I disagree. The part about Free and Open-source software was very topical. It basically concerned the tendency of some to believe that FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software, as the author calls it) is somehow more inherently secure, and it debunks this while qualifying the debunking with some intelligent critique--such as the fact that when many eyes _are_ actually looking at the source code, there is a greater possibility that secure vulnerabilities will be found, as well as the difficulties inherent in comparing the meaning of security in the case of a very widely used OS like MS Windows with OpenBSD. Yes, this was a lot of common sense for the most part, but you should know from reading Slashdot that people are often lacking in that...
A lot of people who speak a lot of different languages live in them too! Go figure. Maybe has something to do with the fact that there is a lot of commerce and culture and etc. going on in them.
...I happen to be a pretentious snob who thinks he knows what he's talking about when it comes to jazz specifically and music in general.
Well, let's get started.
I basically think of five musicians as being the major movers and shakers of 'jazz' (or African-American classical music, or the only truly American classical music, or whatever you want to call it that will piss somebody somewhere off...):
Louis Armstrong
Duke Ellington
Charlie Parker
Miles Davis
John Coltrane
First of all, that's leaving a hell of a lot of very important people out. You could supplement that list with: Sidney Bichet, Jelly-Roll Morton, Art Tatum, Bessie Smith (arguably), Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Coleman Hawkins, Count Basie, Johnny Hodges, Ella Fitzgerald, Dizzy Gillespie, Thelonious Monk, Art Blakey, Lee Konitz, Dave Brubeck, Gerry Mulligan, Sonny Rollins, Yusef Lateef, Herbie Hancock, Roy Haynes, Wayne Shorter, Bill Evans, Ornette Coleman, Nina Simone, Mary Lou Williams, Sun Ra, Charles Mingus, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Pharoah Sanders, Archie Shepp, Jaco Pastorious...I think I spelled his name wrong. Anyways, I'm losing track. All of these people are potentially of equal importance for various reasons, depending on who you talk to. And I'm leaving out a lot of people who others might argue should go on that list and are more important. I also left out a lot of bassists and drummers; this is not to diminish their importance but to emphasize my ignorance.
So, next time you are hanging out with Wynton Marsalis (also potentially on the list, along with his brother and a bunch of their current associates, cronies and sycophants) ask him what he thinks jazz is and was, and see if you don't get a radically different answer compared to the one you'll get from Lester Bowie (Art Ensemble of Chicago, also a horn player). Everybody is an expert with this stuff, and trust me, Wynton Marsalis is not the only one; he just got Ken Burns and a hell of a lot of other people to think he is, along with Stanley Crouch, the definitive guide to jazz.
Okay, that out of the way, I can proceed to tell you what some of my favorite albums/artists, in no particular order, are:
Miles Davis - Kind of Blue--this in my opinion is one of the GREATEST albums ever made in any genre, but I'm biased. I'm also quite fond of the Richard D. James album (Aphex Twin), Talib Kweli & Hi Tek, Sonic Youth's 'Murray Street,' Deerhoof's 'Apple O,' Stevie Wonder's 'Songs in the Key of Life,' Tom Waits entire oeuvre, Missy Elliot's latest (Under Construction?), Debussy's and Schumann's piano works especially, and etc. etc. (yes I am an insufferable music snob, but I think you'd still like talking to me because I try not to be a complete prick about it) so I think you would agree I have eclectic enough tastes that I'm basing this on a wider range of music than just jazz. But anyways, I'm probably still biased.
But I mean, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, and Miles, together? Those three are some of my favorites, and some of the best soloing EVER. The rest of the band isn't too shabby either...
Oh, and as far as Miles goes, also check out: Birth of the Cool (I don't particularly like this album, but people tell me they do and that it is important, YMMV), Volume 1+2 on Blue Note (probably my second favorite Miles album(s)), all the sixties stuff with Wayne Shorter and Herbie Hancock, and to digress for a moment, all of Wayne Shorter's sixties Blue Note stuff--the man is brilliant, and he always had a good side band, with people like Herbie Hancock, Elvin Jones, etc.--and, to get back to Miles, Bitches Brew is a classic, and of course there are MANY MANY more Miles albums...he was making music FOREVER in 20th century, really the entire second half of the century.
Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers, Witch Doctor-- some early Wayne Shorter's on this one I think, I love him. I just love this album for some reason, it's
Ah...good to know! I was almost going to buy one of those, but I couldn't figure out how much it was by looking at it, and I didn't have time to track down the salesperson. But now with your info I'm glad I didn't get one!
...right past Union Square heading toward the west side, and I walked past a electronics/crap shop that was selling a combo pack with one controller and a light gun in it--the controllor itself plugged into the tv. The listing of games must have been around 200+. I'm sure none of them were legally licensed, but they seemed to be the real deal. Looked like Nintendo 8-bit era stuff, like Contra, maybe Mike Tyson's punch-out, that sort of stuff? Anyways...if you're in the neighborhood...
...that some of these 'stupid little robots' are having more success emulating intelligent behavior using a bottom-up methodology than the top-down methodology which I believe his AI folks were all about for a while...am I right?
Re:Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against A
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Wow. Well, when you relax a little, let me know, and maybe we can continue this conversation. If you'd read the initial posts, you would have seen I was reacting to the simplistic characterization of Bill Gates as evil. You responded to my critique of that, so I assumed you were supporting that characterization. Tell me where I went wrong. If you have done a lot of thought on this issue, please let me in on your little secret. And please don't call me kid, you don't know how old I am, and neither do I know how old you are--it will just help us to keep a civil conversation, if that is possible at this point. Or maybe you're trolling me, which, if that is the case, good work!
Sorry, wrong statistic.
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
I guess actually a fourth of Zimbabwe's population is infected with AIDS, those that we know about. Not much less to be concerned about though.
Re:Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against A
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Hello? Since when is getting a monopoly lock on the software industry and using that to push poorly-documented pseudo-standards instead of the real thing just `screwing other rich corporate schmoes out of money'?
Look, in all honestly, who has Microsoft's anti-competitive practices hurt the most really? Has it made an entire third of Zimbabwe's population die from AIDS? I don't think so. Perspective; that is what I am talking about. Whatever your problem with Bill Gates and how he made his money, at least recognize that he is doing something positive and intelligent with it. And to respond to another poster's comment, no he is not just handing it to large drug companies. He and his wife are doing hardcore research to figure out who is doing the right thing for fixing this epidemic, and then they are giving those people money. They are doing good things for the world, which far outweigh, in my mind, any evil that Bill and co. have done to emasculate, for the most part, a bunch of other nerdy and/or wealthy white males. Get over it...software is not the center of the universe. And Bill G. is more complicated than just evil. That was my main point, which apparently every poster who responded to me missed, because they were too busy spitting out their anti-MS anti-Bill missives.
Re:Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against A
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Okay, no need to get so nasty. Maybe I was wrong to generalize, but here's my point: a lot of slashdotters talk about Microsoft and Bill Gates as if they were the epitome of evil, without any critical thought. You did the same. I'm trying to point out that there is more complexity to Mr. Gates than his anti-competitive behavior on Microsoft's behalf. Please respond to that point; you haven't yet.
Re:Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against A
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Philanthropy doesn't excuse prior evildoing.
Right, and some evil-doing (a rich corporate schmoes screwing other rich corporate schmoes out of money, BTW, which pales in comparison to helping the developing world resist the spread of HIV) doesn't necessarily preclude doing some good.
Just like the typical slashdotter: you are incapable of seeing a person as a complex being with both good and evil capabilities, especially if that is Bill Gates. Humans aren't a boolean variable you know, or even as simple as a computer, you know.
Bill Gates is fighting the good fight against AIDS
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Something to think about. What he is doing with the Gates foundation is really a very, very good thing.
I've always found the Gentoo folks to be really helpful. I wouldn't crapflood them though, the signal to noise ratio is pretty low, so let's keep it that way. But those are nice folks, very knowledgeable in general, and helpful. Of course if your problem is specific to Gentoo you might have better luck.
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys?
on
SCO Group Lawsuit Q&A
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Admit it Bruce--you're a fanatical fr1st p05t AC troll!! You've been reloading Slashdot obsessively all day!
...why it is always front-page news here when Joel S. opens his mouth? Is someone who runs Slashdot pals with him or something? He seems to be about as astute about software as, well, your general slashdotter...which is just kinda okay really (I mean, his ideas aren't always terrible, sometimes their good, sometimes stupid and bad. I'd rather hear from, say, Bruce Shneier though, to pick another random qualified software-pundit). I don't get it.
Re:Sexuality in Niven's Work
on
Ask Larry Niven
·
· Score: 1
Yes, I find this to be an especially interesting question, as there is a story in N-Space I believe that is somewhat homophobic...concerns a man being outcast for killing a gay man IIRC (wish I could remember more, like the title, but I can't seem to find my copy of that collection)...and this has always seemed inconsistent with his general attitudes toward sex. I would be interested in seeing this question answered.
To quote the venerable Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
"Space," it says, "is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space. Listen..." and so on.
That's why I've started this new religion called Space-entology. Join today. Send a check for $19.95 to my address to get started (only 268 easy monthly installments!). Don't get left behind when we colonize Io, join today!
I don't know, I don't see why you should really be doing a lot of searching and replacing. Who cares if there is another project's name on some parts in the end, MicroBSD was about the whole package after all, right?
For example, I just recently installed OS X on my old lombard. I was poking around in/etc and realized a lot of the config and scripts actually have OpenBSD there blatantly across the top. If the guys from Apple didn't feel the need to make those sorts of alterations, why did the MicroBSD folks need to? Seems a little fishy or at least kinda stupid.
Science and religion can coincide perfectly with one another.
Sure, as long as you don't try to provide religious answers to scientific questions. Something like, "what was the mechanism for biological adaptation?"--well, god is not a scientific answer, no matter how you slice it. And that's what most creationists, as they call themselves and are generally known to the world, would have you believe. So sure, have your religion, but like I said, keep your peanut butter out of my chocolate. Or was it chocolate out of my peanut butter? Don't remember...you get the picture.
So you are saying that creationism means different things depending on the context? Is this the same for evolution?
Creationism: yes, evolution: no (although the word evolution itself means different things itself in different contexts, and possibly even scientific contexts). We're talking the difference between pseudo-science and science here, remember. People who engage in pseudo-science, or religion, can change terms at will as suits their objectives...like you've been doing with this thread. Scientists are required to maintain a common language so they can actually communicate and forward the progress of learning. Big difference there.
Got the philosophy part down.
Sorry, I didn't express myself very well there. When I said tackle philosophy, I meant something like: "solve" philosophy. Can't do it? Didn't think so. There's the beginnings of the problems of introducing god(s) into science; people can't agree upon basic terms well enough to even solve the problems of whether or not god(s) exist. And because science is essentially pragmatic, we can't really introduce god(s) into it if 1) we can't prove the existence of said entity(ies), 2) (and perhaps more importantly) we can't even agree what god(s) is(are). Follow me? I would think you'd be able to, with all your high-falutin philosophical knowledge!
This also goes back to answer your question about why science and god are a bad mix, if you didn't figure that out already.
Otherwise, check a handy dictionary for the words 'sarcasm' and 'symbolism'.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. The part about Free and Open-source software was very topical. It basically concerned the tendency of some to believe that FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software, as the author calls it) is somehow more inherently secure, and it debunks this while qualifying the debunking with some intelligent critique--such as the fact that when many eyes _are_ actually looking at the source code, there is a greater possibility that secure vulnerabilities will be found, as well as the difficulties inherent in comparing the meaning of security in the case of a very widely used OS like MS Windows with OpenBSD. Yes, this was a lot of common sense for the most part, but you should know from reading Slashdot that people are often lacking in that...
A lot of people who speak a lot of different languages live in them too! Go figure. Maybe has something to do with the fact that there is a lot of commerce and culture and etc. going on in them.
Do you really mean, "a complete masochist?"
...I happen to be a pretentious snob who thinks he knows what he's talking about when it comes to jazz specifically and music in general.
Well, let's get started.
I basically think of five musicians as being the major movers and shakers of 'jazz' (or African-American classical music, or the only truly American classical music, or whatever you want to call it that will piss somebody somewhere off...):
First of all, that's leaving a hell of a lot of very important people out. You could supplement that list with: Sidney Bichet, Jelly-Roll Morton, Art Tatum, Bessie Smith (arguably), Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Coleman Hawkins, Count Basie, Johnny Hodges, Ella Fitzgerald, Dizzy Gillespie, Thelonious Monk, Art Blakey, Lee Konitz, Dave Brubeck, Gerry Mulligan, Sonny Rollins, Yusef Lateef, Herbie Hancock, Roy Haynes, Wayne Shorter, Bill Evans, Ornette Coleman, Nina Simone, Mary Lou Williams, Sun Ra, Charles Mingus, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Pharoah Sanders, Archie Shepp, Jaco Pastorious...I think I spelled his name wrong. Anyways, I'm losing track. All of these people are potentially of equal importance for various reasons, depending on who you talk to. And I'm leaving out a lot of people who others might argue should go on that list and are more important. I also left out a lot of bassists and drummers; this is not to diminish their importance but to emphasize my ignorance.
So, next time you are hanging out with Wynton Marsalis (also potentially on the list, along with his brother and a bunch of their current associates, cronies and sycophants) ask him what he thinks jazz is and was, and see if you don't get a radically different answer compared to the one you'll get from Lester Bowie (Art Ensemble of Chicago, also a horn player). Everybody is an expert with this stuff, and trust me, Wynton Marsalis is not the only one; he just got Ken Burns and a hell of a lot of other people to think he is, along with Stanley Crouch, the definitive guide to jazz.
Okay, that out of the way, I can proceed to tell you what some of my favorite albums/artists, in no particular order, are:
Miles Davis - Kind of Blue--this in my opinion is one of the GREATEST albums ever made in any genre, but I'm biased. I'm also quite fond of the Richard D. James album (Aphex Twin), Talib Kweli & Hi Tek, Sonic Youth's 'Murray Street,' Deerhoof's 'Apple O,' Stevie Wonder's 'Songs in the Key of Life,' Tom Waits entire oeuvre, Missy Elliot's latest (Under Construction?), Debussy's and Schumann's piano works especially, and etc. etc. (yes I am an insufferable music snob, but I think you'd still like talking to me because I try not to be a complete prick about it) so I think you would agree I have eclectic enough tastes that I'm basing this on a wider range of music than just jazz. But anyways, I'm probably still biased.
But I mean, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, and Miles, together? Those three are some of my favorites, and some of the best soloing EVER. The rest of the band isn't too shabby either...
Oh, and as far as Miles goes, also check out: Birth of the Cool (I don't particularly like this album, but people tell me they do and that it is important, YMMV), Volume 1+2 on Blue Note (probably my second favorite Miles album(s)), all the sixties stuff with Wayne Shorter and Herbie Hancock, and to digress for a moment, all of Wayne Shorter's sixties Blue Note stuff--the man is brilliant, and he always had a good side band, with people like Herbie Hancock, Elvin Jones, etc.--and, to get back to Miles, Bitches Brew is a classic, and of course there are MANY MANY more Miles albums...he was making music FOREVER in 20th century, really the entire second half of the century.
Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers, Witch Doctor-- some early Wayne Shorter's on this one I think, I love him. I just love this album for some reason, it's
Ah...good to know! I was almost going to buy one of those, but I couldn't figure out how much it was by looking at it, and I didn't have time to track down the salesperson. But now with your info I'm glad I didn't get one!
...right past Union Square heading toward the west side, and I walked past a electronics/crap shop that was selling a combo pack with one controller and a light gun in it--the controllor itself plugged into the tv. The listing of games must have been around 200+. I'm sure none of them were legally licensed, but they seemed to be the real deal. Looked like Nintendo 8-bit era stuff, like Contra, maybe Mike Tyson's punch-out, that sort of stuff? Anyways...if you're in the neighborhood...
I think it might be even simpler; when it is hot, and you drink a hot beverage, you sweat more. Sweating is your body's way of cooling down.
...that some of these 'stupid little robots' are having more success emulating intelligent behavior using a bottom-up methodology than the top-down methodology which I believe his AI folks were all about for a while...am I right?
Wow. Well, when you relax a little, let me know, and maybe we can continue this conversation. If you'd read the initial posts, you would have seen I was reacting to the simplistic characterization of Bill Gates as evil. You responded to my critique of that, so I assumed you were supporting that characterization. Tell me where I went wrong. If you have done a lot of thought on this issue, please let me in on your little secret. And please don't call me kid, you don't know how old I am, and neither do I know how old you are--it will just help us to keep a civil conversation, if that is possible at this point. Or maybe you're trolling me, which, if that is the case, good work!
I guess actually a fourth of Zimbabwe's population is infected with AIDS, those that we know about. Not much less to be concerned about though.
Hello? Since when is getting a monopoly lock on the software industry and using that to push poorly-documented pseudo-standards instead of the real thing just `screwing other rich corporate schmoes out of money'?
Look, in all honestly, who has Microsoft's anti-competitive practices hurt the most really? Has it made an entire third of Zimbabwe's population die from AIDS? I don't think so. Perspective; that is what I am talking about. Whatever your problem with Bill Gates and how he made his money, at least recognize that he is doing something positive and intelligent with it. And to respond to another poster's comment, no he is not just handing it to large drug companies. He and his wife are doing hardcore research to figure out who is doing the right thing for fixing this epidemic, and then they are giving those people money. They are doing good things for the world, which far outweigh, in my mind, any evil that Bill and co. have done to emasculate, for the most part, a bunch of other nerdy and/or wealthy white males. Get over it...software is not the center of the universe. And Bill G. is more complicated than just evil. That was my main point, which apparently every poster who responded to me missed, because they were too busy spitting out their anti-MS anti-Bill missives.
Okay, no need to get so nasty. Maybe I was wrong to generalize, but here's my point: a lot of slashdotters talk about Microsoft and Bill Gates as if they were the epitome of evil, without any critical thought. You did the same. I'm trying to point out that there is more complexity to Mr. Gates than his anti-competitive behavior on Microsoft's behalf. Please respond to that point; you haven't yet.
Philanthropy doesn't excuse prior evildoing.
Right, and some evil-doing (a rich corporate schmoes screwing other rich corporate schmoes out of money, BTW, which pales in comparison to helping the developing world resist the spread of HIV) doesn't necessarily preclude doing some good.
Just like the typical slashdotter: you are incapable of seeing a person as a complex being with both good and evil capabilities, especially if that is Bill Gates. Humans aren't a boolean variable you know, or even as simple as a computer, you know.
Something to think about. What he is doing with the Gates foundation is really a very, very good thing.
I think?
I've always found the Gentoo folks to be really helpful. I wouldn't crapflood them though, the signal to noise ratio is pretty low, so let's keep it that way. But those are nice folks, very knowledgeable in general, and helpful. Of course if your problem is specific to Gentoo you might have better luck.
Admit it Bruce--you're a fanatical fr1st p05t AC troll!! You've been reloading Slashdot obsessively all day!
...what if anything this might mean for getting DRI on OpenBSD? Thanks.
"Why We Still Feel Okay About Ourselves Even Though Those Nasty Safari Developers Chose to Use Khtml instead of Gecko, Those Jerks."
by Mitchell Baker
...why it is always front-page news here when Joel S. opens his mouth? Is someone who runs Slashdot pals with him or something? He seems to be about as astute about software as, well, your general slashdotter...which is just kinda okay really (I mean, his ideas aren't always terrible, sometimes their good, sometimes stupid and bad. I'd rather hear from, say, Bruce Shneier though, to pick another random qualified software-pundit). I don't get it.
Yes, I find this to be an especially interesting question, as there is a story in N-Space I believe that is somewhat homophobic...concerns a man being outcast for killing a gay man IIRC (wish I could remember more, like the title, but I can't seem to find my copy of that collection)...and this has always seemed inconsistent with his general attitudes toward sex. I would be interested in seeing this question answered.
To quote the venerable Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
"Space," it says, "is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space. Listen..." and so on.
That's why I've started this new religion called Space-entology. Join today. Send a check for $19.95 to my address to get started (only 268 easy monthly installments!). Don't get left behind when we colonize Io, join today!
I don't know, I don't see why you should really be doing a lot of searching and replacing. Who cares if there is another project's name on some parts in the end, MicroBSD was about the whole package after all, right?
For example, I just recently installed OS X on my old lombard. I was poking around in /etc and realized a lot of the config and scripts actually have OpenBSD there blatantly across the top. If the guys from Apple didn't feel the need to make those sorts of alterations, why did the MicroBSD folks need to? Seems a little fishy or at least kinda stupid.
The same problem arises when atheist scientists confused faith and science.
Yes, there are those that aren't critical thinkers in any camp.
As I have said many times, "proper science is agnostic."
...however, proper science is not agnostic (whatever that means), proper science doesn't give a crap about whether god exists or not.
Science and religion can coincide perfectly with one another.
Sure, as long as you don't try to provide religious answers to scientific questions. Something like, "what was the mechanism for biological adaptation?"--well, god is not a scientific answer, no matter how you slice it. And that's what most creationists, as they call themselves and are generally known to the world, would have you believe. So sure, have your religion, but like I said, keep your peanut butter out of my chocolate. Or was it chocolate out of my peanut butter? Don't remember...you get the picture.
So you are saying that creationism means different things depending on the context? Is this the same for evolution?
Creationism: yes, evolution: no (although the word evolution itself means different things itself in different contexts, and possibly even scientific contexts). We're talking the difference between pseudo-science and science here, remember. People who engage in pseudo-science, or religion, can change terms at will as suits their objectives...like you've been doing with this thread. Scientists are required to maintain a common language so they can actually communicate and forward the progress of learning. Big difference there.
Got the philosophy part down.
Sorry, I didn't express myself very well there. When I said tackle philosophy, I meant something like: "solve" philosophy. Can't do it? Didn't think so. There's the beginnings of the problems of introducing god(s) into science; people can't agree upon basic terms well enough to even solve the problems of whether or not god(s) exist. And because science is essentially pragmatic, we can't really introduce god(s) into it if 1) we can't prove the existence of said entity(ies), 2) (and perhaps more importantly) we can't even agree what god(s) is(are). Follow me? I would think you'd be able to, with all your high-falutin philosophical knowledge!
This also goes back to answer your question about why science and god are a bad mix, if you didn't figure that out already.
Otherwise, check a handy dictionary for the words 'sarcasm' and 'symbolism'.
Hmm...yes...sarcasm...