Those laws are somewhat more justified and understandable given that the NAZI party murdered between eight and ten million people directly through the concentration camps and death camps and was responsible for upwards of twenty million addition deaths by starting WWII. It is the old liberal paradox of whether it is justified to supress the speech of those wanting to supress all freedoms.
Echoing another post, banning the symbols just means that, when the next big bad party shows up, they'll use different banners and slogans (they tend to do this anyway). All the ban does is suppress the memory of the party in the first place, which could make it easier for a repeat. Personally, I think every schoolkid in Germany should be made to understand Goerrings words on how this whole thing started. Maybe then some of them will recognize it when it happens again.
Hate to burst your bubble, but you can. It is in fact ALL law is; a clear specification of what is good and bad behaviour, ie. morality/ethics.
To quote a friend, 'morality is between you and God, ethics are between you and your fellow man'. Trespassing is not immoral, but it can be argued that it is unethical. Speeding, however is neither - it's just a regulation. Take another example: tax law - it isn't really a moral obligation or an ethical duty to pay uncle sam, especially if you believe you're being taken advantage of, but it is law.
But no, we can't touch them because they are declared national parks.
Don't you need a nation before you can have a national park? Until there are enough people on mars to have things like jails, what makes you think anybody will pay attention to America and its parks?
What this article in the Economist seems to be doing is complaining that the job isn't finished, and that complexities in setting up a computer system for some project is more difficult than it should be.
Did you notice that the author seems to be complaining that enterprise datacenters are composed of products from multiple vendors? I can't see a datacenter turning into something simple and easy - that's like expecting an assembly line to come in a consumer version.
Here I come, naked and petrified miss Portman!
Or are you saying it can make living things?!
Wow, I think that's dangerously close a geek's sex fantasy.
Yeah, well she probably still wouldn't have sex with you;). Go to the gym once in awhile.
In otherwords, no gold from lead alchemy with this device...some things (gold, silver, platinum, titanium, etc.) would keep their intrinsic value.
Of course, you could hook one of these things up to a toxic waste dump (or mine tailings) and have it separate everything into 100% pure lumps of matter.
Both those roadblocks would go away with local molecular manufacturing. 1) you no longer have to grow surplus food aid in one place, then transport it at great oil cost to the middle of a desert - you instead efficiently assemble what you need in-place using the "old" atoms from your last meal. 2) asshole dictators will have as much luck keeping the power of nanotech away from people as China has in keeping "dangerous ideas" from pentrating their great firewall.
The problems of Africa will only be worsened by something like this - it's hard to overstate just how damaging the combination of kleptocrats and genocide is to a country's progress. even with this cool gadget, you still have to contend with murderous hordes that would rather kill you than build a stable society.
Re:Freely available means less cause to pirate
on
TV Piracy is Next
·
· Score: 1
There's no incentive to pirate episodes of The Simpsons or Family Guy or Futurama when they can be seen, full-screen, full quality, in syndication, or, with the help of tivo, any time you want.
What if you live in Europe, or have lousy reception (and don't want to fork over $50 for the privelege of basic cable)? Lots of reasons.
I can't see why - upper manglement doesn't do much, nor do they care, so long as the project slogs forward. Being underworked sucks, though it does have its good points.
I agree with you but many people do not think and or get jealous when they work 50-60 hours a week and see someone working 30-40 and think its not fair.
I usually tell them that if they get really good, they can work as few hours as I do. Really, though, I don't care too much if they get pissed - I'll go get another job and point to my list of completed projects and valuable contributions outside of my job area as evidence of my skill.
On one team I managed, we had three people like that. Midway through the year, they still hadn't scheduled or taken any. I realized they were pushing themselves way too hard and getting too wrapped up in the day-to-day stuff---and lowering their productivity.
But what if management always see's this guy there at his desk and yourself as the one leaving early and coming in later?
So, if management sees that your work is always finished and you're asking for new stuff while he struggles to meet his deadlines while working 60hrs a week, how is that a problem. Do make a point of always being done early and asking for extra work when your workload drops to 30 hours a week.
Yes but at that price, you'll still have to wait 20 months longer for every game to come out. And some games probably would never reach Mac land.
I'm getting to the point that I'm happy to play games on a PS2 or Xbox. The Mac is for software development - I can't really see loading a box with 2GB just to play a game. The positive side to all this is that that monster box (no, not really) will last for more than 5 years.
If manufactures can't get a copy protection scheme to work for more than a week, I wouldn't expect them to get one to work that blocks underage players.
How is that their job? Surely all these kids have parents.
Blah blah blah. All that stuff was around 20 years ago. Hell, there was more of it. The difference now is that the bad stuff is overreported, so soccer moms the world over do all they can to protect their kids from the world. I say let the kids go play kickball and educate them about not running off with strangers. Grow up - the world is and always has been dangerous. That's no reason to avoid it.
The point of the original poster was that while Macs do cost lots of money, legitimately collecting enough music to fill a state-of-the-art harddrive also costs lots of money (unless, by a big coincidence, all the music you like happens to be under a creative commons or similar license). Of course you spent money on music, and not for the purpose of minimising your iPod's free disk space. This is true, but irrelevant, just like the fact that you don't have to purchase your music through the iTMS is true, but irrelevant. I can't see why the comment pointing this out got moderated up so much.
And my point is that those of us who like our music already have a pile of it. The fact that buying it afresh would cost a ton is irrelevant - we already have it, it's just in a convenient carrying case right now. If, on the other hand, you don't like music, why buy an iPod at all? Even if you do, you're not required to fill it up.
for $2500 I'm having a rack-mount 1TB SATA RAID5 linux server built for home use.
For $1300 I can build a top of the line gaming machine. (I guess I could spend $2500 and get Alienware or Dell stamped on it.)
Whereas I will spend $1300ish on a 1U rack server and $2500 on a 15" powerbook or a dual 1.8G/2GB G5 powermac. All hail the cheesegrater.
Rrrriiiiiight. And you got all of those CDs for free.
That money's already been spent. I only have about 200 CDs, but that's enough to fill a 20G iPod and then some. Only 2 tunes are from iTunes, and about a Gig is anime music that isn't really available anymore.
you can buy a hell of a lot more hardware four your dollar/euro in Intel/AMD land
For $2500, you can get a very nice G5 PowerMac running OSX. You can pay less for a Dell (corporate versions only, please), but the G5 will likely last longer, and the OS will be less screwed up after 2 years. Hardware has gotten to a point where good enough is comparatively cheap, but software is still a large differentiator - my next computer will be a G5.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't so much international law, as it is peer pressure that keeps these gentlemen's agreements intact.
Aren't those the same thing?
Those laws are somewhat more justified and understandable given that the NAZI party murdered between eight and ten million people directly through the concentration camps and death camps and was responsible for upwards of twenty million addition deaths by starting WWII. It is the old liberal paradox of whether it is justified to supress the speech of those wanting to supress all freedoms.
Echoing another post, banning the symbols just means that, when the next big bad party shows up, they'll use different banners and slogans (they tend to do this anyway). All the ban does is suppress the memory of the party in the first place, which could make it easier for a repeat. Personally, I think every schoolkid in Germany should be made to understand Goerrings words on how this whole thing started. Maybe then some of them will recognize it when it happens again.
Hate to burst your bubble, but you can. It is in fact ALL law is; a clear specification of what is good and bad behaviour, ie. morality/ethics.
To quote a friend, 'morality is between you and God, ethics are between you and your fellow man'. Trespassing is not immoral, but it can be argued that it is unethical. Speeding, however is neither - it's just a regulation. Take another example: tax law - it isn't really a moral obligation or an ethical duty to pay uncle sam, especially if you believe you're being taken advantage of, but it is law.
They would actually be international parks, like the Moon and the Antartic.
What happens when somebody colonizes the moon? Will the UN actually do anything about it?
But no, we can't touch them because they are declared national parks.
Don't you need a nation before you can have a national park? Until there are enough people on mars to have things like jails, what makes you think anybody will pay attention to America and its parks?
What this article in the Economist seems to be doing is complaining that the job isn't finished, and that complexities in setting up a computer system for some project is more difficult than it should be.
Did you notice that the author seems to be complaining that enterprise datacenters are composed of products from multiple vendors? I can't see a datacenter turning into something simple and easy - that's like expecting an assembly line to come in a consumer version.
Here I come, naked and petrified miss Portman! Or are you saying it can make living things?! Wow, I think that's dangerously close a geek's sex fantasy.
Yeah, well she probably still wouldn't have sex with you ;). Go to the gym once in awhile.
In otherwords, no gold from lead alchemy with this device...some things (gold, silver, platinum, titanium, etc.) would keep their intrinsic value.
Of course, you could hook one of these things up to a toxic waste dump (or mine tailings) and have it separate everything into 100% pure lumps of matter.
Both those roadblocks would go away with local molecular manufacturing. 1) you no longer have to grow surplus food aid in one place, then transport it at great oil cost to the middle of a desert - you instead efficiently assemble what you need in-place using the "old" atoms from your last meal. 2) asshole dictators will have as much luck keeping the power of nanotech away from people as China has in keeping "dangerous ideas" from pentrating their great firewall.
The problems of Africa will only be worsened by something like this - it's hard to overstate just how damaging the combination of kleptocrats and genocide is to a country's progress. even with this cool gadget, you still have to contend with murderous hordes that would rather kill you than build a stable society.
what's wrong with learning something new?
JCL is known to cause brain damage.
There's no incentive to pirate episodes of The Simpsons or Family Guy or Futurama when they can be seen, full-screen, full quality, in syndication, or, with the help of tivo, any time you want.
What if you live in Europe, or have lousy reception (and don't want to fork over $50 for the privelege of basic cable)? Lots of reasons.
I wish I worked were you worked.
I can't see why - upper manglement doesn't do much, nor do they care, so long as the project slogs forward. Being underworked sucks, though it does have its good points.
I agree with you but many people do not think and or get jealous when they work 50-60 hours a week and see someone working 30-40 and think its not fair.
I usually tell them that if they get really good, they can work as few hours as I do. Really, though, I don't care too much if they get pissed - I'll go get another job and point to my list of completed projects and valuable contributions outside of my job area as evidence of my skill.
Please, don't jest about a drug which has taken the lives of thousands of people. Cocaine is not a joke.
Yeah, well Alcohol kills more people, and drunk people are often funny. Hell, watter kills 5000 people a year - put that in your pipe and smoke it.
On one team I managed, we had three people like that. Midway through the year, they still hadn't scheduled or taken any. I realized they were pushing themselves way too hard and getting too wrapped up in the day-to-day stuff---and lowering their productivity.
So, did you orde them to take a vacation?
But what if management always see's this guy there at his desk and yourself as the one leaving early and coming in later?
So, if management sees that your work is always finished and you're asking for new stuff while he struggles to meet his deadlines while working 60hrs a week, how is that a problem. Do make a point of always being done early and asking for extra work when your workload drops to 30 hours a week.
At 80-110 hours a week, a $100,000 is shit pay. Especially if you live anywhere in California. I wouldn't work for that, not a chance in hell.
More to the point, you could bag groceries in SF and get a 20% raise.
Yes but at that price, you'll still have to wait 20 months longer for every game to come out. And some games probably would never reach Mac land.
I'm getting to the point that I'm happy to play games on a PS2 or Xbox. The Mac is for software development - I can't really see loading a box with 2GB just to play a game. The positive side to all this is that that monster box (no, not really) will last for more than 5 years.
If manufactures can't get a copy protection scheme to work for more than a week, I wouldn't expect them to get one to work that blocks underage players.
How is that their job? Surely all these kids have parents.
Blah blah blah. All that stuff was around 20 years ago. Hell, there was more of it. The difference now is that the bad stuff is overreported, so soccer moms the world over do all they can to protect their kids from the world. I say let the kids go play kickball and educate them about not running off with strangers. Grow up - the world is and always has been dangerous. That's no reason to avoid it.
The point of the original poster was that while Macs do cost lots of money, legitimately collecting enough music to fill a state-of-the-art harddrive also costs lots of money (unless, by a big coincidence, all the music you like happens to be under a creative commons or similar license). Of course you spent money on music, and not for the purpose of minimising your iPod's free disk space. This is true, but irrelevant, just like the fact that you don't have to purchase your music through the iTMS is true, but irrelevant. I can't see why the comment pointing this out got moderated up so much.
And my point is that those of us who like our music already have a pile of it. The fact that buying it afresh would cost a ton is irrelevant - we already have it, it's just in a convenient carrying case right now. If, on the other hand, you don't like music, why buy an iPod at all? Even if you do, you're not required to fill it up.
for $2500 I'm having a rack-mount 1TB SATA RAID5 linux server built for home use. For $1300 I can build a top of the line gaming machine. (I guess I could spend $2500 and get Alienware or Dell stamped on it.)
Whereas I will spend $1300ish on a 1U rack server and $2500 on a 15" powerbook or a dual 1.8G/2GB G5 powermac. All hail the cheesegrater.
vi with eye-candy, that's an oxymoron.
What are you on about? vi is all about eye candy. Real programmers use ed.
Rrrriiiiiight. And you got all of those CDs for free.
That money's already been spent. I only have about 200 CDs, but that's enough to fill a 20G iPod and then some. Only 2 tunes are from iTunes, and about a Gig is anime music that isn't really available anymore.
OGG playback, FM-Radio, and remote. Those all exist in my iRiver iHP-120.
OGG is not important to me, I hate radio (use my iPod in the car, so it's irrelevant anyway), and I do have a remote - it's just not wireless.
you can buy a hell of a lot more hardware four your dollar/euro in Intel/AMD land
For $2500, you can get a very nice G5 PowerMac running OSX. You can pay less for a Dell (corporate versions only, please), but the G5 will likely last longer, and the OS will be less screwed up after 2 years. Hardware has gotten to a point where good enough is comparatively cheap, but software is still a large differentiator - my next computer will be a G5.