In that case, it's hardly worth buying, unless you expect the company to do exceptionally well over the next few weeks.
Take for example, BeOS. It IPO'd at $6/share, surged to $10/share, and is now at around $6.50/share. If you could sell on the first day, you could be rich. If you had to hold onto it, you made virtually no money. If you couldn't get in on the IPO, and bought it at the market opening price (around $7), then you lost money.
I'd have to say I'm confused as to why they released only Turbo C 1.0 and 2.0...what could possibly be wrong with releasing Turbo C/C++ v3.0 for free? I mean, it's a 16-bit DOS compiler from 1992, what do they have to lose by releasing it?
I doubt AOL will switch from IE anytime soon. In return for using IE, they get a spot on the default install of the win9x desktop. Switching to Communicator from IE will force them to give up that prime real-estate, which I doubt they'd want to do.
As for market-share, 30% of the internet may use AOL, but a large percentage of AOLers never use the internet (they stay on the internet AOL areas), and thus never use IE or get counted in the stats. Of those who do use the internet, a sizeable minority are those who have downloaded and installed Netscape or Opera, and use those browsers instead. So even if you subtract the AOL users that use IE, IE still is leading in market-share decisively.
Basically, he's saying that this not-yet-used section of ESR's metaphorical "noosphere" (the bugfix database) is something that makes Open Source more popular than before.
As for the post's diction, I find it rather refreshing that a few people still know how to use words which are greater than two syllables.
The problem with this is that you're trusting the general public to make decisions on the validity of a scientific paper. The average person does not have the knowledge to do so. In order to have an effective system, you need experts to actually peer-review the material, to assure that there are no factual errors in the material, or procedural errors in the experiments.
That's the problem I see with this type of site. Any sort of crackpot scientist could put up an article and get a bunch of media attention, without there being any peer-review of his work first. Do we really want crackpot scientists getting easier access to the media?
The problem is that the Bible itself has many morally "bad" passages, especially the Old Testament. You'll find God commanding His followers to rape, murder, pillage, etc. Despite saying in one place that killing is bad, God commands His followers to kill all the male children prisoners, and keep the female children prisoners for sex slaves. (I posted one of the relevant quotes in a separate reply to this article) Nice morally uplifting book there.
Passing porn is definitely a bad thing, but the Bible, IMHO, should also be banned by these types of things. All material should be judged by the same criteria, regardless of whether the title of the book is "Huckleberry Finn" or "Fahrenheit 451" or "The Bible."
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." -Numbers 31:17-18
Is that the type of filth we want our children to be allowed to read? Should we be teaching them that killing male children is OK, and if they're female children, keep them alive to use as sex slaves?
most staffers and appointees indicted most staffers and appointees convicted
I'm not sure about these. Reagan had quite a few of his staffers and appointees indicted and convicted for his Iran/Contra dealings.
most dramatic attacks on civil liberties in this century
While bad, they weren't the worst this century. Take a look at world war I, where members of the U.S. Socialist party were imprisoned for opposing the war. Not for doing anything illegal, mind you, just for speaking out publically against the war.
largest expansion of US government spending since WWII
I'm not sure about this one. I was under the impression that Reagan expanded US government spending significantly more than Clinton has. I could be wrong however.
You are correct, that if you lived in a non-US-friendly country, it'd be difficult for LucasArts to do anything. However, most non-US-friendly countries don't (yet) have much bandwidth.
The VCD of a movie (MPEG compression) is usually around 1.2 gigabytes or so. An ASF version (which is lower quality) is usually around 300 or 400 megabytes.
I agree, it is not easy to find space on an ISP for these files to be hosted. However, there are millions of people with T1 connections provided by their universities, and millions more with cablemodems or ADSL lines, so while there is no central place for obtaining pirated movies, there are thousands of 10-20 user FTPs and DCC bots that provide them.
Hmm, that seems to make sense, except for the part about connecting mods to the punk scene of the 70s and 80s. How are these two groups connected? Apart from the fact that there was no unified "punk" scene (it covered everything from the leather-jacket wearing American Ramones to the British Sex Pistols and the fiercly political mohawk-wearing Dead Kennedys, not to mention the PhD-led Bad Religion), I don't see the connection to the mod scene you described.
Perhaps he'd lose, perhaps not. I agree that this particular story is fairly unpopular, but several of his recent stories, particularly those soon after Columbine, were quite popular, even among those who weren't regular visitors to slashdot.
He has the support of Rob, however, and that's pretty much all that counts.
I don't think it has anything to do with "selling out." I do agree that their recent stuff, while great, is not as good as their late 80s/early 90s stuff. The main reason is probably the fact that Mr. Brett left. Previously, Mr. Brett and Greg Graffin each wrote about half the songs on each album. They each have different songwriting styles, so it was a nice mix. The Gray Race, the first cd since Mr. Brett's departure (1996), is a great CD IMO, but since it's written entirely by Greg, it lacks the added quality that Mr. Brett's songs add. Basically, Greg's songs are still great, but they now have to carry the whole album, instead of just half of it. No Substance, their latest (1998) CD, on the other hand, is substandard, again IMO. It was an attempt to write everything in the studio by the entire band, instead of Greg writing the songs at home before going to the studio. I think he realizes it was a subpar album, because he said they're not going to try that again for the next album.
Ok, that was probably too long a comment for a REALLY off-topic subject, but anyway =)
What the hell is a Penquin? I've been seeing references to this mysterious being popping up on Slashdot quite a bit recently. Is a penquin related to a penguin, or are they separate entities? I always thought Tux was a penguin, but at least four people now have told me he's a penquin. Perhaps we'll never know...
I'll pass on the essay, but a short answer to "what the hell is a mod" would be interesting. I know what a rocker is, but I've never heard the term "mod" outside of slashdot, unless referring to an Amiga music file (those type of MODs are great, BTW).
The poll was after three or four of his articles drew a ton of criticism in the comments. It was decided to put it to a vote, and the vote was overwhelmingly in his favor, despite the mostly negative comments.
Listen, KatzDot fan. The simple point is that how can a man who probably can't even swap faulty hard drives be a "spokesman" for the oh so oppressed geek community?
I wouldn't consider him a spokesperson for this "community," but he is an interesting writer. Slashdot readers overwhelmingly agreed in a poll near the beginning of his tenure here that he should stay, despite the mostly negative postings in the comments area. Apparently there's a relatively small, but extremely vocal, minority of Katz-haters.
You make the same mistake that many of your fellow Katz-haters accuse him of making. You speak of "we" as if you are some sort of spokesperson for slashdotters. You are not.
Katz has the support of the majority of slashdotters. There was a poll a while back, in response to criticism of his writing, regarding whether he should stay or not. It was overwhelmingly decided that he should stay.
Sure, there are girls who can code, just not a lot of them. Just from my own experience, all my computer science classes have been around 90% male. About half of the males, but all the females, didn't have a clue what was going on. Apparently the girls who can code don't attend my school.
Perhaps the more important question is not "Is it good for Katz to take a 13-year-old into Southpark without his parents consent," but "why is the 13-year-old at the movie theater without his parents knowing about it in the first place?"
So, because the theatre won't let them in to see this great South Park movie, they should punish the creators of South Park financially. Am I missing something?
I have a feeling that neither Trey nor Matt would be too upset about kids pirating South Park or sneaking in to see it. Sneaking in to see an R-rated movie was part of the South Park movie in the first place.
First off, you haven't gotten it through your head yet, you are not a "geek". No matter how much you try to be one of "us" you are below the social status of "geekdom" and have fallen directly to the rank of loserville.
So what makes you the arbiter of this "social status"?
Secondly, those rules are in place so children can go to the theaters without parents tagging along. I should be able to drop my kids off so they can have fun without "dad" tagging along, and hopefully assume that the theaters are going to enforce the legal obligation they have to bar youngsters from R rated movies. This is not something they made up, this is law.
Incorrect. Theaters have no legal obligation to bar youngsters from R rated movies. It is a voluntary thing the theaters do to prevent government regulation. The government encourages it, but does not mandate it (they merely threaten that they will if the theaters stop doing it "voluntarily"). Either way, it is not law. It is indeed something the theaters made up. Please get the facts before rambling on.
Why not suggest that 12 year olds should be able to buy cigarettes?
Cigarettes cause cancer. Movies do not.
What a dumb jerk. This guy is probably the biggest lump of dead weight holding slashdot back from greatness.
Rob disagrees with you, and it's his site. I personally enjoy the majority of Katz's articles.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case, it's hardly worth buying, unless you expect the company to do exceptionally well over the next few weeks.
Take for example, BeOS. It IPO'd at $6/share, surged to $10/share, and is now at around $6.50/share. If you could sell on the first day, you could be rich. If you had to hold onto it, you made virtually no money. If you couldn't get in on the IPO, and bought it at the market opening price (around $7), then you lost money.
I'd have to say I'm confused as to why they released only Turbo C 1.0 and 2.0...what could possibly be wrong with releasing Turbo C/C++ v3.0 for free? I mean, it's a 16-bit DOS compiler from 1992, what do they have to lose by releasing it?
I doubt AOL will switch from IE anytime soon. In return for using IE, they get a spot on the default install of the win9x desktop. Switching to Communicator from IE will force them to give up that prime real-estate, which I doubt they'd want to do.
As for market-share, 30% of the internet may use AOL, but a large percentage of AOLers never use the internet (they stay on the internet AOL areas), and thus never use IE or get counted in the stats. Of those who do use the internet, a sizeable minority are those who have downloaded and installed Netscape or Opera, and use those browsers instead. So even if you subtract the AOL users that use IE, IE still is leading in market-share decisively.
Basically, he's saying that this not-yet-used section of ESR's metaphorical "noosphere" (the bugfix database) is something that makes Open Source more popular than before.
As for the post's diction, I find it rather refreshing that a few people still know how to use words which are greater than two syllables.
Unless the stock goes down, in which case you'd have no profits to redistribute.
The problem with this is that you're trusting the general public to make decisions on the validity of a scientific paper. The average person does not have the knowledge to do so. In order to have an effective system, you need experts to actually peer-review the material, to assure that there are no factual errors in the material, or procedural errors in the experiments.
That's the problem I see with this type of site. Any sort of crackpot scientist could put up an article and get a bunch of media attention, without there being any peer-review of his work first. Do we really want crackpot scientists getting easier access to the media?
The problem is that the Bible itself has many morally "bad" passages, especially the Old Testament. You'll find God commanding His followers to rape, murder, pillage, etc. Despite saying in one place that killing is bad, God commands His followers to kill all the male children prisoners, and keep the female children prisoners for sex slaves. (I posted one of the relevant quotes in a separate reply to this article) Nice morally uplifting book there.
Passing porn is definitely a bad thing, but the Bible, IMHO, should also be banned by these types of things. All material should be judged by the same criteria, regardless of whether the title of the book is "Huckleberry Finn" or "Fahrenheit 451" or "The Bible."
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." -Numbers 31:17-18
Is that the type of filth we want our children to be allowed to read? Should we be teaching them that killing male children is OK, and if they're female children, keep them alive to use as sex slaves?
most staffers and appointees indicted
most staffers and appointees convicted
I'm not sure about these. Reagan had quite a few of his staffers and appointees indicted and convicted for his Iran/Contra dealings.
most dramatic attacks on civil liberties in this century
While bad, they weren't the worst this century. Take a look at world war I, where members of the U.S. Socialist party were imprisoned for opposing the war. Not for doing anything illegal, mind you, just for speaking out publically against the war.
largest expansion of US government spending since WWII
I'm not sure about this one. I was under the impression that Reagan expanded US government spending significantly more than Clinton has. I could be wrong however.
You are correct, that if you lived in a non-US-friendly country, it'd be difficult for LucasArts to do anything. However, most non-US-friendly countries don't (yet) have much bandwidth.
The VCD of a movie (MPEG compression) is usually around 1.2 gigabytes or so. An ASF version (which is lower quality) is usually around 300 or 400 megabytes.
I agree, it is not easy to find space on an ISP for these files to be hosted. However, there are millions of people with T1 connections provided by their universities, and millions more with cablemodems or ADSL lines, so while there is no central place for obtaining pirated movies, there are thousands of 10-20 user FTPs and DCC bots that provide them.
Hmm, that seems to make sense, except for the part about connecting mods to the punk scene of the 70s and 80s. How are these two groups connected? Apart from the fact that there was no unified "punk" scene (it covered everything from the leather-jacket wearing American Ramones to the British Sex Pistols and the fiercly political mohawk-wearing Dead Kennedys, not to mention the PhD-led Bad Religion), I don't see the connection to the mod scene you described.
Perhaps he'd lose, perhaps not. I agree that this particular story is fairly unpopular, but several of his recent stories, particularly those soon after Columbine, were quite popular, even among those who weren't regular visitors to slashdot.
He has the support of Rob, however, and that's pretty much all that counts.
I don't think it has anything to do with "selling out." I do agree that their recent stuff, while great, is not as good as their late 80s/early 90s stuff. The main reason is probably the fact that Mr. Brett left. Previously, Mr. Brett and Greg Graffin each wrote about half the songs on each album. They each have different songwriting styles, so it was a nice mix. The Gray Race, the first cd since Mr. Brett's departure (1996), is a great CD IMO, but since it's written entirely by Greg, it lacks the added quality that Mr. Brett's songs add. Basically, Greg's songs are still great, but they now have to carry the whole album, instead of just half of it. No Substance, their latest (1998) CD, on the other hand, is substandard, again IMO. It was an attempt to write everything in the studio by the entire band, instead of Greg writing the songs at home before going to the studio. I think he realizes it was a subpar album, because he said they're not going to try that again for the next album.
Ok, that was probably too long a comment for a REALLY off-topic subject, but anyway =)
What the hell is a Penquin? I've been seeing references to this mysterious being popping up on Slashdot quite a bit recently. Is a penquin related to a penguin, or are they separate entities? I always thought Tux was a penguin, but at least four people now have told me he's a penquin. Perhaps we'll never know...
Bad Religion would be my choice.
Actually, it's owned by Andover.net. Rob is one of their employees who runs the site.
I'll pass on the essay, but a short answer to "what the hell is a mod" would be interesting. I know what a rocker is, but I've never heard the term "mod" outside of slashdot, unless referring to an Amiga music file (those type of MODs are great, BTW).
The poll was after three or four of his articles drew a ton of criticism in the comments. It was decided to put it to a vote, and the vote was overwhelmingly in his favor, despite the mostly negative comments.
The same thing seems to happen here.
Listen, KatzDot fan. The simple point is that how can a man who probably can't even swap faulty hard drives be a "spokesman" for the oh so oppressed geek community?
I wouldn't consider him a spokesperson for this "community," but he is an interesting writer. Slashdot readers overwhelmingly agreed in a poll near the beginning of his tenure here that he should stay, despite the mostly negative postings in the comments area. Apparently there's a relatively small, but extremely vocal, minority of Katz-haters.
You make the same mistake that many of your fellow Katz-haters accuse him of making. You speak of "we" as if you are some sort of spokesperson for slashdotters. You are not.
Katz has the support of the majority of slashdotters. There was a poll a while back, in response to criticism of his writing, regarding whether he should stay or not. It was overwhelmingly decided that he should stay.
Sure, there are girls who can code, just not a lot of them. Just from my own experience, all my computer science classes have been around 90% male. About half of the males, but all the females, didn't have a clue what was going on. Apparently the girls who can code don't attend my school.
Perhaps the more important question is not "Is it good for Katz to take a 13-year-old into Southpark without his parents consent," but "why is the 13-year-old at the movie theater without his parents knowing about it in the first place?"
So, because the theatre won't let them in to see this great South Park movie, they should punish the creators of South Park financially. Am I missing something?
I have a feeling that neither Trey nor Matt would be too upset about kids pirating South Park or sneaking in to see it. Sneaking in to see an R-rated movie was part of the South Park movie in the first place.
I have no idea why this was moderated up. It contains blatantly false information (the MPAA ratings system is not government-run or mandated).
Hey, maybe I'll try it.
Linux is owned by Bill Gates!
Maybe I'll get a score of 3 now.
First off, you haven't gotten it through your head yet, you are not a "geek". No matter how much you try to be one of "us" you are below the social status of "geekdom" and have fallen directly to the rank of loserville.
So what makes you the arbiter of this "social status"?
Secondly, those rules are in place so children can go to the theaters without parents tagging along. I should be able to drop my kids off so they can have fun without "dad" tagging along, and hopefully assume that the theaters are going to enforce the legal obligation they have to bar youngsters from R rated movies. This is not something they made up, this is law.
Incorrect. Theaters have no legal obligation to bar youngsters from R rated movies. It is a voluntary thing the theaters do to prevent government regulation. The government encourages it, but does not mandate it (they merely threaten that they will if the theaters stop doing it "voluntarily"). Either way, it is not law. It is indeed something the theaters made up. Please get the facts before rambling on.
Why not suggest that 12 year olds should be able to buy cigarettes?
Cigarettes cause cancer. Movies do not.
What a dumb jerk. This guy is probably the biggest lump of dead weight holding slashdot back from greatness.
Rob disagrees with you, and it's his site. I personally enjoy the majority of Katz's articles.