But no, there's nothing magically articulate about bloggers. Plenty of them are happy to syndicate.
That is true; however, there's a difference between legit syndication and what the Slashdot story had to say with this:
What is the use of a blog if bloggers are just going to copy sentences and sentiments from the puppetmaster's email?"
For too many so-called bloggers, it's not at all about content, or even being heard, it's simply about being recognized. Almost everyone wants their 15 minutes, and many aren't particular about how they get it (not that many really are).
I doubt I'm the only person who is bothered that the "Dance monkey, Dance!" (supposed) path to fame is so heavily traveled.
What sort of limitations does your company have on mailbox size
100MB per user in all active folders, not including archives.
amount of time you can keep mail
Mail is auto deleted after 90 days, auto-archive can run any time before that
and archives
no time limit on archives
Please mention your email platform, type of business, and number of user
Groupwise, healthcare, about 1,500 e-mail accounts. Total storage space is about 1.5TB
There was a time when working with computers was referred to as a Science. This was completely justifiable in that almost every aspect of working with computers can be quantified. And as Heinlein observed, that which can be quantified is science, and that which cannot is opinion.
While the article's author does, in fact, have a point about the statistical validity of the Firefox download count, he doesn't approach the subject from that perspective, and instead is ultimately guilty of the same thing he is accusing the Firefox community of: being completely immature.
Almost any book on chess will do right out of the gate. Until she can name the pieces, what their basic moves are, and how they capture, you don't need to bother with anything else.
After that, just some basic strategy: control of the center of the board at first, so either the king's pawn or the queen's pawn should always be her first move for now. Then just getting the hang of the fact that each piece moves differently, and learning the perspective that it's not where the piece sits but to where the piece can move that dictates what squares it controls are the first tricks.
Once she can see that on her own, she'll either instinctively start looking more than one move ahead which is your signal to go get a more advanced book, or she won't and you can relax about it and just play for fun until her interest winds down.
let me be the first to say that being a teenager and doing drugs will NOT ruin your life......If you fail at life its not the drugs your taking or not taking, its you.
I'm sure all those kids who've been pronounced DOA at the ER or pronounced dead at the scene after wrecking their car or OD'ing on their drug of choice greatly appreciate you standing-up for them, given their currently lack of ability to stand-up for themselves. Or to do anything else in the present tense.
The UN Population preditions (PDF alert) project 9.22 billion by 2100. The.78 billion is less than 10 but still enough of a fudge to significantly bias the article toward the author's FUD-driven perspective.
Like you said, people aren't dumb and they're naturally inquisitive.
Where is this planet, and how do I get there?
Many people I deal with are not only as dumb as a box of rocks, they have no patience and no willingness to listen to anyone who even remotely sounds like they know what they are talking about unless the instruction list for getting from broken to back browsing is three steps or less.
Most people want what they want when they want it, and don't give a damn about anything or anyone else.
That's because you're attempting to apply logic to a situation driven by emotion. So no, it won't make sense, and your observation of the same simply means you've understood the situation correctly.
Good points all. There's also the matter of body language. It's very telling that we can give a pseudo-mechanical creation like R2D2 the attributes of body langauge that are recognizable by the average person despite its non-human form, but still have a problems with computers interpreting nuance and idiom, let alone wielding them.
I read the article, and he's not saying exactly that. He's complaining because he thinks the Net is all about Business and Linux instead of just (or at least, primarily) people connecting. He's complaining because the Net is not like it used to be and not likely to return to just what it was anytime soon.
He gives away that with this anthropomorphization: "It means that people are denied the epiphany that the edifice of the Net is precisely the generosity and warmth of humanity connecting with itself."
And he is full of shit. The Net and all its components, virtual and real, are tools. As such they are neither warm nor generous, they simply are. The human attributes come from the humans weilding the tools. This ought to be neither a surprise nor an epiphany to anyone, least of someone as presumably educated and intelligent as Lanier. The edifice of the Net is comprised of ISPs, phone companies, cable companies, and governments. But the people who use the Net not only don't care about that, they are usually oblivious to it most of the time.
The Net is tool whose function is an opportunity via a new, borderless context. He's simply trying to enclose it within borders which have already been surpassed.
Every computer user spends astonishingly huge and increasing amounts of time updating software patches, visiting help desks, and performing other frustratingly tedious, ubiquitous tasks
Define huge. Hundreds of hours? Double-digit percentage of all time spent using the computer? He doesn't say, and I doubt it's close to either metric for all but the most inept of users. For the average person *any* amount of time spent doing *any* one of these tasks is, in their opinion, too much. Time spent doing basic maintenance is one of the most overstated stats thrown around.
The biggest point he comes close to touching but then completely misses is with the language analogy. The informational content of language is almost entirely context sensative. For example, I can make the statement "I'm blue", and without context, you don't know if I'm refering to the color of the clothes I'm wearing, my emotional disposition, me political affiliation, if I'm pretending to be a cartoon dog while playing with my kids, or any other reference for which the word "blue" might apply.
Langauge has the the immediate context of the conversation in which it is occuring, and the ultimate context of the physical world. What he misses is that not only does computer software have to be precise, it has to supply it's own virtual context; i.e. your web browser exists in the virtual context of the network, which connects it to an application which exists in a vitual context of a combination of, for example, a java environment on top of a database on top of an operating system. All the underlying layers provide a context for the next layer above in which to exist and interact. And we had to create every single layer from scratch!
Lanier then makes the usual eglatarian conceit with the statement "Only culture is rich enough to fund the Antigora." The Internet is its own culture, which both incorportates and yet transends mutiple, different national, tribal, and social cultures. Lanier and all the other Internet pundits need to recognize that, get the hell over it, and move on.
It's only a matter of time. Either Wales is going to have to turn to ads to generate some revenue, or look into getting a grant from a University or the Feds. However, either solution is going to infringe on his desire to present a neutral viewpoint, even if just in principle.
Since around 1999 or 2000, the vast majority of viruses and trojans have grabbed all the email addresses in someone inbox, address book, etc. and sent themselves out using a random return address from this list.
I have never gotten a bogus e-mail with a return address of anyone in my address book or in my in-box. But then I've never used MS Outlook to read my e-mail. I've gotten mail with my own e-mail address as the return address, but that just makes for an obviously bogus message.
It really seems sad that the norm is to block reasonable communication tools (I use IM almost exclusively for work related communication) simply because corporate America is infatuated with Microsoft despite the massive security headaches they cause.
For the longest time, all IM clients were blocked by our firewall. We in the IT department can use the Groupwise IM client for internal chat, but not out the firewall. Recently AIM was re-enabled as a requirement by one of our Vendors, but you can bet as soon as anyone fires-up MSN or Yahoo and downloads a trojan or some porn (or does either with AIM) that AIM will get shutdown again.
You don't really think all users would investigate email senders and links before clicking, do you?
I've not used Outlook ever. For the last 14 years I've worked in places that use Groupwise, and I've used netscape/firefox/on-line clients for reading e-mail at home. Doesn't Outlook display the URL of a hyperlink in an html'd e-mail? I occassionally get those phishing e-mails asking to verify my supposed paypal or ebay account, and the text in the e-mail looks like it's going to paypal's or ebay's server, but when I hover the mouse over the link, the URL displayed is usually something else, like a 201.x.x.x or 64.x.x.x address. It doesn't take a much to understand that if the real URL is different from the text--even if you don't know who really owns the 201.x.x.x address in question--that the message is bogus. Is the propagation of the trojan in question truly that different this time?
Sure there is. Don't use MSN to IM, for starters. Don't open e-mail from senders you don't recognize. Don't click on hyperlinks in e-mail without verifying that the URL is really what the text states it is. And if you are in a coporate setting and the Network Admin hasn't blocked IM, you've already got bigger problems to worry about.
I'm 40. I got into Unix & Linux administration about 8 years ago after 10 years of programming experience. I have to make do with coding the occasional ksh and perl scripts to keep the latent programmer in me satisfied, as the other admins with whom I work don't know C. But I wouldn't go back to programming full time. The pay isn't as good, and I don't want to worry about getting outsourced or working one short-term contract job after another.
What happened to a computer language that is intuitive and very easy, that anybody can learn?
You can download from IBM a personal version of UniVerse, which is an extended relational database environment that uses a version of BASIC as the primary programming language.
Sure. Define "embed" and "background" in programming terms and within the context of "operating system"--as opposed to the contexts of either "shell" or "GUI"--and you may have a point.
And if you think Firefly sucks, I'm wondering how arbitrary your standards of measurement are. I didn't like Farscape mostly cause I didn't like the lead character (and consequently only watched a few episodes), but I wouldn't say it sucked just based on that.
Slashdot Mirror
It's probably been hacked as well as slashdotted, (and dug) by now.
morning wake-up juice = coffee black
evening night-cap = captain morgan 'n' coffee black
But no, there's nothing magically articulate about bloggers. Plenty of them are happy to syndicate.
That is true; however, there's a difference between legit syndication and what the Slashdot story had to say with this:
What is the use of a blog if bloggers are just going to copy sentences and sentiments from the puppetmaster's email?"
For too many so-called bloggers, it's not at all about content, or even being heard, it's simply about being recognized. Almost everyone wants their 15 minutes, and many aren't particular about how they get it (not that many really are).
I doubt I'm the only person who is bothered that the "Dance monkey, Dance!" (supposed) path to fame is so heavily traveled.
What sort of limitations does your company have on mailbox size
100MB per user in all active folders, not including archives.
amount of time you can keep mail
Mail is auto deleted after 90 days, auto-archive can run any time before that
and archives
no time limit on archives
Please mention your email platform, type of business, and number of user
Groupwise, healthcare, about 1,500 e-mail accounts. Total storage space is about 1.5TB
There was a time when working with computers was referred to as a Science. This was completely justifiable in that almost every aspect of working with computers can be quantified. And as Heinlein observed, that which can be quantified is science, and that which cannot is opinion.
While the article's author does, in fact, have a point about the statistical validity of the Firefox download count, he doesn't approach the subject from that perspective, and instead is ultimately guilty of the same thing he is accusing the Firefox community of: being completely immature.
Almost any book on chess will do right out of the gate. Until she can name the pieces, what their basic moves are, and how they capture, you don't need to bother with anything else. After that, just some basic strategy: control of the center of the board at first, so either the king's pawn or the queen's pawn should always be her first move for now. Then just getting the hang of the fact that each piece moves differently, and learning the perspective that it's not where the piece sits but to where the piece can move that dictates what squares it controls are the first tricks.
Once she can see that on her own, she'll either instinctively start looking more than one move ahead which is your signal to go get a more advanced book, or she won't and you can relax about it and just play for fun until her interest winds down.
let me be the first to say that being a teenager and doing drugs will NOT ruin your life... ...If you fail at life its not the drugs your taking or not taking, its you.
I'm sure all those kids who've been pronounced DOA at the ER or pronounced dead at the scene after wrecking their car or OD'ing on their drug of choice greatly appreciate you standing-up for them, given their currently lack of ability to stand-up for themselves. Or to do anything else in the present tense.
The UN Population preditions (PDF alert) project 9.22 billion by 2100. The .78 billion is less than 10 but still enough of a fudge to significantly bias the article toward the author's FUD-driven perspective.
Like you said, people aren't dumb and they're naturally inquisitive.
Where is this planet, and how do I get there?
Many people I deal with are not only as dumb as a box of rocks, they have no patience and no willingness to listen to anyone who even remotely sounds like they know what they are talking about unless the instruction list for getting from broken to back browsing is three steps or less.
Most people want what they want when they want it, and don't give a damn about anything or anyone else.
And then, when I actually used my local Freecycle group, I discovered something else: A high percentage of users were over 50, female, or both.
Can you say "regifting"?
None of these make any sense
That's because you're attempting to apply logic to a situation driven by emotion. So no, it won't make sense, and your observation of the same simply means you've understood the situation correctly.
Good points all. There's also the matter of body language. It's very telling that we can give a pseudo-mechanical creation like R2D2 the attributes of body langauge that are recognizable by the average person despite its non-human form, but still have a problems with computers interpreting nuance and idiom, let alone wielding them.
I read the article, and he's not saying exactly that. He's complaining because he thinks the Net is all about Business and Linux instead of just (or at least, primarily) people connecting. He's complaining because the Net is not like it used to be and not likely to return to just what it was anytime soon.
He gives away that with this anthropomorphization: "It means that people are denied the epiphany that the edifice of the Net is precisely the generosity and warmth of humanity connecting with itself."
And he is full of shit. The Net and all its components, virtual and real, are tools. As such they are neither warm nor generous, they simply are. The human attributes come from the humans weilding the tools. This ought to be neither a surprise nor an epiphany to anyone, least of someone as presumably educated and intelligent as Lanier. The edifice of the Net is comprised of ISPs, phone companies, cable companies, and governments. But the people who use the Net not only don't care about that, they are usually oblivious to it most of the time.
The Net is tool whose function is an opportunity via a new, borderless context. He's simply trying to enclose it within borders which have already been surpassed.
Every computer user spends astonishingly huge and increasing amounts of time updating software patches, visiting help desks, and performing other frustratingly tedious, ubiquitous tasks
Define huge. Hundreds of hours? Double-digit percentage of all time spent using the computer? He doesn't say, and I doubt it's close to either metric for all but the most inept of users. For the average person *any* amount of time spent doing *any* one of these tasks is, in their opinion, too much. Time spent doing basic maintenance is one of the most overstated stats thrown around.
The biggest point he comes close to touching but then completely misses is with the language analogy. The informational content of language is almost entirely context sensative. For example, I can make the statement "I'm blue", and without context, you don't know if I'm refering to the color of the clothes I'm wearing, my emotional disposition, me political affiliation, if I'm pretending to be a cartoon dog while playing with my kids, or any other reference for which the word "blue" might apply.
Langauge has the the immediate context of the conversation in which it is occuring, and the ultimate context of the physical world. What he misses is that not only does computer software have to be precise, it has to supply it's own virtual context; i.e. your web browser exists in the virtual context of the network, which connects it to an application which exists in a vitual context of a combination of, for example, a java environment on top of a database on top of an operating system. All the underlying layers provide a context for the next layer above in which to exist and interact. And we had to create every single layer from scratch!
Lanier then makes the usual eglatarian conceit with the statement "Only culture is rich enough to fund the Antigora." The Internet is its own culture, which both incorportates and yet transends mutiple, different national, tribal, and social cultures. Lanier and all the other Internet pundits need to recognize that, get the hell over it, and move on.
Which is so much tastier than the not free complementary food and drinks.
Actually, given what it's costing HRH the Prince of Wales to feed, stable and shod Camilla, you may not have been that far off the first time.
It's only a matter of time. Either Wales is going to have to turn to ads to generate some revenue, or look into getting a grant from a University or the Feds. However, either solution is going to infringe on his desire to present a neutral viewpoint, even if just in principle.
Since around 1999 or 2000, the vast majority of viruses and trojans have grabbed all the email addresses in someone inbox, address book, etc. and sent themselves out using a random return address from this list.
I have never gotten a bogus e-mail with a return address of anyone in my address book or in my in-box. But then I've never used MS Outlook to read my e-mail. I've gotten mail with my own e-mail address as the return address, but that just makes for an obviously bogus message.
It really seems sad that the norm is to block reasonable communication tools (I use IM almost exclusively for work related communication) simply because corporate America is infatuated with Microsoft despite the massive security headaches they cause.
For the longest time, all IM clients were blocked by our firewall. We in the IT department can use the Groupwise IM client for internal chat, but not out the firewall. Recently AIM was re-enabled as a requirement by one of our Vendors, but you can bet as soon as anyone fires-up MSN or Yahoo and downloads a trojan or some porn (or does either with AIM) that AIM will get shutdown again.
You don't really think all users would investigate email senders and links before clicking, do you?
I've not used Outlook ever. For the last 14 years I've worked in places that use Groupwise, and I've used netscape/firefox/on-line clients for reading e-mail at home. Doesn't Outlook display the URL of a hyperlink in an html'd e-mail? I occassionally get those phishing e-mails asking to verify my supposed paypal or ebay account, and the text in the e-mail looks like it's going to paypal's or ebay's server, but when I hover the mouse over the link, the URL displayed is usually something else, like a 201.x.x.x or 64.x.x.x address. It doesn't take a much to understand that if the real URL is different from the text--even if you don't know who really owns the 201.x.x.x address in question--that the message is bogus. Is the propagation of the trojan in question truly that different this time?
Not really a whole lot of choice about this one
Sure there is. Don't use MSN to IM, for starters. Don't open e-mail from senders you don't recognize. Don't click on hyperlinks in e-mail without verifying that the URL is really what the text states it is. And if you are in a coporate setting and the Network Admin hasn't blocked IM, you've already got bigger problems to worry about.
I'm 40. I got into Unix & Linux administration about 8 years ago after 10 years of programming experience. I have to make do with coding the occasional ksh and perl scripts to keep the latent programmer in me satisfied, as the other admins with whom I work don't know C. But I wouldn't go back to programming full time. The pay isn't as good, and I don't want to worry about getting outsourced or working one short-term contract job after another.
I work for a retail label printer.
LabelArt in Milford?
What happened to a computer language that is intuitive and very easy, that anybody can learn?
You can download from IBM a personal version of UniVerse, which is an extended relational database environment that uses a version of BASIC as the primary programming language.
Sure. Define "embed" and "background" in programming terms and within the context of "operating system"--as opposed to the contexts of either "shell" or "GUI"--and you may have a point.
You forgot Lexx.
And if you think Firefly sucks, I'm wondering how arbitrary your standards of measurement are. I didn't like Farscape mostly cause I didn't like the lead character (and consequently only watched a few episodes), but I wouldn't say it sucked just based on that.