"Privacy is a big issue here. What's to stop me from hooking a $30 voice activated phone recorder to the line and record all of your conversations? I don't know how much I trust someone I've never met and who has no real oversight to protect my privacy. Scratch that.. I do know that I don't trust them at all."
Then why do you have a landline or cell phone? Sorry if I'm missing your point here, it's not intentional, I just don't understand why this concern is different.
"could this be the end of long distance charges? "
Back in 1999 I bought a cell phone that ended my long distance charges. I still pay for the phone (kinda like how you still pay for an ISP), but I can call from anywhere in the USA to anywhere in the USA. It could be the end to other stuff, but if you really really hate paying long distance charges....
"Is a Windows 95/98 port to the PocketPC a very usefull tool ?"
Not sure about the tool part, but I really would enjoy playing a bunch of my old DOS'ish games on it like the Space Quest series. Also, it'd be slick if I could run Photoshop on a handheld unit with a stylus. Though I ache for more pixels in the display.
The question shouldn't be "is it useful", but rather, "how can it be useful". More interesting results that way.
"The problem is, he was wrong. Saddam was not making "WMD's". Saddam had not been making them since the first Gulf War."
Sorry to be all technical here, but it cannot be proven that he didn't have them, only that we didn't find them. They built facilities that our satellites couldn't see. With that in mind, it's possible they'll never be found. (On the other hand, it is pretty damning that the weapons weren't used against our army. Frankly, that overrides my previous statement.)
"Iraq was not a threat to the US."
This is bullshit. Though I am pretty much convinced that they weren't armed in such a way that we were in danger, I do feel pretty strongly that they would have been safe haven for Al Qeada (sp?) or similar groups. I also feel that Saddam would, if so inclined, pay them to do 9-11 part 2. (Note: I did NOT say they had anything to do with 9-11.) For that reason, I'm pretty comfortable with Saddam being out of the picture. If it does turn out that the US didn't have strong enough WMD reason to go in, that does miff me. (In case it's difficult to tell, I'm not pro-Bush here, I'm sitting on the fence not really sure which side to lean on.)
"Bush lied to justify an optional war against a country that was no threat to the US. He might have believed that Saddam had "WMD's", but he lied about the "proof" he had."
I'm not convinced Bush in particular lied about anything, but I do have concerns that his staff either lied or obtained really bad info. Remember that Clinton's staff was up in arms over Iraq as well.
Frankly, I don't see myself picking any particular side on this any time soon. There's plenty of info that the US Gov't has that I don't. All this rationale that people have proposed describing how evil Bush is is riddled with holes. Both Saddam and Bush Sr are still alive right now, so vengence doesn't seem like a likely motive. US soldiers are not building a pipeline funneling oil into Bush's house to sell, so I'm not convinced it's about oil. I doubt a politician would bet his re-election on an invasion of a country that isn't directly threatening us. Everybody thinks Bush is an idiot, you'd think they'd rule out the whole "big Romulan'esque plot" theories, yet they don't. Etc.
I could keep going but the longer this gets, the more stupid flaming messages will come. I really hope people just read, comprehend, make their own opinion, and move on. I'll listen to polite/tactful rebuttals, though. As I said before, my mind isn't made up.
"So you're going for the its OK to be lied to once but not twice argument?"
No, moron. I didn't say anything was okay. I said it's weird that they'd lie once but not twice. Doesn't make sense. Either they're remarkably inconsistent or, gee whiz, maybe they truely believed they were there. Either way, it certainly damages the whole "Bush lied to get to Iraq" argument that flies around here.
"They've already taken a stab at the video game industry, remeber? "
So... you're afraid Microsoft will take over email, but you've already noticed they can't make a monopoly out of everything they touch. I can't tell if you're karma whoring or if you've written a rather amusing satire of the way a lot of people here on Slashdot behave.
"Does this have anything even remotely to do with News for Nerds or technology or computers or programing or software or hardware or anthing electonic whatsoever?"
"his has got to be the end for nintendo. Even the handheld strategies for the future seem awefully lame."
It's lame/uninnovative to make a portable system with a Palm Pilot'esque interface that can connect vai 802.11 for wireless play?
Sorry, don't agree. What they've done was made a system that can do more or less what the PC does to make on-line play a viable option on a portable system. Why does the two screens matter? Yes. Treat the touch screen like an on-screen keyboard (like for chat or setting your on-line name etc...) and you've got something you don't have on the PS2 or XBOX. (at least not everybody has...)
And yes, I am a Nintendo Fan boy. Now that that particular point is made, let's get to really discussing this.
"Remember the Dreamcast? Remember the VMU with the LCD screen that could perform certain functions or give you clues or info during the game? Cool, but gimicky."
Pardon my generalizations here, but I really need to let it out: How can you guys like the Palm Pilot but not be impressed by putting a display/interface like it in a GameBoy? How can you call it a gimmick when it revolutionlized pen computing?
"LinuxDevices has a story by the leaders of the 'Minimo' (Mini Mozilla) project..."
Heh I'm a little surprised after all the copyright trouble they've had with names that they used this one.
(Note: Before you hit the reply button, I'm not saying that they are in violation of anything, I'm thinking more about 'knee-jerk danger avoidance'....)
"How much of that is tax? Take the tax away from the US price and the UK price and they even out. The money is just moved around to a different tax in the US. "
Well that's just fine and dandy, but it's still coming out + tax out of my wallet. Frankly, I'm glad I went unemployed for a while. I found a new job in a small town. Yay for 5 minute drives!
"wouldnt it be better to donate cycles to something like folding@home, parkinsons and alzheimers disease protein research?"
It's quite nice to hear somebody ask this question so tactfully. Every other time I've heard it, the context was what an idiot I am.
I chose Seti over the medical research SS's. Why? Because I believe in diversity. To the best of my understanding, SETI has very little in terms of funding and man power, in stark contrast to the medical field where there are lots and lots and lots of people + money trying to cure stuff. I think my time is worth more to Seti than it is to the other projects. (Friendly rebuttals welcome, I'm open to reconsideration...)
I don't like the idea of abandoning SETI altogether. (Note: You didn't say or imply that, but I've heard others want to take it that far...) We shouldn't totally ignore looking for intelligent life. A lot of interesting stuff happens if the "is there life out there" question turns out to be 'yes'.
No you don't. The election was pretty darn close to 50/50. That means that if Gore had been elected, the "looking for intelligent signs of life in Washington" joke would still be funny to half the people.
So, no, you don't have yourselves to blame. We didn't have an ideal candidate.
Slashdot Mirror
"Plus, caffine is bad for you. and it's also the most abused drug on earth."
Well yeah, anything can be bad for you if you abuse it.
"Here's a registration free link thanks to Google."
Here's a who gives a flying fuck" link thanks to NYT.
"Privacy is a big issue here. What's to stop me from hooking a $30 voice activated phone recorder to the line and record all of your conversations? I don't know how much I trust someone I've never met and who has no real oversight to protect my privacy. Scratch that.. I do know that I don't trust them at all."
Then why do you have a landline or cell phone? Sorry if I'm missing your point here, it's not intentional, I just don't understand why this concern is different.
"could this be the end of long distance charges? "
Back in 1999 I bought a cell phone that ended my long distance charges. I still pay for the phone (kinda like how you still pay for an ISP), but I can call from anywhere in the USA to anywhere in the USA. It could be the end to other stuff, but if you really really hate paying long distance charges....
"Is a Windows 95/98 port to the PocketPC a very usefull tool ?"
Not sure about the tool part, but I really would enjoy playing a bunch of my old DOS'ish games on it like the Space Quest series. Also, it'd be slick if I could run Photoshop on a handheld unit with a stylus. Though I ache for more pixels in the display.
The question shouldn't be "is it useful", but rather, "how can it be useful". More interesting results that way.
"I really dont understand the point in having old systems emulated on an old platform "
You don't understand the point of running a well supported OS on a handheld platform? Take out the inhibitor, man!
"Yes, you are "pro-Bush". That is the EXACT same "logic" that he followed. All belief and no facts."
I take it you don't get into much polite discussion about politics, do ya? Here's a hint: Listen instead of telling people what they believe.
"The problem is, he was wrong. Saddam was not making "WMD's". Saddam had not been making them since the first Gulf War."
Sorry to be all technical here, but it cannot be proven that he didn't have them, only that we didn't find them. They built facilities that our satellites couldn't see. With that in mind, it's possible they'll never be found. (On the other hand, it is pretty damning that the weapons weren't used against our army. Frankly, that overrides my previous statement.)
"Iraq was not a threat to the US."
This is bullshit. Though I am pretty much convinced that they weren't armed in such a way that we were in danger, I do feel pretty strongly that they would have been safe haven for Al Qeada (sp?) or similar groups. I also feel that Saddam would, if so inclined, pay them to do 9-11 part 2. (Note: I did NOT say they had anything to do with 9-11.) For that reason, I'm pretty comfortable with Saddam being out of the picture. If it does turn out that the US didn't have strong enough WMD reason to go in, that does miff me. (In case it's difficult to tell, I'm not pro-Bush here, I'm sitting on the fence not really sure which side to lean on.)
"Bush lied to justify an optional war against a country that was no threat to the US. He might have believed that Saddam had "WMD's", but he lied about the "proof" he had."
I'm not convinced Bush in particular lied about anything, but I do have concerns that his staff either lied or obtained really bad info. Remember that Clinton's staff was up in arms over Iraq as well.
Frankly, I don't see myself picking any particular side on this any time soon. There's plenty of info that the US Gov't has that I don't. All this rationale that people have proposed describing how evil Bush is is riddled with holes. Both Saddam and Bush Sr are still alive right now, so vengence doesn't seem like a likely motive. US soldiers are not building a pipeline funneling oil into Bush's house to sell, so I'm not convinced it's about oil. I doubt a politician would bet his re-election on an invasion of a country that isn't directly threatening us. Everybody thinks Bush is an idiot, you'd think they'd rule out the whole "big Romulan'esque plot" theories, yet they don't. Etc.
I could keep going but the longer this gets, the more stupid flaming messages will come. I really hope people just read, comprehend, make their own opinion, and move on. I'll listen to polite/tactful rebuttals, though. As I said before, my mind isn't made up.
"So you're going for the its OK to be lied to once but not twice argument?"
No, moron. I didn't say anything was okay. I said it's weird that they'd lie once but not twice. Doesn't make sense. Either they're remarkably inconsistent or, gee whiz, maybe they truely believed they were there. Either way, it certainly damages the whole "Bush lied to get to Iraq" argument that flies around here.
"Opponents will just say that (1) America planted them there..."
It's interesting how people assume that the USA lied about the WMDs, but they didn't lie again and claim they found weapons.
"t's equally interesting if the answer is 'no'. It's also interesting if the answer is an unequivocal 'maybe'... "
Unfortunately, we can't prove that aliens don't exist.
"In Soviet Russia the asteroids land on you! I'm sorry I had to. "
In Soviet Russia, your joke is funny!!
"What we really need is a solution that is completely non-proprietary. A solution that no one company has any ability to control."
Call me cynical, but won't that mean 3 or 4 competing standards that nobody ever really relies on? There is such a thing as 'too much choice'.
"They've already taken a stab at the video game industry, remeber? "
So... you're afraid Microsoft will take over email, but you've already noticed they can't make a monopoly out of everything they touch. I can't tell if you're karma whoring or if you've written a rather amusing satire of the way a lot of people here on Slashdot behave.
" I fervently hope that someday, somehow, this dire situation of intellectual bankruptcy will abate. "
Yes, I made a bonehead mistake. Don't go measuring everybody else's intelligence by use of terms I incorrectly/accidentally used.
Read my whole post.
"Does this have anything even remotely to do with News for Nerds or technology or computers or programing or software or hardware or anthing electonic whatsoever?"
OH!! Today's Friday! Thanks for reminding me!
"JBoss's Fleury Abjures Astroturfing"
Man, if I'm going to keep reading Slashdot, I'm going to have to embiggen my vocabulary.
"his has got to be the end for nintendo. Even the handheld strategies for the future seem awefully lame."
It's lame/uninnovative to make a portable system with a Palm Pilot'esque interface that can connect vai 802.11 for wireless play?
Sorry, don't agree. What they've done was made a system that can do more or less what the PC does to make on-line play a viable option on a portable system. Why does the two screens matter? Yes. Treat the touch screen like an on-screen keyboard (like for chat or setting your on-line name etc...) and you've got something you don't have on the PS2 or XBOX. (at least not everybody has...)
And yes, I am a Nintendo Fan boy. Now that that particular point is made, let's get to really discussing this.
"Remember the Dreamcast? Remember the VMU with the LCD screen that could perform certain functions or give you clues or info during the game? Cool, but gimicky."
Pardon my generalizations here, but I really need to let it out: How can you guys like the Palm Pilot but not be impressed by putting a display/interface like it in a GameBoy? How can you call it a gimmick when it revolutionlized pen computing?
"LinuxDevices has a story by the leaders of the 'Minimo' (Mini Mozilla) project..."
Heh I'm a little surprised after all the copyright trouble they've had with names that they used this one.
(Note: Before you hit the reply button, I'm not saying that they are in violation of anything, I'm thinking more about 'knee-jerk danger avoidance'....)
"How much of that is tax? Take the tax away from the US price and the UK price and they even out. The money is just moved around to a different tax in the US. "
Well that's just fine and dandy, but it's still coming out + tax out of my wallet. Frankly, I'm glad I went unemployed for a while. I found a new job in a small town. Yay for 5 minute drives!
"Does anyone know (can be bothered to work out) what else could have been done with all the CPU time they've been donated?"
It'd be awesome if they had found a way to distribute 3D rendering that way. It'd be interesting to see just how much could have been done.
"wouldnt it be better to donate cycles to something like folding@home, parkinsons and alzheimers disease protein research?"
It's quite nice to hear somebody ask this question so tactfully. Every other time I've heard it, the context was what an idiot I am.
I chose Seti over the medical research SS's. Why? Because I believe in diversity. To the best of my understanding, SETI has very little in terms of funding and man power, in stark contrast to the medical field where there are lots and lots and lots of people + money trying to cure stuff. I think my time is worth more to Seti than it is to the other projects. (Friendly rebuttals welcome, I'm open to reconsideration...)
I don't like the idea of abandoning SETI altogether. (Note: You didn't say or imply that, but I've heard others want to take it that far...) We shouldn't totally ignore looking for intelligent life. A lot of interesting stuff happens if the "is there life out there" question turns out to be 'yes'.
"As voters, we only have ourselves to blame. "
No you don't. The election was pretty darn close to 50/50. That means that if Gore had been elected, the "looking for intelligent signs of life in Washington" joke would still be funny to half the people.
So, no, you don't have yourselves to blame. We didn't have an ideal candidate.