Why did he play the Emperor in The Empire Strikes Back? (Yes, I know he wasn't the Emperor in Return of the Jedi, my father believes that Lucas changed the whole story after a story outline was leaked in Playboy magazine which involved good and evil clones and the Clone Wars. I don't know if this story is just the typical conspiracy theory that grows up around this type of thing, but Guiness did play the Emperor in Empire Strikes Back) Mainly I just think it is interesting, and I think that we shouldn't neccessarily believe that story in E! online about Alec Guinness. I'd have to see him say he brought a twelve year old to tears on tape before I'd believe he did something like that. He gives the impression that he's a gentleman, and even if it is just a pose I don't think he'd make an admition like that to a reporter. I also thought he was dead, but I guess I was wrong.
Combine this with the auto complete feature I reference above... and how secure is any E-mail accessed through IE? Also, I've used hotmail to access my school E-mail accounts (I've been with them since before they were assimilated by Micros~1) because I know my school accounts can disappear at any time anyway (that's how it is at my school) so I'm not concerned about their security.
Hmm, you know what I think is a huge security hole in Hotmail and numerous other Websites? The idiotic autocomplete feature in Internet Explorer! Why do I say idiotic? Because it is default turned on! Who's bright idea was this! I know that many people have been asking me how to turn it off and how to get their old passwords out of the things. I mean, how many people at a low level of computer literacy have accidentally left their passwords on school, library and other public computers by now. I'd be really interested to see that number. I remember my Dad used to be really paranoid about cookies, but this is worse, because even sites that eschew storing passwords, etc. in cookies can still be subject to the dangers of auto complete. Of course, this will not earn any big headlines because it is a "feature" of IE. Oh well...
Has everybody seen the Secret of Nimh? It's a movie about mice (and rats) with artificially enhanced intelligence building an advanced civilization under a rose bush near a farmhouse. I wonder if mice could be enhanced up to human intelligence?
..the whole instant messenger battle between AOL and Microsoft is a good thing, as it puts the two behemoths against each other and uses up resources they could be using to go after Linux(M$) or crush local ISPs(AOL). Personally, I don't get why they think that the big money is in instant messaging.
Besides which, it leads to entertaining news stories like this.
Hmm, but he isn't the one who made the law in Tennessee making Pi=3 (if there was such a law, I have trouble believing it but on the other hand it could be.)
This is an example of why making laws about scientific inquiry based on the Bible is a horrible idea. Supposing the Bible were interpreted incorrectly? I mean, heck, I read recently that imaging experiments on the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovering new text. Nothing Earth-shattering yet, but even adding one book to the Bible would be quite a shake up for all old testament based religions, eh?
Of course, many people don't believe the Bible is literally true, but if it is, the scientific method, applied correctly will provide irrefutable evidence of that fact in time. It will never get that chance if we go on saying "There are things Man was not meant to study."
I think this is really (mostly) a question of how one feels about circuses, Sea World and the like (which have huge numbers of visitors every day!) and also whether the animals were mistreated.
I don't mind animal performers as long as they aren't mistreated. I don't think that by definition animal performers are mistreated, as some do. So, I guess I'd have to see how the penguins were treated and judge for myself.
Kind of pointless to bring them to a Linux convention though, are the two major political parties going to have their animal mascosts at their conventions?
Incidentally, my latest Libertarian newsletter suggested penguins for the party mascot, because it seems quite a few of us are Linux users... but I think this may be unfair since some Linux users are communists, utopian socialists, Republican, Democrat and other non-Libertarian parties. So, they probably wouldn't appreciate an appropriation of the Linux mascot.
The fact is Netscape needs to release a new browser that is more compliant to standards. I'm not sure I care about Netscape anymore though. I see AOL as being every bit as malevolent as Microsoft, and if people don't want to believe that then why, after aquiring Netscape, didn't AOL deliver it on all those spam CDs it ships out? AOL only bought Netscape to get the brand name (and Netscape's portal page), and is letting the browser die a slow and horrible death. I mean I read somewhere that AOL was having its users use Internet Explorer even after it had aquired Netscape!
I say, there needs to be an open source browser that is not controlled by AOL! I'm not the one to start designing it, surely someone out there is, though!
Probably one of the most popular parts of biology is the study of dinosaurs. So popular that movies like Jurassic Park and the like made millions of dollars Will kids in Kansas schools still be taught about dinosaurs (which are not mentioned in the Bible) or will they, too, be dropped from the curriculum? What do Bible literalists believe about Tyrranosaurus Rx and the like? Just some questions that came to mind last night.
Hey, you know someone with the means could start a cottage industry creating Linux keys to replace the Windows keys. But how difficult would it be to replace the keys? Personally I could see an entire keyboard redesign. Why when I had my Atari 800 Computer, the number pad was a seperate device, sort of like a mouse! (It hooked into one of the joystick ports, I think.) Why not make modern keyboards like that? And bring back all text adventure games too...
Hmm, here's the problem though, I believe that this is a first step to teaching Creation as science. I don't think it is a good idea to try to teach Creation as science because God is not bound by scientific law. Therefore, the science suffers because Creationism is basically something along the lines that, "Reality is an idea in the mind of God." (Sorry, some religious philosophers have suggested this. I'm not sure if they were Christians or not.)
Humans are bound by scientific law, Jesus healing the sick is consistent with the idea of the supernatural, for example, but if I get sick I want my doctor to use scientific methods to heal me. I don't want to go to a faith healer for that. Peter was able to walk on water because Jesus said he could, correct? Try doing that sometime, I'll bet you'll be unable to do it.
Scientists ought not to be forced to accept miracles into their work. It reminds me of an old Far Side cartoon I read once, in which a researcher who was stuck trying to complete a formula writes on the board "then a miracle happens" and his professor is telling him, "I think you need to explain this step more thouroughly." Humans are bound by natural law, God is by definition not, what this debate is doing, actually is forbidding a scientific inquiry into human origins, because the scientist must not start with forgone conclusions if he is to be a truly non-biased researcher. Creationism starts from the idea, "God created the world X-number of years ago in X-number of days, anything which contradicts this must be false." If it were science the person believing in Creation has to start, "I believe that the world was created according to the Bible, now what supporting and contradicting evidence can I find for this theory."
If I believed that this was only to remove evolution from school, well, I'd still be disturbed, obviously, because I believe in it. It's because I believe it is intended to replace evolution with anti-science ("science" in which the conclusions are drawn before the evidence is gathered).
Hey, I always watch the Simpsons, when it is on, while playing games on my computer (and also Futurama);-) Although I will stop if it is a new episode so I can get all the details (we get the Simpsons twice every night here, in reruns, life is good.).
I just wish they'd bring that Simpson's arcade game out for computers, it was better than all the home versions (though Virtual Springfield is good for mindless fun).
Here is my problem with current people who reject evolution out of hand as impossible (and some of these people are my friends); it is the fact that when your arguing something on the basis of faith, it cannot be disproved. Here is the faith based proof of the Eden story and other creation stories:
1. There is a being, called God, who can do whatever He likes. He can create matter out of nothing, He can cause time to reverse itself, and He can cause any scientific law to be suspended whenever He feels like it.
2. Just because something in God's Book (there are a few different versions, the Koran, the Bible, etc.) seems to contradict something or seems to jibe with scientific proof doesn't mean it isn't true. God simply can create a contradictory reality, if He wants. If God's Book were to say that the world was created yesterday, and all the memories we have of existing previous to then were false, well, we know that God has the ability to do it, therefore how can we doubt it?
Science on the other hand is supposed to be based on a skeptical view of reality. If you see flaws in say, the Story of Noah and the Ark (like, to me, it seems unlikely tht God changed the laws of physics after the Great Flood so rainbows would appear to remind Noah of the Covenant. It seems more likely that this is a "just so" story along the lines of how the elephant got it's trunk, I think these were collected by Rudyard Kipling.) as a scientist you are supposed to question it. If as a scientist you just accept things on faith you aren't a scientist.
If you want Creationism taught in school science courses, you need to justify it according to science, not faith! Because faith is belief based on the idea of the supernatural and science is the study of the natural. Science cannot be expected to accept into its practices the idea that nature is all a creation of an outside force and that all the collected knowledge of scientists could suddenly be made false because God decides that Pi should be rounded off to 3 tommorrow or something similar.
Hmm, I think people want to make games for women (money talks a lot more loudly than sexism, IMHO) but they just don't know how. I mean my favorite game series is Resident Evil I don't think the characters in that are barbie doll types (*shrug* don't jump down my throat I just don't see Jill and Claire that way, unfortunately we end up with a matter of personal taste here which gets turned into a political issue.) but when my female friends tried to play it they got intimidated by the UI (though they liked the idea of the game it has a high learning curve, I'm not picking on women here I've known plenty of guys who have the exact same problem with the RE games.) and the only game they want to play lately is Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo (though I can also get one of them to play Street Fighter, the other finds it too masculine.) Since I like playing games with my friends, I keep looking for multiplayer games that will appeal to them but... I haven't hit on a formula that works yet. I'm thinking maybe something like Diablo would be good for online, but there is a stubborness in both of them that "women have better things to do with their time than play games." This is an attitude I get from my Mom and my sister too, so I'm not sure if the mega-appealing female game just hasn't arrived or women really just mostly feel this way.
In a recent computer science guest lecture I attended the featured speaker mentioned something to the audience like "how many businesses run on 100% clean boxes?" Now, what he meant by clean boxes is one software license per computer, as opposed to buying one copy of, say, M$ Word and using it on two or more computers. One of the startups I worked at used very little licensed software, I was always switching to a new program when the 30 day trial would run out on the ones I was using. My boss would've given me a pretty wierd look if I had said, "you know, you've installed M$ Widget on all three computers and we only have the license for one." I mean, the place was operating on a shoestring until the money from a government contract came in. The few programs they actually bought had to be used by more than one person or they may as well of fired some people. (And considering how small the company was, gone out of business right after firing the people.)
Here's and article about this exact type of mentality that I found to be really, really funny:
Of course, the article is about controlling game software as opposed to business software, but it is a similar idea.
In the long run small companies without much starting capitol will end up to be forced into either a) contracting help from the Imperial companies (like IBM, M$, etc.) or b) go with open source. Until the government decides to shut down open source, this will be a huge boon to the open source movement.
How come this guy's posts haven't been moderated down? I mean if people have an opinion on the legal aspects of this thing, all well and good, but why do I have to hear from some low-grade moron who's probably jealous just because of all the attention Kevin got? I mean this is such obvious trolling for Mitnick lovers.
It seems to me that there are far worse things out there, this is fairly neutral speech, I mean is this even going to be an agency with a name?
Has anyone ever heard of the Metallic and Non-Metallic Mine Safety Board of Review? Well, it was a government agency that was created so if a lot of people protested the closing of mines for safety reasons they would have a place to take their complaints. However, in all the years that the agency existed, no one brought one single complaint before the board. Board meetings consisted of trying to come up with a logo for the agency, in nice resort spots, and the guy who ran the agency spent his time in his office listening to classical music until it was time to go home. He was always completely forthright with Congress, and told them during yearly reviews that he didn't have any work to do. Eventually (in Washington slow-time) the closed the agency and transferred its functions to the Dept. of the Interior
I'm not a fan of Bill Clinton, and I think this is probably a waste of time/money, but when you've got agencies with teeth (FBI) egged on by ignorant pols this seems sort of... un-news. I promise to recant if this body turns into a real scary threat, but right now I think there are bigger fish to fry.
The biggest problem that I ever see is people who's attitude is, "I don't care I've already got mine, and besides, my vote/protest isn't going to change anything." I think, therefore that the most effective way to use the Internet is to convince people that they can change things, and that apathy is not the way to go. Therefore I think tech related "Political Success Stories" would be a handy thing to have. It wouldn't hurt, also, to keep a voter guide of pro-liberty and anti-liberty politicians.
I decided I wasn't sure if VisiCalc actually fell into the modern definition of Open Source but it was close enough, I think. I decided to put up this article and let people judge for themselves:
Quote: "Yet for all its brilliance and simplicity, the spreadsheet wasn't an idea that Bricklin attempted to own. In fact, he made far less money from the spreadsheet industry than any of those who successfully built on what Bricklin had pioneered."
I think reaction to Microsoft is in part responsible for the current influnce of the Open Source movement (of course, we should all remember that VisiCalc, which made PCs useful for many business applications, was open source. I don't know if we'd be where we are today without VisiCalc, and jump starting an entire industry sure "fed a lot of mouths.") Why? Well, in my case I resent having to use Microsoft products! I preferred the idea that there was a company that did one thing (like Netscape, when they were an independant company, or Wordperfect) but did it well as opposed to one massive polyglot monster that does many things to the absolute minimum level of adequacy possible. (I also don't care for Windows, but that's beside the point.) The other thing about Open Source is that to learn from code you have to be able to see it! If it's kept under wraps you end up creating the same thing over and over and over again.
I think, though, if people hadn't been convinced by Microsofts actions that they were never going to be allowed to make any money using the proprietary model because M$ would either buy them out (not why I want to be in this business, to be a glorified Wallstreet paper pusher) or make an exact dplicate of their product and run them out of business. Microsoft needs to quit whining, they did a bunch of horribly self-absorbed things out of greed (including breaking the law, I believe) and now they are going to suffer for it. I'm sorry that they brought the government into the computer industry (though the government would've come in in other ways and for other reasons, anyway), but they did it by being ruthless and by pushing the law as much as they could get away with.
but don't provide the Internet access or any "non-productivity software." By all means include a modem, but let the people you donate the computer to set up their own net access. Why? Because in this way you avoid the liability issue. While the current position people have about the Internet is pretty absurd, especially in Utah, you can't change the whole area's attitudes. (Remember, this is a place where a video store was earning money editing the "naughty bits" out of Titanic.) But if you just give a kid a computer with some good wordprocessing software and the like, their parents may (or may not) decide to hook them up to the Internet.
Oh, it is very good for a kid to have exposure to computers at a young age, despite other opinions I've heard on this forum. I did, and I was still an avid reader. The thing that held me back the most in math was a stubborn refusal to use calculators even when doing complex algebra even when the other kids were using them! So, I would be doing my long division out by hand, and not completing my exams while other kids who weren't as good as I was completed on time and got better grades. Why? Because I read some well meaning story in Highlights for children about an alien that was really impressed by a human child who could do math without a calculator.
Embrace technology, don't fear it. Keeping your kids away from computers may end up holding them back, if they aren't learning their other subjects just concentrate on making sure they do, don't try to blame tech!
I still have every issue of Dragon and, later, Dungeon magazine I ever bought (except for two that were stolen, grr), plus all the original books (um, well, you know the first hardbound Monster Manual, Players Handbook and Dungeon Masters Guide, you know the ones with the cool Demon Idol (with the thieves stealing the jewel eye) and the DMG Efreeti on the cover. Oh, and the original Ravenloft module... but I only have the reprint of Tomb of Horrors;_;
(I always preferred Dr. Who to Star Trek though, I think just because I liked the continuing storylines as well as the Daleks and the Cybermen.)
Anybody else out there remember What's New? (with Phil and Dixie?) or Snarfquest? those were some great comic strips, sigh....
AD&D a way to avoid political issues? Wow, when I was a Junior High kid I got accused by a schoolteacher (behind my back) of being a Satanist in front of a class of my peers, because one of my friends tried to defend AD&D by telling the teacher I also played it. After that I got a reputation around the school, people thought I was some kind of warlock. I learned to completely hide the fact that I ever played and eventually stopped. I don't know, have things really changed that much? (I feel old;-) I know Jerry Falwell tried to bring up D&D post-Columbine, though he didn't get any milage from it.
Of course, I haven't really looked at much of the new editions of AD&D, after TSR started their "let's appease the witch-hunters" policy... (I only found out recently they were bought by Wizards of the Coast.)
Slashdot Mirror
Why did he play the Emperor in The Empire Strikes Back? (Yes, I know he wasn't the Emperor in Return of the Jedi, my father believes that Lucas changed the whole story after a story outline was leaked in Playboy magazine which involved good and evil clones and the Clone Wars. I don't know if this story is just the typical conspiracy theory that grows up around this type of thing, but Guiness did play the Emperor in Empire Strikes Back)
Mainly I just think it is interesting, and I think that we shouldn't neccessarily believe that story in E! online about Alec Guinness. I'd have to see him say he brought a twelve year old to tears on tape before I'd believe he did something like that. He gives the impression that he's a gentleman, and even if it is just a pose I don't think he'd make an admition like that to a reporter. I also thought he was dead, but I guess I was wrong.
http://www.mollymail.com
Combine this with the auto complete feature I reference above... and how secure is any E-mail accessed through IE? Also, I've used hotmail to access my school E-mail accounts (I've been with them since before they were assimilated by Micros~1) because I know my school accounts can disappear at any time anyway (that's how it is at my school) so I'm not concerned about their security.
Hmm, you know what I think is a huge security hole in Hotmail and numerous other Websites? The idiotic autocomplete feature in Internet Explorer! Why do I say idiotic? Because it is default turned on! Who's bright idea was this! I know that many people have been asking me how to turn it off and how to get their old passwords out of the things. I mean, how many people at a low level of computer literacy have accidentally left their passwords on school, library and other public computers by now. I'd be really interested to see that number.
I remember my Dad used to be really paranoid about cookies, but this is worse, because even sites that eschew storing passwords, etc. in cookies can still be subject to the dangers of auto complete.
Of course, this will not earn any big headlines because it is a "feature" of IE. Oh well...
Has everybody seen the Secret of Nimh? It's a movie about mice (and rats) with artificially enhanced intelligence building an advanced civilization under a rose bush near a farmhouse.
I wonder if mice could be enhanced up to human intelligence?
..the whole instant messenger battle between AOL and Microsoft is a good thing, as it puts the two behemoths against each other and uses up resources they could be using to go after Linux(M$) or crush local ISPs(AOL). Personally, I don't get why they think that the big money is in instant messaging.
Besides which, it leads to entertaining news stories like this.
Hmm, but he isn't the one who made the law in Tennessee making Pi=3 (if there was such a law, I have trouble believing it but on the other hand it could be.)
This is an example of why making laws about scientific inquiry based on the Bible is a horrible idea. Supposing the Bible were interpreted incorrectly? I mean, heck, I read recently that imaging experiments on the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovering new text. Nothing Earth-shattering yet, but even adding one book to the Bible would be quite a shake up for all old testament based religions, eh?
Of course, many people don't believe the Bible is literally true, but if it is, the scientific method, applied correctly will provide irrefutable evidence of that fact in time. It will never get that chance if we go on saying "There are things Man was not meant to study."
Undead creatures and Balrogs are real animals? Darn, you must live in the coolest neighborhood ;_;
I think this is really (mostly) a question of how one feels about circuses, Sea World and the like (which have huge numbers of visitors every day!) and also whether the animals were mistreated.
I don't mind animal performers as long as they aren't mistreated. I don't think that by definition animal performers are mistreated, as some do. So, I guess I'd have to see how the penguins were treated and judge for myself.
Kind of pointless to bring them to a Linux convention though, are the two major political parties going to have their animal mascosts at their conventions?
Incidentally, my latest Libertarian newsletter suggested penguins for the party mascot, because it seems quite a few of us are Linux users... but I think this may be unfair since some Linux users are communists, utopian socialists, Republican, Democrat and other non-Libertarian parties. So, they probably wouldn't appreciate an appropriation of the Linux mascot.
The fact is Netscape needs to release a new browser that is more compliant to standards. I'm not sure I care about Netscape anymore though. I see AOL as being every bit as malevolent as Microsoft, and if people don't want to believe that then why, after aquiring Netscape, didn't AOL deliver it on all those spam CDs it ships out? AOL only bought Netscape to get the brand name (and Netscape's portal page), and is letting the browser die a slow and horrible death. I mean I read somewhere that AOL was having its users use Internet Explorer even after it had aquired Netscape!
I say, there needs to be an open source browser that is not controlled by AOL! I'm not the one to start designing it, surely someone out there is, though!
Probably one of the most popular parts of biology is the study of dinosaurs. So popular that movies like Jurassic Park and the like made millions of dollars
Will kids in Kansas schools still be taught about dinosaurs (which are not mentioned in the Bible) or will they, too, be dropped from the curriculum?
What do Bible literalists believe about Tyrranosaurus Rx and the like?
Just some questions that came to mind last night.
Hey, you know someone with the means could start a cottage industry creating Linux keys to replace the Windows keys. But how difficult would it be to replace the keys? Personally I could see an entire keyboard redesign. Why when I had my Atari 800 Computer, the number pad was a seperate device, sort of like a mouse! (It hooked into one of the joystick ports, I think.) Why not make modern keyboards like that? And bring back all text adventure games too...
Hmm, here's the problem though, I believe that this is a first step to teaching Creation as science. I don't think it is a good idea to try to teach Creation as science because God is not bound by scientific law. Therefore, the science suffers because Creationism is basically something along the lines that, "Reality is an idea in the mind of God." (Sorry, some religious philosophers have suggested this. I'm not sure if they were Christians or not.)
Humans are bound by scientific law, Jesus healing the sick is consistent with the idea of the supernatural, for example, but if I get sick I want my doctor to use scientific methods to heal me. I don't want to go to a faith healer for that. Peter was able to walk on water because Jesus said he could, correct? Try doing that sometime, I'll bet you'll be unable to do it.
Scientists ought not to be forced to accept miracles into their work. It reminds me of an old Far Side cartoon I read once, in which a researcher who was stuck trying to complete a formula writes on the board "then a miracle happens" and his professor is telling him, "I think you need to explain this step more thouroughly." Humans are bound by natural law, God is by definition not, what this debate is doing, actually is forbidding a scientific inquiry into human origins, because the scientist must not start with forgone conclusions if he is to be a truly non-biased researcher. Creationism starts from the idea, "God created the world X-number of years ago in X-number of days, anything which contradicts this must be false." If it were science the person believing in Creation has to start, "I believe that the world was created according to the Bible, now what supporting and contradicting evidence can I find for this theory."
If I believed that this was only to remove evolution from school, well, I'd still be disturbed, obviously, because I believe in it. It's because I believe it is intended to replace evolution with anti-science ("science" in which the conclusions are drawn before the evidence is gathered).
Try view source on this page to see the way I would handle it:
Anti-Linking Script
Of course, there are other more sophisticated ways to deal with it, but this can work if the people aren't bound and determined to link to you.
Hey, I always watch the Simpsons, when it is on, while playing games on my computer (and also Futurama) ;-) Although I will stop if it is a new episode so I can get all the details (we get the Simpsons twice every night here, in reruns, life is good.).
I just wish they'd bring that Simpson's arcade game out for computers, it was better than all the home versions (though Virtual Springfield is good for mindless fun).
1. There is a being, called God, who can do whatever He likes. He can create matter out of nothing, He can cause time to reverse itself, and He can cause any scientific law to be suspended whenever He feels like it.
2. Just because something in God's Book (there are a few different versions, the Koran, the Bible, etc.) seems to contradict something or seems to jibe with scientific proof doesn't mean it isn't true. God simply can create a contradictory reality, if He wants. If God's Book were to say that the world was created yesterday, and all the memories we have of existing previous to then were false, well, we know that God has the ability to do it, therefore how can we doubt it?
Science on the other hand is supposed to be based on a skeptical view of reality. If you see flaws in say, the Story of Noah and the Ark (like, to me, it seems unlikely tht God changed the laws of physics after the Great Flood so rainbows would appear to remind Noah of the Covenant. It seems more likely that this is a "just so" story along the lines of how the elephant got it's trunk, I think these were collected by Rudyard Kipling.) as a scientist you are supposed to question it. If as a scientist you just accept things on faith you aren't a scientist.
If you want Creationism taught in school science courses, you need to justify it according to science, not faith! Because faith is belief based on the idea of the supernatural and science is the study of the natural. Science cannot be expected to accept into its practices the idea that nature is all a creation of an outside force and that all the collected knowledge of scientists could suddenly be made false because God decides that Pi should be rounded off to 3 tommorrow or something similar.
Hmm, I think people want to make games for women (money talks a lot more loudly than sexism, IMHO) but they just don't know how. I mean my favorite game series is Resident Evil I don't think the characters in that are barbie doll types (*shrug* don't jump down my throat I just don't see Jill and Claire that way, unfortunately we end up with a matter of personal taste here which gets turned into a political issue.) but when my female friends tried to play it they got intimidated by the UI (though they liked the idea of the game it has a high learning curve, I'm not picking on women here I've known plenty of guys who have the exact same problem with the RE games.) and the only game they want to play lately is Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo (though I can also get one of them to play Street Fighter, the other finds it too masculine.) Since I like playing games with my friends, I keep looking for multiplayer games that will appeal to them but... I haven't hit on a formula that works yet.
I'm thinking maybe something like Diablo would be good for online, but there is a stubborness in both of them that "women have better things to do with their time than play games." This is an attitude I get from my Mom and my sister too, so I'm not sure if the mega-appealing female game just hasn't arrived or women really just mostly feel this way.
Here's and article about this exact type of mentality that I found to be really, really funny:
My Dinner with Origin
Of course, the article is about controlling game software as opposed to business software, but it is a similar idea.
In the long run small companies without much starting capitol will end up to be forced into either a) contracting help from the Imperial companies (like IBM, M$, etc.) or b) go with open source. Until the government decides to shut down open source, this will be a huge boon to the open source movement.
How come this guy's posts haven't been moderated down? I mean if people have an opinion on the legal aspects of this thing, all well and good, but why do I have to hear from some low-grade moron who's probably jealous just because of all the attention Kevin got?
I mean this is such obvious trolling for Mitnick lovers.
So?
It seems to me that there are far worse things out there, this is fairly neutral speech, I mean is this even going to be an agency with a name?
Has anyone ever heard of the Metallic and Non-Metallic Mine Safety Board of Review? Well, it was a government agency that was created so if a lot of people protested the closing of mines for safety reasons they would have a place to take their complaints. However, in all the years that the agency existed, no one brought one single complaint before the board. Board meetings consisted of trying to come up with a logo for the agency, in nice resort spots, and the guy who ran the agency spent his time in his office listening to classical music until it was time to go home. He was always completely forthright with Congress, and told them during yearly reviews that he didn't have any work to do. Eventually (in Washington slow-time) the closed the agency and transferred its functions to the Dept. of the Interior
I'm not a fan of Bill Clinton, and I think this is probably a waste of time/money, but when you've got agencies with teeth (FBI) egged on by ignorant pols this seems sort of... un-news. I promise to recant if this body turns into a real scary threat, but right now I think there are bigger fish to fry.
The biggest problem that I ever see is people who's attitude is, "I don't care I've already got mine, and besides, my vote/protest isn't going to change anything." I think, therefore that the most effective way to use the Internet is to convince people that they can change things, and that apathy is not the way to go. Therefore I think tech related "Political Success Stories" would be a handy thing to have. It wouldn't hurt, also, to keep a voter guide of pro-liberty and anti-liberty politicians.
VisiCalc
Quote: "Yet for all its brilliance and simplicity, the spreadsheet wasn't an idea that Bricklin attempted to own. In fact, he made far less money from the spreadsheet industry than any of those who successfully built on what Bricklin had pioneered."
Gee, it's sure not the M$ model, eh?
I think reaction to Microsoft is in part responsible for the current influnce of the Open Source movement (of course, we should all remember that VisiCalc, which made PCs useful for many business applications, was open source. I don't know if we'd be where we are today without VisiCalc, and jump starting an entire industry sure "fed a lot of mouths.") Why? Well, in my case I resent having to use Microsoft products! I preferred the idea that there was a company that did one thing (like Netscape, when they were an independant company, or Wordperfect) but did it well as opposed to one massive polyglot monster that does many things to the absolute minimum level of adequacy possible. (I also don't care for Windows, but that's beside the point.) The other thing about Open Source is that to learn from code you have to be able to see it! If it's kept under wraps you end up creating the same thing over and over and over again.
I think, though, if people hadn't been convinced by Microsofts actions that they were never going to be allowed to make any money using the proprietary model because M$ would either buy them out (not why I want to be in this business, to be a glorified Wallstreet paper pusher) or make an exact dplicate of their product and run them out of business. Microsoft needs to quit whining, they did a bunch of horribly self-absorbed things out of greed (including breaking the law, I believe) and now they are going to suffer for it. I'm sorry that they brought the government into the computer industry (though the government would've come in in other ways and for other reasons, anyway), but they did it by being ruthless and by pushing the law as much as they could get away with.
but don't provide the Internet access or any "non-productivity software." By all means include a modem, but let the people you donate the computer to set up their own net access. Why? Because in this way you avoid the liability issue. While the current position people have about the Internet is pretty absurd, especially in Utah, you can't change the whole area's attitudes. (Remember, this is a place where a video store was earning money editing the "naughty bits" out of Titanic.) But if you just give a kid a computer with some good wordprocessing software and the like, their parents may (or may not) decide to hook them up to the Internet.
Oh, it is very good for a kid to have exposure to computers at a young age, despite other opinions I've heard on this forum. I did, and I was still an avid reader. The thing that held me back the most in math was a stubborn refusal to use calculators even when doing complex algebra even when the other kids were using them! So, I would be doing my long division out by hand, and not completing my exams while other kids who weren't as good as I was completed on time and got better grades. Why? Because I read some well meaning story in Highlights for children about an alien that was really impressed by a human child who could do math without a calculator.
Embrace technology, don't fear it. Keeping your kids away from computers may end up holding them back, if they aren't learning their other subjects just concentrate on making sure they do, don't try to blame tech!
I still have every issue of Dragon and, later, Dungeon magazine I ever bought (except for two that were stolen, grr), plus all the original books (um, well, you know the first hardbound Monster Manual, Players Handbook and Dungeon Masters Guide, you know the ones with the cool Demon Idol (with the thieves stealing the jewel eye) and the DMG Efreeti on the cover. Oh, and the original Ravenloft module... but I only have the reprint of Tomb of Horrors ;_;
(I always preferred Dr. Who to Star Trek though, I think just because I liked the continuing storylines as well as the Daleks and the Cybermen.)
Anybody else out there remember What's New? (with Phil and Dixie?) or Snarfquest? those were some great comic strips, sigh....
AD&D a way to avoid political issues? Wow, when I was a Junior High kid I got accused by a schoolteacher (behind my back) of being a Satanist in front of a class of my peers, because one of my friends tried to defend AD&D by telling the teacher I also played it. After that I got a reputation around the school, people thought I was some kind of warlock. I learned to completely hide the fact that I ever played and eventually stopped. I don't know, have things really changed that much? (I feel old ;-) I know Jerry Falwell tried to bring up D&D post-Columbine, though he didn't get any milage from it.
Of course, I haven't really looked at much of the new editions of AD&D, after TSR started their "let's appease the witch-hunters" policy... (I only found out recently they were bought by Wizards of the Coast.)