Re:Why do we measure things with money?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
Really? If you're asking for real data from your parent poster, where's your data? You don't think people ever had parties or went to worship services 5,000 years ago?
The number 5,000 isn't important. I could have said 50,000 or 100,000 years. What's important is that our lives have gotten much easier, which means we have more free time. Modern humans don't have to worry about being gored by a mastodon or dying of old age at 25.
Re:Why do we measure things with money?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
There's no reason the advances of modern living (like the laptop I'm typng on now) could not come about without all of society having to slave the 40-hour work week.
Are you serious? Do you have any idea how much work and research was required for that laptop to exist?
Reasearch into petroleum byproducts, injection molding, machining components, magnetic storage, power distribution, batteries, transistor types, semiconductor fabrication, microprocessor design, compiler and assembler development, software development, materials purity tolerances, digital signal processing, fluorescent gas illumination, TFT arrays, lasers, optics and lenses, bus design, peripheral chipset design...
If you'd be willing to wait a few thousand years for that, then you're right -- 40 hours a week isn't necessary.
And I don't know what you do for work (if anything), but I sure don't feel like I'm "slaving" here. I like my job, I feel like I'm making a good contribution, and my employer pays me. I then spend this compensation on things that make me happy, because living the simple life of a peasant is possibly the last thing I would want to do now that we've spent thousands of years developing civilization and technology.
The answer is simple: greed & envy. One person wants more than they need (greed). He works more, acquires more. His neighbor gets envious, and does the same. The labor and financial systems in place exploit this to their own advantage (greed -- er, capitalism).
People are greedy. Evolution made people greedy because it's good for survival. There's nothing you can do about that. People in capitalist societies are no more greedy than people in communist societies. The difference is that the capitalists actually have some hope of getting the things they want.
Re:Why do we measure things with money?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
Bullshit. People [in US anyway] work 10% more hours now than they did in 1975
Nice try, but:
- You've offered a single data point for reference over an extremely short time interval (30 years). This is not statistically handy.
- We're a lot more than 110% as efficient as we were in 1975, so we could work less and get as much done. The standard has settled to 40 hours/week because people are comfortable with this.
- 10% is a very small difference that could easily be explained by random variance in this data. Compare our lives today to the lives of humans 5,000 years ago when they had to work almost all of the time they were awake, just to stay alive.
Re:Why do we measure things with money?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
It's a nice thought, though. It annoys me that most of the people in the western world spend more time working than they do anything else.
People in the western world (or anywhere in the world) spend less time working than they ever have before. Because of technology, people are gaining free time at a pretty good rate.
And still people complain. Incredible.
Re:Why do we measure things with money?
on
Star Wars Sickout
·
· Score: 1
When you're hiking through a park or riding a bike, you're not earning money, which you need to live. Food, clothing, and shelter aren't free.
The purpose of money is to reward those that actually care enough to try hard and do a good job at something.
Modern humans have a ridiculous amount of leisure time compared to our ancestors, so don't try to make it sound like "people are victims of consumerism, man!" That is wrong and stupid. Commercialism and industry are parts of having an advanced society.
I'd rather the government was honest about it. Of course it'd be a bit harder to sell to the American people that way.....
I don't think it would be any harder. Rednecks are always going to be pro-USA and hippies are always going to be anti-government whether the government says that attacks on foreign nations are because of oil or because of freedom.
People have made up their minds; I don't think the government's claims about its motives will change anything.
That is just it, the USA intervenes ONLY when it is in its interests, i.e. OIL, or geopolitical games.
Um... why would the US intervene when not in its interests? Yes, the US takes action when it wants to and doesn't when it doesn't want to. Are you confused by that?
Um... it's doesn't matter why you carry a gun at all -- you can't just go around threatening/intimidating people with it unless you want to get your license pulled and get a big fine. So, from this German hacker's perspective, you and your fearsome cronies weren't carrying guns.
She was charged with "sexual abuse of children"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't get charged with "attempted murder" after a failed suicide attempt. Not sure why this should be any different.
Personally, if I could not afford digital TV service, I would willingly and enthusiastically give up analog TV forever anyway, and I would recommend that everyone else do the same. It saddens me that the two technologies coexist and that some people see the lesser one as being 'good enough'.
"The average person won't know the difference" isn't an acceptable excuse for doing poor engineering. There are no excuses for doing poor engineering, and the media industry isn't exactly strapped for cash.
You must not understand technology or progress very well if you're willing to stay with an extremely poor design just because there are some social or political drawbacks to doing it a better way.
Political and social issues are point-of-view driven, but good engineering is absolute.
First of all, a lot of people currently take advantage of the over-the-air broadcasts.
A lot of people took advantage of filling stations that offered leaded gasoline, too. But not anymore.
Secondly, the "stone-age" technology is perfectly adequate for 99% of the people out there. The quality is good enough, it does it's job, and it's cheap.
No. I'm afraid I won't compromise my view on this one. The quality is abyssmal. You know how people say, "I stopped watching TV recently, and I don't really miss it."? This is why. Analog TV broadcasts are horrifically bad. We use no modern technology that is more poorly conceived.
I don't hear people clamoring for digital TV like they did for color TV.
Newsflash: People are morons. They wouldn't know bad technology if it bit them on the ass.
And as far as DRM stuff goes: I'm not really worried about it. Enterprising users are a lot smarter than whoever designs the protection schemes (remember DeCSS?). Of course, it would be better if DRM wasn't there at all, but it's only a matter of time before the movie/music industry realizes that it's futile.
Are you saying that "for over half that time", the land was dominated by one single species of dinosaur? If not, I think I'll go ahead and count the successes of all mammals under what humans have accomplished.
Did it occur to you that the industry can't afford to continue supporting a stone-age technology that a minority of people are asking for? Analog broadcasts aren't being shut off just because broadcasters are mean people -- they're being shut off because it won't make economic sense to continue down that path in the future.
the last thing I need is the government mandating which TV I can buy.
Um... the government does that now. You can't buy a PAL TV here and expect it to work, bucause that's not what's supported. And when digital transmissions are phased in and analog phased out, you won't be able to buy an analog TV and expect it to work because that won't be what's supported then.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? If you're asking for real data from your parent poster, where's your data? You don't think people ever had parties or went to worship services 5,000 years ago?
The number 5,000 isn't important. I could have said 50,000 or 100,000 years. What's important is that our lives have gotten much easier, which means we have more free time. Modern humans don't have to worry about being gored by a mastodon or dying of old age at 25.
There's no reason the advances of modern living (like the laptop I'm typng on now) could not come about without all of society having to slave the 40-hour work week.
Are you serious? Do you have any idea how much work and research was required for that laptop to exist?
Reasearch into petroleum byproducts, injection molding, machining components, magnetic storage, power distribution, batteries, transistor types, semiconductor fabrication, microprocessor design, compiler and assembler development, software development, materials purity tolerances, digital signal processing, fluorescent gas illumination, TFT arrays, lasers, optics and lenses, bus design, peripheral chipset design...
If you'd be willing to wait a few thousand years for that, then you're right -- 40 hours a week isn't necessary.
And I don't know what you do for work (if anything), but I sure don't feel like I'm "slaving" here. I like my job, I feel like I'm making a good contribution, and my employer pays me. I then spend this compensation on things that make me happy, because living the simple life of a peasant is possibly the last thing I would want to do now that we've spent thousands of years developing civilization and technology.
The answer is simple: greed & envy. One person wants more than they need (greed). He works more, acquires more. His neighbor gets envious, and does the same. The labor and financial systems in place exploit this to their own advantage (greed -- er, capitalism).
People are greedy. Evolution made people greedy because it's good for survival. There's nothing you can do about that. People in capitalist societies are no more greedy than people in communist societies. The difference is that the capitalists actually have some hope of getting the things they want.
Bullshit. People [in US anyway] work 10% more hours now than they did in 1975
Nice try, but:
- You've offered a single data point for reference over an extremely short time interval (30 years). This is not statistically handy.
- We're a lot more than 110% as efficient as we were in 1975, so we could work less and get as much done. The standard has settled to 40 hours/week because people are comfortable with this.
- 10% is a very small difference that could easily be explained by random variance in this data. Compare our lives today to the lives of humans 5,000 years ago when they had to work almost all of the time they were awake, just to stay alive.
It's a nice thought, though. It annoys me that most of the people in the western world spend more time working than they do anything else.
People in the western world (or anywhere in the world) spend less time working than they ever have before. Because of technology, people are gaining free time at a pretty good rate.
And still people complain. Incredible.
When you're hiking through a park or riding a bike, you're not earning money, which you need to live. Food, clothing, and shelter aren't free.
The purpose of money is to reward those that actually care enough to try hard and do a good job at something.
Modern humans have a ridiculous amount of leisure time compared to our ancestors, so don't try to make it sound like "people are victims of consumerism, man!" That is wrong and stupid. Commercialism and industry are parts of having an advanced society.
I'd rather the government was honest about it. Of course it'd be a bit harder to sell to the American people that way.....
I don't think it would be any harder. Rednecks are always going to be pro-USA and hippies are always going to be anti-government whether the government says that attacks on foreign nations are because of oil or because of freedom.
People have made up their minds; I don't think the government's claims about its motives will change anything.
I think you forgot this one:
Java, because even primitive data types need to be full-featured objects?
If you had read your parent post, you would have seen that Stallman is a maniac and he refused to speak, not necessarily because he refused to speak.
All this, and it still can't simulate the feeling of accelerative forces which is the best part of driving.
That is just it, the USA intervenes ONLY when it is in its interests, i.e. OIL, or geopolitical games.
Um... why would the US intervene when not in its interests? Yes, the US takes action when it wants to and doesn't when it doesn't want to. Are you confused by that?
Mm... no, I don't think so.
Is it just me, or does Sony really seem to enjoy spewing forth countless crappy proprietary formats?
Sony: We don't need or want Memory Sticks, MiniDiscs, UMDs, or any of your other nonsense.
Take a shower, cut your hair, get a job, and shut the hell up.
Um... it's doesn't matter why you carry a gun at all -- you can't just go around threatening/intimidating people with it unless you want to get your license pulled and get a big fine. So, from this German hacker's perspective, you and your fearsome cronies weren't carrying guns.
She was charged with "sexual abuse of children"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't get charged with "attempted murder" after a failed suicide attempt. Not sure why this should be any different.
The Pledge of Allegiance != US Law
Personally, if I could not afford digital TV service, I would willingly and enthusiastically give up analog TV forever anyway, and I would recommend that everyone else do the same. It saddens me that the two technologies coexist and that some people see the lesser one as being 'good enough'.
"The average person won't know the difference" isn't an acceptable excuse for doing poor engineering. There are no excuses for doing poor engineering, and the media industry isn't exactly strapped for cash.
You must not understand technology or progress very well if you're willing to stay with an extremely poor design just because there are some social or political drawbacks to doing it a better way.
Political and social issues are point-of-view driven, but good engineering is absolute.
First of all, a lot of people currently take advantage of the over-the-air broadcasts.
A lot of people took advantage of filling stations that offered leaded gasoline, too. But not anymore.
Secondly, the "stone-age" technology is perfectly adequate for 99% of the people out there. The quality is good enough, it does it's job, and it's cheap.
No. I'm afraid I won't compromise my view on this one. The quality is abyssmal. You know how people say, "I stopped watching TV recently, and I don't really miss it."? This is why. Analog TV broadcasts are horrifically bad. We use no modern technology that is more poorly conceived.
I don't hear people clamoring for digital TV like they did for color TV.
Newsflash: People are morons. They wouldn't know bad technology if it bit them on the ass.
And as far as DRM stuff goes: I'm not really worried about it. Enterprising users are a lot smarter than whoever designs the protection schemes (remember DeCSS?). Of course, it would be better if DRM wasn't there at all, but it's only a matter of time before the movie/music industry realizes that it's futile.
Or if that's too much work, one could also argue that Google ranks IIS down!
As it well should. As much as anyone may not like to admit it, IIS is bad for the Internet.
Are you saying that "for over half that time", the land was dominated by one single species of dinosaur? If not, I think I'll go ahead and count the successes of all mammals under what humans have accomplished.
You may note that wars against things cost money. No money -- no war. Sorry.
Did it occur to you that the industry can't afford to continue supporting a stone-age technology that a minority of people are asking for? Analog broadcasts aren't being shut off just because broadcasters are mean people -- they're being shut off because it won't make economic sense to continue down that path in the future.
the last thing I need is the government mandating which TV I can buy.
Um... the government does that now. You can't buy a PAL TV here and expect it to work, bucause that's not what's supported. And when digital transmissions are phased in and analog phased out, you won't be able to buy an analog TV and expect it to work because that won't be what's supported then.