Yeah, while John Stossel did do a lot of cool "Give me a Break" segments, he did do a few off the wall crotchety ones.
I remember a particular one where he was saying "Give me a Break" about the Microsoft antitrust trial. Yeah, let's all give Microsoft a break, that's just what they deserve.
Every once in a while it is fun to watch in a deer-caught-in-headlights manner, because it feels more like a sports news show, with flashy cutscenes and revolving boxes and glib commentary passed off as news. It's completely surreal. I was watching on Scarborough Country, where he spent a whole segment railing against government subsidizing of research into potato crop diseases, I MEAN THAT SI CRAZY! WASTING OUR MONIES INTO RESARCHING DISEASES OF OUR FOOD SUPPLY HAR HAR STUPAD GOVERNIMENT! WE SHOULD BE BYING MISCILES TO FIGHT COMMIES WITH!
Yes, it is a sad day when American citizens cannot distinguish between cartoon news and real news. I guess Fox News is worried about confusion in their audience base? Maybe O'Reilly should do a "Give me a break" segement.
Uh, right, maybe/proc fulfills that subset of features, and maybe/sysfs fulfills another, and maybe some other ad-hoc mechanism fulfills yet another, but there is no direct, integrated, shell-accessible API, that spans the entire kernel/platform as far as I know. 1000 piecemeal overlapping solutions that may or may not work depending on configuration and what shell you are using is not the same thing as a 100% integrated solution.
Yeah, Beanshell is great...but do YOU run a Java operating system? What good is it if you can't integrate with the OS itself? That is one of the big apparent wins of MSH. Of course bash/ksh will never get anything like this because all the "elites" will resist anything 1) influenced by MS 2) new and different 3) Object Oriented, because that is for "pansies"
I have a feeling the zealots would be content sitting at vt100 green screens railing about how much better their terminal software is, with a 99% MS dominance in all areas, instead of deigning to compete with MS on its own field.
It's unfortunate that the open source community is eminently open to good new ideas, all except those that originate from MS (yes, a couple do once in a while, they pile tons of cash into R&D!), because it is inherently "evil". What a shame.
"It's a fact that one day most people will be technologically unemployed by robotics, AI, molecular manufacturing, etc."
No, it will simply be cheaper for technologically advanced societies to more efficiently farm work out to the vast majority of people living in poverty that don't have a choice. We have machines today, called humans, and they work for damn cheap (elsewhere). The utopic aspect of technology is way overblow (why build a robot when all you need is a gun).
Charging artificially inflated prices accross the board to subsidize anti-competitive discounts to customers considering switching is completely consistent with a monopoly.
It's tantamount to a cop with a bumper sticker: "Crime pays". Yeah it might be true, or funny, or sarcastic. But when it is promulgated by somebody who is actually purporting to SOLVE the problem you can only conclude that the person is 1) extremely cynical and/or 2) does not really care about solving the problem in the first place.
I urge all slashdotters with day jobs to add "Buffer overflows aren't really a big deal" or "Just set your password to your favorite color" to their sigs, if you really think that type of thing is appropriate.
(this is not a free speech or humor issue, it is a professionalism issue, and that appears to be lacking in these Diebold emails)
"You get the best brains to really think about the problem."
The best brains have already thought about it, and concluded it cannot currently be done with an acceptible level of fidelity. That is basically the reason the GNU-Free project stopped (yeah, there was a FSF electronic voting project).
No network transparency may not be one of them, but the design decisions that facilitated X's specific model introduce a latency bottlenceck. Nobody cares about throughput, it's about latency.
X is too slow. This is commonly dismissed as nonsense due to the
high throughput that tweaked implementations of X have been proven to achieve1. What this does not take into account is that in the general case it is latency that matters more than throughput [6]. Unfortunately, the design of X does not facilitate low latency. "Y: A Successor to the X Window System" - Mark Thomas
* Image data and latency dominate times... * Applications still tied to X server latency... * Fix toolkits to reduce round-trips... * Toolkits should use X events for geometry instead of polling * Toolkits shouldn't need AllocColor for static visuals "LBX Postmortem" - Keith Packard
Yes, bad toolkits are probably largely to blame for this, but so is X for making it so easy to write bad toolkits, and doing little in the way of modeling modern facilities like client-to-client communication, and rendering optimizations that have to be pastiched together on top of one another.
I have never heard of "publishing" as a requirement for copy right. At least here in the US, if I write it down, it implicitly and immediately is copyrighted to me (of course, going through the process of officially "registering" the copyright will improve my chances of success in case of plagiarism, etc.). That said there have been several historical "exceptions" to copyright, e.g. recipes, instructions I believe, stuff like that isn't copyrightable. Until recently "databases" of public info wasn't copyrightable either, but they passed some dumbass law because I guess they figured marketers need even more protection!
Uh, why are universities patenting their research? Aren't they supposed to be releasing info for public use?
That is partially a rhetorical question, and my partial answer is that federal cuts have probably reduced grants/funds to the point that universities must (and indeed they have long since started to) patent and sell their research, sometimes with tacit partnership with industry with specific products in mind, as opposed to being "pure" research.
I'm not against the public, businesses included, profiting from university research, I'm just sort of skeptical of universities getting patents (anathema to the whole purpose of universities), and then licensing them to a select few that pay enough. Otherwise our universities just become off-site research labs for specific companies (i.e. the ones with the money).
WOW You're right! We don't need more fracturing! We need MORE STAGNATION! Heavens no, don't fork: just let your project rot and drive all your volunteers away!
He only flew off the handle in response to stupifying and insulting statements made towards him as he was ASKING to be given CVS commit access to save everyone time and effort. I believe his "don't reply to me" email was simply a sarcastic response to the other guy being WAY overreactive, not meant seriously.
If I were being sincere and asking for help, it sure would piss me off to have random people wander into the the discussion and start insulting me for no reason.
If anything XFree's behavior is immature and unprofessional. Rubbing it in to a volunteer that he doesn't have a "real job" is no way to ATTRACT VOLUNTEERS. Duh.
Can somebody explain what the big deal here is? Aren't the movies reviewed AFTER they come out? If so, how is this a non-negligable risk of piracy at any stretch of the imagination, when Joe Viewer can pick up a DVD, rip it, and then return it, or mill them off in Asia? How are these "screeners" contributing to piracy? Is Tom Hanks running some operation out of his garage or something?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, while John Stossel did do a lot of cool "Give me a Break" segments, he did do a few off the wall crotchety ones.
I remember a particular one where he was saying "Give me a Break" about the Microsoft antitrust trial. Yeah, let's all give Microsoft a break, that's just what they deserve.
Every once in a while it is fun to watch in a deer-caught-in-headlights manner, because it feels more like a sports news show, with flashy cutscenes and revolving boxes and glib commentary passed off as news. It's completely surreal. I was watching on Scarborough Country, where he spent a whole segment railing against government subsidizing of research into potato crop diseases, I MEAN THAT SI CRAZY! WASTING OUR MONIES INTO RESARCHING DISEASES OF OUR FOOD SUPPLY HAR HAR STUPAD GOVERNIMENT! WE SHOULD BE BYING MISCILES TO FIGHT COMMIES WITH!
OMG tickers! Somebody MIGHT STEAL our futaristic tikker tehcnology ! SUE SUE
"it really says hat FNC thinks their viewers are in fact incredibly stupid."
Either that, or that it is hard to distinguish Fox News, from cartoon news.
Yes, it is a sad day when American citizens cannot distinguish between cartoon news and real news. I guess Fox News is worried about confusion in their audience base? Maybe O'Reilly should do a "Give me a break" segement.
Uh, right, maybe /proc fulfills that subset of features, and maybe /sysfs fulfills another, and maybe some other ad-hoc mechanism fulfills yet another, but there is no direct, integrated, shell-accessible API, that spans the entire kernel/platform as far as I know. 1000 piecemeal overlapping solutions that may or may not work depending on configuration and what shell you are using is not the same thing as a 100% integrated solution.
Yeah, Beanshell is great...but do YOU run a Java operating system? What good is it if you can't integrate with the OS itself? That is one of the big apparent wins of MSH. Of course bash/ksh will never get anything like this because all the "elites" will resist anything 1) influenced by MS 2) new and different 3) Object Oriented, because that is for "pansies"
I have a feeling the zealots would be content sitting at vt100 green screens railing about how much better their terminal software is, with a 99% MS dominance in all areas, instead of deigning to compete with MS on its own field.
It's unfortunate that the open source community is eminently open to good new ideas, all except those that originate from MS (yes, a couple do once in a while, they pile tons of cash into R&D!), because it is inherently "evil". What a shame.
"It's a fact that one day most people will be technologically unemployed by robotics, AI, molecular manufacturing, etc."
No, it will simply be cheaper for technologically advanced societies to more efficiently farm work out to the vast majority of people living in poverty that don't have a choice. We have machines today, called humans, and they work for damn cheap (elsewhere). The utopic aspect of technology is way overblow (why build a robot when all you need is a gun).
"Secondly, putting a lid on any sort of research is bad."
What an astounding statement.
Charging artificially inflated prices accross the board to subsidize anti-competitive discounts to customers considering switching is completely consistent with a monopoly.
It's tantamount to a cop with a bumper sticker: "Crime pays". Yeah it might be true, or funny, or sarcastic. But when it is promulgated by somebody who is actually purporting to SOLVE the problem you can only conclude that the person is 1) extremely cynical and/or 2) does not really care about solving the problem in the first place.
I urge all slashdotters with day jobs to add "Buffer overflows aren't really a big deal" or "Just set your password to your favorite color" to their sigs, if you really think that type of thing is appropriate.
(this is not a free speech or humor issue, it is a professionalism issue, and that appears to be lacking in these Diebold emails)
"You get the best brains to really think about the problem."
The best brains have already thought about it, and concluded it cannot currently be done with an acceptible level of fidelity. That is basically the reason the GNU-Free project stopped (yeah, there was a FSF electronic voting project).
Yes, bad toolkits are probably largely to blame for this, but so is X for making it so easy to write bad toolkits, and doing little in the way of modeling modern facilities like client-to-client communication, and rendering optimizations that have to be pastiched together on top of one another.
...it's what you do with it
/me ducks)
(sorry had to be said,
I have never heard of "publishing" as a requirement for copy right. At least here in the US, if I write it down, it implicitly and immediately is copyrighted to me (of course, going through the process of officially "registering" the copyright will improve my chances of success in case of plagiarism, etc.). That said there have been several historical "exceptions" to copyright, e.g. recipes, instructions I believe, stuff like that isn't copyrightable. Until recently "databases" of public info wasn't copyrightable either, but they passed some dumbass law because I guess they figured marketers need even more protection!
Duh, my bad! In this case the company, Sony, is foreign, so the argument may not be as applicable.
Uh, why are universities patenting their research? Aren't they supposed to be releasing info for public use?
That is partially a rhetorical question, and my partial answer is that federal cuts have probably reduced grants/funds to the point that universities must (and indeed they have long since started to) patent and sell their research, sometimes with tacit partnership with industry with specific products in mind, as opposed to being "pure" research.
I'm not against the public, businesses included, profiting from university research, I'm just sort of skeptical of universities getting patents (anathema to the whole purpose of universities), and then licensing them to a select few that pay enough. Otherwise our universities just become off-site research labs for specific companies (i.e. the ones with the money).
WOW You're right! We don't need more fracturing! We need MORE STAGNATION! Heavens no, don't fork: just let your project rot and drive all your volunteers away!
What does that have to do with XFree? You just said that Cygwin was good, not XFree.
He only flew off the handle in response to stupifying and insulting statements made towards him as he was ASKING to be given CVS commit access to save everyone time and effort. I believe his "don't reply to me" email was simply a sarcastic response to the other guy being WAY overreactive, not meant seriously.
If I were being sincere and asking for help, it sure would piss me off to have random people wander into the the discussion and start insulting me for no reason.
If anything XFree's behavior is immature and unprofessional. Rubbing it in to a volunteer that he doesn't have a "real job" is no way to ATTRACT VOLUNTEERS. Duh.
"I think it shows how inefficient mother nature is. Stupid nature, not forseeing our need to drive Hummers and Ford Excursions!"
:)
Yeah, but Mother Nature punishes with rollover fatalities. What nature givith, she taketh.
Yes, that is indeed excellent. If humanity has one problem, it certainly is HOW DO WE KEEP THE CRAP WE MAKE FROM EVER GOING AWAY.
Can somebody explain what the big deal here is? Aren't the movies reviewed AFTER they come out? If so, how is this a non-negligable risk of piracy at any stretch of the imagination, when Joe Viewer can pick up a DVD, rip it, and then return it, or mill them off in Asia? How are these "screeners" contributing to piracy? Is Tom Hanks running some operation out of his garage or something?
That's just want the cia-funded alien-descended atlantians WANT you to believe!
China's not communist you dummy. It's a REPUBLIC. See, it's in its name: Republic of China. Must be true.