Hmm. We wouldn't want to infringe on anyone's right to work 3 hours and stand around the other 5, or promote the idea of someone getting fired for being inept.
--- Wieger was simply taking precautions in order to prevent the ruining of his life. ---
Hmm. It sounded to me like he didn't make any precautions at all. Did he even consult a lawyer? Common sense would tell me that he clearly had the right to keep his content up.
If I were in his position, I'd have contacted a lawyer, my upstream provider (to make sure they'd back me up), etc. The FBI has power, but they're media conscious as anyone. I'd have contacted Wired, Slashdot, etc. for help. I wouldn't have just pulled the switch.
Spam is one person sending bulk email to many - usually the same message, and always unsolicited. From the sounds of it, this was a case of many people sending a few messages to a few people. While it may have been a flood of mail, it by no means is the same thing as spam.
On the one hand, I imagine most of the messages were inflamatory at the very least. At best, they may have been simply informing the ISP's customers that their provider didn't respect their rights to free speech. While the ISP may have been legally within its rights, it's still a mark against them.
If the guy who run the ISP is pissed because his customers know the truth, well, that's too bad. His customers have a right to choose an ISP that will defend them.
Until then, all that is needed is for Red Hat to start acting remotely like Microsoft. As it is, they've been 100% positive to the open-source community (barring buggy software, but even that is subjective).
Without Red Hat, open-source software wouldn't have ever grown past the dippy hippy free sex and code image it has had in the past. Because of Red Hat (and others who make Linux viable for the average person), Linux can and will thrive.
If you have a problem with it, well, let us know what exactly Red Hat has done other than be successful.
I used to sysop an old message board a few years back, before the world moved to the 'net and AOL en masse (I had a shell account which I used as a source of current software, but that's a bit different). Why did people leave? I don't know - my guess is the lack of 32k color graphics, blinking text, and realtime naked pictures of beautiful women had something to do with it. You simply have to look harder to find the value in a BBS.
However, the web has most definately not replaced the best 'features' of the traditional 16 color ANSI based board, even though it pretty much killed them outright. The problems of the web are numerous:
1. It's not stateless, meaning that once a page loads, it's not terribly dynamic until you resubmit a form or click on a link.
2. The audience is multinational, which is great in its own right, but BBSes were fun because you'd often get to meet other BBSers (they lived in town). We even had 'pizzas' and 'coffees' where we'd all get together.
3. For some reason, the signal to noise ratio was usually better. Even on sites where the sysop wasn't a censor-nazi.
4. BBSes were usually more immersive, meaning that you felt you were actually 'somewhere', versus just another web site. You also focused on the site for longer periods of time, whereas web users are far more fickle.
5. BBSing and advertising didn't go so well together, so you didn't have banners. People ran sites usually because they wanted to, not for profits alone.
6. Open standards - 16 color ANSI was pretty universal, and no matter what terminal you used, you would usually see the same thing. You can blame Netscape and Microsoft for the lack of universal standards on today's web.
I'd love to see someone come up with a web based system that captures the feel of the local boards. It's not easy, though - I've tried it myself with Axis Mutatis:
...which has gained a loyal following, but still doesn't replace the good old BBSing community I used to be part of. It's not easy, and I haven't seen it done perfectly yet.
[note: If you go there and have problems, bookmark the site and come back later. I've had some DNS problems so you may or may not be able to get on - you may even end up at a different site]
I'm not 100% sure this would be the only reason why the FBI would shut the site down - seems kind of bizzare to me (wouldn't they have stopped NBC's 'Y2K' movie as well?).
I'm thinking there may have been more to it. I'm not saying it's justified, but...
Re:I'm not one to label anybody but...
on
Geeks vs. Nerds
·
· Score: 1
I'd say Steve Jobs fits the latter description, as he knew exactly what to do with it - make it palettable to the world at large, empowering the 'little guy' by popularizing a computer for the rest of us. Although Jobs DID have somewhat of a tech background, he was definately NO Woz. But without him, the work done by Woz would never have left his garage.
Gates had something of a skill and an above average IQ, but decided it'd be funner to make as much money as possible off of it as his primary goal (note that I think this has changed, now I think the guy is simply power hungry - he has plenty of cash).
Linus, I agree 100%, is a geek with vision. He's basically like Woz, except he's a software geek and didn't need someone like Jobs to prod him on. Jean-Louis is VERY sociable and is tech savvy (although he is Be's CEO now, he was Apple's primary designer for the Mac II line at one point). I also think JLG has his own visions of perfection beyond money, usually involving some sort of testosterone laden idea of 'power' in computing (JLG's common use of phallic imagery, and sheer French-ness, kind of backs this up).
Jobs, Linus, Lean-Louis - have vision of some sort, and in one way or another wanted to make a dent in the universe.
Gates - Made lots of cash selling mediocracy to the masses (I'm not 100% sure I would even give him the benefit of the 'nerd' label, let alone 'geek').
Re:restructuring of society?
on
Geeks vs. Nerds
·
· Score: 1
That's all fine and well, but in the event that we DO make all the mistakes of those we came after, please let's try to make sure nobody overthrows us, okay? I rather like the idea of societal power.:>
No, I think you got it wrong. I think that was actually a variation of the default "sarcastic parody by a jealous foreigner" message, with a little "I'm not American, so that means I'm more enlightened" thrown in for good measure.
>Allthough I agree that the movie is probably >extremly stupid. (as has the general american >response to Y2K been (yeah lets go buy lots of >ammo to feel real safe)) Good thing I live in a >different country.
Perhaps you should invest in a new source for your stereotypes?
Guess what, not all Americans are gun toting loonies - in fact, most aren't. I don't know anyone personally who has stocked up on ammo for Y2k, and I live in an utterly backwards, ultra conservative, partially inbred part of the country (Tri-Cities, Wash. State). Admittedly, a decent portion of the population already has plenty of ammo and guns (and trucks, and gunracks, and...), but this is NOT the rest of the country - most places are far more level headed. Even here I don't think it's gone very far.
I'm glad you live in another country too. We have enough stereotypes to go around already. Of course, you're not an American, so your stereotypes must be 'enlightened', eh?
>I said that, if she was a Christian, she had >serious problems.
Some of us would believe these are one and the same.
(moderators - this is my personal opinion, and not necessarily one that reflects on the 'worth' of Christians, just the sanity of the practice - if you moderate this down, would you do the same for a person who expressed the same opinion over those who believe in Santa Claus through their adult life? If so, feel free to knock me down a notch. Otherwise, thank you for understanding the true meaning of the moderation system.)
I'm not sure, but you've been able to with any other Powerbook made in the last X years. Just put the thing to sleep, pop it out, and switch. Press a key and wait a couple seconds, and you're back up.
While your intentions seem good, I kind of disagree.
I'm a dedicated Mac user, and the OS isn't terribly stable. Don't get me wrong, it has gotten MUCH better in the last 3 or so years, but it's still not of server quality in my opinion (unless you want to babysit the server).
For a desktop system, which is largely the role Macs play, it's not as big a problem. More stability would be nice.
I'll agree on the speed and security, for the most part. Disk access speed could use some work.
Support for hardware and software, in my opinion, is actually quite good. Hardware not so much, but Apple has been moving to industry standards so that helps. Software, via VirtualPC, isn't that big of a problem either. As the Mac is the 2nd major desktop platform, most software isn't that hard to find really - you just get used to mail order or online shopping.
If that 'one thing' is completely HTML compliant, then who cares? As he said, don't reinvent the wheel.
Web designers aren't against 100% compliant HTML, they're for it. They just want consistancy in the implementation (it's much easier to design a site that way). Show me where in the HTML standard it says that each implementation SHOULD be different.
(of course, in some cases it will be different, ie. text based browsers, those for the hearing impaired, etc. But for visual browsers, I'm all for having a consistant rendering engine. It makes my job ever so much more easier)
Slashdot Mirror
Read his other messages. He was being sarcastic.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Hmm. We wouldn't want to infringe on anyone's right to work 3 hours and stand around the other 5, or promote the idea of someone getting fired for being inept.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
My guess is that you'd wake up with your house on fire.
It's happened before.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
Wieger was simply taking precautions in order to prevent the ruining of his life.
---
Hmm. It sounded to me like he didn't make any precautions at all. Did he even consult a lawyer? Common sense would tell me that he clearly had the right to keep his content up.
If I were in his position, I'd have contacted a lawyer, my upstream provider (to make sure they'd back me up), etc. The FBI has power, but they're media conscious as anyone. I'd have contacted Wired, Slashdot, etc. for help. I wouldn't have just pulled the switch.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
That's not spam.
Spam is one person sending bulk email to many - usually the same message, and always unsolicited. From the sounds of it, this was a case of many people sending a few messages to a few people. While it may have been a flood of mail, it by no means is the same thing as spam.
On the one hand, I imagine most of the messages were inflamatory at the very least. At best, they may have been simply informing the ISP's customers that their provider didn't respect their rights to free speech. While the ISP may have been legally within its rights, it's still a mark against them.
If the guy who run the ISP is pissed because his customers know the truth, well, that's too bad. His customers have a right to choose an ISP that will defend them.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Let's turn this around. Don't you think it's a good thing that his customers know their provider might cancel their accounts on a whim?
If I ran a site through his provider, I'd like to know whether or not a mere phone call could take down MY business.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Yeah.
Until then, all that is needed is for Red Hat to start acting remotely like Microsoft. As it is, they've been 100% positive to the open-source community (barring buggy software, but even that is subjective).
Without Red Hat, open-source software wouldn't have ever grown past the dippy hippy free sex and code image it has had in the past. Because of Red Hat (and others who make Linux viable for the average person), Linux can and will thrive.
If you have a problem with it, well, let us know what exactly Red Hat has done other than be successful.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Reread his comment, and tell me, where exactly did he say that the BeOS is based on Unix?
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Hmm - that's an interesting way to change your nationality, cut all military funding and wait 10 years for another country to take over.
No thanks.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Nope, forget that. "Pirate's Cove" has been done before. In fact, we had a board of that name in the 509 area code.
It was a lame WWIV board, too.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I used to sysop an old message board a few years back, before the world moved to the 'net and AOL en masse (I had a shell account which I used as a source of current software, but that's a bit different). Why did people leave? I don't know - my guess is the lack of 32k color graphics, blinking text, and realtime naked pictures of beautiful women had something to do with it. You simply have to look harder to find the value in a BBS.
However, the web has most definately not replaced the best 'features' of the traditional 16 color ANSI based board, even though it pretty much killed them outright. The problems of the web are numerous:
1. It's not stateless, meaning that once a page loads, it's not terribly dynamic until you resubmit a form or click on a link.
2. The audience is multinational, which is great in its own right, but BBSes were fun because you'd often get to meet other BBSers (they lived in town). We even had 'pizzas' and 'coffees' where we'd all get together.
3. For some reason, the signal to noise ratio was usually better. Even on sites where the sysop wasn't a censor-nazi.
4. BBSes were usually more immersive, meaning that you felt you were actually 'somewhere', versus just another web site. You also focused on the site for longer periods of time, whereas web users are far more fickle.
5. BBSing and advertising didn't go so well together, so you didn't have banners. People ran sites usually because they wanted to, not for profits alone.
6. Open standards - 16 color ANSI was pretty universal, and no matter what terminal you used, you would usually see the same thing. You can blame Netscape and Microsoft for the lack of universal standards on today's web.
I'd love to see someone come up with a web based system that captures the feel of the local boards. It's not easy, though - I've tried it myself with Axis Mutatis:
http://www.axismutatis.net
...which has gained a loyal following, but still doesn't replace the good old BBSing community I used to be part of. It's not easy, and I haven't seen it done perfectly yet.
[note: If you go there and have problems, bookmark the site and come back later. I've had some DNS problems so you may or may not be able to get on - you may even end up at a different site]
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I'm not 100% sure this would be the only reason why the FBI would shut the site down - seems kind of bizzare to me (wouldn't they have stopped NBC's 'Y2K' movie as well?).
I'm thinking there may have been more to it. I'm not saying it's justified, but...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
...in Kansas.
:>
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I'd say Steve Jobs fits the latter description, as he knew exactly what to do with it - make it palettable to the world at large, empowering the 'little guy' by popularizing a computer for the rest of us. Although Jobs DID have somewhat of a tech background, he was definately NO Woz. But without him, the work done by Woz would never have left his garage.
Gates had something of a skill and an above average IQ, but decided it'd be funner to make as much money as possible off of it as his primary goal (note that I think this has changed, now I think the guy is simply power hungry - he has plenty of cash).
Linus, I agree 100%, is a geek with vision. He's basically like Woz, except he's a software geek and didn't need someone like Jobs to prod him on. Jean-Louis is VERY sociable and is tech savvy (although he is Be's CEO now, he was Apple's primary designer for the Mac II line at one point). I also think JLG has his own visions of perfection beyond money, usually involving some sort of testosterone laden idea of 'power' in computing (JLG's common use of phallic imagery, and sheer French-ness, kind of backs this up).
Jobs, Linus, Lean-Louis - have vision of some sort, and in one way or another wanted to make a dent in the universe.
Gates - Made lots of cash selling mediocracy to the masses (I'm not 100% sure I would even give him the benefit of the 'nerd' label, let alone 'geek').
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
That's all fine and well, but in the event that we DO make all the mistakes of those we came after, please let's try to make sure nobody overthrows us, okay? I rather like the idea of societal power. :>
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
You need better friends.
"Hey more appropriately, can you come over tonight?"
(and before you say something, realize this was just a bad joke)
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
You obsessive compulsive geek.
(and yes, I say that in the nicest way possible)
:>
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
No, I think you got it wrong. I think that was actually a variation of the default "sarcastic parody by a jealous foreigner" message, with a little "I'm not American, so that means I'm more enlightened" thrown in for good measure.
:>
Anyhow, I'm glad I could help.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Yeah, heaven forbid someone who creates something that other people enjoy should be rewarded for that.
Grow up. There's nothing glamorous about being poor.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
>Allthough I agree that the movie is probably
>extremly stupid. (as has the general american
>response to Y2K been (yeah lets go buy lots of
>ammo to feel real safe)) Good thing I live in a
>different country.
Perhaps you should invest in a new source for your stereotypes?
Guess what, not all Americans are gun toting loonies - in fact, most aren't. I don't know anyone personally who has stocked up on ammo for Y2k, and I live in an utterly backwards, ultra conservative, partially inbred part of the country (Tri-Cities, Wash. State). Admittedly, a decent portion of the population already has plenty of ammo and guns (and trucks, and gunracks, and...), but this is NOT the rest of the country - most places are far more level headed. Even here I don't think it's gone very far.
I'm glad you live in another country too. We have enough stereotypes to go around already. Of course, you're not an American, so your stereotypes must be 'enlightened', eh?
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Heheh, Hanford?
:>
Y2K won't be a problem. It's the nuclear waste that will reach the Columbia in 20 or so years that I'm afraid of.
Pry isn't any worse than Boise Cascade though.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
>I said that, if she was a Christian, she had
>serious problems.
Some of us would believe these are one and the same.
(moderators - this is my personal opinion, and not necessarily one that reflects on the 'worth' of Christians, just the sanity of the practice - if you moderate this down, would you do the same for a person who expressed the same opinion over those who believe in Santa Claus through their adult life? If so, feel free to knock me down a notch. Otherwise, thank you for understanding the true meaning of the moderation system.)
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I'm not sure, but you've been able to with any other Powerbook made in the last X years. Just put the thing to sleep, pop it out, and switch. Press a key and wait a couple seconds, and you're back up.
I imagine the iBook is the same way.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
While your intentions seem good, I kind of disagree.
I'm a dedicated Mac user, and the OS isn't terribly stable. Don't get me wrong, it has gotten MUCH better in the last 3 or so years, but it's still not of server quality in my opinion (unless you want to babysit the server).
For a desktop system, which is largely the role Macs play, it's not as big a problem. More stability would be nice.
I'll agree on the speed and security, for the most part. Disk access speed could use some work.
Support for hardware and software, in my opinion, is actually quite good. Hardware not so much, but Apple has been moving to industry standards so that helps. Software, via VirtualPC, isn't that big of a problem either. As the Mac is the 2nd major desktop platform, most software isn't that hard to find really - you just get used to mail order or online shopping.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
If that 'one thing' is completely HTML compliant, then who cares? As he said, don't reinvent the wheel.
Web designers aren't against 100% compliant HTML, they're for it. They just want consistancy in the implementation (it's much easier to design a site that way). Show me where in the HTML standard it says that each implementation SHOULD be different.
(of course, in some cases it will be different, ie. text based browsers, those for the hearing impaired, etc. But for visual browsers, I'm all for having a consistant rendering engine. It makes my job ever so much more easier)
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)