I've worked in an environment where I tried very hard to get people to start using linux, and even among technical people, there's more resistance than you think, and some of it probably isn't linux.. it's just human nature to resist change, good or bad. Linux will have a signifigant curve to climb just here.
But, let's be realistic: Joe user cares zero about adminstration or even backups in most cases. They should, but that's just not the case. Linux is very much geared towards power-freak gadget-head techies, and that's why we love it so much!
This isn't a bad thing though! What we need is a idiot-friendly version of linux that installs from windows with 2 clicks. Something that makes redhat look technical. An installer that can automatically detetect common partition configurations, make linux a home automatically, and install away! Hell, I'd even like that.
But it doesn't stop there. You need to have a distribution that is 100% gui oriented. No complicated user add procedures - and adduser myname is too compliciated. Just boot into E or KDE or whatever, run a web browser and have a WHOLE $HITLOAD of GUI applications available in the start menu, with lots of eye candy.
Gnome and KDE are coming a long way towards this goal, but we're a few years off. Everyone working on their own little piece will bring us this goal - are you listening, Corel/Redhat/Debian?
This is just plain _wrong_. Does anyone else have flashbacks to big brother, or is it just me? Why would a private organization have _any_ responsibility to the FBI to make things "easily tappable". If it's easy for them, is it easy for any 'ol hacker to as well? Just telnet in, "come get your 0day logs here!"
This sort of thing in private industry makes me just plain sick to my stomach - I'm not an american, but I worry because this nuttiness finds it's way north of the border sooner or later. I thought america was supposed to be the land of the free, yet as an outside observer I see your rights getting quickly taken away in the name of either a drug-free (even your politicians smoke dope!) or protecting children (duh, that's what parents are for).
For example, in Canada, almost _no_ organization will require drug testing for engineering work - yet this is the opposite case in the US. Perhaps when they start looking for DNA samples, protests will start?
Federal screwing with the internet has to stop. Making the internet easy for the feds probably will make it possible for any MORON to play with your router logs.
Answer with your wallet - don't buy hardware that supports features like this. Until people stand up, you'll continue to get walked over. But why worry, you have nothing to hide, right?
Instead, buy hardware that supports idiot-friendly secure encryption, and I don't mean 48 bit DES, either. If the net is encrypted, who gives a flying @#$@# who's listening. They can get a court order to make you turn over your keys - just like they can do for your house.
Hey, I said there was a lot of space - which there is - I didn't say there was a lot of space in convienent areas, or areas where it would be cheap. Just that there's lots of room to put garbage. The world isn't confined to the United States, either - there are extrememly huge wastelands in Canada (and the US).
You don't have to go ruining artic environments, either. There's _lots_ of room to go under, just bury it in the proper geology. But, that's not cheap. (or easy!)
When the cost goes up, so will the cost of disposable products. If you need that product, and the disposable product's impact is smaller, then the disposable product is a better choice _right now_. That might change, but lots of things might change.
One of the prices of being technologically developed is a negative impact on our planet. That's just the way it is. There's nothing we can do about it besides get rid of a lot of people, and Mother Earth hasn't gotten that cranky (yet).
There is a big question about nuclear power plants - I've heard that cancer rates go up around them, and you need to mine uranium, which is hard on the environment - but thanks to Nuclear Weapons, there's lots and lots of fissionable material available.
Some people argue that the damage that radiation can do doesn't make it worth it at any rate. You can ruin land _forever_ if there is an accident.
In my opinion, while other sources of energy are available, we should use those, instead. We still don't understand photosynthesis - plants dissociate water into H+ for energy transport - much like a fuel cell - and nobody is exactly sure how they do this without burning up. My dad who is a PhD Genetist laments about that frequently - in most biology textbooks, there's a "and then a miracle happens" box in the explaination. OTOH, Not many engineers take biology!:)
The technology is important though, because it might lead to breakthroughs in other forms of atomic power, like fusion, or ways to deal with radiation we're not aware of. This is why I suspect no more nuclear plants are being built, but they're not being shut down, either.
The end of the world speeches by environmentalists are largely without regard for technology. We're only beginning to understand the marvels of the universe, and there's lots of friendly energy sources to exploit along the way. In other words, your computer won't be SOL anytime soon (barring Y2K disasters!:)
I would like to point out that we're not being "buried in our own garbage". This is largely a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is, and sometimes, "just throwing it away", is the best thing to do from a environmental perspective!
I don't want to start a flamewar, and I'll probably get moderated down by an eco-freak, but please concider that when you recycle something, it doesn't magically turn into another product. It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free. It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant. Recycling is often worse than throwing it away!
Interestingly enough, a study done in England (Referenced in American Scientific, Sigma Xi Jorunal) indicates that recycling causes _more_ consumption, since people _feel good_ about using recycled products!
This doesn't mean a throw away culture is OK - but if you need the service or product, it might make sense. There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need, 'cause we'll do ourselves long in based on current population projections before this is an issue.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Recycling is last, because it doesn't work very well! Why does everyone forget about the first two, which work _Really_ well. Cut down, and reuse.
Just because it's disposable, doesn't mean it's bad. It might even be BETTER. It might not feel good, though. Consuming resources is something we should think about, and I think people think sucking energy is OK just because it's being recycled, which sometimes is really dumb.
Think about that when you're haulin those bottles back in your 4 ton Ford Extrusion, er, Excursion, wasting a resource we should conserve - gasoline.
Slashdot Mirror
I've worked in an environment where I tried very hard to get people to start using linux, and even among technical people, there's more resistance than you think, and some of it probably isn't linux.. it's just human nature to resist change, good or bad. Linux will have a signifigant curve to climb just here.
But, let's be realistic: Joe user cares zero about adminstration or even backups in most cases. They should, but that's just not the case. Linux is very much geared towards power-freak gadget-head techies, and that's why we love it so much!
This isn't a bad thing though! What we need is a idiot-friendly version of linux that installs from windows with 2 clicks. Something that makes redhat look technical. An installer that can automatically detetect common partition configurations, make linux a home automatically, and install away! Hell, I'd even like that.
But it doesn't stop there. You need to have a distribution that is 100% gui oriented. No complicated user add procedures - and adduser myname is too compliciated. Just boot into E or KDE or whatever, run a web browser and have a WHOLE $HITLOAD of GUI applications available in the start menu, with lots of eye candy.
Gnome and KDE are coming a long way towards this goal, but we're a few years off. Everyone working on their own little piece will bring us this goal - are you listening, Corel/Redhat/Debian?
Kudos..
This is just plain _wrong_. Does anyone else have flashbacks to big brother, or is it just me? Why would a private organization have _any_ responsibility to the FBI to make things "easily tappable". If it's easy for them, is it easy for any 'ol hacker to as well? Just telnet in, "come get your 0day logs here!"
This sort of thing in private industry makes me just plain sick to my stomach - I'm not an american, but I worry because this nuttiness finds it's way north of the border sooner or later. I thought america was supposed to be the land of the free, yet as an outside observer I see your rights getting quickly taken away in the name of either a drug-free (even your politicians smoke dope!) or protecting children (duh, that's what parents are for).
For example, in Canada, almost _no_ organization will require drug testing for engineering work - yet this is the opposite case in the US. Perhaps when they start looking for DNA samples, protests will start?
Federal screwing with the internet has to stop. Making the internet easy for the feds probably will make it possible for any MORON to play with your router logs.
Answer with your wallet - don't buy hardware that supports features like this. Until people stand up, you'll continue to get walked over. But why worry, you have nothing to hide, right?
Instead, buy hardware that supports idiot-friendly secure encryption, and I don't mean 48 bit DES, either. If the net is encrypted, who gives a flying @#$@# who's listening. They can get a court order to make you turn over your keys - just like they can do for your house.
Kudos..
Hey, I said there was a lot of space - which there is - I didn't say there was a lot of space in convienent areas, or areas where it would be cheap. Just that there's lots of room to put garbage. The world isn't confined to the United States, either - there are extrememly huge wastelands in Canada (and the US).
You don't have to go ruining artic environments, either. There's _lots_ of room to go under, just bury it in the proper geology. But, that's not cheap. (or easy!)
When the cost goes up, so will the cost of disposable products. If you need that product, and the disposable product's impact is smaller, then the disposable product is a better choice _right now_. That might change, but lots of things might change.
One of the prices of being technologically developed is a negative impact on our planet. That's just the way it is. There's nothing we can do about it besides get rid of a lot of people, and Mother Earth hasn't gotten that cranky (yet).
Just putting things in perspective, I hope.
Kudos..
There is a big question about nuclear power plants - I've heard that cancer rates go up around them, and you need to mine uranium, which is hard on the environment - but thanks to Nuclear Weapons, there's lots and lots of fissionable material available.
Some people argue that the damage that radiation can do doesn't make it worth it at any rate. You can ruin land _forever_ if there is an accident.
In my opinion, while other sources of energy are available, we should use those, instead. We still don't understand photosynthesis - plants dissociate water into H+ for energy transport - much like a fuel cell - and nobody is exactly sure how they do this without burning up. My dad who is a PhD Genetist laments about that frequently - in most biology textbooks, there's a "and then a miracle happens" box in the explaination. OTOH, Not many engineers take biology! :)
The technology is important though, because it might lead to breakthroughs in other forms of atomic power, like fusion, or ways to deal with radiation we're not aware of. This is why I suspect no more nuclear plants are being built, but they're not being shut down, either.
The end of the world speeches by environmentalists are largely without regard for technology. We're only beginning to understand the marvels of the universe, and there's lots of friendly energy sources to exploit along the way. In other words, your computer won't be SOL anytime soon (barring Y2K disasters! :)
Kudos..
I would like to point out that we're not being "buried in our own garbage". This is largely a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is, and sometimes, "just throwing it away", is the best thing to do from a environmental perspective!
I don't want to start a flamewar, and I'll probably get moderated down by an eco-freak, but please concider that when you recycle something, it doesn't magically turn into another product. It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free. It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant. Recycling is often worse than throwing it away!
Interestingly enough, a study done in England (Referenced in American Scientific, Sigma Xi Jorunal) indicates that recycling causes _more_ consumption, since people _feel good_ about using recycled products!
This doesn't mean a throw away culture is OK - but if you need the service or product, it might make sense. There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need, 'cause we'll do ourselves long in based on current population projections before this is an issue.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Recycling is last, because it doesn't work very well! Why does everyone forget about the first two, which work _Really_ well. Cut down, and reuse.
Just because it's disposable, doesn't mean it's bad. It might even be BETTER. It might not feel good, though. Consuming resources is something we should think about, and I think people think sucking energy is OK just because it's being recycled, which sometimes is really dumb.
Think about that when you're haulin those bottles back in your 4 ton Ford Extrusion, er, Excursion, wasting a resource we should conserve - gasoline.
Kudos!