If 1/50 people write one book in their life, and 1/50 of them are good, and all of them get published because there is zero barrier to entry, we would have so many more books that were good than we do now.
People have more free time and better access to distribution than before. You're not entitled to your streetlamp lighting job, you know.
Yes, it is immoral to allow rich men to try to turn future mothers into their own beasts of burden, just because they have more "points" than the next guy. When it becomes normative, it's necessary to have a bloody revolution. Why do you think WWII was necessary?
Unless you think women should just plan to marry a guy with a good job who can look after her and her child, or maybe become a welfare queen, women need to have a career.
That is precisely what we should be preparing young people for. And not just women, but men too.
Doesn't anyone else see that it's immoral to press, entice or implore a woman to sacrifice her child bearing years so she can fix your computer, or to let other people do so?
Didn't the article about how Facebook is funding freezing womens eggs wake anyone's eyes up to just how fucked up we've become?
Is that what you want for your daughter? Sure as hell isn't what I want for mine.
If that's what you're going to use your power for, you shouldn't have it.
Read up on Henry Kissinger. His conspiracy with the Saudi's created the situation, which really amounted to theft on a global scale by the US.
The war in Iraq happened mostly because they were going to start selling oil for Euro's.
In a nutshell, the reason the world has a fetish for the US dollar is that every time someone offers to sell energy for anything else, the US bomb the shit out of them.
You think we like accepting your funny money in exchange for real world goods, knowing that it will never be redeemed for real world good from the US, but will instead be passed around like a cheque that never gets cashed?
We put a stop to the advertising machine that implores us to be endlessly wasteful consumers, get rid of the private property rules that allow a few to own everything while the multitude suffer deprivation, and start sharing the rewards of our technological progress freely.
When the costs of goods has been reduced to practically nothing, making sure everyone is well taken care of is worth the peace and stability that it brings.
How about I just declare my decision to oppose you at every turn for the rest of my life, and when you escalate, re-escalate in response, for the rest of my life, and we just leave it at that?
Secrets coming out all over these days... good luck, you'll need it.
Evolution doesn't kill anything. Sometimes the environment kills things, sometimes they reach the full expression of their complexity without being killed. Evolution is when the environment kills and diversity is reduced, and the herd now again consists of those whose nature is capable of full expression in the environment.
Ever heard of Gnosticism? They preached that this world was inherently evil, and that when humanity went extinct, we'd all be resurrected in a much nicer world, and therefore, breeding was an evil act.
You cling desperately to your stupid "I'm thinking of a number" straw man because you know that I'm right. Everything that hasn't been confirmed not to be a threat is a threat. You secure your turf, survey it regularly, and build a wall in the hopes it will be good enough to deal with the threat of the unknown.
You know this, of course. Children could figure this out. You're taking this position because you seek to work against the interest of your neighbour and you don't want the task to become more difficult.
You're selfish, and it's as plain as day for all to see.
Dictionary: Adj: Secret: kept from the knowledge of any but the initiated or privileged
If you have a secret that you share with just a few and keep the rest of us in the dark, that is a conspiracy, and conspiracies are a threat to peoples freedom.
Is it a number? Is it a plan to seize control over the water supply? I don't know, but you've expended extraordinary effort to keep me from knowing what it is, which means I can't assure myself that I'm secure and further implies to me that if I knew what you were doing I'd be motivated to put a stop to it.
Your secrets keep me from having access to concrete facts, and that is the reason that they represent a threat.
On my desktop, over the LAN, with caching forcibly disabled, HTTP took 5.3 seconds and was 9% slower than HTTPS.
On my mobile, over WiFi, again, with caching forcibly disabled, HTTP took 6.8 seconds and HTTPS took 10.8 seconds, 33% slower, AND instead of consumed 2 MB of data because caching couldn't be used.
On my mobile, over the cellular network, HTTP took 18 seconds, and HTTPS took 30 seconds, 69% slower, AND consumed 2 MB of data.
So, considering that mobile is huge and growing, THIS IS A DUMB IDEA.
Freedom does not require you to operate in secret. If you feel the need to operate in secret, either you need to fix your culture, or you need to fix yourself.
Preventing misrepresentation is a social positive. Preserving secrecy is a social negative. Compromises have to be made, but protecting your secrets is not a noble goal in and of itself, shouldn't be necessary in a free society, and in fact represents a threat to other peoples freedom.
Better question is, if you can directly stimulate the brain and cause pleasure, why bother opening your eyes?
Oh right. Because movies are with propaganda, and the point of the brain stimulation is to break your capacity for critical evaluation.
I'll pass, thanks. I read Spider Robinson, I know how this turns out, and I don't feel like being found sitting in a pile of my own excrement with a beatific grin on my face...
Well, the ones I helped build provide food for the community farmers in their individual plots, and they also provide freshly picked vegetables to local upscale restaurants, and they also provide several tons of food to the food bank each year, and they conduct weekly educational sessions, inviting the people who go to the food bank to be direct participants in what is keeping them alive each day.
One of them is surrounded by a "wall of food", a kind of a hedge built entirely of perennial food bearing plants. I ended up coming into that project later in its history, it was your traditional "grid of personal plots in a field" type of urban garden, and the first meeting I went to was a discussion about how to prevent starving homeless people from stealing food from the plots. The wall of food was my idea, inspired by Geoff Lawton's system of building food forests.
"Liking farming" didn't really have that much to do with it for most of the people concerned.
I'm sincere. Distributing 3D printer parts, building urban farms and facilitating copyright violation all come from the same place: A desire to create abundance and destroy scarcity. Might never happen, but that's no reason not to try.
Working hard to protect human culture from those who would prefer to see it surrounded by a most and accessed via a toll bridge controlled by them?
It's not just about having access for myself, it's also about cutting off the money supply to the industry.
Having the Library of Alexandria for myself isn't going to protect me from the ignorance of savages. Only ensuring that they too have a copy can do that.
Will people latch on to this and try to disseminate it? Probably.
Will they be any more impartial than the news media? Doubtful.
Eventually people might realize that they can't trust reporting, that they must survey things for themselves, and that they shouldn't trust people who make decisions without surveying things for themselves, because those people don't know shit. Probably not, but it could happen.
They'll be old by then, though, and another generation of naive people will be fleeced.
Slashdot Mirror
If 1/50 people write one book in their life, and 1/50 of them are good, and all of them get published because there is zero barrier to entry, we would have so many more books that were good than we do now.
People have more free time and better access to distribution than before. You're not entitled to your streetlamp lighting job, you know.
Yes, it is immoral to allow rich men to try to turn future mothers into their own beasts of burden, just because they have more "points" than the next guy. When it becomes normative, it's necessary to have a bloody revolution. Why do you think WWII was necessary?
Used to be that East met West in Hong Kong, and the water kept the Western cultural norms from corrupting the peasantry.
Now, South Korea is the island, and North Korea is the water.
Unless you think women should just plan to marry a guy with a good job who can look after her and her child, or maybe become a welfare queen, women need to have a career.
That is precisely what we should be preparing young people for. And not just women, but men too.
Doesn't anyone else see that it's immoral to press, entice or implore a woman to sacrifice her child bearing years so she can fix your computer, or to let other people do so?
Didn't the article about how Facebook is funding freezing womens eggs wake anyone's eyes up to just how fucked up we've become?
Is that what you want for your daughter? Sure as hell isn't what I want for mine.
If that's what you're going to use your power for, you shouldn't have it.
Read up on Henry Kissinger. His conspiracy with the Saudi's created the situation, which really amounted to theft on a global scale by the US.
The war in Iraq happened mostly because they were going to start selling oil for Euro's.
In a nutshell, the reason the world has a fetish for the US dollar is that every time someone offers to sell energy for anything else, the US bomb the shit out of them.
You think we like accepting your funny money in exchange for real world goods, knowing that it will never be redeemed for real world good from the US, but will instead be passed around like a cheque that never gets cashed?
We don't.
I found rebuilding Viacom's websites in Groovy to be a real pleasure.
Working with .net, not so much...
We put a stop to the advertising machine that implores us to be endlessly wasteful consumers, get rid of the private property rules that allow a few to own everything while the multitude suffer deprivation, and start sharing the rewards of our technological progress freely.
When the costs of goods has been reduced to practically nothing, making sure everyone is well taken care of is worth the peace and stability that it brings.
How about I just declare my decision to oppose you at every turn for the rest of my life, and when you escalate, re-escalate in response, for the rest of my life, and we just leave it at that?
Secrets coming out all over these days... good luck, you'll need it.
Evolution doesn't kill anything. Sometimes the environment kills things, sometimes they reach the full expression of their complexity without being killed. Evolution is when the environment kills and diversity is reduced, and the herd now again consists of those whose nature is capable of full expression in the environment.
Ever heard of Gnosticism? They preached that this world was inherently evil, and that when humanity went extinct, we'd all be resurrected in a much nicer world, and therefore, breeding was an evil act.
Not too many Gnostics around. See how that works?
At least with mythology, if it's wrong enough, it kills its adherents, so it's subject to evolutionary pressure.
This may as well have been pulled out of a cereal box.
You cling desperately to your stupid "I'm thinking of a number" straw man because you know that I'm right. Everything that hasn't been confirmed not to be a threat is a threat. You secure your turf, survey it regularly, and build a wall in the hopes it will be good enough to deal with the threat of the unknown.
You know this, of course. Children could figure this out. You're taking this position because you seek to work against the interest of your neighbour and you don't want the task to become more difficult.
You're selfish, and it's as plain as day for all to see.
Now you're just being stupid.
Dictionary: Adj: Secret: kept from the knowledge of any but the initiated or privileged
If you have a secret that you share with just a few and keep the rest of us in the dark, that is a conspiracy, and conspiracies are a threat to peoples freedom.
Is it a number? Is it a plan to seize control over the water supply? I don't know, but you've expended extraordinary effort to keep me from knowing what it is, which means I can't assure myself that I'm secure and further implies to me that if I knew what you were doing I'd be motivated to put a stop to it.
Your secrets keep me from having access to concrete facts, and that is the reason that they represent a threat.
Now, fuck off, coward.
Great illustration.
On my desktop, over the LAN, with caching forcibly disabled, HTTP took 5.3 seconds and was 9% slower than HTTPS.
On my mobile, over WiFi, again, with caching forcibly disabled, HTTP took 6.8 seconds and HTTPS took 10.8 seconds, 33% slower, AND instead of consumed 2 MB of data because caching couldn't be used.
On my mobile, over the cellular network, HTTP took 18 seconds, and HTTPS took 30 seconds, 69% slower, AND consumed 2 MB of data.
So, considering that mobile is huge and growing, THIS IS A DUMB IDEA.
Yeah, set up encrypted WebRTC with multiple peers from a mobile device, and see now negligible it is.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Freedom does not require you to operate in secret. If you feel the need to operate in secret, either you need to fix your culture, or you need to fix yourself.
Preventing misrepresentation is a social positive. Preserving secrecy is a social negative. Compromises have to be made, but protecting your secrets is not a noble goal in and of itself, shouldn't be necessary in a free society, and in fact represents a threat to other peoples freedom.
Encryption has a cost, it isn't free. It increases CPU utilisation and power consumption. It interferes with caching and reduces network efficiency.
This is a dumb idea. A very dumb idea.
Better question is, if you can directly stimulate the brain and cause pleasure, why bother opening your eyes?
Oh right. Because movies are with propaganda, and the point of the brain stimulation is to break your capacity for critical evaluation.
I'll pass, thanks. I read Spider Robinson, I know how this turns out, and I don't feel like being found sitting in a pile of my own excrement with a beatific grin on my face...
Well, the ones I helped build provide food for the community farmers in their individual plots, and they also provide freshly picked vegetables to local upscale restaurants, and they also provide several tons of food to the food bank each year, and they conduct weekly educational sessions, inviting the people who go to the food bank to be direct participants in what is keeping them alive each day.
One of them is surrounded by a "wall of food", a kind of a hedge built entirely of perennial food bearing plants. I ended up coming into that project later in its history, it was your traditional "grid of personal plots in a field" type of urban garden, and the first meeting I went to was a discussion about how to prevent starving homeless people from stealing food from the plots. The wall of food was my idea, inspired by Geoff Lawton's system of building food forests.
"Liking farming" didn't really have that much to do with it for most of the people concerned.
I'm sincere. Distributing 3D printer parts, building urban farms and facilitating copyright violation all come from the same place: A desire to create abundance and destroy scarcity. Might never happen, but that's no reason not to try.
Working hard to protect human culture from those who would prefer to see it surrounded by a most and accessed via a toll bridge controlled by them?
It's not just about having access for myself, it's also about cutting off the money supply to the industry.
Having the Library of Alexandria for myself isn't going to protect me from the ignorance of savages. Only ensuring that they too have a copy can do that.
Will people latch on to this and try to disseminate it? Probably.
Will they be any more impartial than the news media?
Doubtful.
Eventually people might realize that they can't trust reporting, that they must survey things for themselves, and that they shouldn't trust people who make decisions without surveying things for themselves, because those people don't know shit. Probably not, but it could happen.
They'll be old by then, though, and another generation of naive people will be fleeced.
Make a script that pseudorandomly removes and replaces obscure fonts if you're that concerned.
It's called running amok. It's caused by an evil tiger spirit that enters the body and causes us to commit evil acts.
Does this bring anything to the table that Groovy doesn't?