Problem is it this plan throws up an economic barrier to getting knowledge, which is the exact OPPOSITE of what a free library is supposed to be.
Scenario: Poor kid doing a term paper. A smart, ambitious kid, and he needs some relatively obscure books. Cash value may be $100/per for academic stuff. So now this kid must come up with $300 cash to write his paper. It doesn't matter if he's going to get it back - he just doesn't have it to give.
And the system can't be "opt-in". That means the well-off get to be anonymous, while the poor get tracked.
Lord knows I think the ACLU is a bunch of busibodies, but they'd have a fit over this one, and rightfully so.
"Public Libraries are _public_ places, owned by the _government_."
Not necessarily. "Public" does not necessarily equal "Gov't." Some are indepentent non-profit orgs, with a public charter. And the others are part of the local gov't, NOT the federal.
"The government has a right to collect information from the library."
Again, not necessarily. The Feds have even LESS right to tell the states what to do than the states. State governments are sovereign entities, except as delimited by the constitution - a document you are apparently unfamiliar with.
"It is not a private citizen's business or residence. It's almost like your telling the government not to use sonar guns to catch people on the roads."
Now you are just a goofball. It's RADAR, idiot. And some areas DO limit what the police can do with it. What's next - the prosecutor is allowed to see the public defenders records because it's a gov't office? Jeez.
Now our European friends will have their own private clubhouse so they can bitch about the US as much as they want w/o any noisome dissent from those crude, unprincipled warmongers across the Atlantic.
As for saving the global network from US domination by creating a parallel, smaller, private network - isn't that like fighting the Baby Bell monopolies by running a bunch of tin cans and string?
http://primavera.com/ makes a slew of software for project management. especially P3, which is the industry standard scheduling software that MS Project was trying to emulate.
Pro: extremely flexible, will do all but wipe your nose.
Con: expensive, not sure about browser based options.
"Likewise, I miss those big-ass keyboards that click when you type."
You mean like the one I use every day at work? Vintage 1993, with the Blue "IBM" logo (it has drain holes) $5 at goodwill - oops, $3.75 at 25% off.
"I had to retire it when, while moving from one dorm room to another, I broke off some of the caps that cover the keys. I've still got it in my closet, though"
Key caps are still available from IBM. Actually, so are the original keyboards, although the manufacturing plant was bought by someone else.
"And remember all those M-16s jamming all the time in Nam? The commercial gun that the Army started with when they developed it was apparently much less likely to jam, but by the time it got kluged up into a more military-looking gun, it jammed more."
Err, no. The AR-15 was developed by a man named Stoner to BE a military weapon. Armalite may have released a commercial version of it first, but it was always a military weapon by design, with military, not sporting, priorities.
As for the jamming, that was not a "military" design decision so much as a "DOD" design decision. McNamara decided that chrome plating the chamber of the rifle was simply not necessary and struck it off the specification to save a few $.01's.
Although, what the hell - the guy has enough deaths on his tally; what's a few more attributed to technical ignorance?
"One excuse I've heard is that if you don't have enough evidence that someone is not being productive and you fire them, they can sue you (WTF, I highly doubt that). "
Allow me to introduce you to the term "At Will" employment. That means that one is employed at the will of the employer. If the employer loses the wiil to employ someone, they can be let go with no reason whatsoever.
HOWEVER...
Thia only applies if one is male, white, under 40, has no disabilities that fall under the scope of the ADA, and (in some states) straight. If you are not one of these, you fall into a "protected class" and, although one can still be fired, the employer needs to document it REALLY well.
Tough luck with the anti trust accusation. They haven't tried to decrease competition; they merely won't play nice. As for the blocking, so what? Reverse engineering is legal, and it's awfully hard to complain about AOL's blocking of other clients by reverse engineering them when the clients were developed by reverse engineering AOL's IM system.
The FCC realized that they couldn't force AOL to open up IM, so that's why the put on the restriction about interoperability required for "next generation" IM. But I submit the following:
1. The bright broadband future has gone phhhht or is on indefinite hold.
2. "Advanced" IM would allow high speed data transfers of voice, VIDEO, and FILES - aka the dreaded FILESHARING!!!
3. IM hasn't turned out to be the "killer ap" people were hoping for, especially in the business world.
Given the above, AOL has little incentive to develop high bandwidth IM, and so even less incentive to open up.
Not only do you need an architect to lay it out, you need an engineering firm to design the HVAC and electrical systems - and no, a spot cooler and a power strip won't cut it.
Then hire a contractor (that's me) to build it.
Then hire a cardiologist, 'cause you're gonna have a heart attack when it comes to paying for it.
Just bite the bullet and do it right. Every owner I've ever dealt with who tried to design or engineer their own facilities has been dissatisfied with the result.
You want a Cavalier model CS-72 (or -96 if you folks are real thirsty) They were made up until 198?, and can be found on E-bay for under $500 for a good used unit. If you want a restored round top from the 50's, more like $2K-$4K
They will hold almost any size or shape bottle, although it will scrape the labels off 20 oz. coke products (.5 liter bottles work fine)
Mechanism is analog and all the parts are available. Or you can mod it - I would expect nothing less.
A handspring runs what, $100 wholesale? For that money you could get the entire library of Heinlein juveniles - for each kid.
www.abebooks.com
"Tunnel in the Sky": teaches about self reliance and teamwork. 110 copies, $2-$5 a piece
"Starship Troopers": Honor, courage, and a case history in how Holleywood can really screw up a good story. 159 copies, $2-$6 a piece.
"Rocket Ship Galileo": Teach history by looking at what we thought the future would be like over 50 years ago, i.e WHY don't we have nuclear powered rockets piloted by teenage kids. 39 copies, $3-$10 (make them share)
Buy a few copies per kid - make them swap.
Just have to have tech? Find e-book versions of them.
"We don't have to "prove" any of your requests. Sharing MP3s without the permission of the copyright holder is illegal. Period."
Really? WOW! Oh, wait a minute - I granted that in my post, as follows: "Then prove to me... not just that the actions of individuals are illegal."
"Does it hurt the music industry? The question is irrelevant."
Then why is the music industry relying so heavily on it?
"Does the music industry use monopolistic practices? The question is irrelevant."
Funny - the Napster judge didn't think so. And if the music industry is using the threat of file sharing to distract people from monopolistic practices, then the question seems relevant.
"Are file sharing networks illegal per se? The question is irrelevant."
Again - if it's so irrelevant, why is the industry so intent on proving it so?
"If you don't like the copyright laws then work to change them."
Never said anything about copyright - use the search function.
"Stealing music is illegal. Period. End of story."
And the straw man argument is complete. You are arguing against a point I didn't make, and thereby distracting the reader from my original point.
I was commenting on the RIAA's dubious arguments about file sharing killing them. They are using that argument to justify losses to their shareholders, to lobby Congress for new laws, and to the media to distract from inquiries about business practices.
I'd welcome your response, but advise you to read up on argument skills and logic - you're kind of boring.
"the bulk of the music industry's loss comes from the high amount of 'small-time" MP3 pirating."
Beware of assuming the precedent. Your statement about the industries "losses" assumes a tie to sharing over P2P networks, which is a fallacy (or at least an unproven hypothesis)
Attn Hillary Rosen et al:
First prove to me that the losses (if indeed there are any real losses in an industry notorious for cooking its books) are caused definitively by sharing and not by a combination of crappy music and poor management.
Then prove to me that file sharing networks are illegal per se, and not just that the actions of individuals are illegal.
Then prove to me that the industry's distribution plans are not monopolistic and illegal in themselves.
Then you can cross the bridge to the Holy Grail. Until then, argue about the air speed velocity of an unladen african swallow, because it's just about as relevant.
"But I think the anti-exceptionalists have a compelling point: it is not sufficient to just walk into every cyberlaw case and whine "but the Internet is different!!!".
In one sense the internet IS different - it DOESN'T EXIST in a legal sense. The "Internet" is a communication means. It only intersects humans - the real object of laws is human behavior, after all - at it's interfaces. A human commits fraud, seduces a minor, sells stolen property, at a keyboard, printer, screen, and does it for real life spoils - money, sex, respect. It's what the actual human beings do at those interfaces that should be judged, not the means by which they do it. As for laws needing to change - no shit, they always need to change, and do change.
The internet is "different" from a legal standpoint just as the dot-economy was "different" from the old economy: just a different way for the unscrupulous to do things they wouldn't otherwise be allowed to do.
"...you can do a lot of interesting experiments with sodium or potassium."
Experiments, hell. I used to work for a guy that kept sticks of sodium submerged in kerosene. When the groundhogs got uppity, he'd drop a few sticks down the hole, stand 20' away, and hit it with a garden hose. A satisfactory kaboom, and the groundhogs kept a low profile for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Problem is it this plan throws up an economic barrier to getting knowledge, which is the exact OPPOSITE of what a free library is supposed to be.
Scenario: Poor kid doing a term paper. A smart, ambitious kid, and he needs some relatively obscure books. Cash value may be $100/per for academic stuff. So now this kid must come up with $300 cash to write his paper. It doesn't matter if he's going to get it back - he just doesn't have it to give.
And the system can't be "opt-in". That means the well-off get to be anonymous, while the poor get tracked.
Lord knows I think the ACLU is a bunch of busibodies, but they'd have a fit over this one, and rightfully so.
"Public Libraries are _public_ places, owned by the _government_."
Not necessarily. "Public" does not necessarily equal "Gov't." Some are indepentent non-profit orgs, with a public charter. And the others are part of the local gov't, NOT the federal.
"The government has a right to collect information from the library."
Again, not necessarily. The Feds have even LESS right to tell the states what to do than the states. State governments are sovereign entities, except as delimited by the constitution - a document you are apparently unfamiliar with.
"It is not a private citizen's business or residence. It's almost like your telling the government not to use sonar guns to catch people on the roads."
Now you are just a goofball. It's RADAR, idiot. And some areas DO limit what the police can do with it. What's next - the prosecutor is allowed to see the public defenders records because it's a gov't office? Jeez.
Now our European friends will have their own private clubhouse so they can bitch about the US as much as they want w/o any noisome dissent from those crude, unprincipled warmongers across the Atlantic.
As for saving the global network from US domination by creating a parallel, smaller, private network - isn't that like fighting the Baby Bell monopolies by running a bunch of tin cans and string?
Actually, I'm not in it - except for those damned Usenet posts (rec.gardens.roses you pervs)
I don't think a "small" architectural firm has a $100k plotter. Probably an older, maybe second hand one - just like the original post implied.
http://www.rpidesigns.com/
I'm thinking sex chair from the 60's combined with the gamma ray machine with which Bruce Banner/Bill Bixby turned himself into the Hulk/Lou Ferrigno.
Doesn't the cd rom poke you in the nuts when it ejects? Err, never mind.
http://primavera.com/ makes a slew of software for project management. especially P3, which is the industry standard scheduling software that MS Project was trying to emulate.
Pro: extremely flexible, will do all but wipe your nose.
Con: expensive, not sure about browser based options.
"...my current 20 gig iPod will be sufficient enough for me to listen to music until it mechanically fails (which could be in 40 years)"
Anyone know what the MTBF on the HD in an iPod is? I'll bet it's not going to equate to 40 years.
Be careful when you say "I've got mine, so I'm safe until the future". The future is here.
"Likewise, I miss those big-ass keyboards that click when you type."
You mean like the one I use every day at work? Vintage 1993, with the Blue "IBM" logo (it has drain holes) $5 at goodwill - oops, $3.75 at 25% off.
"I had to retire it when, while moving from one dorm room to another, I broke off some of the caps that cover the keys. I've still got it in my closet, though"
Key caps are still available from IBM. Actually, so are the original keyboards, although the manufacturing plant was bought by someone else.
Live the dream - resurrect your old IBM Model M?
"And remember all those M-16s jamming all the time in Nam? The commercial gun that the Army started with when they developed it was apparently much less likely to jam, but by the time it got kluged up into a more military-looking gun, it jammed more."
Err, no. The AR-15 was developed by a man named Stoner to BE a military weapon. Armalite may have released a commercial version of it first, but it was always a military weapon by design, with military, not sporting, priorities.
As for the jamming, that was not a "military" design decision so much as a "DOD" design decision. McNamara decided that chrome plating the chamber of the rifle was simply not necessary and struck it off the specification to save a few $.01's.
Although, what the hell - the guy has enough deaths on his tally; what's a few more attributed to technical ignorance?
"One excuse I've heard is that if you don't have enough evidence that someone is not being productive and you fire them, they can sue you (WTF, I highly doubt that). "
Allow me to introduce you to the term "At Will" employment. That means that one is employed at the will of the employer. If the employer loses the wiil to employ someone, they can be let go with no reason whatsoever.
HOWEVER...
Thia only applies if one is male, white, under 40, has no disabilities that fall under the scope of the ADA, and (in some states) straight. If you are not one of these, you fall into a "protected class" and, although one can still be fired, the employer needs to document it REALLY well.
Tough luck with the anti trust accusation. They haven't tried to decrease competition; they merely won't play nice. As for the blocking, so what? Reverse engineering is legal, and it's awfully hard to complain about AOL's blocking of other clients by reverse engineering them when the clients were developed by reverse engineering AOL's IM system.
The FCC realized that they couldn't force AOL to open up IM, so that's why the put on the restriction about interoperability required for "next generation" IM. But I submit the following:
1. The bright broadband future has gone phhhht or is on indefinite hold.
2. "Advanced" IM would allow high speed data transfers of voice, VIDEO, and FILES - aka the dreaded FILESHARING!!!
3. IM hasn't turned out to be the "killer ap" people were hoping for, especially in the business world.
Given the above, AOL has little incentive to develop high bandwidth IM, and so even less incentive to open up.
It sucks, but there it is.
If we call squid "calamari" when we eat it, how do squid refer to people when they eat us?
(And yes, I know "Calamari" is Italian for "squid". Just go with it.)
Or Baron von Wau-Wau in Spider Robinson's "Callahan" stories
"While we're at it, let's find the part where Al Gore claims to have invented the internet."
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet," in an interview with CNN.
"Invented the Internet"? No.
Self aggrandizement? Yes.
Relevance? not a lot.
I second that emotion.
Not only do you need an architect to lay it out, you need an engineering firm to design the HVAC and electrical systems - and no, a spot cooler and a power strip won't cut it.
Then hire a contractor (that's me) to build it.
Then hire a cardiologist, 'cause you're gonna have a heart attack when it comes to paying for it.
Just bite the bullet and do it right. Every owner I've ever dealt with who tried to design or engineer their own facilities has been dissatisfied with the result.
You want a Cavalier model CS-72 (or -96 if you folks are real thirsty) They were made up until 198?, and can be found on E-bay for under $500 for a good used unit. If you want a restored round top from the 50's, more like $2K-$4K
They will hold almost any size or shape bottle, although it will scrape the labels off 20 oz. coke products (.5 liter bottles work fine)
Mechanism is analog and all the parts are available. Or you can mod it - I would expect nothing less.
A handspring runs what, $100 wholesale? For that money you could get the entire library of Heinlein juveniles - for each kid.
www.abebooks.com
"Tunnel in the Sky": teaches about self reliance and teamwork. 110 copies, $2-$5 a piece
"Starship Troopers": Honor, courage, and a case history in how Holleywood can really screw up a good story. 159 copies, $2-$6 a piece.
"Rocket Ship Galileo": Teach history by looking at what we thought the future would be like over 50 years ago, i.e WHY don't we have nuclear powered rockets piloted by teenage kids. 39 copies, $3-$10 (make them share)
Buy a few copies per kid - make them swap.
Just have to have tech? Find e-book versions of them.
And the list goes on.
"We don't have to "prove" any of your requests. Sharing MP3s without the permission of the copyright holder is illegal. Period."
... not just that the actions of individuals are illegal."
Really? WOW! Oh, wait a minute - I granted that in my post, as follows: "Then prove to me
"Does it hurt the music industry? The question is irrelevant."
Then why is the music industry relying so heavily on it?
"Does the music industry use monopolistic practices? The question is irrelevant."
Funny - the Napster judge didn't think so. And if the music industry is using the threat of file sharing to distract people from monopolistic practices, then the question seems relevant.
"Are file sharing networks illegal per se? The question is irrelevant."
Again - if it's so irrelevant, why is the industry so intent on proving it so?
"If you don't like the copyright laws then work to change them."
Never said anything about copyright - use the search function.
"Stealing music is illegal. Period. End of story."
And the straw man argument is complete. You are arguing against a point I didn't make, and thereby distracting the reader from my original point.
I was commenting on the RIAA's dubious arguments about file sharing killing them. They are using that argument to justify losses to their shareholders, to lobby Congress for new laws, and to the media to distract from inquiries about business practices.
I'd welcome your response, but advise you to read up on argument skills and logic - you're kind of boring.
"the bulk of the music industry's loss comes from the high amount of 'small-time" MP3 pirating."
Beware of assuming the precedent. Your statement about the industries "losses" assumes a tie to sharing over P2P networks, which is a fallacy (or at least an unproven hypothesis)
Attn Hillary Rosen et al:
First prove to me that the losses (if indeed there are any real losses in an industry notorious for cooking its books) are caused definitively by sharing and not by a combination of crappy music and poor management.
Then prove to me that file sharing networks are illegal per se, and not just that the actions of individuals are illegal.
Then prove to me that the industry's distribution plans are not monopolistic and illegal in themselves.
Then you can cross the bridge to the Holy Grail. Until then, argue about the air speed velocity of an unladen african swallow, because it's just about as relevant.
"But I think the anti-exceptionalists have a compelling point: it is not sufficient to just walk into every cyberlaw case and whine "but the Internet is different!!!".
In one sense the internet IS different - it DOESN'T EXIST in a legal sense. The "Internet" is a communication means. It only intersects humans - the real object of laws is human behavior, after all - at it's interfaces. A human commits fraud, seduces a minor, sells stolen property, at a keyboard, printer, screen, and does it for real life spoils - money, sex, respect. It's what the actual human beings do at those interfaces that should be judged, not the means by which they do it. As for laws needing to change - no shit, they always need to change, and do change.
The internet is "different" from a legal standpoint just as the dot-economy was "different" from the old economy: just a different way for the unscrupulous to do things they wouldn't otherwise be allowed to do.
Two Geeks Landscaping
http://www.toro.com/home/mowers/imow/
And you can probably hook them up in a Beowulf Cluster...
Secretaries that worked at my wife's firm:
T'Kela
Shardinay (not sure about the spelling on this one)
Both named after what their paraents were drinking the night they were conceived.
Of course, in this crowd we'd get "CodRed" and "Bawls."
Nevermind. This is not the naming scheme you're looking for.
"...you can do a lot of interesting experiments with sodium or potassium."
Experiments, hell. I used to work for a guy that kept sticks of sodium submerged in kerosene. When the groundhogs got uppity, he'd drop a few sticks down the hole, stand 20' away, and hit it with a garden hose. A satisfactory kaboom, and the groundhogs kept a low profile for a while.