Sticks and stones, etc. People need to understand that some things aren't funny. Death is one of them. On an oddly just note, if Slashdot readers drive the price up, what happens when the auction closes?
From Ebay's Help section:
If you get no responses through email, you can request your seller's phone number. After a reasonable amount of time, if you are still unable to contact the seller via email or phone, you can leave appropriate feedback to alert other bidders about your experience.
I am not a lawyer, but is the seller liable for fraud, by presenting themselves as the actual owner of the properties by placing it up for sale?
If the information they entered for the eBay account is fake, what actions are available to pursue the user, as he's just engaged eBay as the medium for fraudulent activities?
I understand that some people need to make jokes to handle serious issues. Conversely, those people need to learn, as I have, when and where to draw the line.
I'm writing this response from a desk within the NOC of the Networld+Interop show in Atlanta, GA.
On opening day of what is still a very popular (and large) trade show, attendance was shockingly, and understandably, low. The CNN building directly across the street stood empty, evacuated against the remote possibility that it might be a target.
Streaming media products were quickly retooled and retasked. Clusters of stunned attendees and staff gathered around state-of-the-art flat panels and projection screens as today's events progressed. The 2x4 edge-to-edge video wall within the NOC has been displaying streaming media and television all day, workstation monitors spun to face outward so passerby's can have other places to view.
By 1 pm, Interop team volunteers were paired with Event staff to canvass the show floors to advise exhibitors that we'd be closing the show floor early to allow people to depart where possible. In between, people are emailing, messaging, calling, checking on loved ones. As I write this, Interop team members are still clustered within the I-Labs area, watching live newsfeeds streamed over the grid.
The shock of the incident is incredible. This is the kind of tragedy you see in movies and pray never happens. During one of a couple meetings today, someone present for the Oklahoma City bombing brought up a powerful notion: The victims of these tragedies, and the people they leave behind, need to know there is support for them, that people care. I consider myself to be a fairly thick skinned individual, and this event has struck me to the core.
We, as a chorus, are the voice of the world. Take the time to show your support. Resist the kneejerk response to lash out in anger. Even more, demolish the impulse to turn this into a laughing matter.
Allow me a brief moment to express some outrage: Within hours of the initial incident, the remains of the WTC were placed for auction on eBay. I'm sure someone thought it was funny. I'm sure some people still think it's funny. I hope those of you who do mention it in mixed company, and have to face down the family member of a victim of today's incredible tragedy.
Hey, moderators! Lift your leg, it's impeding the removal of your head from your ass.
Are you even reading this thread? How in the world are you tagging this fork of the thread as offtopic? It was an answer to a relevent strain of precedence that would have direct effects pertaining to any lawsuit brought against developers of GPL'd software.
If it's correct, that no successful suit has even been brought against a manufacturer of personal weaponry for the actions of the customer base, then it's logically extensible to the software industry with proper licensing agreements.
If this is not the case, then Microsoft is responsible for any network intrusion using unauthorised installations of SMS, or the cDc for any intrusions made with Back Orifice, or Symantec for surreptitious use of PC anywhere (Example argument here).
Do you honestly think either case is going to happen? In the same universe that neither of those cases would occur, lives software coded under the GPL and distributed without warrantee, as accepted by the user each and every time they use that product.
A good example exercise would NetStumbler, an exquisitely useful diagnostic tool which just happens to be a large double edged claymore of a sword. Are the authors of this software responsible for any use that leads unauthorised parties into a poorly configured (read: Unsecured) 802.11b network?
If you'd like to kick the ball about in left field, is Ford or Budweiser responsible for any deaths at the hands of a drunk driver? The answer is, vehemently, no, because humans possess free will and can do stupid or illegal shit at anytime. They accept responsibility for their actions anytime they turn a key, pop a bottle cap, or click a mouse. The differences in prosecution will lie wholly in the intentions behind the action, and the consequences of the same. The bottom line remains, however, that the manufacturer/developer is NOT responsible for the actions of (arguably) sapient users in possession of power tools.
I know I'm replying to my own comment, but this is directed to whoever moderated it as a troll. Read what I said, and actually consider the relevance.
For the RIAA or MPAA to sue the programmers of software because of what a user did with it is the exact same as some plaintiff to sue Smith and Wesson for making the gun some perp used to shoot at them with. It's holding the creator responsible for the actions of the user, and that's wrong. It stifles creativity under a blanket of fear.
My question remains: Are there legal precedents where someone has attempted to sue the creator of something for the uncontrollable actions of the user? Has someone tried and succeeded? Better yet, have they failed? I'm not a lawyer, I wouldn't know where to start looking.
See, this is what irks me about AC's. You had a crystal clear point to make here, leaning slightly in the off topic but relevant direction, and you shot yourself in the foot by leading off with pointless vulgarity. Next time, have a little pride in what you have to say, and sign your name to it. Minus the vulgarity that detracts from the overall effect of using your voice, this could have been a much more useful comment.
In the same circumstance that would inspire deep-pocketed (or newly shallow pocketed) companies to sue GPL underdogs, what's to stop the underdog from returning with a hamstring countersuit for anti-competitive practices?
Where is the liability in writing free software that just happens to do what the ultra expensive video equipment and services does?
Competition and underdogs come from tyrannical control of a market. What are the cost breaks across this market, and where do the huge expenses add up from?
Re:The surgon general...
on
ACM vs. RIAA
·
· Score: 1
It's funny you mention this.
Before I get started, let's try an exercise in copyright law. Before continuing any farther, you agree that by reading the remainder of my post here (as copyright holder), you will not reply anonymously. As copyright holder of the viewpoint expressed below, I reserve the right to have a valid e-mail address for anyone disputing, supporting, or making any other comment to the content below.
Any anonymous reply invokes my right to pursue investigation into the identity of any Anonymous Coward, through the correlation of web and ISP logging facilities.
By the by, this is a big 'Eat me' to Anonymous Cowards. I think you're ticks on the underbelly of Free Speech. While you're foaming at the mouth and cursing my name, you can at least take heart that I'd defend your right to speak anonymously. I just think it sucks that people can't stand by their rhetoric.
From the RIAA faq about the DMCA:
Q. Isn't it true that there shouldn't even be a webcasting performance right for sound recordings because it was intentionally left out of the DPRA and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") was passed without any debate from Congress?
While the topic discussion isn't webcasting, note the bold letters. The DMCA passed unanimously in the Senate.
I realize some readers here aren't American. To you, I say DON'T LET YOUR LEGISLATURES PASS THIS CRAP. Personally, I think it's fully high time for some accountability initiatives. Skylarov was arrested because this bill was signed into law without floor debate and support. Where were our Congressmen to defend our rights? Who will question the responsibility of our lawmakers if the constitutional basis of the DMCA is found to be infringing?
I encourage you to take the time to read the RIAA DMCA Webcasting faq, and understand why the DMCA is so important to record companies. It's plainly visible in the FAQ: They want control of what you listen to.
Some examples: (this text is from the RIAA webcasting faq) The webcasting statutory license applies to webcasters that:
(1) offer non-interactive programming (i.e., not on-demand or personalized programming);
(2) primarily offer audio or other entertainment programming as opposed to primarily selling or promoting particular products or services; and
(3) abide by certain conditions spelled out in the statute.
Some of those conditions:
2. Sound recording performance complement. A webcaster may not play in any three-hour period (1) more than three songs from a particular album, including no more than two consecutively, or (2) four songs by a particular artist or from a boxed set, including no more than three consecutively. This limit is called the "sound recording performance complement."
The cynic in me reads this and ponders some daily tallies of the crap overplayed on local stations.
Here's an interesting twist, though:
Q. Terrestrial radio stations don't pay sound recording copyright owners. Why should webcasters be treated any differently?
A. The lack of a broad sound recording performance right that applies to US terrestrial broadcasts is an historical accident. In almost every other country broadcasters pay for their use of the sound recordings upon which their business is based. For decades, the US recording industry fought unsuccessfully to change this anomaly while broadcasters built very profitable businesses on the creative works of artists and record companies. The broadcasters were simply too strong on Capitol Hill.
Wow. They pull off one of the worst bills in American history, and have the nerve to grouse about this? The RIAA isn't interested in what you want. They're interested in controlling how you are spoon fed media. The DMCA is designed to take away your basic right to a choice.
Consider the coolest feature of the VCR. Fast forward. When working under the Fair Use clause and taping Seinfeld, you could skip the commercials in the taped episode where Kramer thinks he's a dog. You could rent 'Honey, I shrunk my diapragm' at Blockbuster and fast forward through the previews for other movies. Sadly, friends, personal control over bought and paid for technology is a thing of the past. It's senile and dying a tottering death, with the RIAA and MPAA hanging around like ungrateful sons and daughters waiting to reap the inheritence.
I own a few DVDs I can't fast forward through the stack of promo crap at the beginning. The freedom once given to us by the remote control (that being that one where you can have full control over your home entertainment system without ever having to leave your couch) has been usurped by DVD region codes and encoded controller restrictions. The worst part? I may own the equipment, and I may have paid for that shiny disc, but it's a felony for me to learn how and implement a way to skip crap I didn't want in the first place.
So, what's next? If watermarking and content control become realities, how long until we see something as ludicrous, but possible, as not being able to skip audio tracks because you only want to hear the one song on a CD you bought because the band is a one hit wonder? How much time will be lost to having to sit through a segment of media we're not interested in seeing because we live in the US and aren't allowed to skip the spoonfeeding?
Big Media isn't interested in what you want. They're interested in what you'll buy lacking other options. And your congressmen are they're (perhaps willing) accomplices.
It's funny. I've sent in several submissions over time, and certainly, not ALL of them deserved a singular entry, and one of them most certainly did (The short lived media explosion of the Kent State 'bust of a Starcraft Clan for "hate" crimes').
Just yesterday, I pointed out that the epoch timestamp tacks on another digit next week or so, and that didn't even make the Slashback. I'd bet a case of beer with CmdrTaco and Cowperson Niel that somewhere, there will be a y2k-esque software failure because some twit only packed an int(9) epoch date field.
No one seemed to care when I submitted an article about content protection plans for ATA hard drives, even though I thought it was interesting.
Slashdot is no longer news for nerds. It's fodder for the unwashed masses who are stunned and amazed by shiny things and anything to firm up the belief that Microsoft is bad, and Linux is Good, no matter what the truth may be.
I don't mean to get off on a rant here, but I'm increasingly disillusioned by the portal of interest that Slashdot used to be. You can hardly call this 'news' of any journalistic stripe when it lacks any kind of clear detachment from a specific point of view, and behaves more like a pack of screaming frat boys with pocket calculators.
I'm pretty much a daily reader, and I occasionally submit something that other people like myself would find interesting. Rejected. 9 for 10. The one piece I've had accepted wound up in a Slashback, with very little mention. It's funny though, considering the content, since you, the foaming-at-the-mouth, Damn-The-Man Slashdot populace, actually took the time to potentially make a situation worse for a Kent State student by sending crap emails and even a few phone calls 'in support' of the accused. I spent three days playing journalist and digging up facts to present a clarified story that apparantly wasn't interesting enough for Slashdot once it wasn't a clear oppression of the geeked. Shenanigans, I say!
It's enough that the rampant Anonymous Cowards don't have the nerve, integrity, or sheer balls to attach a name to their drivel, but I guess that's for the best. I don't want to know who you are, because your opinion generally isn't worth the price of admission. You guys sit and bitch about Katz, who takes the time to present a clear view that anyone can read, whether you like it or not, and the courage to put his name on it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not sitting here with my Microsoft polo biting my thumb at the DoJ, but I'm also not sporting my Linux fanaticism like a bad tupee and sniggering down my nose at anyone who thinks you're talking about algebra when you use 'x' by itself as a term. I used to really dig my daily Slashdot read, but now it's all I can do to just gloss over the front page before skipping straight to Freshmeat to keep up with what's really going on.
In closing, Katz, we who could be central characters of 'Geeks', salute you. To the news acceptance squad, thanks for the rejections. It's just like high school, and I'm still not good enough. CmdrTaco and founding crew, my condolences on the lobotomization of your site.
(Yes, I put my name to this, because it's MY voice, and people are damn well gonna know it.)
There's a simple perl CGI tool called JD What's New. I use it quite a bit myself. You can find it on Freshmeat here. Last change, MD5, Checksum, and size are all applicable methods for checking for updates.
Honestly, I don't think it's a cover story. I think it's an accident gone awry. Being in a journalistic position when I wrote the follow-up, I stuck to facts, and left my opinions out of it. I spoke to a couple different people, and the issue isn't as big or totally desructive as it was originally made out to be. I think most of the damage done here was really in the initial coverage of the case.
There's some misinterpretation in the Kent Stater pieces, and I feel some of the facts cited by the sources I spoke with are also erroneous and overstated. 60 to 70 hours to fix some web content? Uploaded content 'alter configurations'? Getting details about what happened on the server was like pulling teeth. Being an engineering type, it was all I could do not to really get into it with Dave Futey, the ResNet admin of the server in question, knowing what I do about the systems and mechanics involved.
All in all, I think police involvement could have been avoided, and this has largely come down to the wrong people making decisions without understanding the information presented.
As I understand it, the design of the Volkswagen was such that factories used to manufacture them could be rapidly retooled to produce other fun things, like tanks and support vehicles.
Hah, like anything out of SFO can truly be on time.
I think it's kinda sad that they're considering prosecution on the scale that's mentioned in the article. In the very least, they should have the work evaluated by qualified and experienced engineers to determine if there truly WAS a safety hazard.
Movie reviews in general.
on
The Pledge
·
· Score: 1
I think it's good to find other reviews in these kind of forums. I personally shy away from most broadcast media, radio and TV alike, preferring to be my own person, despite what MTV is currently doing to hair styles. My choice of personalism over sheep-cow-moo herd mentality makes peer reviews of movies pretty important, in my book.
I'll prolly go see this movie, maybe tonight, based simply on Jon's review.
I wish someone had warned be about 'The Family Man', though. Don't get me wrong, the movie was awesome. I just wasn't expecting it.
billn's beatstick: Cyber BS, Katz, Geography.
on
The New Geography
·
· Score: 3
I gotta stop sleeping in. This is the kind of stuff I really like setting up my cardboard pulpit for.
I don't mean to get off on a Dennis Miller-esque rant here, but..
There isn't "cyber" anything, in any sense true to the context in which the term 'cyber' was coined. People calling the Internet
"cyberspace" need to be flogged. Sadly, I'd rather stick to the 'Information Superhighway' line, as it applies to an increasingly fast infrastructure for moving our era's biggest commodity: porn^Wdata.
The only thing that currently comes close to 'cyber' is those folks equipped with mechanical supplements to accomodate a disability. Skip the fruity 'chip in the arm' experiment, that could have been pulled off in a less dangerous manner by putting it under his tongue. The wearable computer chic that's evolving is a good start, and simple evolution and miniaturization will spur it into the true definition of 'cyber' whatever.
Don't agree with me? Screw off, I'm a 'cyber' purist, and the world needs more.
Katz. Don't like his work? Exercise your sapience endowed freedom of choice, and DON'T READ IT. You freaks are worse than the Howard Stern audience. Do you realize, half his listeners are there for the same reason the other half is, which is to hear what he says next, despite the fact that they don't agree or like it? If you ARE going to read his work, do it with an open mind, and look at what he's writing about, and not at what he's writing. There's no law or commandment that say you have to like Katz. I'm open minded enough to understand what he's writing about, whether I agree with his viewpoint or not. I'd happily applaud him for the reaction he gets from you guys, like dangling a plastic banana in front of monkeys. Looks like a banana, tastes like crap. You're just reacting to the fact that he's got a banana, whether you're going to eat it, or not.
Geography. This is my review of Katz's review of the SUBJECT that book tackles, whether it does it well or not. Most people don't realize, that the Internet, as a cultural tool, isn't a medium. It's an accelerator. The only other medium on the planet that can disseminate information faster is a pack of small town wives.
Internetworks, as a medium, dramatically change the way corporations *need* to work, and the way their employees *want* to work. High tech companies dealing in information commodities don't need to bring the miners to the mine any longer. Personally, I'm a network engineer and NMS prototype developer, myself. I work from home. In my boxers. I have a fridge under my desk. I think that covers how high tech employees *want* to work.
Here's the Wendy's 'Biggie' sized "But". Not all companies are high tech companies. We still need steel mills, farming communities, and every other craft in the class[1]. Take a trip back to the movie 'Son in Law', as a perfect example of what Katz and Cyber BS Joe are talking about. The daughter went off to college, and the son is a computer nerd[2]. The father, a generation farmer, couldn't understand his son's desire to program. The nature of humanity, or maybe just Americans, to rebel against what their parents do, is accelerated by high technology and Internet culture, and is undoubtedly increasingly sucking the marrow from our nations.. well, no, actually, our WORLD'S support infrastructure.
L.E.Modesitt, Jr, wrote in his book, _Timediver's Dawn_[3], that high tech societies tend to burn themselves out rather quickly. The Internet's accelerating effect is a good example of this, as more and more people are lured from staple support industries to the glitz and glamour of a connected 'global village' (Hey, Hillary, this village is raising more kids than you think.)
So yes, absolutely, I agree that there's a distinct shift in where our population is moving, both geographically, and morally. There's an interesting counterpoint to this, though. Just as the Internet is changing where and how people live, it's bringing more people to the surface, and leveling the playing field. People have more *options*. The savagely intelligent illuminati who, in years past, were concealed beneath basic struggles for survival are clawing their way to the surface and making a difference. The distances between life changing opportunities has narrowed dramatically for many people.
Don't believe me? Read Katz's book, _Geeks_. Some of my friends did, and threw it at me to read. Why? It was an interesting parallel to my own life, as a small town native struggling to make ends meet. I won't trash that book, because it's absolutely true for a lot of us.
What does it all come down to? Choices. The Internet, as a culture, gives us more. Can we always make them? Certainly not. I never went to college. Dropped out of high school. Because I'm one of those 'bright' people who can do whatever they set their minds to[4], I managed to land a tech job with skills I picked up while ditching school and BBS'ing. Three years later, a startup ISP brought the Internet within my reach. Six months later, I was gone, following the American Dream.
[dramatic pause, ala Shatner.]
The Dream. To do crap no one has considered before. To boldly piss off investors and accountants alike. To draw six figure salaries and vacation in Fiji.
The Dream, which has been slowly sucking the marrow from our societies, luring bright young minds to build the next big thing.
Accelerated by the Internet.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be.. no, I'm mostly right.
[1] Except novelty toy factories. You bastards are a waste of plastic, and need to go to hell.
[2] Don't for an instant think I'm slighting him. 'Computer nerd' is a distinct badge of honor, in my book.
[3] Science fiction, a good read.
[4] It's not ego inflation when dozens of people tell you so, so piss off if you think I'm on a high horse.
First and foremost, for those of you who dislike/hate/ignore Katz, thankfully, for everyone one of you increasingly narrowminded hatemongers, there's a good ten people who appreciate what it is Jon does. I'm happy you've found the courage to voice your opinion without hiding behind anonymity, but I question your objectivity.
For everyone of you who finds Katz's posts boring because they don't contain anything you don't already know, there's another ten to fifty people reading his works who DON'T fully grasp the concepts he's taking the time to learn himself and explain in a distilled form. Given the prevelance of loudmouthed technocrats blaring an unyielding attitude here in these forums, it's no wonder those learning don't pipe up to voice appreciation for what Katz does. As much as I respect your right your own opinion, as well as your right to voice it, I would ask the same of any of you, for those with questions.
I'm as guilty as the next person, when it comes to looking down on people I consider to be of lesser technical ability than myself. I know I have talents and skills, but I also know I'm not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I like to keep in mind that once upon a time, I was a less-than-clueful newbie, too.
You don't have to like Jon. You don't have to like me. This isn't a utopia, and I don't expect it to be one as long as it's populated by humans.
But.
Question the effects of your vociferous rantings. I don't post under the guise of an AC because I feel I have an open mind about things, that I can express my opinions well enough to sign my name to them.
The Internet, as a medium for the masses, has broken us out of one herd, and through human habit, put us into another. The downfall of this, is the human failure towards anger and resentment for things they don't understand. The ease and speed with which people can air their opinions taints forums such as this with an undercurrent of anger and hostility. Don't believe me? As soon as you're done foaming at the mouth because I dare to belittle you, flip back up the page and objectively read the vitriol posted here.
Personally, I don't read all of Jon's articles. I read the ones that cover topics that grab my eye, even though I may already be well versed in the matter. Jon typically does more than enough legwork to present a solid view of the subject, at a pace that ANY READER can read, and come away with a good understanding of the topic.
This, in my mind, equals a great contribution to Internet society in part, and raising the general awareness of the populace as a whole. What the hell have YOU contributed lately?
I make the five apes analogy as a point of how behavior is begun, perpetrated, and encouraged, despite the fact that the condition leading to the behavior may no longer exist. I'm heartened by the fact that we, as sapient beings, can learn to recognize that the behavior is 'wrong', and take steps to correct it.
As far as the issue of monetary wealth.. I won't slight the wealthy for wanting to keep the money they have, provided they earned it. I also won't slight them for passing that wealth to their children.
But. =)
I fully expect those parents to raise those children to be responsible and decent people. I know it may seem unrealistic, but you can't affect your environment without deciding what you want it to be. The world doesn't need more arrogant children purporting classism based on monetary advantages they didn't earn.
Rob, you're off my Christmas list. And here I was going to send a case of Guinness.
The article was.. something. But like most AC postings, lacking in meat and content. I'm inclined to agree that Gore himself didn't actually write it. Even if he did, it's lacking. Through the article, he basically staked out a few political issues, pointed at them, and said "I'm thinking about these." Not too much mention of what his actual ANSWERS were.
The offhand comment about the current DOJ administration.. specifically: Even though the Justice Department makes its own independent decisions in such matters without input from the White House, its leaders -including Joel Klein -are appointees of the current administration. For that reason, I couldn't comment on the decision that was clearly on many people's minds on the Microsoft campus today.
If you couldn't talk about the decision, or answer to speculation about the outcome, why go? Why visit a company with thousands of employees, who would be out of their gourds to not be worrying what is going to happen to their employer, and not be able to answer their concerns? I've never really though of MS as a target political demographic, but those people are voters too, and they have families. Were I an MS staffer, I'd be pretty irate for that kind of tease.
The school thing is simple enough, if not controversial. School uniforms, and no book bags.
Slow down, put the chair down. That's an expensive monitor, most likely, and while beating it may make you feel better, it won't affect me in anyway.
The Columbine shootings, as well as others, stem from a single socialogical foible: Classism. It's just like racism, but can be applied to anyone. Classism, like racism, springs from the basic human nature of the need for community, and is then corrupted by the innate human fear of things not understood. That done, it's sparked by an individual pointing out or making light of the differences, and then mimicked by other members of the community as acceptable behavior.
Everyone familiar with the five ape theory of behaviour? I'm not sure who coined it, but I'll paraphrase it here.
Place five apes in a cage. In the center, a set of stairs, with bananas at the top. An ape climbs the stairs to get the bananas, but as soon he touches them, the rest of the apes are sprayed with cold water. Over time, the apes will learn that going after the bananas results in being sprayed.
Remove one ape, and replace it with a new one. Not knowing of the water, he'll attempt the bananas. The other apes may simply block him, or go so far as to assault him to prevent it, but the new ape doesn't know WHY. Over time, he simply accepts this behaviour.
Repeat the cycle. Replace one of the remaining four original apes with a new one. The three original apes, as well as the first new ape, will repeat the prohibitive behaviour.
Continue the process until all five original apes are replaced. Now, you have five new apes, who won't climb the stairs, but don't know why.
Now apply this to the 200 years of greed, war, and strife that our country is built on.
I'll happily quote Kaa's Law, at this point, in that within an sufficiently large enough group of people, most are stupid. If someone has theory on mob/herd sociology, I'd love to hear it.
So, why do I suggest school uniforms? Again, the core of the problem is classism. Like racism, it stems from SURFACE PERCEPTIONS. As you strip those away, you have less resistance to solving the more basic problems inherent in human nature.
But.
It's a band-aid. It's a scotch-tape patch to a gaping hole in the American psyche that's defined by 400 years of questionably acceptable behaviour spawned by the greed of what was probably one man's idea.
Tougher laws aren't going to help it. Legislating a 'hate crime' isn't going to stop it. It's not going to go away with a single election. It's a frame of mind, and it's got to start with the people. I plan to have kids some day, and I plan to raise them in an environment of diversity. I'm proud of the person I've become, because I had a solid guiding hand during the important formative stages of my life (Hi Dad!).
One thing 'Gore' touched on, I fully support, and that's encouraging parental involvement. Someone should poll this, but for those of you still living at home, or better, with kids in your home, how much time on average do they spend by themselves? Is there a computer in their room? A TV?
A lesson I learned recently, having two roommates, each of us with our own computers, is that bedrooms aren't living rooms. Moving my computer into the living room has dramatically improved the inter-personal relations in my household. Now, all machines are in the 'living room', which is what it really is. I fully intend to continue this trend as I get older, and I hope it catches on.
As far as the rest of the Internet, the porn, the warez, the hate.. It's not going to go away until people change. Politicians can't change people. People can change people. It starts in the home. Now go out and club your neighbors into submission with kindness.
Browsing through the current discussion (which I'm happy to see if rife with content), my caffiene-induced long memory recalled an article posted to/. recently about artificial photosynthesis, using solar energy to fuel chemical reactions in the same manner that plants do it. I could see something like this applied to a small plate on the hood of my truck, keeping my battery charged. Or not, since I live in Arizona, and don't want my truck becoming self-aware.
Back on topic.. As mentioned previously, the problem with broadcast power is the stuff that gets in between. Biomass tends to react poorly to the levels we'd need to power all our toys. Don't believe me? Call the people who live on Mercury, and their disgruntled neighbors on Venus. Broadcast energy, like microwave (as was mentioned in a previous post), has a side effect of particle excitation in the medium. Done in space, between non-terrestrial platforms, it wouldn't be much of a problem. Done on terra firma, you begin generating biological side effects caused by pumping extra heat into the immediate environment. Over time and in abundance, you contribute to trivial things like greenhouse effects, technicians hanging out on the roof and angling dishes at random birds, and (God forbid) roach mutation.
Air by itself isn't a practical medium for transmission of high energy. The required power outputs are just to high, and the return isn't high enough. Old 'Star Wars' theory involving ground based lasers (for the purpose of courtesy polishing of enemy spy satellites to a glossy shine) postulates the leeching properties of 'thermal blooming' as heating air begins distorting the optical path and decreasing efficiency.
But.
Another article posted on/. back in May/99, discussed the use of an ultr aviolet laser emitting a stream of photons to perform optical path ionization to facilitate transmission of electricity (25ma, 100hz) to ranges of 100 meters! Granted, the use they purport is for tasers, and my immediate thoughts went back to cat experimentation (Hey, PETA, I want some 9v cells for Christmas), but the cross-over application possibilities exist.
Combinations of the two concepts would probably result in marked increases in efficiency, but working in non-vacuum environments still leaves you open to transmission degradation due to something as simple as wholesale friction.
Current limitations aside, other recent developments in miniaturization opens a door to using low power broadcast technology to provide power to devices that don't need a lot (like that hokey 'smart dust' concept, that you can counter with in-born allergies and thermonuclear sneeze assaults). You've played Starcraft. The Protoss concept of short range power pylons lends itself well to this, albeit on a smaller scale.
Relaying power between low-draw sensor clusters would be a good application, too. Weather monitoring, tracking HIGH LEVELS OF RF/EM RADIATION IN URBAN SETTINGS, and trivial biomass affecting things like that would be good, too.
I'm surprised no one pointed this out yet.
on
The Ottoman PC
·
· Score: 1
Following the links of the cDc posting, to the 'interview' with Garms of MS, they classify any trojan as software that can damage the system in any way. The nature of trojans require some social engineering, of course, to install.
By it's own definition, MS is guilty of the distribution of the largest trojan ever made.
When was the last time you had Windows eat itself? Wipe a drive lately? Lose some documents?
In riposte, I offer this tangent from the current thread;
Perl, as a scaled development platform, lends well to fast stable development, perfectly suitable to concept prototyping and portablility testing. It's not C/C++. It was never intended to be, if I understand my history correctly. I'm rather disappointed that you choose to slam Perl users/developers as a whole, based on your opinion of a single person involved in it's development and documentation.
Your statement, calling Perl a 'rather incoherent collection of features noone really understands' does quite well to give us an insight into where you fit in the food chain of intelligencia. I'm rather shocked that you go on to call yourself a C coder, when Perl is a far more distilled animal and (I think) far easier to learn and understand. That being said, Perl lends more to the Unix environment learning curve than raw C itself does, in that it provides interfaces to many of the same functions, in a manner that is typically easier for the new user to understand.
Some of you are probably scoffing and mumbling 'Who gives a crap about newbies?', and honestly, if that's your permanent ingrained attitude, I hope you're sterile and live/work in an environment where you can't influence children. The greatest strength of Unix, and likewise Perl as a natively grown (though win32/etc exported) commodity, stimulate and nurture a neverending learning process, which is important to the expansion, evolution, and sanity of our increasingly technologically savvy culture (despite the high Imac sales).
Larry Wall, as the father of Perl, is probably one of my top few dozen revered people, not for the product itself, but for the cultural stimulation he aimed to produce. I can't honestly say I'm heavily involved in Perl politics, be it the development of Perl itself, or furthering it's growth by supplying useful code. I'm really just an end user who hangs out in #perl on Efnet and learns by osmosis. You malign the lack of 'rational discussions', which simply says 'I browse a couple newsgroups', and not much else.
You don't like Tom. Big deal. Little, insignificant me has been at odds with him, too. The difference between you and I, is that I know when to point at a single person, and not a group as a whole, by association. Society, and further, mankind as a whole would be a lot better if they'd hop off THAT beaten old stump.
Some of the greatest people I know, I've met on my neverending quest for knowledge, even if it's with what you speak of as an apparantly inferior development tool (that you still use).
I'm off my tangent, now. I apologize for any stress/therapy incurred by my tirade. I just thought that needed to be said.
Slashdot Mirror
Sticks and stones, etc. People need to understand that some things aren't funny. Death is one of them. On an oddly just note, if Slashdot readers drive the price up, what happens when the auction closes?
From Ebay's Help section:
If you get no responses through email, you can request your seller's phone number. After a reasonable amount of time, if you are still unable to contact the seller via email or phone, you can leave appropriate feedback to alert other bidders about your experience.
I am not a lawyer, but is the seller liable for fraud, by presenting themselves as the actual owner of the properties by placing it up for sale?
If the information they entered for the eBay account is fake, what actions are available to pursue the user, as he's just engaged eBay as the medium for fraudulent activities?
I understand that some people need to make jokes to handle serious issues. Conversely, those people need to learn, as I have, when and where to draw the line.
I'm writing this response from a desk within the NOC of the Networld+Interop show in Atlanta, GA.
On opening day of what is still a very popular (and large) trade show, attendance was shockingly, and understandably, low. The CNN building directly across the street stood empty, evacuated against the remote possibility that it might be a target.
Streaming media products were quickly retooled and retasked. Clusters of stunned attendees and staff gathered around state-of-the-art flat panels and projection screens as today's events progressed. The 2x4 edge-to-edge video wall within the NOC has been displaying streaming media and television all day, workstation monitors spun to face outward so passerby's can have other places to view.
By 1 pm, Interop team volunteers were paired with Event staff to canvass the show floors to advise exhibitors that we'd be closing the show floor early to allow people to depart where possible. In between, people are emailing, messaging, calling, checking on loved ones. As I write this, Interop team members are still clustered within the I-Labs area, watching live newsfeeds streamed over the grid.
The shock of the incident is incredible. This is the kind of tragedy you see in movies and pray never happens. During one of a couple meetings today, someone present for the Oklahoma City bombing brought up a powerful notion: The victims of these tragedies, and the people they leave behind, need to know there is support for them, that people care. I consider myself to be a fairly thick skinned individual, and this event has struck me to the core.
We, as a chorus, are the voice of the world. Take the time to show your support. Resist the kneejerk response to lash out in anger. Even more, demolish the impulse to turn this into a laughing matter.
Allow me a brief moment to express some outrage: Within hours of the initial incident, the remains of the WTC were placed for auction on eBay. I'm sure someone thought it was funny. I'm sure some people still think it's funny. I hope those of you who do mention it in mixed company, and have to face down the family member of a victim of today's incredible tragedy.
Are you even reading this thread? How in the world are you tagging this fork of the thread as offtopic? It was an answer to a relevent strain of precedence that would have direct effects pertaining to any lawsuit brought against developers of GPL'd software.
If it's correct, that no successful suit has even been brought against a manufacturer of personal weaponry for the actions of the customer base, then it's logically extensible to the software industry with proper licensing agreements.
If this is not the case, then Microsoft is responsible for any network intrusion using unauthorised installations of SMS, or the cDc for any intrusions made with Back Orifice, or Symantec for surreptitious use of PC anywhere (Example argument here).
Do you honestly think either case is going to happen? In the same universe that neither of those cases would occur, lives software coded under the GPL and distributed without warrantee, as accepted by the user each and every time they use that product.
A good example exercise would NetStumbler, an exquisitely useful diagnostic tool which just happens to be a large double edged claymore of a sword. Are the authors of this software responsible for any use that leads unauthorised parties into a poorly configured (read: Unsecured) 802.11b network?
If you'd like to kick the ball about in left field, is Ford or Budweiser responsible for any deaths at the hands of a drunk driver? The answer is, vehemently, no, because humans possess free will and can do stupid or illegal shit at anytime. They accept responsibility for their actions anytime they turn a key, pop a bottle cap, or click a mouse. The differences in prosecution will lie wholly in the intentions behind the action, and the consequences of the same. The bottom line remains, however, that the manufacturer/developer is NOT responsible for the actions of (arguably) sapient users in possession of power tools.
I know I'm replying to my own comment, but this is directed to whoever moderated it as a troll. Read what I said, and actually consider the relevance.
For the RIAA or MPAA to sue the programmers of software because of what a user did with it is the exact same as some plaintiff to sue Smith and Wesson for making the gun some perp used to shoot at them with. It's holding the creator responsible for the actions of the user, and that's wrong. It stifles creativity under a blanket of fear.
My question remains: Are there legal precedents where someone has attempted to sue the creator of something for the uncontrollable actions of the user? Has someone tried and succeeded? Better yet, have they failed? I'm not a lawyer, I wouldn't know where to start looking.
Isn't this the same as suing Smith and Wesson because the licensed owner shot someone with it?
Is there, as yet, a legal precedent for cases such as this?
See, this is what irks me about AC's. You had a crystal clear point to make here, leaning slightly in the off topic but relevant direction, and you shot yourself in the foot by leading off with pointless vulgarity. Next time, have a little pride in what you have to say, and sign your name to it. Minus the vulgarity that detracts from the overall effect of using your voice, this could have been a much more useful comment.
In the same circumstance that would inspire deep-pocketed (or newly shallow pocketed) companies to sue GPL underdogs, what's to stop the underdog from returning with a hamstring countersuit for anti-competitive practices?
Where is the liability in writing free software that just happens to do what the ultra expensive video equipment and services does?
Competition and underdogs come from tyrannical control of a market. What are the cost breaks across this market, and where do the huge expenses add up from?
Before I get started, let's try an exercise in copyright law. Before continuing any farther, you agree that by reading the remainder of my post here (as copyright holder), you will not reply anonymously. As copyright holder of the viewpoint expressed below, I reserve the right to have a valid e-mail address for anyone disputing, supporting, or making any other comment to the content below.
Any anonymous reply invokes my right to pursue investigation into the identity of any Anonymous Coward, through the correlation of web and ISP logging facilities.
By the by, this is a big 'Eat me' to Anonymous Cowards. I think you're ticks on the underbelly of Free Speech. While you're foaming at the mouth and cursing my name, you can at least take heart that I'd defend your right to speak anonymously. I just think it sucks that people can't stand by their rhetoric.
From the RIAA faq about the DMCA: Q. Isn't it true that there shouldn't even be a webcasting performance right for sound recordings because it was intentionally left out of the DPRA and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") was passed without any debate from Congress?
While the topic discussion isn't webcasting, note the bold letters. The DMCA passed unanimously in the Senate.
I realize some readers here aren't American. To you, I say DON'T LET YOUR LEGISLATURES PASS THIS CRAP. Personally, I think it's fully high time for some accountability initiatives. Skylarov was arrested because this bill was signed into law without floor debate and support. Where were our Congressmen to defend our rights? Who will question the responsibility of our lawmakers if the constitutional basis of the DMCA is found to be infringing?
I encourage you to take the time to read the RIAA DMCA Webcasting faq, and understand why the DMCA is so important to record companies. It's plainly visible in the FAQ: They want control of what you listen to.
Some examples: (this text is from the RIAA webcasting faq)
The webcasting statutory license applies to webcasters that:
(1) offer non-interactive programming (i.e., not on-demand or personalized programming);
(2) primarily offer audio or other entertainment programming as opposed to primarily selling or promoting particular products or services; and (3) abide by certain conditions spelled out in the statute.
Some of those conditions: 2. Sound recording performance complement. A webcaster may not play in any three-hour period (1) more than three songs from a particular album, including no more than two consecutively, or (2) four songs by a particular artist or from a boxed set, including no more than three consecutively. This limit is called the "sound recording performance complement."
The cynic in me reads this and ponders some daily tallies of the crap overplayed on local stations.
Here's an interesting twist, though: Q. Terrestrial radio stations don't pay sound recording copyright owners. Why should webcasters be treated any differently?
A. The lack of a broad sound recording performance right that applies to US terrestrial broadcasts is an historical accident. In almost every other country broadcasters pay for their use of the sound recordings upon which their business is based. For decades, the US recording industry fought unsuccessfully to change this anomaly while broadcasters built very profitable businesses on the creative works of artists and record companies. The broadcasters were simply too strong on Capitol Hill.
Wow. They pull off one of the worst bills in American history, and have the nerve to grouse about this? The RIAA isn't interested in what you want. They're interested in controlling how you are spoon fed media. The DMCA is designed to take away your basic right to a choice.
Consider the coolest feature of the VCR. Fast forward. When working under the Fair Use clause and taping Seinfeld, you could skip the commercials in the taped episode where Kramer thinks he's a dog. You could rent 'Honey, I shrunk my diapragm' at Blockbuster and fast forward through the previews for other movies. Sadly, friends, personal control over bought and paid for technology is a thing of the past. It's senile and dying a tottering death, with the RIAA and MPAA hanging around like ungrateful sons and daughters waiting to reap the inheritence.
I own a few DVDs I can't fast forward through the stack of promo crap at the beginning. The freedom once given to us by the remote control (that being that one where you can have full control over your home entertainment system without ever having to leave your couch) has been usurped by DVD region codes and encoded controller restrictions. The worst part? I may own the equipment, and I may have paid for that shiny disc, but it's a felony for me to learn how and implement a way to skip crap I didn't want in the first place.
So, what's next? If watermarking and content control become realities, how long until we see something as ludicrous, but possible, as not being able to skip audio tracks because you only want to hear the one song on a CD you bought because the band is a one hit wonder? How much time will be lost to having to sit through a segment of media we're not interested in seeing because we live in the US and aren't allowed to skip the spoonfeeding?
Big Media isn't interested in what you want. They're interested in what you'll buy lacking other options. And your congressmen are they're (perhaps willing) accomplices.
Demand accountability.
It's funny. I've sent in several submissions over time, and certainly, not ALL of them deserved a singular entry, and one of them most certainly did (The short lived media explosion of the Kent State 'bust of a Starcraft Clan for "hate" crimes').
Just yesterday, I pointed out that the epoch timestamp tacks on another digit next week or so, and that didn't even make the Slashback. I'd bet a case of beer with CmdrTaco and Cowperson Niel that somewhere, there will be a y2k-esque software failure because some twit only packed an int(9) epoch date field.
No one seemed to care when I submitted an article about content protection plans for ATA hard drives, even though I thought it was interesting.
Slashdot is no longer news for nerds. It's fodder for the unwashed masses who are stunned and amazed by shiny things and anything to firm up the belief that Microsoft is bad, and Linux is Good, no matter what the truth may be.
I don't mean to get off on a rant here, but I'm increasingly disillusioned by the portal of interest that Slashdot used to be. You can hardly call this 'news' of any journalistic stripe when it lacks any kind of clear detachment from a specific point of view, and behaves more like a pack of screaming frat boys with pocket calculators.
I'm pretty much a daily reader, and I occasionally submit something that other people like myself would find interesting. Rejected. 9 for 10. The one piece I've had accepted wound up in a Slashback, with very little mention. It's funny though, considering the content, since you, the foaming-at-the-mouth, Damn-The-Man Slashdot populace, actually took the time to potentially make a situation worse for a Kent State student by sending crap emails and even a few phone calls 'in support' of the accused. I spent three days playing journalist and digging up facts to present a clarified story that apparantly wasn't interesting enough for Slashdot once it wasn't a clear oppression of the geeked. Shenanigans, I say!
It's enough that the rampant Anonymous Cowards don't have the nerve, integrity, or sheer balls to attach a name to their drivel, but I guess that's for the best. I don't want to know who you are, because your opinion generally isn't worth the price of admission. You guys sit and bitch about Katz, who takes the time to present a clear view that anyone can read, whether you like it or not, and the courage to put his name on it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not sitting here with my Microsoft polo biting my thumb at the DoJ, but I'm also not sporting my Linux fanaticism like a bad tupee and sniggering down my nose at anyone who thinks you're talking about algebra when you use 'x' by itself as a term. I used to really dig my daily Slashdot read, but now it's all I can do to just gloss over the front page before skipping straight to Freshmeat to keep up with what's really going on.
In closing, Katz, we who could be central characters of 'Geeks', salute you. To the news acceptance squad, thanks for the rejections. It's just like high school, and I'm still not good enough. CmdrTaco and founding crew, my condolences on the lobotomization of your site.
(Yes, I put my name to this, because it's MY voice, and people are damn well gonna know it.)
- billn
There's a simple perl CGI tool called JD What's New. I use it quite a bit myself. You can find it on Freshmeat here.
Last change, MD5, Checksum, and size are all applicable methods for checking for updates.
There's some misinterpretation in the Kent Stater pieces, and I feel some of the facts cited by the sources I spoke with are also erroneous and overstated. 60 to 70 hours to fix some web content? Uploaded content 'alter configurations'? Getting details about what happened on the server was like pulling teeth. Being an engineering type, it was all I could do not to really get into it with Dave Futey, the ResNet admin of the server in question, knowing what I do about the systems and mechanics involved.
All in all, I think police involvement could have been avoided, and this has largely come down to the wrong people making decisions without understanding the information presented.
As I understand it, the design of the Volkswagen was such that factories used to manufacture them could be rapidly retooled to produce other fun things, like tanks and support vehicles.
Hah, like anything out of SFO can truly be on time. I think it's kinda sad that they're considering prosecution on the scale that's mentioned in the article. In the very least, they should have the work evaluated by qualified and experienced engineers to determine if there truly WAS a safety hazard.
I think it's good to find other reviews in these kind of forums. I personally shy away from most broadcast media, radio and TV alike, preferring to be my own person, despite what MTV is currently doing to hair styles. My choice of personalism over sheep-cow-moo herd mentality makes peer reviews of movies pretty important, in my book. I'll prolly go see this movie, maybe tonight, based simply on Jon's review. I wish someone had warned be about 'The Family Man', though. Don't get me wrong, the movie was awesome. I just wasn't expecting it.
I gotta stop sleeping in. This is the kind of stuff I really like setting up my cardboard pulpit for.
I don't mean to get off on a Dennis Miller-esque rant here, but..
There isn't "cyber" anything, in any sense true to the context in which the term 'cyber' was coined. People calling the Internet
"cyberspace" need to be flogged. Sadly, I'd rather stick to the 'Information Superhighway' line, as it applies to an increasingly fast infrastructure for moving our era's biggest commodity: porn^Wdata.
The only thing that currently comes close to 'cyber' is those folks equipped with mechanical supplements to accomodate a disability. Skip the fruity 'chip in the arm' experiment, that could have been pulled off in a less dangerous manner by putting it under his tongue. The wearable computer chic that's evolving is a good start, and simple evolution and miniaturization will spur it into the true definition of 'cyber' whatever.
Don't agree with me? Screw off, I'm a 'cyber' purist, and the world needs more.
Katz. Don't like his work? Exercise your sapience endowed freedom of choice, and DON'T READ IT. You freaks are worse than the Howard Stern audience. Do you realize, half his listeners are there for the same reason the other half is, which is to hear what he says next, despite the fact that they don't agree or like it? If you ARE going to read his work, do it with an open mind, and look at what he's writing about, and not at what he's writing. There's no law or commandment that say you have to like Katz. I'm open minded enough to understand what he's writing about, whether I agree with his viewpoint or not. I'd happily applaud him for the reaction he gets from you guys, like dangling a plastic banana in front of monkeys. Looks like a banana, tastes like crap. You're just reacting to the fact that he's got a banana, whether you're going to eat it, or not.
Geography. This is my review of Katz's review of the SUBJECT that book tackles, whether it does it well or not. Most people don't realize, that the Internet, as a cultural tool, isn't a medium. It's an accelerator. The only other medium on the planet that can disseminate information faster is a pack of small town wives.
Internetworks, as a medium, dramatically change the way corporations *need* to work, and the way their employees *want* to work. High tech companies dealing in information commodities don't need to bring the miners to the mine any longer. Personally, I'm a network engineer and NMS prototype developer, myself. I work from home. In my boxers. I have a fridge under my desk. I think that covers how high tech employees *want* to work.
Here's the Wendy's 'Biggie' sized "But". Not all companies are high tech companies. We still need steel mills, farming communities, and every other craft in the class[1]. Take a trip back to the movie 'Son in Law', as a perfect example of what Katz and Cyber BS Joe are talking about. The daughter went off to college, and the son is a computer nerd[2]. The father, a generation farmer, couldn't understand his son's desire to program. The nature of humanity, or maybe just Americans, to rebel against what their parents do, is accelerated by high technology and Internet culture, and is undoubtedly increasingly sucking the marrow from our nations.. well, no, actually, our WORLD'S support infrastructure.
L.E.Modesitt, Jr, wrote in his book, _Timediver's Dawn_[3], that high tech societies tend to burn themselves out rather quickly. The Internet's accelerating effect is a good example of this, as more and more people are lured from staple support industries to the glitz and glamour of a connected 'global village' (Hey, Hillary, this village is raising more kids than you think.)
So yes, absolutely, I agree that there's a distinct shift in where our population is moving, both geographically, and morally. There's an interesting counterpoint to this, though. Just as the Internet is changing where and how people live, it's bringing more people to the surface, and leveling the playing field. People have more *options*. The savagely intelligent illuminati who, in years past, were concealed beneath basic struggles for survival are clawing their way to the surface and making a difference. The distances between life changing opportunities has narrowed dramatically for many people.
Don't believe me? Read Katz's book, _Geeks_. Some of my friends did, and threw it at me to read. Why? It was an interesting parallel to my own life, as a small town native struggling to make ends meet. I won't trash that book, because it's absolutely true for a lot of us.
What does it all come down to? Choices. The Internet, as a culture, gives us more. Can we always make them? Certainly not. I never went to college. Dropped out of high school. Because I'm one of those 'bright' people who can do whatever they set their minds to[4], I managed to land a tech job with skills I picked up while ditching school and BBS'ing. Three years later, a startup ISP brought the Internet within my reach. Six months later, I was gone, following the American Dream.
[dramatic pause, ala Shatner.]
The Dream. To do crap no one has considered before. To boldly piss off investors and accountants alike. To draw six figure salaries and vacation in Fiji.
The Dream, which has been slowly sucking the marrow from our societies, luring bright young minds to build the next big thing.
Accelerated by the Internet.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be.. no, I'm mostly right.
[1] Except novelty toy factories. You bastards are a waste of plastic, and need to go to hell.
[2] Don't for an instant think I'm slighting him. 'Computer nerd' is a distinct badge of honor, in my book.
[3] Science fiction, a good read.
[4] It's not ego inflation when dozens of people tell you so, so piss off if you think I'm on a high horse.
What, you think $foo and $bar are reserved words?
Sounds like item editing in Diablo II. =)
I read the article.
I read the replies.
First and foremost, for those of you who dislike/hate/ignore Katz, thankfully, for everyone one of you increasingly narrowminded hatemongers, there's a good ten people who appreciate what it is Jon does. I'm happy you've found the courage to voice your opinion without hiding behind anonymity, but I question your objectivity.
For everyone of you who finds Katz's posts boring because they don't contain anything you don't already know, there's another ten to fifty people reading his works who DON'T fully grasp the concepts he's taking the time to learn himself and explain in a distilled form. Given the prevelance of loudmouthed technocrats blaring an unyielding attitude here in these forums, it's no wonder those learning don't pipe up to voice appreciation for what Katz does. As much as I respect your right your own opinion, as well as your right to voice it, I would ask the same of any of you, for those with questions.
I'm as guilty as the next person, when it comes to looking down on people I consider to be of lesser technical ability than myself. I know I have talents and skills, but I also know I'm not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I like to keep in mind that once upon a time, I was a less-than-clueful newbie, too.
You don't have to like Jon. You don't have to like me. This isn't a utopia, and I don't expect it to be one as long as it's populated by humans.
But.
Question the effects of your vociferous rantings. I don't post under the guise of an AC because I feel I have an open mind about things, that I can express my opinions well enough to sign my name to them.
The Internet, as a medium for the masses, has broken us out of one herd, and through human habit, put us into another. The downfall of this, is the human failure towards anger and resentment for things they don't understand. The ease and speed with which people can air their opinions taints forums such as this with an undercurrent of anger and hostility. Don't believe me? As soon as you're done foaming at the mouth because I dare to belittle you, flip back up the page and objectively read the vitriol posted here.
Personally, I don't read all of Jon's articles. I read the ones that cover topics that grab my eye, even though I may already be well versed in the matter. Jon typically does more than enough legwork to present a solid view of the subject, at a pace that ANY READER can read, and come away with a good understanding of the topic.
This, in my mind, equals a great contribution to Internet society in part, and raising the general awareness of the populace as a whole. What the hell have YOU contributed lately?
I make the five apes analogy as a point of how behavior is begun, perpetrated, and encouraged, despite the fact that the condition leading to the behavior may no longer exist. I'm heartened by the fact that we, as sapient beings, can learn to recognize that the behavior is 'wrong', and take steps to correct it.
As far as the issue of monetary wealth.. I won't slight the wealthy for wanting to keep the money they have, provided they earned it. I also won't slight them for passing that wealth to their children.
But. =)
I fully expect those parents to raise those children to be responsible and decent people. I know it may seem unrealistic, but you can't affect your environment without deciding what you want it to be. The world doesn't need more arrogant children purporting classism based on monetary advantages they didn't earn.
'Suprisingly decent', roblimo called it.
Rob, you're off my Christmas list. And here I was going to send a case of Guinness.
The article was.. something. But like most AC postings, lacking in meat and content. I'm inclined to agree that Gore himself didn't actually write it. Even if he did, it's lacking. Through the article, he basically staked out a few political issues, pointed at them, and said "I'm thinking about these." Not too much mention of what his actual ANSWERS were.
The offhand comment about the current DOJ administration.. specifically:
Even though the Justice Department makes its own independent decisions in such matters without input from the White House, its leaders -including Joel Klein -are appointees of the current administration. For that reason, I couldn't comment on the decision that was clearly on many people's minds on the Microsoft campus today.
If you couldn't talk about the decision, or answer to speculation about the outcome, why go? Why visit a company with thousands of employees, who would be out of their gourds to not be worrying what is going to happen to their employer, and not be able to answer their concerns? I've never really though of MS as a target political demographic, but those people are voters too, and they have families. Were I an MS staffer, I'd be pretty irate for that kind of tease.
The school thing is simple enough, if not controversial. School uniforms, and no book bags.
Slow down, put the chair down. That's an expensive monitor, most likely, and while beating it may make you feel better, it won't affect me in anyway.
The Columbine shootings, as well as others, stem from a single socialogical foible: Classism. It's just like racism, but can be applied to anyone. Classism, like racism, springs from the basic human nature of the need for community, and is then corrupted by the innate human fear of things not understood. That done, it's sparked by an individual pointing out or making light of the differences, and then mimicked by other members of the community as acceptable behavior.
Everyone familiar with the five ape theory of behaviour? I'm not sure who coined it, but I'll paraphrase it here.
Place five apes in a cage. In the center, a set of stairs, with bananas at the top. An ape climbs the stairs to get the bananas, but as soon he touches them, the rest of the apes are sprayed with cold water. Over time, the apes will learn that going after the bananas results in being sprayed.
Remove one ape, and replace it with a new one. Not knowing of the water, he'll attempt the bananas. The other apes may simply block him, or go so far as to assault him to prevent it, but the new ape doesn't know WHY. Over time, he simply accepts this behaviour.
Repeat the cycle. Replace one of the remaining four original apes with a new one. The three original apes, as well as the first new ape, will repeat the prohibitive behaviour.
Continue the process until all five original apes are replaced. Now, you have five new apes, who won't climb the stairs, but don't know why.
Now apply this to the 200 years of greed, war, and strife that our country is built on.
I'll happily quote Kaa's Law, at this point, in that within an sufficiently large enough group of people, most are stupid. If someone has theory on mob/herd sociology, I'd love to hear it.
So, why do I suggest school uniforms? Again, the core of the problem is classism. Like racism, it stems from SURFACE PERCEPTIONS. As you strip those away, you have less resistance to solving the more basic problems inherent in human nature.
But.
It's a band-aid. It's a scotch-tape patch to a gaping hole in the American psyche that's defined by 400 years of questionably acceptable behaviour spawned by the greed of what was probably one man's idea.
Tougher laws aren't going to help it. Legislating a 'hate crime' isn't going to stop it. It's not going to go away with a single election. It's a frame of mind, and it's got to start with the people. I plan to have kids some day, and I plan to raise them in an environment of diversity. I'm proud of the person I've become, because I had a solid guiding hand during the important formative stages of my life (Hi Dad!).
One thing 'Gore' touched on, I fully support, and that's encouraging parental involvement. Someone should poll this, but for those of you still living at home, or better, with kids in your home, how much time on average do they spend by themselves? Is there a computer in their room? A TV?
A lesson I learned recently, having two roommates, each of us with our own computers, is that bedrooms aren't living rooms. Moving my computer into the living room has dramatically improved the inter-personal relations in my household. Now, all machines are in the 'living room', which is what it really is. I fully intend to continue this trend as I get older, and I hope it catches on.
As far as the rest of the Internet, the porn, the warez, the hate.. It's not going to go away until people change. Politicians can't change people. People can change people. It starts in the home. Now go out and club your neighbors into submission with kindness.
Browsing through the current discussion (which I'm happy to see if rife with content), my caffiene-induced long memory recalled an article posted to /. recently about artificial photosynthesis, using solar energy to fuel chemical reactions in the same manner that plants do it. I could see something like this applied to a small plate on the hood of my truck, keeping my battery charged. Or not, since I live in Arizona, and don't want my truck becoming self-aware.
/. back in May/99, discussed the use of an ultr aviolet laser emitting a stream of photons to perform optical path ionization to facilitate transmission of electricity (25ma, 100hz) to ranges of 100 meters! Granted, the use they purport is for tasers, and my immediate thoughts went back to cat experimentation (Hey, PETA, I want some 9v cells for Christmas), but the cross-over application possibilities exist.
Back on topic.. As mentioned previously, the problem with broadcast power is the stuff that gets in between. Biomass tends to react poorly to the levels we'd need to power all our toys. Don't believe me? Call the people who live on Mercury, and their disgruntled neighbors on Venus. Broadcast energy, like microwave (as was mentioned in a previous post), has a side effect of particle excitation in the medium. Done in space, between non-terrestrial platforms, it wouldn't be much of a problem. Done on terra firma, you begin generating biological side effects caused by pumping extra heat into the immediate environment. Over time and in abundance, you contribute to trivial things like greenhouse effects, technicians hanging out on the roof and angling dishes at random birds, and (God forbid) roach mutation.
Air by itself isn't a practical medium for transmission of high energy. The required power outputs are just to high, and the return isn't high enough. Old 'Star Wars' theory involving ground based lasers (for the purpose of courtesy polishing of enemy spy satellites to a glossy shine) postulates the leeching properties of 'thermal blooming' as heating air begins distorting the optical path and decreasing efficiency.
But.
Another article posted on
Combinations of the two concepts would probably result in marked increases in efficiency, but working in non-vacuum environments still leaves you open to transmission degradation due to something as simple as wholesale friction.
Current limitations aside, other recent developments in miniaturization opens a door to using low power broadcast technology to provide power to devices that don't need a lot (like that hokey 'smart dust' concept, that you can counter with in-born allergies and thermonuclear sneeze assaults). You've played Starcraft. The Protoss concept of short range power pylons lends itself well to this, albeit on a smaller scale.
Relaying power between low-draw sensor clusters would be a good application, too. Weather monitoring, tracking HIGH LEVELS OF RF/EM RADIATION IN URBAN SETTINGS, and trivial biomass affecting things like that would be good, too.
Where is the power cord?
Following the links of the cDc posting, to the 'interview' with Garms of MS, they classify any trojan as software that can damage the system in any way. The nature of trojans require some social engineering, of course, to install.
By it's own definition, MS is guilty of the distribution of the largest trojan ever made.
When was the last time you had Windows eat itself?
Wipe a drive lately? Lose some documents?
Perl, as a scaled development platform, lends well to fast stable development, perfectly suitable to concept prototyping and portablility testing. It's not C/C++. It was never intended to be, if I understand my history correctly. I'm rather disappointed that you choose to slam Perl users/developers as a whole, based on your opinion of a single person involved in it's development and documentation.
Your statement, calling Perl a 'rather incoherent collection of features noone really understands' does quite well to give us an insight into where you fit in the food chain of intelligencia. I'm rather shocked that you go on to call yourself a C coder, when Perl is a far more distilled animal and (I think) far easier to learn and understand. That being said, Perl lends more to the Unix environment learning curve than raw C itself does, in that it provides interfaces to many of the same functions, in a manner that is typically easier for the new user to understand.
Some of you are probably scoffing and mumbling 'Who gives a crap about newbies?', and honestly, if that's your permanent ingrained attitude, I hope you're sterile and live/work in an environment where you can't influence children. The greatest strength of Unix, and likewise Perl as a natively grown (though win32/etc exported) commodity, stimulate and nurture a neverending learning process, which is important to the expansion, evolution, and sanity of our increasingly technologically savvy culture (despite the high Imac sales).
Larry Wall, as the father of Perl, is probably one of my top few dozen revered people, not for the product itself, but for the cultural stimulation he aimed to produce. I can't honestly say I'm heavily involved in Perl politics, be it the development of Perl itself, or furthering it's growth by supplying useful code. I'm really just an end user who hangs out in #perl on Efnet and learns by osmosis. You malign the lack of 'rational discussions', which simply says 'I browse a couple newsgroups', and not much else.
You don't like Tom. Big deal. Little, insignificant me has been at odds with him, too.
The difference between you and I, is that I know when to point at a single person, and not a group as a whole, by association. Society, and further, mankind as a whole would be a lot better if they'd hop off THAT beaten old stump.
Some of the greatest people I know, I've met on my neverending quest for knowledge, even if it's with what you speak of as an apparantly inferior development tool (that you still use).
I'm off my tangent, now. I apologize for any stress/therapy incurred by my tirade. I just thought that needed to be said.