You said exactly what I was gonna say: good idea, bad execution. I would defintitely consider doing this: using a "poem hack" to attract people to my site. It just has to communicate to people a real message. This guy wasn't focused at all.
The scarcity and low profile of mental health services in Canada, and I assume to an even greater extent in the States, is a major cause for concern. I often feel a popular sentiment that councelling is of little or no value, and there is a monstrous stigma that is attached to anyone who seeks help.
You only have to look at the most stressful jobs. Take cops: while there may be lip service paid to the provision of councelling services, there is simply no way most cops are going to take the initiative to talk to a councellor about their problems. And with the high rate of drug abuse, domestic violence, and suicide in police forces around North America, you have to ask yourself, why isn't this a more public issue? I mean, we are allowing a culture of violence and silence to persist, amongst the very organizations we all trust to protect us.
The same can be said for any industry that places its workers in high-stress situations, without the tools to deal with their emotions.
When it comes to public councelling, I know that here in Canada you can get councelling through your Medical Services Plan, but you will have a flag on your file from then on. It will be available to any agency with access to your medical history. So you would probably prefer to pay a mental health pro out of your own pocket, to avoid any record. That, of course, is expensive. Many good councellors use a sliding scale, but it is still a major investment for someone of modest means. The options aren't really clear to most people.
The majority of people who are addicted to X can't afford to pay for their own treatment. So they don't get treated. And the costs get passed on in other forms: crime, corruption, and lost productivity. I have to think that our culture requires us to be sick with guilt and self-loathing in order for us to be more motivated to consume... all the advertising I have ever seen has promised me a better, happier, more popular position in life if I just fork over the cash.
I think you are close to the point here, but this is my take on it:
Addiction is a behaviour. You learn to become addicted. You can also unlearn it to a certain extent... but (as all the psych people out there probably already know), a behaviour can never be completely extinguished once learned. Hence the "once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic" mantra of AA has a real foundation.
Behaviours are like memes: they compete with each other. To the extent that you exibit one behaviour more than others, it defines you. Getting locked into a certain pattern of behaviour(s) makes you boring, IMNSHO. Thus, addiction may be a response to boredom, but it in turn makes you boring. Got to love the irony.
Of course people who feel inadequate, unsatisfied, and ignored in "real life" (whatever that is) will try to find a way to experience the thrill of power, exultation, and adulation. The fact that they are "only acting" has nothing to do with the reality of their experience. Other people may choose to devote their lives to, say, show biz for the exact same reasons. You could argue that acting in a play and playing in an online game are equivalent, except you are more likely to be paid for the former. Keep in mind that this may change.
So really, when someone retreats into addiction, they are seeking well-being and belonging. The fact that people identify more easily with their game alter-egos than with their equally-artificial social persona is not only a matter of mental health, but an indicator that our culture (the ones in which these games flourish, that is) itself is sick.
Why are people so ready to give up the world of wage slavery, voter apathy, anti-intellectualism for worlds like EverQuest? I think the answer is obvious: it's more rewarding than involving themselves in the game of "real life". They want to live the life of a hero (or villian) in the true sense: they want to take on the role of the archetype, to accept the hero's challenge to conquer his own weaknesses and transcend The World itself.
We all are, really. Some of us have kids to keep our name/genes alive. Some try to make their mark on history. Others may work in their community to improve things for the next generation. All are seeking a "place" in the world--not the world of time and space, but the world of stories, lore, and cultural memory. Looked at from this point of view, what the EQ addicts are doing isn't so strange. They are trying to do what we all do, just in a different medium.
The problem here is that no game can deliver on the promise of the hero's quest. The closest they will come to this experience is not to "beat the game" from within the game, but to beat it from the outside, BY PUTTING THE GAME BEHIND THEM. They can then move on to the real challenge: finding a way through life that reinforces their spiritual, emotional, and physical well-being.
Our Western lives have been organized around things that seem custom-made to make us feel bad about ourselves, which drives us to find comfort in one addiction or another. We spend our lives trying to make up for the guilt and regrets of what we "had" to do. Basically, through the long process of dividing people into halves (private/public, personal/professional) we have created a world for ourselves where everyone walks around fighting with themselves and each other. Why is it so strange that we would want to escape from this?
I was going to write an overly-long response about how this kind of territorialism will poison the technological groundwater of future society, but it comes down to this:
The harder they try to control it, the more people will resist. The more powerful, aggressive, and merciless these corps get, the more of a reaction there will be against them. Not content to actually provide VALUE in order to make money, to provide services or goods that actually benefit anybody, they would prefer to worm their way to the heart of the Web and set up their corporate IP borders in a realm that should be run more like Antarctica than a gold rush.
So what do you call it when something that used to belong to everybody is appropriated by a self-interested party? Vandalism? Theft? Annexation? No matter how you look at it, this is an act of war: using IP law as a weapon against the common good. Maybe stuff like this will eventually change people's minds about the value of patents, copyrights, and trademarks. I can only hope.
Kudos to you and your neighbours. There should be more of this kind of community-based approach to high-speed in rural areas. Now, you live in a perfect world... if only the hard drives were faster.
I think US$2k plus $10/month for services is a bargain for a connection that is about 100x faster than my US$30/mo ADSL here in Canada. You definitely have some advantages in terms of the design of your community (lots of straight-line trenches in soft earth helps a lot), but I'm sure the same approach could work in small towns around here.
You should be very proud (your community collectively and you personally) of this project. Now, perhaps I might visit sometime for a LAN party some time?...
True, but there's no reason we couldn't build robots smart enough to be paranoid. All you have to do is program in some basic knowledge of the environment (geological features, atmospheric/solar conditions, possible threats, criteria for "targets of opportunity", etc.) it's designed to explore. I really don't think we have to design "Intelligent" robots... why can't they be fuzzy/dumb, kind of curious, and tough?
And you could build a lot of little robots that talked to each other. If one buys the farm doing something stupid, the others could learn. Bandwidth wouldn't be a problem if we improved comms infrastructure in the solar system (laser satellite repeaters?). Latency isn't much of an issue, really. We aren't in a rush to scoop dirt, are we? Take it easy mon, kick back at the console and wait for you dumb robot to get nervous and ask your advice...
If *I* was mission control, I'd MUCH rather have to deal with dead hardware than dead astronauts. Think Apollo 13. Think Challenger. Think every Mars mission that dissappeared without a trace.
Anyhow, the point is likely moot. There is simply NO way that remote exploration technology won't catch up with the vague and poorly-supported "plans" for a manned mission to Mars.
I say, if we want to start colonizing space, let's start closer to home.
As for the rest of the world, I say to them - sucks to be you. Sounds cold, eh? Well it is. I'm not losing sleep or majorly depriving myself because I'm more fortunate than much of the world.
Nice to see you stand firmly on principle. "I got mine, sucks to be you." Pets give you warm fuzzy feelings... but you proudly proclaim that you couldn't care less about the suffering of your fellow humans.
Wow. You're so cool. And deep. Wow. I hope that all Americans can be like you. Oh, wait. They already are.
Re:more important things to do in space ...
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Excuse me? How is sending some guys to a nearby rock going to advance science more than investigating these strange objects? The article was pretty light on facts, but it looks like these stars could provide a LOT of information about particles that we have a REALLY hard time finding with even the biggest particle accelerators.
And are you suggesting that the work being done in Astronomy/Cosmology in the U.S. is costing BILLIONS of dollars? C'mon, man, get a grip! And I firmly reject the idea that only "humans in space" can effectively explore and exploit worlds outside ours.
If we have learned anything from the last few decades, I think it's that technology is an extension of our senses into the universe outside of our bodies... so why do we have drag our frail monkey-bodies to Mars if we can get the raw data cheaper and more safely with instrumentation? So we can play golf there too?
Yeah, it's at the bottom of the page... It talks about a small rocket they launched LAST YEAR:
The vehicle was successfully launched on April 19, 2001. Things went so well that plans have already been made with Alabama A&M University to build and launch a larger prototype that will serve as a sounding rocket to take micro-gravity experiments into space. The project is being supported by a number of Huntsville's high-tech aerospace companies and federal agencies including NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
THAT sounds more like a Slashdot headliner... so where is the article about the BIG rocket? Oh! Let me guess... it hasn't happened yet.
Globalism is just a word. It is the trend of funneling government (national and IMF) cash into the pockets of elite that bothers me, not increasing "closeness" of cultures. As you say, Globalism in service of the multinationals is not going to do much good... for anybody who isn't a multinational shareholder.
Every problem we have could be solved with a little "Prisoners' Dilemma" reasoning, but I just don't see how you change corporate culture so radically that the elite are willing to sacrifice their maximized self-interest for the benefit of people they will never meet. As has been pointed out often on this site--especially by self-proclaimed capitalists--greed is just a fact of life, and why not accept the system that has been built around the pursuit of self-interest?
Well, because greed is not the rock of my moral foundation. And although I bet it is for a lot of people, I would prefer to live in a world where decisions are focused on maximizing the common good (what I like to call "Social Capital"), not just the interests represented by the creaking and warped structures of the Establishment.
It makes sense not to sink more money in the pit of International Aid as conceived by the elite. That is, more money for businesses to strip wealth from the third world, more money to build infrastructure that locks them into expensive technologies, and more money to grease the palms of local officials to ensure things go smoothly.
Lets face it: there is only a call for "Reform" in cases where the corruption is actually interfering with profits... after all, there's no need to reform governments that continue to shaft their constituents and give free reign to multinationals, is there? As a matter of fact, let's reward those countries by not interfering in their civil affairs (Indonesia) and if they go broke following our IMF directives (Argentina), too bad for them.
You are exactly right. This is an example of the Taoist principle: to make yourself strong, to become the aggressor, is to invite attack by the weak. Nobody stays on top forever, and the only reason you can BE on top is that the people "below" you allow it.
The thing is, the guys on top (big conglomerates and industry groups) will be VERY vulnerable to the slings and arrows of misfortune, especially with a legion of hackers out there ready to point out the chinks in their armour. This is principle of "infinite eyes", where nobody can hide the truth when enough people have access to the raw data.
So any industry that REALLY wants to succeed will find a way to use these principles to their advantage: be the "nice guy"/underdog, let the minor stuff slide, give people more for their money, look at hackers as a resource and bellweather. You may not become dominant, but you will probably survive while the big guys struggle ever-harder to keep control on the way down.
Just try and stay clear of those dinosaurs during their death throes... it's not a safe place to be. So I guess that also means don't tie yourself to them with partnership agreements.
Remember, all you Anarchists and Libertarians... the Wheel turns. Try and stay off the Top, for your own sake.
Dweeb's what? People reading this site are belong to Dweeb? Who is Dweeb? And why are Slashdotters his and his alone? What about Geek? Does he have none? Or Dork? Or you, the Yet-Another-Illiterate-Troll-Who-Has-Not-Yet-Grokk ed-The-Purpose-Of-The-Possessive-Apostrophe?
Each detector is rated at 4 megapixels, giving the 30-CCD array a whopping 120-megapixels (120 million pixels) sensitivity. The higher the number of pixels, the greater the resolution.
Great!! Where can I get one? Does it have USB 2.0 or FireWire? And how many hi-res shots can I fit in memory? Does it take SmartMedia or CompactFlash?
I just hope that I can find a big enough LCD to view these pix at 100%...
C'mon. This is hardly surprising. We were all waiting for something like this. Nothing like a new administration to "send a message"... only the message seems to be along the lines of "MPAA/RIAA/M$ Uber Alles!".
Are you seriously saying that the misinformed people who are concerned about mutant flies are eco-terrorists? You give them too much credit.
And as for "tactics" by groups who present options in the "harshest possible light even when they know they are lying"... that could be almost anyone, couldn't it? The NRA, Greenpeace, Microsoft, George Dubya. Anybody who wants to spin their message to the public. Not that I approve of such shenanigans, but then I'm clued in enough not to believe everything people tell me.
To me, ecological fear-mongering is wrong; right up there with ranting about an "axis of evil" or starting new wars "just cuz". Or pretending you care about Africans in order to make your attack against your "terrorists" seem like it's based in compassion... when it's really just an expression of paranoia that somehow a few hipies pleading for restraint will make any difference to the glorious and efficient progress of short-sighted technocrats.
Fear not! The world is being destroyed according to schedule. Your grandchildren will enjoy their domed lives immensely, I'm sure. I (like the poor flies) will not be adding my genes to the pool, so I don't care how much the rest of you screw it up.
Imagine you are living next to a river, enjoying the fishing, the transportation, the community that has grown up around life on the river.
Then some @sshole finds a nugget of gold. Suddenly there's a town upstream, polluting the river, 1000s of stinky (and paranoid) prospectors pointing shotguns ("git awfa mah propertah!"), and the river is clogged with boats.
We can only hope that the gold runs dry quickly, the prospectors drown trying to run the rapids on their way to sell their sacks of gold (which they tend to tie to their bodies, thankfully), and things will get back to normal sooner or later.
Complaining about the politics of popular fiction? Tsk! Tsk!
What are geeks doing watching television, anyway? Aren't they supposed to be too busy doing things that require the full attention of their mighty intellects, like whoring for karma and ranting about Microsoft?
I mean, I have a passable A/V rig, and I get my cable for free, but my remote has a thick layer of dust over the "Power" button...
Finally, someone who knows what they are talking about.
Finding the unexploded ordnance is the tricky bit, but it's nice to know the demolition/deactivation tech is being developed. I also heard about a high-pressure water disruptor cannon for bomb disposal a couple of years ago, so this must be the same principle? (ie: smash device before it can trigger and detonate)
Of course the REAL reason land mines are so costly to remove is because they are usually deployed without ANY thought to how they will be recovered.
Putting aside the issue of civilian casualties, the forces who deploy these weapons should be responsible for paying for their clean up. Maybe they they'd keep better deployment records and maps, and avoid the use of air-deployed mines.
I can only think of a few ways in which you could use mines legitimately (Fort Knox, nuclear power stations, max. security prisons, etc.) and only then when they are in areas that are clearly marked. Putting mines in areas used by civilians is negligent to the point of evil.
If you are running a server off of DSL in Canada, you better check your six. My buddy just got "the call" from Telus, and had to stop hosting a bunch of domains. Including mine.:(
Evidently they have a new strategy to track down "abuses" of their "service". So be warned.
On the plus side: it took my buddy a day to figure out how to get around it by putting a server on a cable connection which runs a Perl script that reflects the domains to a "non-Web" port on his ADSL server. He just needs to do a little more work to support directories as well as the base domains. Plus, the cable server caches static content... bonus! I have always had a gut feeling that cable + dsl was the best option.
So fuck you, Telus. We can use Cable against thee.
That if you DON'T use the InterWeb, that you are supporting Terrorism?
You know, with all these people on the Web, somebody might be able to figure a way to sell things to them. Just think of the possibilities! We could develop products that cost nothing to deliver! 100% profit! All you'd need is some money to fund the development effort. But I'm sure people would want to get in on the ground floor. This could be BIG!
There's a lot I could say about Rogers and it's "service". There's a lot some of my friends DO say about Rogers and it's "service". I have found my experience with Telus ADSL to be pretty good (not perfect, just pretty good), and I am glad I don't have to rely on a "high-speed" connection that is shared with the file-sharing geek down the street.
Having said this, I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea to split the broadband consumer packages up into tiers. That's fine. As long as paying more for your connection gets you BOTH higher traffic limits and a increased level of service. This could translate into better support, increased bandwidth (both top end and guaranteed minimum), and more extras (fixed IPs, e-mail addys, etc.). As long as you are getting a better service for paying more, bring it on.
I kinda doubt this is what they will do. And the term "bandwidth hogs" --used liberally in the article-- seems more than a little propagandist to me. What are they saying? That these people shouldn't be using their connections this way? That it is wrong to consume b/w that you paid for? It's pretty rich of Rogers to imply some of its users are greedy, and taking advantage of poor old Teddy R.
I mean, just think of all the lost profits! *sniff* I gotta go... I'm getting all choked up!
From a white paper on wavelet technology from Rainmaker's site:
Wavelet modulation provides reliable high-bandwidth transmission of data, voice and video over existing wireline (phoneline and powerline) and wireless media.
It doesn't seem clear why this is a particularly cable-oriented technology. The fact that they say it can be used for wireless would seem to hurt cable more than help it. I understand that the cable guys are going to be able to extend the life of their wired infrastructure, and maybe make money off of 3rd party providers, but if wavelets can be used to jack up the b/w in wireless, then I think this is pretty bad news for any wire providers.
As far as I can figure, getting fat (or reasonably fat... 1Gb/s) b/w on a cellular link (or CDPD, or sat-tel, or whatever) would attract people who want applications like voice/IP, e-mail, messaging, chat, Web browsing, etc. on a mobile platform. Wire will be fine for big stuff like HDTV, server traffic, etc., but I bet most consumers don't use most of their b/w most of the time. (They would just like to know that they COULD take advantage of a fat pipe when they need it... maybe someone should come up with a "bandwidth/QOS on demand" scheme?)
I don't think Cringely is that great a reporter, and the fact that he focuses completely on cable makes me wonder. And judging by the uncritical "Ra! Ra! Rainmaker!", I'd say that he doesn't plan on remaining a non-investor for long.
Is it just me, or does this thing seem a little vapourish? I mean, it sounds good, and all, but where o where are the close-up product shots? All I see is tiny mockups in the models's hands, and some graphics. No close-up pix. What's up? Can't they afford a photographer? Or is the hardware still beta?
"Internautes" = Internauts. I like it. Not so much "surfing" as an epic sea voyage. With sirens and cyclopses and a golden fleecing at the end of it all...
Slashdot Mirror
Woah! You can tell this guy isn't working for an American software company. Must be some sort of radical socialist or something...
You said exactly what I was gonna say: good idea, bad execution. I would defintitely consider doing this: using a "poem hack" to attract people to my site. It just has to communicate to people a real message. This guy wasn't focused at all.
The scarcity and low profile of mental health services in Canada, and I assume to an even greater extent in the States, is a major cause for concern. I often feel a popular sentiment that councelling is of little or no value, and there is a monstrous stigma that is attached to anyone who seeks help.
You only have to look at the most stressful jobs. Take cops: while there may be lip service paid to the provision of councelling services, there is simply no way most cops are going to take the initiative to talk to a councellor about their problems. And with the high rate of drug abuse, domestic violence, and suicide in police forces around North America, you have to ask yourself, why isn't this a more public issue? I mean, we are allowing a culture of violence and silence to persist, amongst the very organizations we all trust to protect us.
The same can be said for any industry that places its workers in high-stress situations, without the tools to deal with their emotions.
When it comes to public councelling, I know that here in Canada you can get councelling through your Medical Services Plan, but you will have a flag on your file from then on. It will be available to any agency with access to your medical history. So you would probably prefer to pay a mental health pro out of your own pocket, to avoid any record. That, of course, is expensive. Many good councellors use a sliding scale, but it is still a major investment for someone of modest means. The options aren't really clear to most people.
The majority of people who are addicted to X can't afford to pay for their own treatment. So they don't get treated. And the costs get passed on in other forms: crime, corruption, and lost productivity. I have to think that our culture requires us to be sick with guilt and self-loathing in order for us to be more motivated to consume... all the advertising I have ever seen has promised me a better, happier, more popular position in life if I just fork over the cash.
Addiction is a behaviour. You learn to become addicted. You can also unlearn it to a certain extent... but (as all the psych people out there probably already know), a behaviour can never be completely extinguished once learned. Hence the "once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic" mantra of AA has a real foundation.
Behaviours are like memes: they compete with each other. To the extent that you exibit one behaviour more than others, it defines you. Getting locked into a certain pattern of behaviour(s) makes you boring, IMNSHO. Thus, addiction may be a response to boredom, but it in turn makes you boring. Got to love the irony.
Of course people who feel inadequate, unsatisfied, and ignored in "real life" (whatever that is) will try to find a way to experience the thrill of power, exultation, and adulation. The fact that they are "only acting" has nothing to do with the reality of their experience. Other people may choose to devote their lives to, say, show biz for the exact same reasons. You could argue that acting in a play and playing in an online game are equivalent, except you are more likely to be paid for the former. Keep in mind that this may change.
So really, when someone retreats into addiction, they are seeking well-being and belonging. The fact that people identify more easily with their game alter-egos than with their equally-artificial social persona is not only a matter of mental health, but an indicator that our culture (the ones in which these games flourish, that is) itself is sick.
Why are people so ready to give up the world of wage slavery, voter apathy, anti-intellectualism for worlds like EverQuest? I think the answer is obvious: it's more rewarding than involving themselves in the game of "real life". They want to live the life of a hero (or villian) in the true sense: they want to take on the role of the archetype, to accept the hero's challenge to conquer his own weaknesses and transcend The World itself.
We all are, really. Some of us have kids to keep our name/genes alive. Some try to make their mark on history. Others may work in their community to improve things for the next generation. All are seeking a "place" in the world--not the world of time and space, but the world of stories, lore, and cultural memory. Looked at from this point of view, what the EQ addicts are doing isn't so strange. They are trying to do what we all do, just in a different medium.
The problem here is that no game can deliver on the promise of the hero's quest. The closest they will come to this experience is not to "beat the game" from within the game, but to beat it from the outside, BY PUTTING THE GAME BEHIND THEM. They can then move on to the real challenge: finding a way through life that reinforces their spiritual, emotional, and physical well-being.
Our Western lives have been organized around things that seem custom-made to make us feel bad about ourselves, which drives us to find comfort in one addiction or another. We spend our lives trying to make up for the guilt and regrets of what we "had" to do. Basically, through the long process of dividing people into halves (private/public, personal/professional) we have created a world for ourselves where everyone walks around fighting with themselves and each other. Why is it so strange that we would want to escape from this?
The harder they try to control it, the more people will resist. The more powerful, aggressive, and merciless these corps get, the more of a reaction there will be against them. Not content to actually provide VALUE in order to make money, to provide services or goods that actually benefit anybody, they would prefer to worm their way to the heart of the Web and set up their corporate IP borders in a realm that should be run more like Antarctica than a gold rush.
So what do you call it when something that used to belong to everybody is appropriated by a self-interested party? Vandalism? Theft? Annexation? No matter how you look at it, this is an act of war: using IP law as a weapon against the common good. Maybe stuff like this will eventually change people's minds about the value of patents, copyrights, and trademarks. I can only hope.
I think US$2k plus $10/month for services is a bargain for a connection that is about 100x faster than my US$30/mo ADSL here in Canada. You definitely have some advantages in terms of the design of your community (lots of straight-line trenches in soft earth helps a lot), but I'm sure the same approach could work in small towns around here.
You should be very proud (your community collectively and you personally) of this project. Now, perhaps I might visit sometime for a LAN party some time?...
And you could build a lot of little robots that talked to each other. If one buys the farm doing something stupid, the others could learn. Bandwidth wouldn't be a problem if we improved comms infrastructure in the solar system (laser satellite repeaters?). Latency isn't much of an issue, really. We aren't in a rush to scoop dirt, are we? Take it easy mon, kick back at the console and wait for you dumb robot to get nervous and ask your advice...
If *I* was mission control, I'd MUCH rather have to deal with dead hardware than dead astronauts. Think Apollo 13. Think Challenger. Think every Mars mission that dissappeared without a trace.
Anyhow, the point is likely moot. There is simply NO way that remote exploration technology won't catch up with the vague and poorly-supported "plans" for a manned mission to Mars.
I say, if we want to start colonizing space, let's start closer to home.
Nice to see you stand firmly on principle. "I got mine, sucks to be you." Pets give you warm fuzzy feelings... but you proudly proclaim that you couldn't care less about the suffering of your fellow humans.
Wow. You're so cool. And deep. Wow. I hope that all Americans can be like you. Oh, wait. They already are.
And are you suggesting that the work being done in Astronomy/Cosmology in the U.S. is costing BILLIONS of dollars? C'mon, man, get a grip! And I firmly reject the idea that only "humans in space" can effectively explore and exploit worlds outside ours.
If we have learned anything from the last few decades, I think it's that technology is an extension of our senses into the universe outside of our bodies... so why do we have drag our frail monkey-bodies to Mars if we can get the raw data cheaper and more safely with instrumentation? So we can play golf there too?
The vehicle was successfully launched on April 19, 2001. Things went so well that plans have already been made with Alabama A&M University to build and launch a larger prototype that will serve as a sounding rocket to take micro-gravity experiments into space. The project is being supported by a number of Huntsville's high-tech aerospace companies and federal agencies including NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
THAT sounds more like a Slashdot headliner... so where is the article about the BIG rocket? Oh! Let me guess... it hasn't happened yet.
Ok, so how the hell is a year-old "first" news?
Globalism is just a word. It is the trend of funneling government (national and IMF) cash into the pockets of elite that bothers me, not increasing "closeness" of cultures. As you say, Globalism in service of the multinationals is not going to do much good... for anybody who isn't a multinational shareholder.
Every problem we have could be solved with a little "Prisoners' Dilemma" reasoning, but I just don't see how you change corporate culture so radically that the elite are willing to sacrifice their maximized self-interest for the benefit of people they will never meet. As has been pointed out often on this site--especially by self-proclaimed capitalists--greed is just a fact of life, and why not accept the system that has been built around the pursuit of self-interest?
Well, because greed is not the rock of my moral foundation. And although I bet it is for a lot of people, I would prefer to live in a world where decisions are focused on maximizing the common good (what I like to call "Social Capital"), not just the interests represented by the creaking and warped structures of the Establishment.
It makes sense not to sink more money in the pit of International Aid as conceived by the elite. That is, more money for businesses to strip wealth from the third world, more money to build infrastructure that locks them into expensive technologies, and more money to grease the palms of local officials to ensure things go smoothly.
Lets face it: there is only a call for "Reform" in cases where the corruption is actually interfering with profits... after all, there's no need to reform governments that continue to shaft their constituents and give free reign to multinationals, is there? As a matter of fact, let's reward those countries by not interfering in their civil affairs (Indonesia) and if they go broke following our IMF directives (Argentina), too bad for them.
No, on second thought, let's NOT do that.
The thing is, the guys on top (big conglomerates and industry groups) will be VERY vulnerable to the slings and arrows of misfortune, especially with a legion of hackers out there ready to point out the chinks in their armour. This is principle of "infinite eyes", where nobody can hide the truth when enough people have access to the raw data.
So any industry that REALLY wants to succeed will find a way to use these principles to their advantage: be the "nice guy"/underdog, let the minor stuff slide, give people more for their money, look at hackers as a resource and bellweather. You may not become dominant, but you will probably survive while the big guys struggle ever-harder to keep control on the way down.
Just try and stay clear of those dinosaurs during their death throes... it's not a safe place to be. So I guess that also means don't tie yourself to them with partnership agreements.
Remember, all you Anarchists and Libertarians... the Wheel turns. Try and stay off the Top, for your own sake.
Dweeb's what? People reading this site are belong to Dweeb? Who is Dweeb? And why are Slashdotters his and his alone? What about Geek? Does he have none? Or Dork? Or you, the Yet-Another-Illiterate-Troll-Who-Has-Not-Yet-Grokk ed-The-Purpose-Of-The-Possessive-Apostrophe?
Great!! Where can I get one? Does it have USB 2.0 or FireWire? And how many hi-res shots can I fit in memory? Does it take SmartMedia or CompactFlash?
I just hope that I can find a big enough LCD to view these pix at 100%...
C'mon. This is hardly surprising. We were all waiting for something like this. Nothing like a new administration to "send a message"... only the message seems to be along the lines of "MPAA/RIAA/M$ Uber Alles!".
And as for "tactics" by groups who present options in the "harshest possible light even when they know they are lying"... that could be almost anyone, couldn't it? The NRA, Greenpeace, Microsoft, George Dubya. Anybody who wants to spin their message to the public. Not that I approve of such shenanigans, but then I'm clued in enough not to believe everything people tell me.
To me, ecological fear-mongering is wrong; right up there with ranting about an "axis of evil" or starting new wars "just cuz". Or pretending you care about Africans in order to make your attack against your "terrorists" seem like it's based in compassion... when it's really just an expression of paranoia that somehow a few hipies pleading for restraint will make any difference to the glorious and efficient progress of short-sighted technocrats.
Fear not! The world is being destroyed according to schedule. Your grandchildren will enjoy their domed lives immensely, I'm sure. I (like the poor flies) will not be adding my genes to the pool, so I don't care how much the rest of you screw it up.
Then some @sshole finds a nugget of gold. Suddenly there's a town upstream, polluting the river, 1000s of stinky (and paranoid) prospectors pointing shotguns ("git awfa mah propertah!"), and the river is clogged with boats.
We can only hope that the gold runs dry quickly, the prospectors drown trying to run the rapids on their way to sell their sacks of gold (which they tend to tie to their bodies, thankfully), and things will get back to normal sooner or later.
Either that, or its time to move.
What are geeks doing watching television, anyway? Aren't they supposed to be too busy doing things that require the full attention of their mighty intellects, like whoring for karma and ranting about Microsoft?
I mean, I have a passable A/V rig, and I get my cable for free, but my remote has a thick layer of dust over the "Power" button...
Finding the unexploded ordnance is the tricky bit, but it's nice to know the demolition/deactivation tech is being developed. I also heard about a high-pressure water disruptor cannon for bomb disposal a couple of years ago, so this must be the same principle? (ie: smash device before it can trigger and detonate)
Of course the REAL reason land mines are so costly to remove is because they are usually deployed without ANY thought to how they will be recovered.
Putting aside the issue of civilian casualties, the forces who deploy these weapons should be responsible for paying for their clean up. Maybe they they'd keep better deployment records and maps, and avoid the use of air-deployed mines.
I can only think of a few ways in which you could use mines legitimately (Fort Knox, nuclear power stations, max. security prisons, etc.) and only then when they are in areas that are clearly marked. Putting mines in areas used by civilians is negligent to the point of evil.
Evidently they have a new strategy to track down "abuses" of their "service". So be warned.
On the plus side: it took my buddy a day to figure out how to get around it by putting a server on a cable connection which runs a Perl script that reflects the domains to a "non-Web" port on his ADSL server. He just needs to do a little more work to support directories as well as the base domains. Plus, the cable server caches static content... bonus! I have always had a gut feeling that cable + dsl was the best option.
So fuck you, Telus. We can use Cable against thee.
You know, with all these people on the Web, somebody might be able to figure a way to sell things to them. Just think of the possibilities! We could develop products that cost nothing to deliver! 100% profit! All you'd need is some money to fund the development effort. But I'm sure people would want to get in on the ground floor. This could be BIG!
Having said this, I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea to split the broadband consumer packages up into tiers. That's fine. As long as paying more for your connection gets you BOTH higher traffic limits and a increased level of service. This could translate into better support, increased bandwidth (both top end and guaranteed minimum), and more extras (fixed IPs, e-mail addys, etc.). As long as you are getting a better service for paying more, bring it on.
I kinda doubt this is what they will do. And the term "bandwidth hogs" --used liberally in the article-- seems more than a little propagandist to me. What are they saying? That these people shouldn't be using their connections this way? That it is wrong to consume b/w that you paid for? It's pretty rich of Rogers to imply some of its users are greedy, and taking advantage of poor old Teddy R.
I mean, just think of all the lost profits! *sniff* I gotta go... I'm getting all choked up!
Wavelet modulation provides reliable high-bandwidth transmission of data, voice and video over existing wireline (phoneline and powerline) and wireless media.
It doesn't seem clear why this is a particularly cable-oriented technology. The fact that they say it can be used for wireless would seem to hurt cable more than help it. I understand that the cable guys are going to be able to extend the life of their wired infrastructure, and maybe make money off of 3rd party providers, but if wavelets can be used to jack up the b/w in wireless, then I think this is pretty bad news for any wire providers.
As far as I can figure, getting fat (or reasonably fat... 1Gb/s) b/w on a cellular link (or CDPD, or sat-tel, or whatever) would attract people who want applications like voice/IP, e-mail, messaging, chat, Web browsing, etc. on a mobile platform. Wire will be fine for big stuff like HDTV, server traffic, etc., but I bet most consumers don't use most of their b/w most of the time. (They would just like to know that they COULD take advantage of a fat pipe when they need it... maybe someone should come up with a "bandwidth/QOS on demand" scheme?)
I don't think Cringely is that great a reporter, and the fact that he focuses completely on cable makes me wonder. And judging by the uncritical "Ra! Ra! Rainmaker!", I'd say that he doesn't plan on remaining a non-investor for long.
Is it just me, or does this thing seem a little vapourish? I mean, it sounds good, and all, but where o where are the close-up product shots? All I see is tiny mockups in the models's hands, and some graphics. No close-up pix. What's up? Can't they afford a photographer? Or is the hardware still beta?
"Internautes" = Internauts. I like it. Not so much "surfing" as an epic sea voyage. With sirens and cyclopses and a golden fleecing at the end of it all...