Anything that requires a steady reliable internet connection is not going to work, at least not the way things are now.
well. google provides service based software. so software that works like that can be workable services. Not much else. what's the big deal? Oh, "OS" ? they keep using that word...
Is this use of technology disgusting? I think so. So are assault rifles and hand grenades, in my opinion. But this does not make them immoral in the context in which they are meant to be used.
Landmines do not have a human moral compass to guide them in their actions. They exist outside of morality. Contrast this with a suicide bomber, who has decided very clearly that there is little difference between military and civilian casualties, except that civilian casualties might be more beneficial to their cause (in creating terror). At the very least, the suicide bomber distinguishes between enemy and friend. Mines make no such distinctions. Therefore, I have to conclude that mines are worse than suicide bombers. But also, for a human who is subject to moral boundaries to deploy an amoral technology is clearly immoral, because although the device acts alone, the fact that the device acts at all is due to the fact of its deployment.
If the distraction originates from merely having a conversation, what is the difference between talking on a cell phone and talking to the person next to you?
I know that for me there is not much difference - they're equally bad for my driving. Now on the other hand listening to really loud good music actually has a focusing effect and makes me a better driver.
You are suggesting that in 2006 (or, let's say, 2009) you would actually bear arms against the government of the united states? You think that you are keeping the government in check with your guns? This is not 1775. I can't imagine a scenario in which that could possibly work. What, do you have an inside line to the army? Are you going to parachute into the capital? Take over the government in a coup and set up democracy again?
Doing do has allowed our system of government to withstand a century of determined effort to overthrow it by Socialism.
There is no such determined effort; and even if there was, your solution - to prepare for violence against your ideological enemies - is nothing but disaster. One sometimes gets the sense that survivalists and gun lovers actually want these bad scenarios to come so that they get a real chance to play with their toys, and finally get some respect from everyone else who think they are totally fricking crazy.
I'll let the government take my right to own a gun when we go to the japanese system: No military, and a police-force using bicycles and bobby-sticks.
I think it is a good goal. It's all about implementation though, and it would take a very long time to make the transition. That is why I don't advocate gun confiscation. My tax proposal, as full of holes and as absurd as it is, is clearly a pro-liberty, pro-freedom approach - it's just that, as we are fond of saying, freedom isn't free. You want to pursue a hobby that is meant to kill people, and yet, somehow and totally by accident actually does the job quite often? Then IMHO it is the collective responsibility of gun owners to figure out how to reduce the side effects and keep guns out of the hands of the irresponsible. I say it again: gun owners need to be collectively responsible. One way to measure responsibility in our society is in dollars.
but guns as objects are not the point - safe use and (especially parental) responsibility are complex; an "object-specific tax" seems like an inevitably intrusive, tyrannical answer, which is why examples like the above make sense to me. How to assess the tax on... floor wax? Table saws? Kitchen implements?
Well why not make RPGs legal to own by private citizens, as well? (assuming, of course, they aren't) Why not anti-aircraft missile batteries on your roof? Are there draconian neighborhood zoning laws against sandbagged foxholes and tripwire fields? Why isn't it legal to lay mines in the perimiter of your own, private yard? They're for defense only right? Like your mac-10. Who has ever been assaulted with a mine? Where do these fascist restrictions end?;-)
I think it is safe to say that owning RPGs is a bad idea because they might actually be used. I say the same thing about guns.
Now, I think the tax idea is full of holes. But on the other hand we apply such taxes to things that hurt society, for instance alcohol and tobacco, gambling etc. I don't think you can argue that swimming pools and cars hurt society more than their absence would help society even though they are dangerous.
Bull. That is like saying everyone who drives is responsible for drunk drivers killing people, or that the library is responsible for weapons of mass destruction because they have chemistry books. A gun is a TOOL. Like every tool it has valid uses and invalid ones.
There is no equivalences to be found among those things. It's absurd to compare them.
As for your comment about a culture of violence, get a grip and check out the REAL world. Violence will not disappear if private citizens lose their guns. The Hutus were very effective using machetes. The Nazis and the Soviets both killed millions.
I suggested that gun violence would. It's about the guns. We're talking about guns. Not machetes or icepicks, wood chippers, or religious nationalism. Your invocation of the Hutus, Nazis and Soviets is idiotic FUD in the context of gun violence in America (about which I'm assuming we're talking). Unless of course you know something I don't about the future of Christian Nationalism, socialism, or fascism here.
And of course the mac-10 you keep under your pillow isn't going to protect you from any of those anyway; only education, fighting poverty, transparency in government, and - my god - progressive liberalism will.
for your cabinet full of target shooting and hunting guns. And anything that reduces the number of bullets fired is fine with me, in general, of course. It sounds like for your defensive weapon you'd have to practice enough that entering the passcode would be second nature. better to have more practice handling your gun than less.
But I have a simpler, safer solution: lose your gun altogether. I think every time a kid is killed by a stray bullet we raise a tax on guns and gun owners. You can get all of that money back with interest if you get rid of your gun. Eventually gun owners will see that it is in their own best interest to work together to make guns safer and out of the hands of kids and the irresponsible. Everyone who owns a gun is partly responsible for the culture of guns and violence. I'm looking at you, libertarians.
Too right. If NASA + contractors can't build something that works reliably aand cost effectively then why should they be protected? Let market forces dominate and offshore the whole lot!
They should be protected when they are doing what they exist for doing - air and space stuff that is in the national interest. That's a pretty gray area, but capitalists are far too short term focused to do much of it, for better or worse. If market forces had dominated, we would never have been in space at all. Billions and billions of dollars and 50 years of development up front with no clear path to making money? sign me up.
Amen! Parents/schools/camps/etc. want a scapegoat, something they can blame for their incompetence. MySpace is the perfect thing to blame: it's new, it's different,
Parents don't want someone to blame for problems, they want to prevent problems. It doesn't matter who is to blame when your daughter turns up dead, because blame won't bring her back. Parents know there are fucked up people in the world, and the last thing we want to do is fuel their fantasies. but at the same time we don't want our children to be turned into suspicious, world-weary cynics.
I guess I just wish people would spend less time attacking MySpace and more time teaching kids how to be safe and smart online.
It's an ongoing problem. Communication and empathy is a lot of work.
I can't wait until they start mining all that green cheese.
I have seen cheese that looks like moon rocks in my refrigerator. Maybe it would be better if I alternated moving it between the oven and the freezer every 14.75 earth days...
It's about control. studios don't know whether apple will destroy them or not. They can't stand losing control over their stuff. they had enormous power over distribution in the old days, stores and radio. everything that happens online is a loss of control.
Dump the OS. It's inevitable anyway. We're all going to use a Linux derivative or standard/open OS some day, so now's the chance to turn Windows into a window manager / application environment like KDE or Gnome. Or Aero analogous to Cocoa/Aqua with an open underlying OS. They can continue to waste money on a proprietary OS or jump on the train. People are already getting used to the idea that a computer can run windows and the mac OS and windows as an OS has no special advantages - only restrictions. why fight it?
Bill Gates knows this, and he knows he's a product of the early days of the PC / OS wars. He knows he can't transition to the new era, unlike Jobs who has the iPod and loves to make a product. Bill has chosen the perfect time to exit stage left and he has something else he cares about - the gates foundation.
Whatever they do, it's got to be a dramatic step that shows they are in control and have a vision. Apple switching to os X then going Intel showed that they have long term strategic thought. and it's clear that MS has just been coasting on their own past success.
Opportunity is complex. We're not a bunch of individuals, we're members of different overlapping social groups. We need peer acceptance. If none of our groups include anything having to do with science, we won't or can't consider it. In other words, we don't have the opportunity. Very few people strike out on their own; nobody is self-made. Everyone needs a support network. It takes a village to raise a child, etc. Reaching out across the gap like this is a good thing, it creates this opportunity that the individual may not have realized or for whatever reason did not understand was there in the first place.
For geeks to catcall and harp on genetics etc does nothing but reinforce social divisions, keeping talent away. I don't know what I'd be doing if I didn't have the opportunity to learn programming. I'm sure there are more than a few awesomely talented women who would really thrive here.
That's a rational approach. Decice Bush is wrong then try to figure out what he's saying.
Transparency and oversight is against their ideology. The case is closed on this point, it is not up for debate. Therefore, any impression of it is automatically suspect.
Republicans eliminated the independent Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the late 90s. It was absorbed into the state department as the Bureau of Arms Control. Then it was closed last summer. Republicans like the nukes. they want to build more any chance they get. They don't like oversight, and "independent", as you may well know, means "anti-republican" in their world view. if you're not for us, you're against us.
If they retire their old weapons and build new ones, isn't that reducing their armaments? If I get rid of a dozen old guns and buy a single new rifle, am I not reducing the number of weapons I have?
Yeah, that sounds so simple, obvious, transparent and logical. And therefore, it must be wrong; these are not exactly characteristics of this administration. Just sayin'.
yeah, that and others are decent interim solutions, but CSS 3.0 brings it for real, and designers will be able to rely on common and complete CSS 3.0 support as soon as maybe 2012 (shed a tear). Though we have -moz-border-radius in mozilla browsers.
Toll lanes on the information superhighway... wow... the big problem here is that the people who shape and pass these bills actually use terms like "information superhighway".
They're not talking about information driving along on the broadband highway. They're making an analogy to the construction of the highway system as a public good. It's a perfect analogy as far as analogies go. Do you want wal-mart or comcast to own the roads you drive on? Do you want to have to pay a special fee if you wish to drive to Target instead of Wal-Mart when Wal-Mart owns the road? You cannot own the road, you cannot use a toll or control of a road to shut out competition, and you cannot get special access or priorities on the road based on your market capitalization. The net should be the same way.
The point (unstated) being simply that physically the imac is set up for use at a desk, being up more at eye level, real mouse, real keyboard etc., without portable power design constraints. But it's also quite luggable. If you're doing video or 3d rendering you could even take 2, 4, or even 6 core duo minis and one lcd.
Slashdot Mirror
You are suggesting that in 2006 (or, let's say, 2009) you would actually bear arms against the government of the united states? You think that you are keeping the government in check with your guns? This is not 1775. I can't imagine a scenario in which that could possibly work. What, do you have an inside line to the army? Are you going to parachute into the capital? Take over the government in a coup and set up democracy again?
There is no such determined effort; and even if there was, your solution - to prepare for violence against your ideological enemies - is nothing but disaster. One sometimes gets the sense that survivalists and gun lovers actually want these bad scenarios to come so that they get a real chance to play with their toys, and finally get some respect from everyone else who think they are totally fricking crazy.
I think it is a good goal. It's all about implementation though, and it would take a very long time to make the transition. That is why I don't advocate gun confiscation. My tax proposal, as full of holes and as absurd as it is, is clearly a pro-liberty, pro-freedom approach - it's just that, as we are fond of saying, freedom isn't free. You want to pursue a hobby that is meant to kill people, and yet, somehow and totally by accident actually does the job quite often? Then IMHO it is the collective responsibility of gun owners to figure out how to reduce the side effects and keep guns out of the hands of the irresponsible. I say it again: gun owners need to be collectively responsible. One way to measure responsibility in our society is in dollars.
Well why not make RPGs legal to own by private citizens, as well? (assuming, of course, they aren't) Why not anti-aircraft missile batteries on your roof? Are there draconian neighborhood zoning laws against sandbagged foxholes and tripwire fields? Why isn't it legal to lay mines in the perimiter of your own, private yard? They're for defense only right? Like your mac-10. Who has ever been assaulted with a mine? Where do these fascist restrictions end? ;-)
I think it is safe to say that owning RPGs is a bad idea because they might actually be used. I say the same thing about guns.
Now, I think the tax idea is full of holes. But on the other hand we apply such taxes to things that hurt society, for instance alcohol and tobacco, gambling etc. I don't think you can argue that swimming pools and cars hurt society more than their absence would help society even though they are dangerous.
There is no equivalences to be found among those things. It's absurd to compare them.
I suggested that gun violence would. It's about the guns. We're talking about guns. Not machetes or icepicks, wood chippers, or religious nationalism. Your invocation of the Hutus, Nazis and Soviets is idiotic FUD in the context of gun violence in America (about which I'm assuming we're talking). Unless of course you know something I don't about the future of Christian Nationalism, socialism, or fascism here.
And of course the mac-10 you keep under your pillow isn't going to protect you from any of those anyway; only education, fighting poverty, transparency in government, and - my god - progressive liberalism will.
I do not think society would be better without cars, bats, knives, crowbars, croquet mallets, anvils, etc.
But I do think society would be better without guns. A problem of implementation. I acknowledge this silly tax idea is full of holes. Food for thought
for your cabinet full of target shooting and hunting guns. And anything that reduces the number of bullets fired is fine with me, in general, of course. It sounds like for your defensive weapon you'd have to practice enough that entering the passcode would be second nature. better to have more practice handling your gun than less.
But I have a simpler, safer solution: lose your gun altogether. I think every time a kid is killed by a stray bullet we raise a tax on guns and gun owners. You can get all of that money back with interest if you get rid of your gun. Eventually gun owners will see that it is in their own best interest to work together to make guns safer and out of the hands of kids and the irresponsible. Everyone who owns a gun is partly responsible for the culture of guns and violence. I'm looking at you, libertarians.
I talk about that on the internet all the time.
Parents don't want someone to blame for problems, they want to prevent problems. It doesn't matter who is to blame when your daughter turns up dead, because blame won't bring her back. Parents know there are fucked up people in the world, and the last thing we want to do is fuel their fantasies. but at the same time we don't want our children to be turned into suspicious, world-weary cynics.
It's an ongoing problem. Communication and empathy is a lot of work.
I have seen cheese that looks like moon rocks in my refrigerator. Maybe it would be better if I alternated moving it between the oven and the freezer every 14.75 earth days...
It's about control. studios don't know whether apple will destroy them or not. They can't stand losing control over their stuff. they had enormous power over distribution in the old days, stores and radio. everything that happens online is a loss of control.
Dump the OS. It's inevitable anyway. We're all going to use a Linux derivative or standard/open OS some day, so now's the chance to turn Windows into a window manager / application environment like KDE or Gnome. Or Aero analogous to Cocoa/Aqua with an open underlying OS. They can continue to waste money on a proprietary OS or jump on the train. People are already getting used to the idea that a computer can run windows and the mac OS and windows as an OS has no special advantages - only restrictions. why fight it?
Bill Gates knows this, and he knows he's a product of the early days of the PC / OS wars. He knows he can't transition to the new era, unlike Jobs who has the iPod and loves to make a product. Bill has chosen the perfect time to exit stage left and he has something else he cares about - the gates foundation.
Whatever they do, it's got to be a dramatic step that shows they are in control and have a vision. Apple switching to os X then going Intel showed that they have long term strategic thought. and it's clear that MS has just been coasting on their own past success.
Opportunity is complex. We're not a bunch of individuals, we're members of different overlapping social groups. We need peer acceptance. If none of our groups include anything having to do with science, we won't or can't consider it. In other words, we don't have the opportunity. Very few people strike out on their own; nobody is self-made. Everyone needs a support network. It takes a village to raise a child, etc. Reaching out across the gap like this is a good thing, it creates this opportunity that the individual may not have realized or for whatever reason did not understand was there in the first place.
For geeks to catcall and harp on genetics etc does nothing but reinforce social divisions, keeping talent away. I don't know what I'd be doing if I didn't have the opportunity to learn programming. I'm sure there are more than a few awesomely talented women who would really thrive here.
Transparency and oversight is against their ideology. The case is closed on this point, it is not up for debate. Therefore, any impression of it is automatically suspect.
Republicans eliminated the independent Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the late 90s. It was absorbed into the state department as the Bureau of Arms Control. Then it was closed last summer. Republicans like the nukes. they want to build more any chance they get. They don't like oversight, and "independent", as you may well know, means "anti-republican" in their world view. if you're not for us, you're against us.
Bad examples are still helpful. No examples are worse.
spherical paper made in space!
yeah, that and others are decent interim solutions, but CSS 3.0 brings it for real, and designers will be able to rely on common and complete CSS 3.0 support as soon as maybe 2012 (shed a tear). Though we have -moz-border-radius in mozilla browsers.
and the long wait for CSS 3.0.
The point (unstated) being simply that physically the imac is set up for use at a desk, being up more at eye level, real mouse, real keyboard etc., without portable power design constraints. But it's also quite luggable. If you're doing video or 3d rendering you could even take 2, 4, or even 6 core duo minis and one lcd.