So does anyone actually know anything about China? Personally I would rather hear from people who are informed than a bunch of anti-communist propoganda. Can anyone recommend some good books for us westerners to read to get the Chinese viewpoint? The comment about herion above reminds me of a passage in Fahrenheit 451, is this what they are talking about:
You cant build a house without nails and wood. If you dont want a house built, hide the nails and wood. If you dont want a man unhappy politically, dont give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, topheavy and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it. Peace, Montag. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popluar songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of 'facts' they fell stuffed, but absolutely 'brilliant' with information. Then they'll fell they're thinking, they'll be happy, because facts of that sort don't change. Dont give them any slippery stuff like philosphy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy. Any man who can take a TV wall apart and put it back together again, and most men can, nowadays, is happier than any man who tries to slide-rule, measure and equate the universe, which just won't be measure or equated without making man feel bestial and lonely. I know, I've tried it; to hell with it. So bring on your clubs and parties, your acrobats and magicians, your daredevils, jet cards, motorcycle helicopters, your sex and herion, more of everythign to do with automatic reflix. If the drama is bad, if the film says nothing, if the play is hollow, sting me with the theremin, loudly. I'll think I'm responding to the play, when it's only a tactile raction to vibration. But I dont care. I just like solid entertainment."
whew, I think there is sooo much in there. Dont we love our surround sound (and our surround light) the audience is listening, but are they thinking? China, do they look at us, and see our lives converging as an unthinking mass? Do they fear that and choose to protect their socialist populous. Every post I have seen on here so far has this assumption that the chinese are not happy. That no-one could be happy under a communist regiem. Maybe they are not, but maybe that's the way they want it. Unhappy and awake vs happy but unconcious. Is China's fight against free information to protect their populous any worse than the US's fight against drugs? Or am I just trying to beat an intelligent conversation out of a crowd that isn't capable of it anymore?
First they came for the hackers.
But I never did anything illegal with my computer,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the pornographers.
But I thought there was too much smut on the Internet anyway,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the anonymous remailers.
But a lot of nasty stuff gets sent from anon.penet.fi,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the encryption users.
But I could never figure out how to work PGP anyway,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for me.
And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
That's great! Now you can close your eyes and pretend the law doesn't exist because there is no way to enforce it. Yah! An alternative, would be to do something about the law rather than just giving up on society.
No see, judges have a specific purpose in civil suits, to decide who is right and who is wrong in the eyes of the law. It is not a judge's duty to make new laws, modify the existing ones or otherwise devine some lofty moral goal. Congress has the power to make new laws and recede old ones. The law in question, copyright, was made specifically for this purpose. It's a stupid law, but that's my opinion. It has been highly effective at promoting the arts and as such is not likely to be receded any time soon (in fact it is being strengthened with such laws as the DMCA, as we all know). So stop bitching about "greedy corporations" and judges doing their job, and come up with some good reasons why the law should be changed.
Yer, cause we all know that the laws werent made to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. At least figure out what it is your attacking before you attack it.
you know, before all this sound recording junk came along musicians used to make a fair living off sheet music. Of course, that was before the intellect expected of fans dropped low enough for "tabs" to be necessary.
Music score is like source code and tablature is like object code and the sound is like the gui! That's why Oasis isn't in jail for rippin' their look and feel off The Beatles.
please at least show enough respect to quote the entire thing:
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
man.. it's just like that 60's thing dude. We're all gunna be lookin' back in 40 years saying "damn, we could have had clones way back then.. stupid government, I'm glad we did away with it and now live in underground caves" or something
ok, let's concede that one.. does this change my point at all? If people didn't constantly try to base their microkernels on Mach we would have some sort of progress and not still be using monolithic kernels.
and the gui, let's not forget the gui. My only point is that people should actually reimplement rather than use Mach which is such a lame first generation microkernel.
that's amuzing because I just used it and it conveyed meaning to pretty much everyone who read it. That qualifies as a "word" in my book. So perhaps what you ment to say is that I misspelt it and as such I would remind you that I never said anything about the front page story's spelling. So shut the fuck up ok?
see that's the problem. people like you just quote the microsoft propoganda without actually knowing what this "technology" is that they are talking about. Here's a hint: it involves microkernels vs monolithic kernels. Try thinking for yourself, I know it hurts but you might learn something.
we should be using microkernels, however every time someone tries to make a microkernel they give up and go grab the source for mach which just sux ass hardcore.
umm.. winnt is not a microkernel. That is why it blows. Because they said "this microkernel stuff is just too hard, fuck it, let's put all the gui code in the kernel". Once again, the microkernel failed. Is this because microkernels suck? No, it's because Microsoft sux.. but has anyone written a microkernel other than Microsoft (and not just based it on Mach?) I dont know, perhaps someone can enlighten me.
try putting in a tiny bit of effort so thousands of people the world around dont have to. BTW - Mach has done more to stiffle microkernels than any theory or performance debate has ever. To most people microkernel == Mach (which has never been used successfully in a production system) or WinNT which just blows. No wonder we're still using monolythic kernels in the year 2001.
yes, if I close my eyes the world will go away. Having a fuckwit writing news means there is one less competent person writing news which means I, and others who can recognise a dickhead, miss out.
Slashdot Mirror
So does anyone actually know anything about China? Personally I would rather hear from people who are informed than a bunch of anti-communist propoganda. Can anyone recommend some good books for us westerners to read to get the Chinese viewpoint? The comment about herion above reminds me of a passage in Fahrenheit 451, is this what they are talking about:
You cant build a house without nails and wood. If you dont want a house built, hide the nails and wood. If you dont want a man unhappy politically, dont give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, topheavy and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it. Peace, Montag. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popluar songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of 'facts' they fell stuffed, but absolutely 'brilliant' with information. Then they'll fell they're thinking, they'll be happy, because facts of that sort don't change. Dont give them any slippery stuff like philosphy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy. Any man who can take a TV wall apart and put it back together again, and most men can, nowadays, is happier than any man who tries to slide-rule, measure and equate the universe, which just won't be measure or equated without making man feel bestial and lonely. I know, I've tried it; to hell with it. So bring on your clubs and parties, your acrobats and magicians, your daredevils, jet cards, motorcycle helicopters, your sex and herion, more of everythign to do with automatic reflix. If the drama is bad, if the film says nothing, if the play is hollow, sting me with the theremin, loudly. I'll think I'm responding to the play, when it's only a tactile raction to vibration. But I dont care. I just like solid entertainment."
whew, I think there is sooo much in there. Dont we love our surround sound (and our surround light) the audience is listening, but are they thinking? China, do they look at us, and see our lives converging as an unthinking mass? Do they fear that and choose to protect their socialist populous. Every post I have seen on here so far has this assumption that the chinese are not happy. That no-one could be happy under a communist regiem. Maybe they are not, but maybe that's the way they want it. Unhappy and awake vs happy but unconcious. Is China's fight against free information to protect their populous any worse than the US's fight against drugs? Or am I just trying to beat an intelligent conversation out of a crowd that isn't capable of it anymore?
they need to speed it up before it will completely take over.
Major corps dont have 3d graphics cards, trust me, I looked :)
The common satire:
:)
First they came for the hackers.
But I never did anything illegal with my computer,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the pornographers.
But I thought there was too much smut on the Internet anyway,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the anonymous remailers.
But a lot of nasty stuff gets sent from anon.penet.fi,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the encryption users.
But I could never figure out how to work PGP anyway,
so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for me.
And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
My google skills are unmatched
That's great! Now you can close your eyes and pretend the law doesn't exist because there is no way to enforce it. Yah! An alternative, would be to do something about the law rather than just giving up on society.
No see, judges have a specific purpose in civil suits, to decide who is right and who is wrong in the eyes of the law. It is not a judge's duty to make new laws, modify the existing ones or otherwise devine some lofty moral goal. Congress has the power to make new laws and recede old ones. The law in question, copyright, was made specifically for this purpose. It's a stupid law, but that's my opinion. It has been highly effective at promoting the arts and as such is not likely to be receded any time soon (in fact it is being strengthened with such laws as the DMCA, as we all know). So stop bitching about "greedy corporations" and judges doing their job, and come up with some good reasons why the law should be changed.
Yer, cause we all know that the laws werent made to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. At least figure out what it is your attacking before you attack it.
you know, before all this sound recording junk came along musicians used to make a fair living off sheet music. Of course, that was before the intellect expected of fans dropped low enough for "tabs" to be necessary.
Music score is like source code and tablature is like object code and the sound is like the gui! That's why Oasis isn't in jail for rippin' their look and feel off The Beatles.
please at least show enough respect to quote the entire thing:
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
- Pastor Martin Niemöller
man.. it's just like that 60's thing dude. We're all gunna be lookin' back in 40 years saying "damn, we could have had clones way back then.. stupid government, I'm glad we did away with it and now live in underground caves" or something
blah.. there is shit that is in the kernel that is not contained within the definition of a microkernel.. wtf is with you man?
ok, let's concede that one.. does this change my point at all? If people didn't constantly try to base their microkernels on Mach we would have some sort of progress and not still be using monolithic kernels.
and the gui, let's not forget the gui. My only point is that people should actually reimplement rather than use Mach which is such a lame first generation microkernel.
that's amuzing because I just used it and it conveyed meaning to pretty much everyone who read it. That qualifies as a "word" in my book. So perhaps what you ment to say is that I misspelt it and as such I would remind you that I never said anything about the front page story's spelling. So shut the fuck up ok?
see that's the problem. people like you just quote the microsoft propoganda without actually knowing what this "technology" is that they are talking about. Here's a hint: it involves microkernels vs monolithic kernels. Try thinking for yourself, I know it hurts but you might learn something.
we should be using microkernels, however every time someone tries to make a microkernel they give up and go grab the source for mach which just sux ass hardcore.
beos is not, nor will it ever be a production system. I know nothing about qnx.
actually it is "flamebait", ie. a desenting opinion that is supposed to make you think and defend your position.
umm.. winnt is not a microkernel. That is why it blows. Because they said "this microkernel stuff is just too hard, fuck it, let's put all the gui code in the kernel". Once again, the microkernel failed. Is this because microkernels suck? No, it's because Microsoft sux.. but has anyone written a microkernel other than Microsoft (and not just based it on Mach?) I dont know, perhaps someone can enlighten me.
and != at && like != unlike
try putting in a tiny bit of effort so thousands of people the world around dont have to. BTW - Mach has done more to stiffle microkernels than any theory or performance debate has ever. To most people microkernel == Mach (which has never been used successfully in a production system) or WinNT which just blows. No wonder we're still using monolythic kernels in the year 2001.
ie, it would confirm what I say every day.
yes, if I close my eyes the world will go away. Having a fuckwit writing news means there is one less competent person writing news which means I, and others who can recognise a dickhead, miss out.
I would prefer it if every story posted by Tim was in blood red, so I can imagine that I am slowly stabbing him to death.
or does this story have a blue border? WTF?