the moment when GAIM can look like DeadAIM or Trillian, or anything in that general region of interest. Frankly, I think GAIM is a super powerful program, that I have loved for years, but damnit, make it look nice.
Odd, over here in OS X land we have a very nice looking multiclient, AduiumX, which happens to be open source as well. I think is goes some what to say that OSS doesn't HAVE to be ugly. It might have something to do with OSS development on OS X though, where it already is an aesthetic platform, and people expect nice looking software, and like developing handsome apps to fit the general feel of the OS.
On Linux, sadly, people see interface design as optional, since the whole platform isn't very pretty (talking of window managers, not CLI, CLI is teh beautiful). Why make a nice looking app for KDE, KDE already looks like a spoonful of crap?
This can be said for Windows too, though at least there, there is a standard to the GUI, albeit a weak and kludgy one.
Ah yes, the good old inductive fallacy. David Hume thou art avenged!
Neither can we prove that things will fall (even terrestially) every time, that the sun will rise tomorrow, that H + O2 will be water, or ANYTHING in science. We can only observe it x times, and be relatively certain in our observations. Science never grants certanty, only pretty damn sure-ness. If these kids managed to reduce to principle, proven by a coherent web of theory, then they are more certain than the sum of their observations, but still not completely.
Not even Einsteinian physics are certain, afterall.
If we must run with the skeptic vibe, I would like to challenge you to disproving Descartes radical doubt? Can you PROVE, beyond a doubt, that anything exists besides the cogito (I think therefore I am)?
Mao = Bad. Communism = NOT communism, but a misapproriation of the word. Communism = Giving the workers the means to production, a premise which none, except the blinded, can call wrong.
As a true contrarian, I dismiss your post as being from the Right.
A true contrarian is a pure moderate. 90% of both sides is pure Dogma. And 99.9% of the POV of individuals in unresearched hearsay.
Being that I don't know the full story, I will withold judgement, or use it as an allegory to discuss freedom. It doesn't stop people from drawing (valid) lessons from the Bible (or other unconfirmed scriptures), that the work may be fictional.
It MIGHT have happened though, since the student reporting this alleged act would be breaking the law.
The say people support communism is the day humanity takes another step back progression of the human spirit and all its endeavors.
Unless, of course, your Marx, who saw Communism as the eventual end point of a (Hegelian) dialectic. To Marx, Communism is the end of economic history. Mind, it is not something strive towards in a direct way, but it does represent the telelogical ends (Marx is quoted as not being a "marxist" for this reason).
Granted communism as accepted by two of the worlds super-powers doesn't pan out right. But they are not pure communism as envisioned by Marx. You should read him, even if you refuse to agree with him. My view of laissez-faire was destroyed by reading him.
I haven't read Mao's book, but I should, even if I don't think I will agree with it. This preconception might be wrong, a mere product of capitalist conditioning. No harm in trying. I also read Mein Kampf, I was right in my preconceptions in that case (that it was crap), but I am a better person for reading it.
The "Great" books (books that have influenced millions) should be required reading in a society that doesn't not want to harbor mindless drones (read, USA). This means the Bible, the Koran, the Manifesto, Mein Kampf, The Little Red Book, the works of Joseph Smith (The invisible hand is a s great killer of men!), etc...
Of course, in America, we don't want an open minded populance anymore, we want trained idiots. We are to excell at a task, and know nothing more. This is the best way of perpetuating the powers-that-be.
I still find it odd that even in the hyper-liberal climate of America (where we learn of everything wrong that the White Men have done to everyone) we never learn of Eugenics, or of Hitler lauding our country in our sterilization policies. I think this should, also, be required reading to teach what happens when group-think goes wrong.
Above the actor peice, you have to find the premise TOO elaborite, to complex. It doesn't seem plausable in the slightest. Most kids learn about gravity. 99.9% of people have seen astronauts in space floating around. Tons of people have at least seen space-flicks such as Apollo 13, with a high G launch.
My faith in humanity (the poor shred there is left) cannot beleive that there exists people that stupid. Eventually they will have to question why the NO ONE ELSE uses gravity generators.
I am so sick of Reality tv, though I know I should like just for its post-modern irony. I think, even if not paid to do so, that all of reality tv is nothing but acting, these clowns are doing what is expected of them. I'm supposed to have a functional IQ of 2, and be a duplicitous bitch, so be it! This show, I still think, has taken it to the maximum logical level.
I'm too lazy to hunt, but above this comment there are several links to a page that confirms this. At least two of the non-actors are actors.
Do you really think that journalists dig that deep in entertainment peices? (or any peices nowadays).
How hard is it to dupe the average TV audience? Reality shows have a formula which they follow, based around shallow human emotions. These shallow human emotions are pretty easy to do. It wouldn't be hard to find a cast to act like petty idiots.
This is what people expect. Why would they ever question?
This is irreality television, staged for your pleasure. Part of the fun is that the audience cannot know that they are being duped, not the cast. It's like a post-modern reality show, the rolls have been switched.
I want a smart AND dumb interface. Smart as in it intuits what I need, and makes that more accesable. And dumb in the sense that it doesn't do ANYTHING unless I tell it to, and most of all, it never advertises its presence. You shouldn't have to think about a GUI, thats the point.
I'm glad that everyone who wants a simple interface is stupid. I will gladly move into the stupid camp.
As a long time geek I've got some iteration of the big 3 OSes on a box somewhere (OS X, XP Pro, and Debian/KDE). The OS X is the newest addition, and I find myself using it more and more, because it doesn't require me to think about it, it is a reflexive OS. This allows me to be more productive (writing, graphic design, some web-work).
Granted if I was a coder or admin this would be different, and I would stick to my Linux box. But for what I do it distracts me from my tasks. Thus people who don't code or admin are "idiots" by Linus. And most people don't code, nor want to.
I'm sorry if idiots don't want to think about their OS too much.
I'm officially handing in my Linux fan-club card today. No one wants to use Linux (by this I mean windows drones), and this attitude is why. I guess I'm just not 1337 enough for KDE anymore, I'm too busy getting things done to be 1337, so thats okay.
Can't we geeks drop this damn elitism? It is getting rather old. Sure, we can know that we got the skills, but if we want to break windows we have to realize that the average end-user DOESN'T, and DOESN'T want the skills. They want to do taxes, check email, write a letter, browse the web. Perhaps some decent device contectivity.
They don't want to write device drivers, and in hand with that, be confused.
And, its not like Gnome is going to kill KDE. Let the geeks stick with KDE if they want. Lets the users cut their teeth on Linux in the most pleasant of ways.
Has anyone stopped and though about this? Outside of the stale 1337 POV?
Are we going to accept that we WANT our grandparents to switch to Linux? For security, or to break the "evil" toe-hold of MS. If so it HAS TO HAVE THE GNOME VIEW. No one outside of us sadomasochistic geeks want a complicated computer, and to tell the truth I am getting sick of needless complexity (sure it should be there, but HIDDEN). And its not like Gnome is dumbing down Linux itself, it still allows term access, thus all of our arcane and 1337 complexity is a CLI away.
99% of people don't want to have to think about what their computer does, or what their OS is doing. They don't want a layer of transperency between the OS and the GUI. OS equals all of the nasty and dangerous guts, it has a large tag "here there be monsters". The GUI should, in their eyes, hide this.
If you want to be uber, fine, use KDE or don't bother with X. But to say to tell people not to because it is simple is absurd. Yes, I will be moderated as troll for disagreeing with the holy Linus. People want simple. People like simple. Everyday I pray to got that computing moves towards greater simplicity. Remember, though, simplicity DOES NOT mean less power, it just means that there is a guidline to hide the possibility of that (confusing) power deeper within the GUI interface.
I really wish the Linux GUI crowd would invent something like OS X (sitting on its nice BSD core), simple, functional, elegant. But it seems that the GUI side of OSS windows manager development is mildly retarded, or unable to accept that people like K.I.S.S. And more so (for you KDE designers) people want something they can look at all day.
Drat. Wasted my mod points in commenting to the troll-ish parent.
Good point though, I never really thought of the whole copyright issue from the view of a direct participant, only as one subject to the issue.
I like this idea. Since now it seems that they are ignoring 99.9% of copyright holders in the interest of the extreme minority. Can you put a value on ideas with this view? It seems that ideas become like gem stones, with some artificially inflated to high levels, where the rest of them are probably superior.
And what would this make you? Better then the average/.er? It seems like meta-egotism to me now. "You think you have a privledged view, well I have more privledged one than you and can tell you otherwise!" Seems arrogant to me.
And yes, geeks DO know more about some of the things you listed, since they actually create the culture which gives these works context. (granted not so much Aeon Flux, or the Simpsons, which is given context by some potheads in the 90's, and everyone else, repectivly). How much of the lay public have READ the Lord of the Rings, or have digested all of the Starwars mythos? Just by this I think we have a slighly priveledged point of view OF those topics, since we have created the context in which they are read. Before LoTR or Starwars I-III came out, what did people think of these topics? That they were geeky. Thank you.
Other than that, EVERYONE has a privledged point of view, and should express their opinion on the topics (the real, non-media ones) you express. We got in this mess because these business asshats have been running the show free from public scrutiny. Sadly, they are beginning to over-step bounds into effecting our actual culture adversly, and thus all participants in this culture have the right to comment, or fight. It is now in our domain, and it would be absurd to sit back and take it.
I'm sorry, movie reviewers do not count as "credentialed or recognized professionals, their opinions are as good as mine, yours, or some homeless parapelegic guy with a frontal lobotomy. Hence the mixed revies EVERY movie gets (or for literary critics, EVERY book gets). If these people were "professionals" don't you think there would be a method? No, they are coughing up pure opinion, and if you ask most of them they would agree. Unless I'm missing some objective, empirical methodology in which they secretly use. Thus the lay public IS allowed, and encouraged, to critique movies, AND the asshats that review them. This is how Hollywood makes or loses money. How many movies have you seen because your freind told you to see it, and how many because some fat moron on TV told you to see it?
This comes back to culture. This is a geek culture, and we listen to our fellows opinions since they have similar interests as us. The things that my fellow/.ers like are more likely to be something that I like than something some rich, hollywood mouthpeice tells me to like. I share a common culture, common goals, and such with people on/. (a higher percentage than in the world outside, at least, meaning still low).
So what is your ideal world like? Everyone shuts up and takes it? Experts are as gods, and we should bow to their will? Seems like a sure path to complancence, and domination. On should ALWAYS question the experts, this paradigm works.
Its nice to see that geeks are effected by the natural progression of media too.
First there is the problem, which is real. Then there is response, which is real. Then there is FUD. Which is unwarrented. Then there is marketting, which is amusing but unnescissary.
Root kits have been around for awhile, and this is the first one that has seen much attention. Just because of the former part of the proposition doesn't make them a huge threat. But the lay person will not see this, and thus think that Intel is saving western society. Fah.
It you look at the history of/. you will see that it is indeed a blog. And by your definition the BoingBoing lies about itself by calling itself a blog, since there are more than one maintainer. Ditto with any Blogspot account with multiple maintainers (there is a lot). My old sight used to use a blog for update information, there were 10 people who could post, and therefore it was no longer a blog? A blog simply lists stories in a reverse chronological order, usually has shorter update times, and shorter entries. It doesn't matter how the stories are selected. Welcome to CmdrTaco's blog!
I don't think code base matters too much either, being that you can have multiple code-bases leading to the same format. If you take a gander at/.'s frontpage and most blogs, it would be hard to tell the difference. Date. K. Author. K. Comments? K. Jingoistic title supporting a view? K. See,/. is a slightly more sophisticated version of a blogger account.
Are you missing the ethical issue? The verbatum lifting, and non-attibution of text is wrong, ethically. I'd actually view it a little beyong theft, since I do have more invested in my words than in my property. My words are my identity. There is more to life than money and getting your across, there are ethical standards of behavior (something that people increasingly ignore in their greed).
Also, if you are not attributed, then how does this ever reflect back on you? And with the amount of pulp media out there, how are you to ever know? We're talking a non-local system (blogs), suplanted by a local system, which could be anywhere. The odds of my thoughts being usurped by my local newspaper is very very slim considering the amount of other sources of hijacking there are.
Granted, without my writing being my primary profit flow, I would love to be picked up by mainstream media, with FULL ATTRIBUTION. Though this would be violating my blanket CC (noncomm, attribution, share), and I would fight it right now by matter of principle. I don't agree with oldschool copyright, but I am a supporter of CC and copyleft. If writing was to become profit for me, I would fight even more for protection, especially without attribution.
Also, if your writing, or the writing your reading, comes that easily there is something wrong. Most people who write would agree, that it requires work and thought. You can't just sit down at a keyboard and hammer out something, you need research, though, ideas, you need inspiration. The problem with most blogs is that they are effortless, so its just some idiot spaying idiocy with no backing, or logical progression. Sure, there are exceptions, but for the most part it comes down to the "opinion's are like assholes" clause, but sadly the latter is louder about the former.
Writing quality stuff is hard, and it is work. And as such it should be protected.
And sadly, you say this on one of the larger blogs on the internet.
And probably to, and with, some of the more clique factions of the internet. Not Slashdotters, but techies in general. We probably have one of the largest invented vocabularies of any feild.
Slashdot Mirror
You should try it on OS X, it has been a persistant (and persistantly ignored) bug on OS X for the last couple version (pre-PR, even). It runs like FireFox did on Windows around 0.5 . I can't cite my own usage right now, because I'm using the G4 Deerpark port, so my memory and processor use will be slightly more in-line than vanilla Firefox.
But with use, and exstensive tab use I will still climb into the hundreds of megs, even with the process idling. (App closed). As said above, the only way to clear up this wasted memory is by killing the process.
On OS X, it becomes almost unusable. I toy with switching to Opera daily, and use Safari for all my small tasks. Sadly, Safari updates kill Pithhelmet, so I lose my adblocker. And Opera seems rather like bloatware.
Here is an odd solution. Perhaps we can update our sexual mores up from victorian england, or our puritan roots?
Why the hell are Americans such damn prudes...
Sensationalize much?
I'm sure these NSA cookies lead to a massive loss of human life and limb. I'm sure they are also in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, and international law. Right....
Torture is bad, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND!
I'm getting sick of the idiotic political comments (not just here)... "In other news it will be warm and sunny, with highs reaching into the 80s... Like TORTURE, or ILLEGAL wiretaps!"
Please, keep the politics on topic at least. Random outbursts and false analogies doesn't further anyones case, it just makes the presenter look like an idiot.
Sorry for sounding caustic.
1. Because it is confiscation. You're taking away someone else's property, that he/she has earned through hard work, long hours, and dedication. In a capitalist economy, anyone can earn enough money to live on, any excess can be saved, invested, or blown on entertainment. What you do with that excess is your choice, and determines how you live.
/.er, but in the real world of production in which 90% of the population lives. 90% of the population is living one or two paychecks from the street. The price of labor is related to the cost of living, you pay them enough to keep them alive, and to let them reproduce.
And the capitalist is taking away the labor of the workers at a lesser cost than it is worth. This can be seen, also, as theft. Without the worker there is no value generated by production, the worker should get his/her FAIR share of capital, meaning more than a living wage. The profits, ideally, would be split amongst workers evenly and fairly, instead of companies paying workers the lowest possible amount to keep retention, as to increase their own capitol.
And obviously not everyone can have this execess capitol. Look around you, how many people actually have that much capitol? Not in the affluent technological world of the average
. How do you determine who gets what means of production? I call a share of the biopharm trade for myself, it's a lot more lucrative than the flooring sales I do now. It can't be too tough for me to learn it, our new utopia assures me that I am just as qualified for this as the people who have spent 10 years in post-secondary education learning nothing BUT biopharm.
If you add value via production to the product, then, in a Marxist society, then you are entitled your share. You are not qualified to the biofarm, sorry, unless you work it. This still would happen, it just cuts out the priveledged positions on top, who get more for less work.
If the proletariat has the means of production, they can still do practically nothing with it. They work in a factory, make chairs for themselves, go home with those chairs, and the wife sells them out of the house while the husband is at work. Without capitalism (there's that dirty word again) to hire subordinates to produce more chairs for more production, transportation to move the chairs to a retail shop, retail shops to distribute those chairs, everyone operates individually, and is stunted by all the various operations needed to make a profit. In an industrialized society, people HAVE to perform different functions. How can the means of production be owned by all when not everyone is capable of using it, and it is useless to have everyone use it?
Who said that Marxism precludes market? There still is a market, the workers can still sell their goods. And stores can still exist to distribute these goods. Everything would pretty much be like a worker run factory, which do exist (and are doing wonders in foreign countries where the wonderous capitalist globalization has abandoned them). You never underline why there must be "subordiates" that are hired out. There subordinates would just receive their fare share (linked to the value they add, and not to how little is needed to keep them).
Where does "means of production" end? Does it include retail shops? How do you assign value to these, and make it fair, so that the people working in the retail shops can be exactly as profitable as the people working in the factories?
The means of production don't end. But it can be comparmentalized. When the product is produced, then the means of production are done, or when it is distributed for sale. Sure, the guys who manufacture the hammer is part of the chain leading to the chair, but there is no reason to not treat them as discrete chunks of production.
Again, I am supporting Marxism, as opposed to communism. Marxist Communism is an end point of a dialectic. It isn't something to pick up arms for, we see what happens when you forc
I honestly believe that GAIM looks like garbage. I know the UI stuff is what OSS has been all about sucking at, and this is no departure from what seems like the norm, but c'mon. I am seriously waiting for the moment when GAIM can look like DeadAIM or Trillian, or anything in that general region of interest. Frankly, I think GAIM is a super powerful program, that I have loved for years, but damnit, make it look nice.
Odd, over here in OS X land we have a very nice looking multiclient, AduiumX, which happens to be open source as well. I think is goes some what to say that OSS doesn't HAVE to be ugly. It might have something to do with OSS development on OS X though, where it already is an aesthetic platform, and people expect nice looking software, and like developing handsome apps to fit the general feel of the OS.
On Linux, sadly, people see interface design as optional, since the whole platform isn't very pretty (talking of window managers, not CLI, CLI is teh beautiful). Why make a nice looking app for KDE, KDE already looks like a spoonful of crap?
This can be said for Windows too, though at least there, there is a standard to the GUI, albeit a weak and kludgy one.
Ah yes, the good old inductive fallacy. David Hume thou art avenged!
Neither can we prove that things will fall (even terrestially) every time, that the sun will rise tomorrow, that H + O2 will be water, or ANYTHING in science. We can only observe it x times, and be relatively certain in our observations. Science never grants certanty, only pretty damn sure-ness. If these kids managed to reduce to principle, proven by a coherent web of theory, then they are more certain than the sum of their observations, but still not completely.
Not even Einsteinian physics are certain, afterall.
If we must run with the skeptic vibe, I would like to challenge you to disproving Descartes radical doubt? Can you PROVE, beyond a doubt, that anything exists besides the cogito (I think therefore I am)?
Ouch. Propagandize more!
Viva la Capitalism, it can do no wrong!
Mao = Bad.
Communism = NOT communism, but a misapproriation of the word.
Communism = Giving the workers the means to production, a premise which none, except the blinded, can call wrong.
As a true contrarian, I dismiss your post as being from the Right.
A true contrarian is a pure moderate. 90% of both sides is pure Dogma. And 99.9% of the POV of individuals in unresearched hearsay.
Being that I don't know the full story, I will withold judgement, or use it as an allegory to discuss freedom. It doesn't stop people from drawing (valid) lessons from the Bible (or other unconfirmed scriptures), that the work may be fictional.
It MIGHT have happened though, since the student reporting this alleged act would be breaking the law.
Flippant comment following:
Seems applicable in the US too. Or some people would say so.
Not sure if I'm on their team though.
The say people support communism is the day humanity takes another step back progression of the human spirit and all its endeavors.
Unless, of course, your Marx, who saw Communism as the eventual end point of a (Hegelian) dialectic. To Marx, Communism is the end of economic history. Mind, it is not something strive towards in a direct way, but it does represent the telelogical ends (Marx is quoted as not being a "marxist" for this reason).
Granted communism as accepted by two of the worlds super-powers doesn't pan out right. But they are not pure communism as envisioned by Marx. You should read him, even if you refuse to agree with him. My view of laissez-faire was destroyed by reading him.
I haven't read Mao's book, but I should, even if I don't think I will agree with it. This preconception might be wrong, a mere product of capitalist conditioning. No harm in trying. I also read Mein Kampf, I was right in my preconceptions in that case (that it was crap), but I am a better person for reading it.
The "Great" books (books that have influenced millions) should be required reading in a society that doesn't not want to harbor mindless drones (read, USA). This means the Bible, the Koran, the Manifesto, Mein Kampf, The Little Red Book, the works of Joseph Smith (The invisible hand is a s great killer of men!), etc...
Of course, in America, we don't want an open minded populance anymore, we want trained idiots. We are to excell at a task, and know nothing more. This is the best way of perpetuating the powers-that-be.
I still find it odd that even in the hyper-liberal climate of America (where we learn of everything wrong that the White Men have done to everyone) we never learn of Eugenics, or of Hitler lauding our country in our sterilization policies. I think this should, also, be required reading to teach what happens when group-think goes wrong.
Above the actor peice, you have to find the premise TOO elaborite, to complex. It doesn't seem plausable in the slightest. Most kids learn about gravity. 99.9% of people have seen astronauts in space floating around. Tons of people have at least seen space-flicks such as Apollo 13, with a high G launch.
My faith in humanity (the poor shred there is left) cannot beleive that there exists people that stupid. Eventually they will have to question why the NO ONE ELSE uses gravity generators.
I am so sick of Reality tv, though I know I should like just for its post-modern irony. I think, even if not paid to do so, that all of reality tv is nothing but acting, these clowns are doing what is expected of them. I'm supposed to have a functional IQ of 2, and be a duplicitous bitch, so be it! This show, I still think, has taken it to the maximum logical level.
I'm too lazy to hunt, but above this comment there are several links to a page that confirms this. At least two of the non-actors are actors.
Do you really think that journalists dig that deep in entertainment peices? (or any peices nowadays).
How hard is it to dupe the average TV audience? Reality shows have a formula which they follow, based around shallow human emotions. These shallow human emotions are pretty easy to do. It wouldn't be hard to find a cast to act like petty idiots.
This is what people expect. Why would they ever question?
No, not some of them being actors...
ALL of them.
This is irreality television, staged for your pleasure. Part of the fun is that the audience cannot know that they are being duped, not the cast. It's like a post-modern reality show, the rolls have been switched.
I know I'm misusing your words here but...
I want a smart AND dumb interface. Smart as in it intuits what I need, and makes that more accesable. And dumb in the sense that it doesn't do ANYTHING unless I tell it to, and most of all, it never advertises its presence. You shouldn't have to think about a GUI, thats the point.
I'm glad that everyone who wants a simple interface is stupid. I will gladly move into the stupid camp.
As a long time geek I've got some iteration of the big 3 OSes on a box somewhere (OS X, XP Pro, and Debian/KDE). The OS X is the newest addition, and I find myself using it more and more, because it doesn't require me to think about it, it is a reflexive OS. This allows me to be more productive (writing, graphic design, some web-work).
Granted if I was a coder or admin this would be different, and I would stick to my Linux box. But for what I do it distracts me from my tasks. Thus people who don't code or admin are "idiots" by Linus. And most people don't code, nor want to.
I'm sorry if idiots don't want to think about their OS too much.
I'm officially handing in my Linux fan-club card today. No one wants to use Linux (by this I mean windows drones), and this attitude is why. I guess I'm just not 1337 enough for KDE anymore, I'm too busy getting things done to be 1337, so thats okay.
Can't we geeks drop this damn elitism? It is getting rather old. Sure, we can know that we got the skills, but if we want to break windows we have to realize that the average end-user DOESN'T, and DOESN'T want the skills. They want to do taxes, check email, write a letter, browse the web. Perhaps some decent device contectivity.
They don't want to write device drivers, and in hand with that, be confused.
And, its not like Gnome is going to kill KDE. Let the geeks stick with KDE if they want. Lets the users cut their teeth on Linux in the most pleasant of ways.
Agreed. I don't see how wanting to ignore my GUI as I work makes me idiotic.
The perfect GUI = Sleek, steamlined, utterly ignorable, simple.
While, of course, still having all the power. Which Gnome does, since I can still get my term CLI.
But I know salespeople who've tried both Gnome and KDE and come down firmly on the KDE side.
:)
Then it must be true!
Has anyone stopped and though about this? Outside of the stale 1337 POV?
Are we going to accept that we WANT our grandparents to switch to Linux? For security, or to break the "evil" toe-hold of MS. If so it HAS TO HAVE THE GNOME VIEW. No one outside of us sadomasochistic geeks want a complicated computer, and to tell the truth I am getting sick of needless complexity (sure it should be there, but HIDDEN). And its not like Gnome is dumbing down Linux itself, it still allows term access, thus all of our arcane and 1337 complexity is a CLI away.
99% of people don't want to have to think about what their computer does, or what their OS is doing. They don't want a layer of transperency between the OS and the GUI. OS equals all of the nasty and dangerous guts, it has a large tag "here there be monsters". The GUI should, in their eyes, hide this.
If you want to be uber, fine, use KDE or don't bother with X. But to say to tell people not to because it is simple is absurd. Yes, I will be moderated as troll for disagreeing with the holy Linus. People want simple. People like simple. Everyday I pray to got that computing moves towards greater simplicity. Remember, though, simplicity DOES NOT mean less power, it just means that there is a guidline to hide the possibility of that (confusing) power deeper within the GUI interface.
I really wish the Linux GUI crowd would invent something like OS X (sitting on its nice BSD core), simple, functional, elegant. But it seems that the GUI side of OSS windows manager development is mildly retarded, or unable to accept that people like K.I.S.S. And more so (for you KDE designers) people want something they can look at all day.
Not geeks, people. Mod down at will.
Drat. Wasted my mod points in commenting to the troll-ish parent.
Good point though, I never really thought of the whole copyright issue from the view of a direct participant, only as one subject to the issue.
I like this idea. Since now it seems that they are ignoring 99.9% of copyright holders in the interest of the extreme minority. Can you put a value on ideas with this view? It seems that ideas become like gem stones, with some artificially inflated to high levels, where the rest of them are probably superior.
And what would this make you? Better then the average /.er? It seems like meta-egotism to me now. "You think you have a privledged view, well I have more privledged one than you and can tell you otherwise!" Seems arrogant to me.
/.ers like are more likely to be something that I like than something some rich, hollywood mouthpeice tells me to like. I share a common culture, common goals, and such with people on /. (a higher percentage than in the world outside, at least, meaning still low).
And yes, geeks DO know more about some of the things you listed, since they actually create the culture which gives these works context. (granted not so much Aeon Flux, or the Simpsons, which is given context by some potheads in the 90's, and everyone else, repectivly). How much of the lay public have READ the Lord of the Rings, or have digested all of the Starwars mythos? Just by this I think we have a slighly priveledged point of view OF those topics, since we have created the context in which they are read. Before LoTR or Starwars I-III came out, what did people think of these topics? That they were geeky. Thank you.
Other than that, EVERYONE has a privledged point of view, and should express their opinion on the topics (the real, non-media ones) you express. We got in this mess because these business asshats have been running the show free from public scrutiny. Sadly, they are beginning to over-step bounds into effecting our actual culture adversly, and thus all participants in this culture have the right to comment, or fight. It is now in our domain, and it would be absurd to sit back and take it.
I'm sorry, movie reviewers do not count as "credentialed or recognized professionals, their opinions are as good as mine, yours, or some homeless parapelegic guy with a frontal lobotomy. Hence the mixed revies EVERY movie gets (or for literary critics, EVERY book gets). If these people were "professionals" don't you think there would be a method? No, they are coughing up pure opinion, and if you ask most of them they would agree. Unless I'm missing some objective, empirical methodology in which they secretly use. Thus the lay public IS allowed, and encouraged, to critique movies, AND the asshats that review them. This is how Hollywood makes or loses money. How many movies have you seen because your freind told you to see it, and how many because some fat moron on TV told you to see it?
This comes back to culture. This is a geek culture, and we listen to our fellows opinions since they have similar interests as us. The things that my fellow
So what is your ideal world like? Everyone shuts up and takes it? Experts are as gods, and we should bow to their will? Seems like a sure path to complancence, and domination. On should ALWAYS question the experts, this paradigm works.
Its nice to see that geeks are effected by the natural progression of media too.
First there is the problem, which is real.
Then there is response, which is real.
Then there is FUD. Which is unwarrented.
Then there is marketting, which is amusing but unnescissary.
Root kits have been around for awhile, and this is the first one that has seen much attention. Just because of the former part of the proposition doesn't make them a huge threat. But the lay person will not see this, and thus think that Intel is saving western society. Fah.
Never noticed it still worked. At least in the terminal.app on OS X backspace works fine, and most distros I've tinkered with as well.
/. thinks of CLI as arcane anymore. :)
The first bit was supposed to be funny. Guess no one on
How did you get modded troll? Silly mods, innocent questions are not trolls. Guess you just weren't 1337 enough for someones taste, phhhhht.
/. humor. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot_subculture#. 5EH.5EH.5EH.5EH
In older text editors, and in certain arcane and obscure OSs of yesteryear ^W (ctrl-w) deleted a word, unlike ^H, which deleted a character. Hence the bad
It you look at the history of /. you will see that it is indeed a blog. And by your definition the BoingBoing lies about itself by calling itself a blog, since there are more than one maintainer. Ditto with any Blogspot account with multiple maintainers (there is a lot). My old sight used to use a blog for update information, there were 10 people who could post, and therefore it was no longer a blog? A blog simply lists stories in a reverse chronological order, usually has shorter update times, and shorter entries. It doesn't matter how the stories are selected. Welcome to CmdrTaco's blog!
/.'s frontpage and most blogs, it would be hard to tell the difference. Date. K. Author. K. Comments? K. Jingoistic title supporting a view? K. See, /. is a slightly more sophisticated version of a blogger account.
I don't think code base matters too much either, being that you can have multiple code-bases leading to the same format. If you take a gander at
What makes Slashcode different? Really?
Are you missing the ethical issue? The verbatum lifting, and non-attibution of text is wrong, ethically. I'd actually view it a little beyong theft, since I do have more invested in my words than in my property. My words are my identity. There is more to life than money and getting your across, there are ethical standards of behavior (something that people increasingly ignore in their greed).
Also, if you are not attributed, then how does this ever reflect back on you? And with the amount of pulp media out there, how are you to ever know? We're talking a non-local system (blogs), suplanted by a local system, which could be anywhere. The odds of my thoughts being usurped by my local newspaper is very very slim considering the amount of other sources of hijacking there are.
Granted, without my writing being my primary profit flow, I would love to be picked up by mainstream media, with FULL ATTRIBUTION. Though this would be violating my blanket CC (noncomm, attribution, share), and I would fight it right now by matter of principle. I don't agree with oldschool copyright, but I am a supporter of CC and copyleft. If writing was to become profit for me, I would fight even more for protection, especially without attribution.
Also, if your writing, or the writing your reading, comes that easily there is something wrong. Most people who write would agree, that it requires work and thought. You can't just sit down at a keyboard and hammer out something, you need research, though, ideas, you need inspiration. The problem with most blogs is that they are effortless, so its just some idiot spaying idiocy with no backing, or logical progression. Sure, there are exceptions, but for the most part it comes down to the "opinion's are like assholes" clause, but sadly the latter is louder about the former.
Writing quality stuff is hard, and it is work. And as such it should be protected.
And sadly, you say this on one of the larger blogs on the internet.
And probably to, and with, some of the more clique factions of the internet. Not Slashdotters, but techies in general. We probably have one of the largest invented vocabularies of any feild.