On April 25, All Things Considered on NPR did a five-minute story on this new Science article. Highly recommended, gives some good background not only on how this theory fits better with some of the current data that we are collecting, but also talks about how difficult it is for a new theory to gain acceptance in the scientific community when it flies in the face of a long-established theory.
I think that changing the business model has to be an answer. Please point out to these people that no matter what they do to try to legislate technology, there are always going to be ways to get around said technology with technology. Someone else has already pointed out that you can simply use secure encryption to hide from the feds, and people will always be able to "roll their own" computers.
The RIAA and their cronies have to get on board with the new technologies, and not fight against them as strongly as they do. Sure, there are always going to be some slashdotters and the like who insist on getting everything for free because of strongly-held beliefs that all data should be free (like beer) and that intellectual property is all a bunch of BS. However, 98% of America would prefer to use a legal, low-cost alternative to Grokster and Kazza than to have a bunch of illegal MP3's sitting on their hard drive.
If they'll help to create the mechanism by which I, for $1 each, can download tracks from any label from the Internet, I promise you, my copy of Kazaa Lite is going right in the virtual trash bin.
I consider SETI@Home to be one of the most inspirational projects ever attempted by our generation. Really, it's my equivalent of the moon shot (which happened two years before I was born).
I don't get misty-eyed very easily, but when I think about the films of JFK's inspirational speech... well, I hope the Kleenex is handy.
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade, and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard."
Who cares if this ever produces real results or not? It doesn't matter. It's the search that is important. Human beings striving for something new, working hard to discover whether they are truly not alone in the universe. I consider that to be an outstanding effort and achievement, even if we never find ET. I am proud to donate my computer's spare CPU cycles to such a noble effort.
God, that sounds so cheesy to go back and read it. But there it is. There's not much in the world today I get to feel good about. SETI@Home is definitely one of them.
Student works, documentaries and pariodies, huh? OK.
Why I hope someone submits the complete Episode I in this contest:
1) It's a great documentary about filmmakers after they lose their talent and get greedy.
2) It'a a terrific parody of the Star Wars series. If a student filmmaker had made this, Jar Jar Binks would have been hysterical, not insulting.
3) The quality of directing was that of a student parody. After all, no one's done those cheesy side-to-side wipe-away scene changes since... well, since Star Wars.
4) The acting was so bad, it was obvious that the actors weren't being paid anything. Not to mention I'm sure Anakin was the casting agent's grandkid or something.
5) You walked out of the theater thinking, "Man, that sucked, but the guy's got potential. Maybe someone will give him a chance someday."
Fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. All of the Libertarian posts on this side-thread are modded up to 2. All the Socialists posts are modded down to 0. A wonderful way to make sure that opposing viewpoints are squelched, eh?
Define lose? You value something he doesn't, and vice versa. It's not a win/lose proposition, it's colliding value systems, and it really can't be turned into an argument. A Libertarian (I assume like you, pardon if the assumption is incorrect) values individual freedom and corporate economic independence; a Socialist (like me) values strong government oversight because we value making sure the under-served (the people who corporations lose money serving) are still served.
This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals."
Isn't keeping car thieves off the street "protecting the law-abiding" by making sure my car isn't stolen? So often, the police are accused of being reactive rather than proactive, i.e. "We caught the murderer but the victim is still dead." My favorite thing about honeypots like this is that they get the criminal before they have a chance to steal my car. It will also have the further effect of reducing the number of people who are willing to try to steal cars, as "this might be a cop car!"
And there are many paintings from the [Middle Ages] of nude women who were most likely under 18 when they posed for the painting. So would all this centuries old art have to be destroyed if the law would have been upheld.
Oh, that's just classic. What a great way to eliminate all child pornography. All we really need to do is submit all of those paintings to the Patent Office, under the rubric of "prior art". That way, we can claim that they patented child pornography in the Middle Ages, and anyone producing it today is in violation of our patent.
> Whenever I go in and purchase stuff, I demand that I have the rebate price without a card...
And *why* do you think you have a right to do this? Kroger has clearly established a trade: You let us collect personal information on you, we'll give you cheaper prices on milk. You don't let us do it, you pay the higher price on milk. Kroger has every right to do this, just as you have every right to refuse, but why should you expect the cheaper price if you're not willing to meet their conditions?
NYT registration, same deal. You don't pay a damn cent for their story. They offering you a service. They have a right to something in return for that. If you don't like giving them what they ask for, don't read the story. But don't just sit there and compain that they actually want to make money at their business! Online can't continue to be a loss-leader for the brick-and-mortar stuff, when the brick-and-mortar side of the house keeps shrinking every month.
Slashdot Mirror
... I can tech my Aibo to stop piddling on the rug and start using the newspaper. Man, this reality-in-pet-robots has got to stop somewhere...
On April 25, All Things Considered on NPR did a five-minute story on this new Science article. Highly recommended, gives some good background not only on how this theory fits better with some of the current data that we are collecting, but also talks about how difficult it is for a new theory to gain acceptance in the scientific community when it flies in the face of a long-established theory.
The RIAA and their cronies have to get on board with the new technologies, and not fight against them as strongly as they do. Sure, there are always going to be some slashdotters and the like who insist on getting everything for free because of strongly-held beliefs that all data should be free (like beer) and that intellectual property is all a bunch of BS. However, 98% of America would prefer to use a legal, low-cost alternative to Grokster and Kazza than to have a bunch of illegal MP3's sitting on their hard drive.
If they'll help to create the mechanism by which I, for $1 each, can download tracks from any label from the Internet, I promise you, my copy of Kazaa Lite is going right in the virtual trash bin.
http://www.msnbc.com/c/0/77/999/ssMain.asp?fmt=Chi ld&0ss=N%r0077999
It's going pretty fast still, and MSNBC did a serious upgrade for the Olympics, so I doubt it will get Slashdotted.
You know it's just the first step, next there'll be...
Solar Surfboards ("Dude, killer photon streams today!")..,
Solar Beach Parties ("Hey, wicked tan in only 2 seconds!")...
and of course, the ultimate insult, Solar Jet Skis (but at least you can't hear the noise from the engine).
I consider SETI@Home to be one of the most inspirational projects ever attempted by our generation. Really, it's my equivalent of the moon shot (which happened two years before I was born).
I don't get misty-eyed very easily, but when I think about the films of JFK's inspirational speech... well, I hope the Kleenex is handy.
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade, and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard."
Who cares if this ever produces real results or not? It doesn't matter. It's the search that is important. Human beings striving for something new, working hard to discover whether they are truly not alone in the universe. I consider that to be an outstanding effort and achievement, even if we never find ET. I am proud to donate my computer's spare CPU cycles to such a noble effort.
God, that sounds so cheesy to go back and read it. But there it is. There's not much in the world today I get to feel good about. SETI@Home is definitely one of them.
Why I hope someone submits the complete Episode I in this contest:
1) It's a great documentary about filmmakers after they lose their talent and get greedy.
2) It'a a terrific parody of the Star Wars series. If a student filmmaker had made this, Jar Jar Binks would have been hysterical, not insulting.
3) The quality of directing was that of a student parody. After all, no one's done those cheesy side-to-side wipe-away scene changes since... well, since Star Wars.
4) The acting was so bad, it was obvious that the actors weren't being paid anything. Not to mention I'm sure Anakin was the casting agent's grandkid or something.
5) You walked out of the theater thinking, "Man, that sucked, but the guy's got potential. Maybe someone will give him a chance someday."
This is why I'm a programmer, not a reporter. Compilers check your mistakes!
NoClassDefFoundError: "John Kurzweil" not found (did you mean "Ray Kurzweil"?)
They'll pry this joystick out of my cold, dead hands!
Fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. All of the Libertarian posts on this side-thread are modded up to 2. All the Socialists posts are modded down to 0. A wonderful way to make sure that opposing viewpoints are squelched, eh?
Define lose? You value something he doesn't, and vice versa. It's not a win/lose proposition, it's colliding value systems, and it really can't be turned into an argument. A Libertarian (I assume like you, pardon if the assumption is incorrect) values individual freedom and corporate economic independence; a Socialist (like me) values strong government oversight because we value making sure the under-served (the people who corporations lose money serving) are still served.
Isn't keeping car thieves off the street "protecting the law-abiding" by making sure my car isn't stolen? So often, the police are accused of being reactive rather than proactive, i.e. "We caught the murderer but the victim is still dead." My favorite thing about honeypots like this is that they get the criminal before they have a chance to steal my car. It will also have the further effect of reducing the number of people who are willing to try to steal cars, as "this might be a cop car!"
Oh, that's just classic. What a great way to eliminate all child pornography. All we really need to do is submit all of those paintings to the Patent Office, under the rubric of "prior art". That way, we can claim that they patented child pornography in the Middle Ages, and anyone producing it today is in violation of our patent.
> Whenever I go in and purchase stuff, I demand that I have the rebate price without a card... And *why* do you think you have a right to do this? Kroger has clearly established a trade: You let us collect personal information on you, we'll give you cheaper prices on milk. You don't let us do it, you pay the higher price on milk. Kroger has every right to do this, just as you have every right to refuse, but why should you expect the cheaper price if you're not willing to meet their conditions? NYT registration, same deal. You don't pay a damn cent for their story. They offering you a service. They have a right to something in return for that. If you don't like giving them what they ask for, don't read the story. But don't just sit there and compain that they actually want to make money at their business! Online can't continue to be a loss-leader for the brick-and-mortar stuff, when the brick-and-mortar side of the house keeps shrinking every month.