For what it is worth, the modal logic version of the "Ontological" argument was first advanced by Charles Hartshorne in Anselm's Discovery and the Logic of Perfection. Plantinga's version of the argument emphasizes the way that "necessary existence" is different from "existence." None the less both emphasize the articulation of Anselm in the third chapter of the Proslogion rather than the second.
I'll be the first to say that Windows Vista hasn't been the best thing ever... However, your comments point out that each step in the evolutionary process is helpful. Sometimes the mistakes are as important as the successes. As long as MS learns from what has gone wrong with Vista, continues to improve it (SP1, SP2, etc.) I don't think the problems are earth shattering.
Also, if we look at each step in the process, I'm comfortable saying I would never go backwards. As soon as I could go to 2000 at my organization I did. As soon as XP was out I started upgrading and learning that OS. I've been running Vista for almost 12 months now and I don't think I'd go back. I haven't deployed it throughout my company yet, but I'm working out the kinks and I'll be fine by the time I deploy it throughout the organization.
If I remember correctly, the first 12 months of using any update to Windows has been a pain. To expect this change to be different would be extremely naive. If we were to guess in 3 years, could we imagine people still clinging to XP? It doesn't seem likely. Perhaps Vista will turn out to be a bit like Windows ME... Even if it does, I'll be happy if it leads to something like Windows 2000.
Now the question for me is not how is Vista going to work... It is, how will Windows server 2008 be?
Here is a quick attempt to address the questions above.
First, File synchronization is the easy way to go. I would avoid using the off-line files feature of Windows xp. I've had lots of problems with it. First of all, if the network connection drops for any reason then the user ends up off-line and can't print. Depending on how savvy your users are this can be a problem. I suggest SyncToy from Microsoft or another third party solution.
On the security side, we have Lenovo Thinkpads. With the embedded security chip we can setup encrypted drives that allow users to store files that cannot be opened without the users password (or fingerprint). This software and hardware comes standard on most of the Thinkpads.
You are certianly right. Blackboard isn't a perfect tool. At the same time, the claim that it could be coded internally rather easily is just asinine. For instance, the assessment tool is pretty flexible and can be used faily effectively if you know what you are doing. I'm glad nobody is asking me to code a tool like that right now...
I'm actually using Blackboard to teach a course online right now and the inability of your faculty to teach using the tool doesn't make it suck. Blackboard is like all other tools. Used correctly it is a great help. Used incorrectly it is a waste of time and money. And as far as tools go, it has some pretty nice features and can be adapted to do what you need/want it to do...
I am not sure what will happen with the Blackboard patent (if it will hold up, etc.), but I see this as an attempt for
Blackboard to try to keep some face. The Blackboard product heavily utilizes "building blocks" (assuming you have the enterprise version), many of which are open source. If Blackboard is benefiting from open source, attacking open source products may kill or slow down the inovation that comes from the building blocks...
Additionally, I think this is an attempt to try to placate those who are shouting prior art and want to go after the patent and invalidate it... The reasoning might go like, "If they aren't going after sakai or moodle, i don't really care if they have the patent." That is how I see the real purpose of this move... It seems fairly shrewd. Hopefuly higher ed will continue to go after them and educause will keep the pressure up. BTW, there is a joint statement from educause and sakai (PDF) on educause's website. (Here is the statement on sakai's page.)
I wouldn't be suprised to see that lots of small businesses could use Publisher. Granted it isn't InDesign or Quark, but for the average hack, you can make decent looking stuff with Publisher. At least it has quite a few more options than Word.
I understand what you are saying, but there are other options instead of setting up your own server running Linux, Apache, MySQL, Php, etc. There are many ISP's and webhosting companies that will do almost all of the work for you. I worked with a friend to setup a website for our chruch and our ISP uses a web based admin interface that installed Joomla, configured MySQL for us. All we did was click "install joomla". Additionally, checking that interface periodically give us the opportunity to install updates with one click.
Not that everyone here needs that much help, but it sure beats having to maintain servers for friends, associates, or organizations who don't have the time or skills to do it themselves.
I wonder how this will affect server virtualization. While you probably wouldn't run exchange 12 under vmware, will there be a version of software that will fool windows into thinking it is running on 64-bit?
I run a small network and I have to say that I have one server that ran NT4 then Win 2k and now runs Win 2k3. Obviously it isn't under a serious load, but then why would I want to dump good hardware that continues to run well. On the other hand, it might be that this software will be released so far into the future that I'll have the demand to upgrade the hardware for my servers. At any rate, this means I won't be buying anymore servers that don't have 64-bit software even if I don't install a 64-bit OS right now.
You will still see ads. They will just be product placement like what you have in movies. The actors will be drinking Coke, listening to iPods, and driving a Toyota.
My comments above were not strictly related to this kind of argument. First of all your example seems to assume a few things.
First, it assumes in such a situation, I would be able to successfully shoot the man in a way that will prevent him from hurting her. One could probably argue that I could do as much damage as I could do good in such a situation. Who's to say that I wouldn't miss the hostage taker and hit my wife instead? Sure, you could state that some persons (such as a military sniper) wouldn't worry about that, but that isn't me. Second, the example is very arbitrary.
Finally, if you look at others who have avoided using violence to achieve their ends, (Martin Luther King, Jr. and Dorothy Day as two examples) their humanity or in King's case (manhood) isn't to be questioned just because they didn't resort to violence to address evil. My thought (and perhaps my entire point) is that our imaginations are so captured by violence as the solution to evil that we completely miss other ways (perhaps more effective ways) to address situations. What about the way persons were mistreated in South Africa under apartheid? They found a solution that didn't involve violence.
To be sure, my rejection of violence isn't out of a basic humanism, altruism, or pragmatism. For me, that rejection is a conviction based on Christianity. While many "christians" seems to have no problem with war or violence, there is a consistent tradition of those who reject violence (King and Day are both examples-Also the Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, some Anglicans and Roman Catholics, even a few evangelical protestants like me!). I don't pretend for a moment that Christian nonviolence makes sense outside of the community shaped by the Cross, but I would state that nonviolence offers a counter example to those whose imaginations are captured by violence.
I don't want to sound preachy or as if I have all of the answers to the tough questions of life. I'm simply trying to honestly respond to your comments.
Perhaps a better question is even though there were manufacturing facilities, should they have been bombed in a different way to avoid civilian casulties?
Furthermore, I think that the use of the atomic weapons was calculated to create enormous psychological impact on Japan. If your goals were strictly military, why not drop a smaller bomb (nuclear or non-nuclear) on the tactical target? It seems to me that the obvious answer is that those things don't have the psychological impact that the larger weapons have on the "enemy".
So killing 25,000 (a consevative estimate) for little military effacy is only "slightly unethical?" Or is it only "slightly unethical" since Germany had it coming?
Forgive me for being so crass, but it seems to me that we are a bit cavalier about the death of civilians.
The moral calculus that makes civilian deaths a "necessary evil" is the scariest part, to me at least, of warfare in this day and age. Certainly from the beginning of human history we have dealt with the evils of humanity killing each other. I am not so naïve to believe that civilians were not killed in wars. I am sure that the raping and pillaging that accompanied victory included immeasurable harm to civilians.
The interesting (or scary) part to me is that in a day and era where war is (at least to some degree) governed by the Geneva conventions we still don't bat an eye at civilian deaths. Those who die (like those killed in the firebombing of Dresden, or when Sherman burned Atlanta, or as a result of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki) are simply swept up into the category of "necessary evil." There deaths, we tell ourselves, are necessary so that our goals in warfare are to be achieved.
So my question is, when we start applying this kind of moral calculus to our decisions what is a human life worth? What are the lives of our children, our wives or husbands, our mothers and fathers or anyone else worth? Do we care if those who have no part in the combat die? Would "necessary evil" be a satisfying explanation to you if persons you love had to die?
Perhaps I am to soft, but "necessary evil" is not an explanation that I would accept, nor is it an explanation that I would be prepared to think some one else who may or may not be my "enemy" should accept.
I think they should have invited the star wars kid to participate. That might have been a merciful end for him after being mocked for so long. Or perhaps he was the "third party" giving technical advice.
I agree. Your employer can always get access back into the system. The thing is to be the only one who understands how it all fits together. Really, this isn't even hard when you are running an IT department for a small company. Just make sure that the other employees are in charge of specific areas (and why woudn't they be?) and you are set.
Even if they are able to hire a replacement, it will take them quite a while to understand all of the decisions you made over the past few years. Like, why is DNS configured this way? Or Why are these servers running such and such software?
That being said, I still like to document as much as I can. If my employer turns out to be a jerk, they don't get the documentation. If they treat me fairly, they can have it all.
I would agree with most of this comment. However, let me say that if you want to take notes with a laptop or you plan on "going mobile" very much the new Intel Pentium M processors rock. Recently in a three hour class my friend only burned 24% of his battery while taking notes in word. Given the way that you can be on the go all day...plus centrino comes with integrated wireless. This type of battery life is a great advantage for days where you don't get back to your room very much. Additionally, you can probably wait for at least a couple months on buying a laptop so prices on the newer processors should drop.
For graduate students, I really recommend laptops. I just finished my thesis and I it would have been next to impossible for me to do that much writing without being mobile. It also saves tons of book carrying if you can take your laptop in and use it while your writing.
One can be excited when they patch things this quickly. My real concern is to whether we will see tons of patches for forthcoming software. That is, will all of the talk of more 'secure' computing be just talk.
I certainly agree that Win 2k, XP, etc. all seem to have more security bugs than you can shake a stick at. Given the problem, the question is can MS make any sort of headway? Can they actually offer a product that will really be stable and secure? My theory is that we will know a lot more about the answer to these questions in six months. If Win 2003 server has 18Mb of patches in the first 6 months then we will know the answer. Personally, I am hoping the start doing better.
What of the other thugs we haven't taken time to address? We seem to be selective about the thugs we take care of. What of the thugs in Uganda? Or what about the situation in Sudan?
If our justification for this war is to remove a thug, why do we tolerate other thugs? Why haven't we brought our full diplomatic and other strength to bear on them?
Given that most DVD's now contain special features, it seems like the prudent thing to do is wait until the entire series (LOTR, Star Wars, Matrix, etc.) is released together. Why would I want to pony up the bucks for one special edition DVD when I can wait and get the ultra-super-extra-even specialer Box collection? Further, if you don't know if they are going to release the ultra-super-extra-even specialer Box collection, would you wait until all the DVD's were out just in case? I guess I am going to wait a while before investing in DVD's of any of these series until I see if they will release a whole series of DVD's.
Slashdot Mirror
For what it is worth, the modal logic version of the "Ontological" argument was first advanced by Charles Hartshorne in Anselm's Discovery and the Logic of Perfection. Plantinga's version of the argument emphasizes the way that "necessary existence" is different from "existence." None the less both emphasize the articulation of Anselm in the third chapter of the Proslogion rather than the second.
I'll be the first to say that Windows Vista hasn't been the best thing ever... However, your comments point out that each step in the evolutionary process is helpful. Sometimes the mistakes are as important as the successes. As long as MS learns from what has gone wrong with Vista, continues to improve it (SP1, SP2, etc.) I don't think the problems are earth shattering. Also, if we look at each step in the process, I'm comfortable saying I would never go backwards. As soon as I could go to 2000 at my organization I did. As soon as XP was out I started upgrading and learning that OS. I've been running Vista for almost 12 months now and I don't think I'd go back. I haven't deployed it throughout my company yet, but I'm working out the kinks and I'll be fine by the time I deploy it throughout the organization. If I remember correctly, the first 12 months of using any update to Windows has been a pain. To expect this change to be different would be extremely naive. If we were to guess in 3 years, could we imagine people still clinging to XP? It doesn't seem likely. Perhaps Vista will turn out to be a bit like Windows ME... Even if it does, I'll be happy if it leads to something like Windows 2000. Now the question for me is not how is Vista going to work... It is, how will Windows server 2008 be?
Here is a quick attempt to address the questions above.
First, File synchronization is the easy way to go. I would avoid using the off-line files feature of Windows xp. I've had lots of problems with it. First of all, if the network connection drops for any reason then the user ends up off-line and can't print. Depending on how savvy your users are this can be a problem. I suggest SyncToy from Microsoft or another third party solution.
On the security side, we have Lenovo Thinkpads. With the embedded security chip we can setup encrypted drives that allow users to store files that cannot be opened without the users password (or fingerprint). This software and hardware comes standard on most of the Thinkpads.
You are certianly right. Blackboard isn't a perfect tool. At the same time, the claim that it could be coded internally rather easily is just asinine. For instance, the assessment tool is pretty flexible and can be used faily effectively if you know what you are doing. I'm glad nobody is asking me to code a tool like that right now...
I'm actually using Blackboard to teach a course online right now and the inability of your faculty to teach using the tool doesn't make it suck. Blackboard is like all other tools. Used correctly it is a great help. Used incorrectly it is a waste of time and money. And as far as tools go, it has some pretty nice features and can be adapted to do what you need/want it to do...
--JS
Blackboard to try to keep some face. The Blackboard product heavily utilizes "building blocks" (assuming you have the enterprise version), many of which are open source. If Blackboard is benefiting from open source, attacking open source products may kill or slow down the inovation that comes from the building blocks...
Additionally, I think this is an attempt to try to placate those who are shouting prior art and want to go after the patent and invalidate it... The reasoning might go like, "If they aren't going after sakai or moodle, i don't really care if they have the patent." That is how I see the real purpose of this move... It seems fairly shrewd. Hopefuly higher ed will continue to go after them and educause will keep the pressure up. BTW, there is a joint statement from educause and sakai (PDF) on educause's website. (Here is the statement on sakai's page.)
--JSIf you are just doing some testing, VMWare server is free for linux or windows.
I wouldn't be suprised to see that lots of small businesses could use Publisher. Granted it isn't InDesign or Quark, but for the average hack, you can make decent looking stuff with Publisher. At least it has quite a few more options than Word.
I understand what you are saying, but there are other options instead of setting up your own server running Linux, Apache, MySQL, Php, etc. There are many ISP's and webhosting companies that will do almost all of the work for you. I worked with a friend to setup a website for our chruch and our ISP uses a web based admin interface that installed Joomla, configured MySQL for us. All we did was click "install joomla". Additionally, checking that interface periodically give us the opportunity to install updates with one click.
Not that everyone here needs that much help, but it sure beats having to maintain servers for friends, associates, or organizations who don't have the time or skills to do it themselves.
I wonder how this will affect server virtualization. While you probably wouldn't run exchange 12 under vmware, will there be a version of software that will fool windows into thinking it is running on 64-bit?
I run a small network and I have to say that I have one server that ran NT4 then Win 2k and now runs Win 2k3. Obviously it isn't under a serious load, but then why would I want to dump good hardware that continues to run well. On the other hand, it might be that this software will be released so far into the future that I'll have the demand to upgrade the hardware for my servers. At any rate, this means I won't be buying anymore servers that don't have 64-bit software even if I don't install a 64-bit OS right now.
You will still see ads. They will just be product placement like what you have in movies. The actors will be drinking Coke, listening to iPods, and driving a Toyota.
My comments above were not strictly related to this kind of argument. First of all your example seems to assume a few things.
First, it assumes in such a situation, I would be able to successfully shoot the man in a way that will prevent him from hurting her. One could probably argue that I could do as much damage as I could do good in such a situation. Who's to say that I wouldn't miss the hostage taker and hit my wife instead? Sure, you could state that some persons (such as a military sniper) wouldn't worry about that, but that isn't me. Second, the example is very arbitrary.
Finally, if you look at others who have avoided using violence to achieve their ends, (Martin Luther King, Jr. and Dorothy Day as two examples) their humanity or in King's case (manhood) isn't to be questioned just because they didn't resort to violence to address evil. My thought (and perhaps my entire point) is that our imaginations are so captured by violence as the solution to evil that we completely miss other ways (perhaps more effective ways) to address situations. What about the way persons were mistreated in South Africa under apartheid? They found a solution that didn't involve violence.
To be sure, my rejection of violence isn't out of a basic humanism, altruism, or pragmatism. For me, that rejection is a conviction based on Christianity. While many "christians" seems to have no problem with war or violence, there is a consistent tradition of those who reject violence (King and Day are both examples-Also the Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, some Anglicans and Roman Catholics, even a few evangelical protestants like me!). I don't pretend for a moment that Christian nonviolence makes sense outside of the community shaped by the Cross, but I would state that nonviolence offers a counter example to those whose imaginations are captured by violence.
I don't want to sound preachy or as if I have all of the answers to the tough questions of life. I'm simply trying to honestly respond to your comments.
Perhaps a better question is even though there were manufacturing facilities, should they have been bombed in a different way to avoid civilian casulties?
Furthermore, I think that the use of the atomic weapons was calculated to create enormous psychological impact on Japan. If your goals were strictly military, why not drop a smaller bomb (nuclear or non-nuclear) on the tactical target? It seems to me that the obvious answer is that those things don't have the psychological impact that the larger weapons have on the "enemy".
So killing 25,000 (a consevative estimate) for little military effacy is only "slightly unethical?" Or is it only "slightly unethical" since Germany had it coming?
Forgive me for being so crass, but it seems to me that we are a bit cavalier about the death of civilians.
The moral calculus that makes civilian deaths a "necessary evil" is the scariest part, to me at least, of warfare in this day and age. Certainly from the beginning of human history we have dealt with the evils of humanity killing each other. I am not so naïve to believe that civilians were not killed in wars. I am sure that the raping and pillaging that accompanied victory included immeasurable harm to civilians.
The interesting (or scary) part to me is that in a day and era where war is (at least to some degree) governed by the Geneva conventions we still don't bat an eye at civilian deaths. Those who die (like those killed in the firebombing of Dresden, or when Sherman burned Atlanta, or as a result of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki) are simply swept up into the category of "necessary evil." There deaths, we tell ourselves, are necessary so that our goals in warfare are to be achieved.
So my question is, when we start applying this kind of moral calculus to our decisions what is a human life worth? What are the lives of our children, our wives or husbands, our mothers and fathers or anyone else worth? Do we care if those who have no part in the combat die? Would "necessary evil" be a satisfying explanation to you if persons you love had to die?
Perhaps I am to soft, but "necessary evil" is not an explanation that I would accept, nor is it an explanation that I would be prepared to think some one else who may or may not be my "enemy" should accept.
I think they should have invited the star wars kid to participate. That might have been a merciful end for him after being mocked for so long. Or perhaps he was the "third party" giving technical advice.
I agree. Your employer can always get access back into the system. The thing is to be the only one who understands how it all fits together. Really, this isn't even hard when you are running an IT department for a small company. Just make sure that the other employees are in charge of specific areas (and why woudn't they be?) and you are set.
Even if they are able to hire a replacement, it will take them quite a while to understand all of the decisions you made over the past few years. Like, why is DNS configured this way? Or Why are these servers running such and such software?
That being said, I still like to document as much as I can. If my employer turns out to be a jerk, they don't get the documentation. If they treat me fairly, they can have it all.
They should say, "My reality is linguistically structured."
That is how I associate the word "pain" with what I am feeling. It is also how I understand that you are "not nice."
I also know what to say to you. "I say 'Put this in your corn cob pipe and smoke it.'" Then I kick you in the reproductive organs.
I would agree with most of this comment. However, let me say that if you want to take notes with a laptop or you plan on "going mobile" very much the new Intel Pentium M processors rock. Recently in a three hour class my friend only burned 24% of his battery while taking notes in word. Given the way that you can be on the go all day...plus centrino comes with integrated wireless. This type of battery life is a great advantage for days where you don't get back to your room very much. Additionally, you can probably wait for at least a couple months on buying a laptop so prices on the newer processors should drop.
For graduate students, I really recommend laptops. I just finished my thesis and I it would have been next to impossible for me to do that much writing without being mobile. It also saves tons of book carrying if you can take your laptop in and use it while your writing.
Good thing I'm a pacifict.
I downloaded RH9 last week. Nice kiddies; however, I have already started downloading updates and security patches.
One can be excited when they patch things this quickly. My real concern is to whether we will see tons of patches for forthcoming software. That is, will all of the talk of more 'secure' computing be just talk.
I certainly agree that Win 2k, XP, etc. all seem to have more security bugs than you can shake a stick at. Given the problem, the question is can MS make any sort of headway? Can they actually offer a product that will really be stable and secure? My theory is that we will know a lot more about the answer to these questions in six months. If Win 2003 server has 18Mb of patches in the first 6 months then we will know the answer. Personally, I am hoping the start doing better.
Are they going to release a boxed set with DVD's that have old releases too? When are they releasing the collecter's edition.
What of the other thugs we haven't taken time to address? We seem to be selective about the thugs we take care of. What of the thugs in Uganda? Or what about the situation in Sudan?
If our justification for this war is to remove a thug, why do we tolerate other thugs? Why haven't we brought our full diplomatic and other strength to bear on them?
My guess? It is about the $$.
Given that most DVD's now contain special features, it seems like the prudent thing to do is wait until the entire series (LOTR, Star Wars, Matrix, etc.) is released together. Why would I want to pony up the bucks for one special edition DVD when I can wait and get the ultra-super-extra-even specialer Box collection? Further, if you don't know if they are going to release the ultra-super-extra-even specialer Box collection, would you wait until all the DVD's were out just in case? I guess I am going to wait a while before investing in DVD's of any of these series until I see if they will release a whole series of DVD's.