So, if we view the brain as a hard drive, how about processors? Does this mean:
Einstein was the biological equivalent of a Cray? Inherently cooler people run k7s, and the feds all have PIIIs? Dumb people have the old Celerons? Siamese twins = dual processors? People who take smart drugs = overclockers?
I agree that our society is far too puritanical about sex -- all the while being strangely obsessed with it.
The real problem, though, is that the Internet is becoming a mirror of our social reality. Just as it was a place of trust and social goodwill in the 60s, as its techno-hippi e creators intended it to be, less-than-desirable elements of our society have seeped in simply because they have a right to a presence on the Net. Bigots, the religiously intolerant, sexual predators, Multi-Level-Marketers -- all have a place now on the web. The true issue behind the drive to control internet content is the government's need to control the representation of reality. Congressmen fancy that a world without pornography or anything remotely offensive would be a better world, "better for us". They misguidedly choose to treat us like children by installing the metaphorical equivalent of those annoying little spring-leashes that parents cuff on their children's wrists, forgetting that they are our representatives, not our masters. But at heart, what they are attempting is the suppression of undesirable elements of society, and to hopefully put those elements at a disadvantage in the real world. As the Internet becomes more and more a part of everyday lives, those businesses, sexually-oriented or no, and those facets of society who are denied access to a voice on the web will be that much closer to being totally eliminated from any participation in this "democracy". This is why the disparity in Net access according to socioeconomic group is so important and disturbing -- when the homeless and welfare mothers can't get online, it's much easier to ignore them, isn't it? In case the article link doesn't come through, here is the URL (Also linked off of yesterday's Hacker News Network to the Washington Post): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999 -06/15/150l-061599-idx.html
Re:Why the bitterness?
on
Cool PC Cases
·
· Score: 1
Oh, please. Where's your sense of fun? Computers are work tools for many people, yes, but I know people who take pride in their machines as virtually sprouted appendages of themselves. If you're into the most intense graphics, the fastest machine, the best of everything just because you think it's cool -- and there's nothing wrong with that, I love my machine simply as a prime source of recreation -- then why not make it look badass as well? I've contemplated various finishes for my box, anything from an iridescent coating to leopard spots. My boyfriend just painted his box a sort of blue-stone texture, and while I haven't seen it yet, it looks sweet from all reports.
Aesthetics, to me personally, are important. It's not enough for it to work well; if I'm going to stare at it 12+ hours a day, if it's going to cost upwards of $1,000, it had better be eyecandy too.
The problem with the intel cases, of course, is that they're lame and ugly. Personally, I'm embarrassed for the poor people in the stupid jumpsuits. Is there really no way they can be more useful to society? The photos don't work well as ads, either, because quite frankly I can't see much of the cases at all. Definitely the road to go for case customization is the do-it-yourself route.
A more appropriate question: Where does the money go?
Considering how time- and effort-intensive such an effort would be, and how much time it would take, it could easily take several months. It would take longer if you revised it along the way to keep pace with new/future GNOME versions. All told, the effort from start to publish could easily take a year. $20,000 is not that hefty for an annual salary, *especially* if you're supporting others besides yourself. If you have a job on the side, that's better and more secure, but it slows your production and you don't have much of a life worth speaking of.
A GNOME manual would be well worth having. As for your donations -- where else would you prefer they go? Especially since you will be able to procure the documentation for free? Also, a donation implies money given in free will, no strings attached -- you didn't give your donation with a legal clause attached specifying that it was not to be used to support documentation projects.
As someone who hopes to someday be a novelist -- Don't ever underestimate the monetary value of a writer's work.:)
First of all, I think people, in general, on this particular forum topic so far have been much too sensitive about Jon's perceived litmus testing of them as geeks or not-geeks. He used the phrase "likely" not "is". He made generalizations in order to get to the broader point. Personally, as a geek, I somewhat resent that you take the liberty of saying "geeks don't like you [Jon]." I like him just fine; I find his articles to be thought-provoking, well-written, and insightful. Therefore, you made an incorrect assumption and sweeping generalization of your own.
Secondly, "place" may be broadly defined. Jon wasn't "making up wild hypotheses about what [the programmer] was really thinking", he was suggesting a reinterpretation.
"[Programmer] I have a hard time classifying it as another place. Its just a matter of being hyperfocused on a task. I'm not going anywhere, I'm just performing really well and you get lost in it."
[Mr. Katz] But to me, that is another place, one never experienced by the vast majority of people, and cyberspace is, increasingly a different reality, a virtual one, as the Matrix suggested."
He said, "But for me." To paraphrase, "For me, this is how I view it." He did not say "I think what this person really meant was..." He meant, "I disagree with this person's perception. If I were in his shoes, I would think of it this way. Seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate way of carrying on a conversation; Jon Katz's argument stands as valid.
Thirdly, states of mind (and this seems to be much of Mr. Katz's point about VR/Cyberspace, etc., as well as being a frequent theme of discourse on such topics) may be perceived as places.
More and more, I come to believe that our minds are powerful enough to create things we've yet to imagine, that we create our own realities, that our thoughts can control and influence reality far more than we imagine. Therefore, "the Zone" and "cyberspace" both, by virtue of their connection with the mind, may be considered "places" in their own right.
It seems to me the point that people are generally driving toward, but never seem to quite hit, is this:
There are major flaws within the American educational institution (note that word well) that are not being addressed. Low teacher pay, poor quality of teaching, low standards and expectations, lack of funding, even a cultural lack of respect for all things intellectual, and a cult of vapidity that worships celebrity and beauty. Addressing these problems would lead to places of education where the Trenchcoat Mafia would be transformed into the President of Student Council. (In my wildest dreams, whatever.:/) Or at least places where these teens could live a semblance of a normal, happy life.
If you don't live a happy childhood, how can you expect to live a happy adulthood? The baggage we form in these years creates assumptions, attitudes, and memories that haunt us for the rest of our lives. It's not physical starvation, true. It's emotional. And that, on some level, is every bit as painful and worthy of compassion and relief.
Children are suffering. Regardless of whether their pain is equal to that of a starving Ethiopian child, think of this: They're still so young. Can you really expect them to have a "sense of perspective" at such a tender age, in such conditions? Can you, in the face of such massive cultural dysfunctions as anorexia, prom night hysteria, oversexualization, and Ally McBeal? I don't think the reality our teens ingest is really indicative of the reality adults live.
Or perhaps it is -- which would be truly frightening indeed.
Slashdot Mirror
So, if we view the brain as a hard drive, how about processors? Does this mean:
:)
Einstein was the biological equivalent of a Cray?
Inherently cooler people run k7s, and the feds all have PIIIs?
Dumb people have the old Celerons?
Siamese twins = dual processors?
People who take smart drugs = overclockers?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I agree that our society is far too puritanical about sex -- all the while being strangely obsessed with it.
9 -06/15/150l-061599-idx.html
The real problem, though, is that the Internet is becoming a mirror of our social reality. Just as it was a place of trust and social goodwill in the 60s, as its techno-hippi e creators intended it to be, less-than-desirable elements of our society have seeped in simply because they have a right to a presence on the Net. Bigots, the religiously intolerant, sexual predators, Multi-Level-Marketers -- all have a place now on the web. The true issue behind the drive to control internet content is the government's need to control the representation of reality. Congressmen fancy that a world without pornography or anything remotely offensive would be a better world, "better for us". They misguidedly choose to treat us like children by installing the metaphorical equivalent of those annoying little spring-leashes that parents cuff on their children's wrists, forgetting that they are our representatives, not our masters. But at heart, what they are attempting is the suppression of undesirable elements of society, and to hopefully put those elements at a disadvantage in the real world. As the Internet becomes more and more a part of everyday lives, those businesses, sexually-oriented or no, and those facets of society who are denied access to a voice on the web will be that much closer to being totally eliminated from any participation in this "democracy". This is why the disparity in Net access according to socioeconomic group is so important and disturbing -- when the homeless and welfare mothers can't get online, it's much easier to ignore them, isn't it?
In case the article link doesn't come through, here is the URL (Also linked off of yesterday's Hacker News Network to the Washington Post):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/199
Oh, please. Where's your sense of fun? Computers are work tools for many people, yes, but I know people who take pride in their machines as virtually sprouted appendages of themselves. If you're into the most intense graphics, the fastest machine, the best of everything just because you think it's cool -- and there's nothing wrong with that, I love my machine simply as a prime source of recreation -- then why not make it look badass as well? I've contemplated various finishes for my box, anything from an iridescent coating to leopard spots. My boyfriend just painted his box a sort of blue-stone texture, and while I haven't seen it yet, it looks sweet from all reports.
Aesthetics, to me personally, are important. It's not enough for it to work well; if I'm going to stare at it 12+ hours a day, if it's going to cost upwards of $1,000, it had better be eyecandy too.
The problem with the intel cases, of course, is that they're lame and ugly. Personally, I'm embarrassed for the poor people in the stupid jumpsuits. Is there really no way they can be more useful to society? The photos don't work well as ads, either, because quite frankly I can't see much of the cases at all. Definitely the road to go for case customization is the do-it-yourself route.
A more appropriate question: Where does the money go?
:)
Considering how time- and effort-intensive such an effort would be, and how much time it would take, it could easily take several months. It would take longer if you revised it along the way to keep pace with new/future GNOME versions. All told, the effort from start to publish could easily take a year. $20,000 is not that hefty for an annual salary, *especially* if you're supporting others besides yourself. If you have a job on the side, that's better and more secure, but it slows your production and you don't have much of a life worth speaking of.
A GNOME manual would be well worth having. As for your donations -- where else would you prefer they go? Especially since you will be able to procure the documentation for free? Also, a donation implies money given in free will, no strings attached -- you didn't give your donation with a legal clause attached specifying that it was not to be used to support documentation projects.
As someone who hopes to someday be a novelist --
Don't ever underestimate the monetary value of a writer's work.
First of all, I think people, in general, on this particular forum topic so far have been much too sensitive about Jon's perceived litmus testing of them as geeks or not-geeks. He used the phrase "likely" not "is". He made generalizations in order to get to the broader point. Personally, as a geek, I somewhat resent that you take the liberty of saying "geeks don't like you [Jon]." I like him just fine; I find his articles to be thought-provoking, well-written, and insightful. Therefore, you made an incorrect assumption and sweeping generalization of your own.
Secondly, "place" may be broadly defined. Jon wasn't "making up wild hypotheses about what [the programmer] was really thinking", he was suggesting a reinterpretation.
He said, "But for me." To paraphrase, "For me, this is how I view it." He did not say "I think what this person really meant was..." He meant, "I disagree with this person's perception. If I were in his shoes, I would think of it this way. Seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate way of carrying on a conversation; Jon Katz's argument stands as valid.
Thirdly, states of mind (and this seems to be much of Mr. Katz's point about VR/Cyberspace, etc., as well as being a frequent theme of discourse on such topics) may be perceived as places.
More and more, I come to believe that our minds are powerful enough to create things we've yet to imagine, that we create our own realities, that our thoughts can control and influence reality far more than we imagine. Therefore, "the Zone" and "cyberspace" both, by virtue of their connection with the mind, may be considered "places" in their own right.
There are major flaws within the American educational institution (note that word well) that are not being addressed. Low teacher pay, poor quality of teaching, low standards and expectations, lack of funding, even a cultural lack of respect for all things intellectual, and a cult of vapidity that worships celebrity and beauty. Addressing these problems would lead to places of education where the Trenchcoat Mafia would be transformed into the President of Student Council. (In my wildest dreams, whatever.
If you don't live a happy childhood, how can you expect to live a happy adulthood? The baggage we form in these years creates assumptions, attitudes, and memories that haunt us for the rest of our lives. It's not physical starvation, true.
It's emotional. And that, on some level, is every bit as painful and worthy of compassion and relief.
Children are suffering. Regardless of whether their pain is equal to that of a starving Ethiopian child, think of this: They're still so young. Can you really expect them to have a "sense of perspective" at such a tender age, in such conditions? Can you, in the face of such massive cultural dysfunctions as anorexia, prom night hysteria, oversexualization, and Ally McBeal? I don't think the reality our teens ingest is really indicative of the reality adults live.
Or perhaps it is -- which would be truly frightening indeed.