I don't understand the meaning of this guy's statements and so I can't even say yet if they're wrong or right.
Operating systems are irrelevant to WHAT? If he were to say the ability for 3d documents to display on the screen, I would disagree.
Or perhaps he would rather qualify, and say only the interrupt-handling section of an OS is irrelevant to disk transfers. I would diagree in this case as well.
So I won't criticize until he makes a meaningful statement.
Why does everyone quote Stallan? He's a hothead who would rather quibble than write code. The best thing would be to ignore this man. I think free software under the GPL license is a good idea and has many proper applications, but why do we care about Stallman's latest petty outburst?
Admire people not for their big mouths, but for their merits.
The reason it in inside is it is then part of the list that is denoted by the parentheses, and can be more easily manipulated by a another scheme procedure reflectively. Reflection is the property that code can examine and change code at its same level of abstraction and run it. I saw an example where you could pass an expression like
(+ 2 (* x (/ x 3))) into a "derivative" method, which would examine that expression, MODIFY it, and return a completely valid new scheme method that was the actual mathematical derivative.
Very cool. The reason it could easily do this recursively is that the operators were bould with the arguments inside the same list.
What's so wrong about people looking at porn? Is there something about our bodily functions that some people haven't yet adjusted to?
I'm kind of curious why reproduction in particular was chosen to be the dirty function. Why not digestion or respiration? Maybe we should start filtering those "dirty" pictures that show people eating!
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Property and the restraint of physical force are concepts invented by what we call civilized man. You may have heard the term "civilized," and you may not but it's generally agreed that behaving like apes with big sticks is not the most comfortable way to live.
Was your post merely meant to troll? Seriously, do you want to be able to make beneficial peaceful trades with others, or spend your time adding a moat and yet another machinegun to the measly hut which you were too busy to build properly because you were defending the produce of your garden from the daily mob?
Property may be a fiction, but it's a game of pretend that I really want to keep playing!
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
"What high school excells at is helping kids grow socially. Believe it or not, this world isnt usually about how smart you are. It is about who you know and how personable you are. People who do not purposely alienate themselves in high school have very good opportunities to build people skills that they will use later in life. You rarely get that if you are home schooled."
I think that "socialization" in public school must refer to becoming accustomed to socialistic practices, because it simply can't refer to getting along better with people.:) Think about it: in school you're stuck in a weird environment where people of very close age groups are forced together in crowds everyday, very much unlike the real world where you will meet people of all walks of life and all ages. People in school develop a pack mentality: eager to lash out and criticize and put down, afraid of becoming the next target. Being homeschooled myself, I'm shocked by the hostility and insecurity that I see in packs of publicly schooled kids.
Not only does public school distort peer relationships, turning kids into unfriendly, hostile wolves, it undermines kids' self-esteem and personal integrity. Kids are not treated like humans with constitutional rights, they are treated like prisoners. In this dreamworld, teachers are your complete authority. You get no trial, instead you can get slapped with detentions simply by being condemned. And these detentions aren't geared towards making amends for your wrongs, they are meant 100% to degrade you and make you submit to the will of Authority. You scrub toilets, or write self-incriminating sentences 1000 times on a blackboard. Even during a day when you haven't angered the powers that be, you must still ask permission to go to the bathroom and optionally get a slip of paper authorizing you to walk there! How can you learn to respect others if you're taught not to respect yourself?
Besides all this, public schools suppress individuality. Wear the wrong clothes you get picked on. I remember when I was going to a private school people would stop me just to jeer, "Nice shooooes, Joe! Hahaha!" I must not have been wearing brand X. Clearly school doesn't prepare kids for critically assessing advertising. But I digress (it's so easy with all public schooling's faults to shoot down). School supresses individuality. There's no such thing as majoring in a subject because you get to learn exactly what everyone else does. When my brother's publically schooled friend heard that I somehow enjoy programming in my spare time, he looked at me like I was some sort of freak. I'm proud of it. Simply because I spent my free time in an intellectual activity I instantly lost "cool."
As a parting note, let me remind you that nowhere else in civilized countries do children regularily shoot people than in the wonderful social haven known as public school.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
"Freenet is a peer-to-peer network designed to allow the distribution of information over the Internet in an efficient manner, without fear of censorship. Freenet is completely decentralized, meaning that there is no person, computer, or organisation in control of Freenet or essential to its operation. This means that Freenet cannot be attacked like centralized peer-to-peer systems such as Napster. Freenet also employs intelligent routing and caching meaning that it learns to route requests more efficiently, automatically mirrors popular data, makes network flooding almost impossible, and moves data to where it is in greatest demand. All of this makes it much more efficient and scalable than systems such as Gnutella. To become a part of Freenet all you need is a computer with an Internet connection and the capability to run a Freenet server...."
What are you waiting for? Go download a client!:-)
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
Years ago they probably asked how the poor would get shoes without redistribution of wealth. Shoes used to be a luxury, despite their great usefulness. I imagine that the competition of many private schools would keep prices down.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
As far as I can see, destroying crops is just stupid. I don't know who the wise guy was who had the idea that we can get rich by destroying our production... By "reduce the supply" I meant that it would be reduced by farmers as they moved into the city, not by being destroyed.
Farmers are in no danger of becoming unnecessary! We all need food to live, and they are our suppliers. There is no need to "keep them alive" with subsidies and so forth.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
So the small farmers get some money to get a new start in the cities, and farming is handled by farmers who run larger productions and can work more efficiently. Combine this efficiency with government environmental controls and the low prices caused by the competition of the big fishes and you find that the market is indeed at work.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
Haha! Yeah, the other communications mediums do suck. I was just trying to show the Robin Hood mentality for what it is. I actually think it would become profitable to provide these services to farmers out in the sticks. I go into more detail about that in my post The Invisible Hand @ Work.
As for homeschooling, my parents really don't have much to do with it. I learn from books, not my parents. In many areas I'm more educated than they are. Still, poor people would have to buy the books or go to a library (which is made free by taxation). The answer to education for all (or at least those who care) in the free market was given in one of the chapters of Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. It has articles by many authors. I think it was compiled by Ayn Rand.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
"I think perhaps the pizza delivery metaphor is a bit inappropriate in this case. The original reason for legislation like the rural electrification act is that there is no economic incentive for a utility to serve people in rural areas. The fedral government decided around the great depression that it was important for all americans to have access to basic services, like electricity and telephone access."
The Americans, too, decided that they wanted electricity and telephones. Had they been given a chance, they would have voted with their pocketbooks. Not only that, but I think it would actually become profitable to give these services to them. More on this a little later.
"When the above poster argues that the government should make high speed internet access available cheaply to all he is merely suggesting that in the next several years, access to the internet will become a basic necessity that should be freely available to all. This is quite unlike pizza delivery which I think we would all agree is not necessary for our basic standard of living."
Terms like "basic necessity," and "basic standard of living," only have meaning if one adopts Marx's labor theory of value where everything has an absolute value (measured by the labor that went into its production) in comparison with everything else. Capitalism is founded on the theory of subjective value, where the value of an object lies in the mind of the valuer. I feel that the subjective theory is the only one that makes sense. It makes sense because everyone is different, and has unique values. To a geek, internet access might be crucial to happiness. A redneck would doubtless consider other things "necessities." There are, certainly, some things that everyone really does need, like food, clothing, etc. I don't think internet access is necessary to everyone.
"Finally the person who suggested that rural families should either deal with skyrocketing costs or move "back to civilization" should at least support his arguments a little more. Whether we like it or not, farming is a VITAL part of the american economy.... Suggesting that they should just move back to the cities to get these necessities would have dire consequences to our economy. Is it worth paying an extra $.02 per month on your phone bill so some country bumpkin can have electricity? Or would you rather he moved into the city and brought milk prices up to those comparable with liquor."
Obviously the products that farmers market are in demand. Reduce the supply and you're very right that prices for those products will skyrocket! Lots of this money will go back to the remaining farmers. Now if a whole area is full of rich farmers, it would be very profitable to sell internet service to them at a higher rate, so ISP's would move into the area. In the meantime, other potential farmers would see all the dough that can be made in the industry, so they move to the country and produce. Their production lowers the price of food products. Now the price of foodstuff is back to normal, and ISP's exist in the country. The market at work.
Perhaps I'm wildly ignorant (correction, I know I am), so don't be harsh if I'm way off the mark. It just seems like that is what would happen. Comments, please?
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
"Your ability to participate in the economy and to access public services is not hampered by not having pizza delivery."
Is a pizza joint not part of the economy? As for public services, I don't see what's so fundementally different between a telephone and a pizza. Without a telephone, it's harder to communicate; without food life is impossible. Of course, there are other foods besides pizza to eat, but there are also other means of communication than a phone. Would I rather go without pizza or a phone? Pizza for sure! But the fact that I value phone service more than pizza service doesn't give me the "right" to a phone. The right to a phone simply means the right to force someone else to give it to me, regardless of the cost to them. This would be more obvious if the government just gave me a machinegun and let me do the forcing myself. What makes it harder to see the robbery involved on my behalf is that the machinegun is wielded secondhand for me by the police force, which is what would be used agsinst someone who refuses to pay their taxes and resists punishment. Of course, this Waco situation is only reached by really determined people, but it is always waiting there if we try to resist hard enough.
"Though the situation is a bit different with net access, because the telephone infrastructure is already there. But originaly, it was either subsidize rural areas, or they don't get telephone. The cost was such that it would have been more profitable to ignore them."
I don't see anything out-of-the-ordinary about that. Life involves choices, and we adapt to scarcity as best we can. Life doesn't get any better when the government picks favorites and grants them special privileges.
"I wonder, did you receive a public education? It is effectivly income redistribution. I wonder how you'd feel about income redistribution when the welfare state quadruples in size, because education is no longer available to the poor."
Actually, I was homeschooled.:}
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
"And to the few posts I have read which think that this is some sort of private enterprise success story versus a slow blundering government, it isn't. It is a classic example of business going after the highly profitable bits and leaving the taxpayer to fund the basic research. The same basic research which incidentally made it all possible in the first place."
Business people can tend to be unwise by waving a technological wand before completely realizing the consequences. I doubt, though, that government-controlled science is any wiser since this tendency is present in most people anyway, be they in business or not. The reason that the highly profitable bits are profitable is because they are useful. People don't pay for things that aren't useful in their eyes. The market forces people to work efficiently and go for the most useful aspects of science, which, in the short run are the actual benefits to humanity, and, in the long run are the underlying theoretical structures. A company that invests time in advancing the theoretical will profit later on when its deeper knowledge allows it to outperform all the rest in practicalities that have the potential to help the "here and now" which is the only life we actually live, by definition.
In order to provide an incentive to company research, a company should not be forced to give away its trade secrets away for at least a few years. When other companies see how much the wise business (and its customers!) are profitting, they will scramble to bring their theoretical structure up to date. If other companies haven't come up to date in a few years, the original company will be forced to share its secrets, making a serious checkmate impossible.
Perhaps many people don't like this scenario because they are prejudiced against businesses that have served customers well enough to have been able to grow in capacity to serve -- i.e. "big business." It amazes me that the selfsame people are so much in favor of government which is both bigger and wields actual violent power.
I see the free market approach to science as an efficient way to harness human nature to acheive practical and theoretical progress. For those who feel that business-sponsored science would be a shoddy rush-job, I point out that it will certainly be faster, as shown by the speed of the government-sponsored genome mapping vs that of the free market. Will it be shoddy? It's not in a business's long term interest to do a crappy job. As a closing note I'd like to point out VA and its SourceForge as an example of a company that really knows what's good for it.
Perhaps I'm full of crap, but I bet that what I said has a grain of truth. Please respond and we can talk about it.
-- Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment: find out how the free market does it right.
I agree that a well educated populace is very important for a nation's wealth. The more skill there is, the more, and better, production will be. In the end it's these goods and services that count; you can't eat money. However, I think that a large disparity between incomes would still exist between well-educated citizens because wages are ultimately determined by consumers. Very famous movie stars, singers, and other entertainers would still make piles more than a McDonalds worker. Low-skill, low-paying jobs won't just go away if the average citizen's education is higher because need will still exist for nontechnical services. Someone will still need to "take your order" or scrub floors, or dig ditches. It's possible that some of these tasks could be relegated to machines, but in the forseeable future humans will still have to do them.
Just remember that outside of the digital world: Utility is the basis of value. Scarcity is measure of value. Price is the evidence of value.
Slashdot Mirror
Try _Elements of Set Theory_ by Enderton. The foundations of math are open for anybody to learn. Why settle for some 2nd-hand account?
I don't understand the meaning of this guy's statements and so I can't even say yet if they're wrong or right.
Operating systems are irrelevant to WHAT? If he were to say the ability for 3d documents to display on the screen, I would disagree.
Or perhaps he would rather qualify, and say only the interrupt-handling section of an OS is irrelevant to disk transfers. I would diagree in this case as well.
So I won't criticize until he makes a meaningful statement.
Why does everyone quote Stallan? He's a hothead who would rather quibble than write code. The best thing would be to ignore this man. I think free software under the GPL license is a good idea and has many proper applications, but why do we care about Stallman's latest petty outburst?
Admire people not for their big mouths, but for their merits.
The reason it in inside is it is then part of the list that is denoted by the parentheses, and can be more easily manipulated by a another scheme procedure reflectively. Reflection is the property that code can examine and change code at its same level of abstraction and run it. I saw an example where you could pass an expression like
(+ 2 (* x (/ x 3))) into a "derivative" method, which would examine that expression, MODIFY it, and return a completely valid new scheme method that was the actual mathematical derivative.
Very cool. The reason it could easily do this recursively is that the operators were bould with the arguments inside the same list.
http://upl.cs.wisc.edu
The Undergraduate Programming Lab. Cool little place where this kind of hacking goes on.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
FREAKY! That exact same thing happened to me... It was kind of disturbing trying to sleep and seeing more DOOM.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Oh, of course. I forgot. Those criteria make it evil. My bad.
</sarcasm>
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
What's so wrong about people looking at porn? Is there something about our bodily functions that some people haven't yet adjusted to?
I'm kind of curious why reproduction in particular was chosen to be the dirty function. Why not digestion or respiration? Maybe we should start filtering those "dirty" pictures that show people eating!
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Property and the restraint of physical force are concepts invented by what we call civilized man. You may have heard the term "civilized," and you may not but it's generally agreed that behaving like apes with big sticks is not the most comfortable way to live.
Was your post merely meant to troll? Seriously, do you want to be able to make beneficial peaceful trades with others, or spend your time adding a moat and yet another machinegun to the measly hut which you were too busy to build properly because you were defending the produce of your garden from the daily mob?
Property may be a fiction, but it's a game of pretend that I really want to keep playing!
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
When schooling is taken into the private sector, competition brings all prices down.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Certainly. Another important thing is making them take a piss, since they will die if they don't and all industrial societies need their population.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
I think that "socialization" in public school must refer to becoming accustomed to socialistic practices, because it simply can't refer to getting along better with people. :) Think about it: in school you're stuck in a weird environment where people of very close age groups are forced together in crowds everyday, very much unlike the real world where you will meet people of all walks of life and all ages. People in school develop a pack mentality: eager to lash out and criticize and put down, afraid of becoming the next target. Being homeschooled myself, I'm shocked by the hostility and insecurity that I see in packs of publicly schooled kids.
Not only does public school distort peer relationships, turning kids into unfriendly, hostile wolves, it undermines kids' self-esteem and personal integrity. Kids are not treated like humans with constitutional rights, they are treated like prisoners. In this dreamworld, teachers are your complete authority. You get no trial, instead you can get slapped with detentions simply by being condemned. And these detentions aren't geared towards making amends for your wrongs, they are meant 100% to degrade you and make you submit to the will of Authority. You scrub toilets, or write self-incriminating sentences 1000 times on a blackboard. Even during a day when you haven't angered the powers that be, you must still ask permission to go to the bathroom and optionally get a slip of paper authorizing you to walk there! How can you learn to respect others if you're taught not to respect yourself?
Besides all this, public schools suppress individuality. Wear the wrong clothes you get picked on. I remember when I was going to a private school people would stop me just to jeer, "Nice shooooes, Joe! Hahaha!" I must not have been wearing brand X. Clearly school doesn't prepare kids for critically assessing advertising. But I digress (it's so easy with all public schooling's faults to shoot down). School supresses individuality. There's no such thing as majoring in a subject because you get to learn exactly what everyone else does. When my brother's publically schooled friend heard that I somehow enjoy programming in my spare time, he looked at me like I was some sort of freak. I'm proud of it. Simply because I spent my free time in an intellectual activity I instantly lost "cool."
As a parting note, let me remind you that nowhere else in civilized countries do children regularily shoot people than in the wonderful social haven known as public school.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
In their own words,
"Freenet is a peer-to-peer network designed to allow the distribution of information over the Internet in an efficient manner, without fear of censorship. Freenet is completely decentralized, meaning that there is no person, computer, or organisation in control of Freenet or essential to its operation. This means that Freenet cannot be attacked like centralized peer-to-peer systems such as Napster. Freenet also employs intelligent routing and caching meaning that it learns to route requests more efficiently, automatically mirrors popular data, makes network flooding almost impossible, and moves data to where it is in greatest demand. All of this makes it much more efficient and scalable than systems such as Gnutella. To become a part of Freenet all you need is a computer with an Internet connection and the capability to run a Freenet server. ..."
What are you waiting for? Go download a client! :-)
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Why would anyone move to an area that doesn't have phone service?
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Years ago they probably asked how the poor would get shoes without redistribution of wealth. Shoes used to be a luxury, despite their great usefulness. I imagine that the competition of many private schools would keep prices down.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
As far as I can see, destroying crops is just stupid. I don't know who the wise guy was who had the idea that we can get rich by destroying our production... By "reduce the supply" I meant that it would be reduced by farmers as they moved into the city, not by being destroyed.
Farmers are in no danger of becoming unnecessary! We all need food to live, and they are our suppliers. There is no need to "keep them alive" with subsidies and so forth.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
So the small farmers get some money to get a new start in the cities, and farming is handled by farmers who run larger productions and can work more efficiently. Combine this efficiency with government environmental controls and the low prices caused by the competition of the big fishes and you find that the market is indeed at work.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
As for homeschooling, my parents really don't have much to do with it. I learn from books, not my parents. In many areas I'm more educated than they are. Still, poor people would have to buy the books or go to a library (which is made free by taxation). The answer to education for all (or at least those who care) in the free market was given in one of the chapters of Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. It has articles by many authors. I think it was compiled by Ayn Rand.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
The Americans, too, decided that they wanted electricity and telephones. Had they been given a chance, they would have voted with their pocketbooks. Not only that, but I think it would actually become profitable to give these services to them. More on this a little later.
"When the above poster argues that the government should make high speed internet access available cheaply to all he is merely suggesting that in the next several years, access to the internet will become a basic necessity that should be freely available to all. This is quite unlike pizza delivery which I think we would all agree is not necessary for our basic standard of living."
Terms like "basic necessity," and "basic standard of living," only have meaning if one adopts Marx's labor theory of value where everything has an absolute value (measured by the labor that went into its production) in comparison with everything else. Capitalism is founded on the theory of subjective value, where the value of an object lies in the mind of the valuer. I feel that the subjective theory is the only one that makes sense. It makes sense because everyone is different, and has unique values. To a geek, internet access might be crucial to happiness. A redneck would doubtless consider other things "necessities." There are, certainly, some things that everyone really does need, like food, clothing, etc. I don't think internet access is necessary to everyone.
"Finally the person who suggested that rural families should either deal with skyrocketing costs or move "back to civilization" should at least support his arguments a little more. Whether we like it or not, farming is a VITAL part of the american economy. ... Suggesting that they should just move back to the cities to get these necessities would have dire consequences to our economy. Is it worth paying an extra $.02 per month on your phone bill so some country bumpkin can have electricity? Or would you rather he moved into the city and brought milk prices up to those comparable with liquor."
Obviously the products that farmers market are in demand. Reduce the supply and you're very right that prices for those products will skyrocket! Lots of this money will go back to the remaining farmers. Now if a whole area is full of rich farmers, it would be very profitable to sell internet service to them at a higher rate, so ISP's would move into the area. In the meantime, other potential farmers would see all the dough that can be made in the industry, so they move to the country and produce. Their production lowers the price of food products. Now the price of foodstuff is back to normal, and ISP's exist in the country. The market at work.
Perhaps I'm wildly ignorant (correction, I know I am), so don't be harsh if I'm way off the mark. It just seems like that is what would happen. Comments, please?
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Is a pizza joint not part of the economy? As for public services, I don't see what's so fundementally different between a telephone and a pizza. Without a telephone, it's harder to communicate; without food life is impossible. Of course, there are other foods besides pizza to eat, but there are also other means of communication than a phone. Would I rather go without pizza or a phone? Pizza for sure! But the fact that I value phone service more than pizza service doesn't give me the "right" to a phone. The right to a phone simply means the right to force someone else to give it to me, regardless of the cost to them. This would be more obvious if the government just gave me a machinegun and let me do the forcing myself. What makes it harder to see the robbery involved on my behalf is that the machinegun is wielded secondhand for me by the police force, which is what would be used agsinst someone who refuses to pay their taxes and resists punishment. Of course, this Waco situation is only reached by really determined people, but it is always waiting there if we try to resist hard enough.
"Though the situation is a bit different with net access, because the telephone infrastructure is already there. But originaly, it was either subsidize rural areas, or they don't get telephone. The cost was such that it would have been more profitable to ignore them."
I don't see anything out-of-the-ordinary about that. Life involves choices, and we adapt to scarcity as best we can. Life doesn't get any better when the government picks favorites and grants them special privileges.
"I wonder, did you receive a public education? It is effectivly income redistribution. I wonder how you'd feel about income redistribution when the welfare state quadruples in size, because education is no longer available to the poor."
Actually, I was homeschooled. :}
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Business people can tend to be unwise by waving a technological wand before completely realizing the consequences. I doubt, though, that government-controlled science is any wiser since this tendency is present in most people anyway, be they in business or not. The reason that the highly profitable bits are profitable is because they are useful. People don't pay for things that aren't useful in their eyes. The market forces people to work efficiently and go for the most useful aspects of science, which, in the short run are the actual benefits to humanity, and, in the long run are the underlying theoretical structures. A company that invests time in advancing the theoretical will profit later on when its deeper knowledge allows it to outperform all the rest in practicalities that have the potential to help the "here and now" which is the only life we actually live, by definition.
In order to provide an incentive to company research, a company should not be forced to give away its trade secrets away for at least a few years. When other companies see how much the wise business (and its customers!) are profitting, they will scramble to bring their theoretical structure up to date. If other companies haven't come up to date in a few years, the original company will be forced to share its secrets, making a serious checkmate impossible.
Perhaps many people don't like this scenario because they are prejudiced against businesses that have served customers well enough to have been able to grow in capacity to serve -- i.e. "big business." It amazes me that the selfsame people are so much in favor of government which is both bigger and wields actual violent power.
I see the free market approach to science as an efficient way to harness human nature to acheive practical and theoretical progress. For those who feel that business-sponsored science would be a shoddy rush-job, I point out that it will certainly be faster, as shown by the speed of the government-sponsored genome mapping vs that of the free market. Will it be shoddy? It's not in a business's long term interest to do a crappy job. As a closing note I'd like to point out VA and its SourceForge as an example of a company that really knows what's good for it.
Perhaps I'm full of crap, but I bet that what I said has a grain of truth. Please respond and we can talk about it.
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Another popular win32 lego CAD is MLCad, which is compatible with LDRAW.D .htm
http://www.user.xpoint.at/m.lachmann/MLCad/MLCA
--
Peace, education, prosperity, and a clean environment:
find out how the free market does it right.
Just remember that outside of the digital world:
Utility is the basis of value.
Scarcity is measure of value.
Price is the evidence of value.
--
I've also noticed that few people who deride OO really know it. I suppose that's true for all sophisticated concepts.
Tell me about the different methodologies; I'd like to learn more. :}