Mods: parent is a humorous reference to the (perhaps valid) accusations that Stephenson writes fantastic ideas and interesting plots into his books, but the endings are rather like the pavement at the end of the free-fall.
>> I would vote for Nader if it weren't for the fact that it would essentially be throwing my vote away.
But you're NOT throwing your vote away! One of the problems with the current system (and we agree that the current system is problematic) is that people don't vote for who they stand for - people vote AGAINST who they don't want. Voting like this only encourages the two-party stranglehold. If enough voters vote 3rd party and cause a major upset (i.e. vote for Nader, "stealing" a vote from Kerry), perhaps the major parties will be more willing to change the voting system to prevent this sort of thing.
Apparently, the Greens and Nader steal votes from Kerry, and (correct me if I'm wrong) Badnarik from Bush. It's going to be a close race no matter what, but with these candidates taking votes from both parties, perhaps they'll begin to incorporate measures that stop 3rd party votes from hurting them.
I understand the desire behind the "anyone but bush" campaign, and of course I have no right to tell anyone how to vote. Having said that, most people who vote 3rd party are dissatisfied with both of the primary parties to begin with, and some of us don't see many important differences between the two, or believe that neither primary candidates will make a good President. For those people, voting 3rd party is voting honestly, and voting honestly is NEVER a wasted vote.
Hmm...so what if some grey-hat hacker was to write a worm delivering a program that, when confronted with an EULA, would automatically click through or do what is necessary to agree (radio button, etc.) before the user gets a chance to see the EULA? If it's technically a malignant program and the user never sees the EULA...are they still bound?
Problem with that is who cares about you if you're from Podunk, Iowa? If it's directly proportional, you can bet your arse that the ONLY places that'll see the candidates faces are the big cities. I agree that the electoral system sucks, but I think direct popular vote under the current system will introduce its own problems.
This guy may not fit your preferences totally, in particular I'm unsure of his stance on abortion, but check out www.badnarik.org and www.lp.org. Those are for the Libertarian candidate and party, respectively. The gist of his platform is smaller gov't and more personal freedom (which fits well with the philosophy in your last sentence).
I may be telling you things you already know, but others may benefit as well if I am. It's hard to find a party that matches your personal values exactly, because there are just too many different people with different interests for that to happen often. I was raised conservative republican but a nonvoter until only a few weeks ago. I realized I didn't like either of the primary candidates, so I wasn't planning on voting this year either, until the Badnarik interview on Slashdot. I was impressed by his honesty, or candidness if you will, and even his defense of ideas that I don't agree with (such as no public land).
Check him out - he seems to match your views pretty well, and he also seems to have a good head on his shoulders.
I used to be a POP kid. 'Course, I didn't have a laptop. I love the fact that I can get my mail anywhere, which you said was not a concern of yours.
The kicker, though, is the killer interface. Conversations are great, though they're missing some key features, such as a way to add new people to the conversation (present) and send them the entire contents of the conversation before they joined (not present). I have, of course, suggested this to the google kids.
It's also very nice to be able to find anything with one search, as I know that when I was using POP, if I didn't remember exactly where I put something it could take tens of minutes to find it.
Also, a wonderful feature is the username+descriptor@gmail.com. Now, if I *must* give my address to view or do something, I always put a descriptor afterward (such as filoeleven+slashdot@gmail.com) so I can easily track what comes from where - useful to figure out where spam is coming from, though none's actually made it past their filter yet.
Oh, and the 1000MB, but nobody really cares about that anymore;)
Thanks for clearing that up. Seriously. Here I was thinking, "Wait...did he just say nanometers? It looks like nanometers, but it can't be nanometers. Can it?"
And at that point I gave up all hope, as I was sure googling for "nm" would return nothing but New Mexico, nanometers, and never mind.
Parent makes a good point, but I say don't leave. By all means, stay and debate if you have different views! Sure, you're going to get flamed now and then, but this IS the internet.
If we don't have dissenting voices, Slashdot would become nothing more than horrible jokes about ??? profiting from hot grits in Soviet Russia.
He seems to know his shit somewhat -- better than the "Hackers are evildoers, let's train marines to hack and go hack them" I'd expect from Bush.
That's exactly what Kerry is advocating for viruses, though. You said so yourself: FBI legal squadrons. Also, why is the gov't responsible for spyware/viruses if they're not responsible for instituting better broadband (Kerry says that's the responsibility of the private sector)?
Both candidates want the gov't to stick their hands in way too many aspects of life that they should leave well enough alone. The spyware thing is the most ridiculous I've seen yet.
Yeah, I was very impressed by the Badnarik Slashdot interview - enough to do a lot of reading. While I don't agree with everything in the Libertarian party, I'm impressed enough at his willingness to actually ANSWER A QUESTION, as well as his stance on most issues, that he'll be getting my vote.
It's very frustrating for me now because I'd love to see more people become aware of Badnarik's platform, but that seems unlikely, as he's essentially locked out of the "open" debate.
VERY insightful addition. Though they may take the angle "use wasn't as widespread, therefore it wasn't as big a deal as alcohol." Of course, that puts one in the position of marginalizing minorities...hmm.
This is an incredibly relevant question that needs to be answered, as those of us who prefer the reefer as our drug of choice are having trouble getting rid of the stigma that's been attached to it/us. However, I doubt that either candidate will do much more than dodge the question. I'd love to see them try to defend themselves with solid facts, but in order to put them on the defensive we need to add legitimate facts and/or references that accurately portray the relative dangers of cannabis and alcohol. I'm aware of gov't studies and recommendations that have gone unheeded, but don't have the time to search for them. Any takers?
> If a store is making money by selling an artist's work, then that artist should be making money too.
Correct, UNTIL the copyright expires. This law basically says that artists' copyright on bootlegged audio is eternal, which, as the judge says, flies in the face of standard copyright law. So the law is being struck down in hopes that a new, refined law, one that defines a set length of time, will take its place.
I'm not being an ass, I really want to know what difference it makes if this is released under a non-GPL license. Is it because of the clause that says software that links to GPL libraries must be GPL? I'm not that familiar with the issues concerning libraries.
Not actually true. There's a lot of discussion on some bike forum (linked from the Slashdot article on lockpicking, which I suspect the submitter ganked this story from) and in the midst of pissing and moaning (and rightfully so) it's pointed out that the pins on the Kryptonite locks have a much smaller length span than in most locks. Also, it only takes a quarter turn of the Kryptonite lock to unlock it, whereas more secure tubular locks must be turned farther.
(posting from memory, so adequately, but not completely accurate)
>> Again...maybe you don't want others (even if they're your friends) joining in on your party for the night.
Er...in that case, wouldn't you just skip the whole 'txt the server' part, and leave no one the wiser?
Which isn't to say that your point is invalid: I'd like to see 'privacy' implemented as some sort of access lists: you've got a standard list of friends it forwards the message to, and then maybe you've got an extended list (for the big parties), etc. Of course, you should be able to include/exclude anyone at will; the lists are there so that you don't HAVE to contact them all individually.
Totally didn't catch that. My take on it was that in stage terms, "exit stage left" means go off the RIGHT side of the stage from the audience's point of view. My "vantage point" during this section of narrative was basically above the center console, almost between the two seats, so for me "exit stage left" fit perfectly well =)
Incidentally, as I don't have the book with me, what country was this in, and have you verified that the seating is the opposite of the USA?
...was the Command Line has got to be one of the best informative essays I have read. Nominally he's talking about operating systems, but he manages to throw in Batmobiles, Disney World, quake-proofing San Fran, and the venerable Hole Hawg drill. Quite entertaining even if you've already got the knowledge.
See? Now I'm reading it again instead of sleeping.
Of course IT matters! Haven't you been reading? IT will revolutionize personal travel! Entire cities will be built with IT in mind! Pedestrians will virually disappear as IT becomes our primary mode of transportation.
I swear all this was already covered...is this another dupe?
In addition to that, when posting here in geekland you might also want to be aware of the issue that there really is no such beast as centripetal force, as it is in fact simply intertia and not a force by any means.
Err...I think you're referring to centrifugal force. That's the fictitious one. Unless you know something I don't, which is quite possible, and I'd like to be made aware of it if that is the case.
The rings aren't very visible in the first image, and I wondered at its validity. But the second image, taken at a later time of day so that the rings show up better, I assume, really clears everything up. All doubt is gone from my mind.
Slashdot Mirror
Mods: parent is a humorous reference to the (perhaps valid) accusations that Stephenson writes fantastic ideas and interesting plots into his books, but the endings are rather like the pavement at the end of the free-fall.
Actually, I can't document where I found it, because it was in some random comment here on Slashdot. Glad to see that the chain is continuing =D
>> I would vote for Nader if it weren't for the fact that it would essentially be throwing my vote away.
But you're NOT throwing your vote away! One of the problems with the current system (and we agree that the current system is problematic) is that people don't vote for who they stand for - people vote AGAINST who they don't want. Voting like this only encourages the two-party stranglehold. If enough voters vote 3rd party and cause a major upset (i.e. vote for Nader, "stealing" a vote from Kerry), perhaps the major parties will be more willing to change the voting system to prevent this sort of thing.
Apparently, the Greens and Nader steal votes from Kerry, and (correct me if I'm wrong) Badnarik from Bush. It's going to be a close race no matter what, but with these candidates taking votes from both parties, perhaps they'll begin to incorporate measures that stop 3rd party votes from hurting them.
I understand the desire behind the "anyone but bush" campaign, and of course I have no right to tell anyone how to vote. Having said that, most people who vote 3rd party are dissatisfied with both of the primary parties to begin with, and some of us don't see many important differences between the two, or believe that neither primary candidates will make a good President. For those people, voting 3rd party is voting honestly, and voting honestly is NEVER a wasted vote.
you could also check out www.theonion.com
*ducks*
Hmm...so what if some grey-hat hacker was to write a worm delivering a program that, when confronted with an EULA, would automatically click through or do what is necessary to agree (radio button, etc.) before the user gets a chance to see the EULA? If it's technically a malignant program and the user never sees the EULA...are they still bound?
;)
Worth a shot, methinks
Problem with that is who cares about you if you're from Podunk, Iowa? If it's directly proportional, you can bet your arse that the ONLY places that'll see the candidates faces are the big cities.
I agree that the electoral system sucks, but I think direct popular vote under the current system will introduce its own problems.
This guy may not fit your preferences totally, in particular I'm unsure of his stance on abortion, but check out www.badnarik.org and www.lp.org. Those are for the Libertarian candidate and party, respectively. The gist of his platform is smaller gov't and more personal freedom (which fits well with the philosophy in your last sentence).
I may be telling you things you already know, but others may benefit as well if I am.
It's hard to find a party that matches your personal values exactly, because there are just too many different people with different interests for that to happen often. I was raised conservative republican but a nonvoter until only a few weeks ago. I realized I didn't like either of the primary candidates, so I wasn't planning on voting this year either, until the Badnarik interview on Slashdot. I was impressed by his honesty, or candidness if you will, and even his defense of ideas that I don't agree with (such as no public land).
Check him out - he seems to match your views pretty well, and he also seems to have a good head on his shoulders.
I used to be a POP kid. 'Course, I didn't have a laptop. I love the fact that I can get my mail anywhere, which you said was not a concern of yours.
;)
The kicker, though, is the killer interface. Conversations are great, though they're missing some key features, such as a way to add new people to the conversation (present) and send them the entire contents of the conversation before they joined (not present). I have, of course, suggested this to the google kids.
It's also very nice to be able to find anything with one search, as I know that when I was using POP, if I didn't remember exactly where I put something it could take tens of minutes to find it.
Also, a wonderful feature is the username+descriptor@gmail.com. Now, if I *must* give my address to view or do something, I always put a descriptor afterward (such as filoeleven+slashdot@gmail.com) so I can easily track what comes from where - useful to figure out where spam is coming from, though none's actually made it past their filter yet.
Oh, and the 1000MB, but nobody really cares about that anymore
Thanks for clearing that up. Seriously. Here I was thinking, "Wait...did he just say nanometers? It looks like nanometers, but it can't be nanometers. Can it?"
And at that point I gave up all hope, as I was sure googling for "nm" would return nothing but New Mexico, nanometers, and never mind.
Parent makes a good point, but I say don't leave. By all means, stay and debate if you have different views! Sure, you're going to get flamed now and then, but this IS the internet.
...
...we're in trouble
If we don't have dissenting voices, Slashdot would become nothing more than horrible jokes about ??? profiting from hot grits in Soviet Russia.
He seems to know his shit somewhat -- better than the "Hackers are evildoers, let's train marines to hack and go hack them" I'd expect from Bush.
That's exactly what Kerry is advocating for viruses, though. You said so yourself: FBI legal squadrons. Also, why is the gov't responsible for spyware/viruses if they're not responsible for instituting better broadband (Kerry says that's the responsibility of the private sector)?
Both candidates want the gov't to stick their hands in way too many aspects of life that they should leave well enough alone. The spyware thing is the most ridiculous I've seen yet.
Now decidedly OT:
Yeah, I was very impressed by the Badnarik Slashdot interview - enough to do a lot of reading. While I don't agree with everything in the Libertarian party, I'm impressed enough at his willingness to actually ANSWER A QUESTION, as well as his stance on most issues, that he'll be getting my vote.
It's very frustrating for me now because I'd love to see more people become aware of Badnarik's platform, but that seems unlikely, as he's essentially locked out of the "open" debate.
VERY insightful addition. Though they may take the angle "use wasn't as widespread, therefore it wasn't as big a deal as alcohol." Of course, that puts one in the position of marginalizing minorities...hmm.
This is an incredibly relevant question that needs to be answered, as those of us who prefer the reefer as our drug of choice are having trouble getting rid of the stigma that's been attached to it/us. However, I doubt that either candidate will do much more than dodge the question. I'd love to see them try to defend themselves with solid facts, but in order to put them on the defensive we need to add legitimate facts and/or references that accurately portray the relative dangers of cannabis and alcohol. I'm aware of gov't studies and recommendations that have gone unheeded, but don't have the time to search for them. Any takers?
> If a store is making money by selling an artist's work, then that artist should be making money too.
Correct, UNTIL the copyright expires. This law basically says that artists' copyright on bootlegged audio is eternal, which, as the judge says, flies in the face of standard copyright law. So the law is being struck down in hopes that a new, refined law, one that defines a set length of time, will take its place.
Who cares?
I'm not being an ass, I really want to know what difference it makes if this is released under a non-GPL license. Is it because of the clause that says software that links to GPL libraries must be GPL? I'm not that familiar with the issues concerning libraries.
Anybody willing to educate me?
Not actually true. There's a lot of discussion on some bike forum (linked from the Slashdot article on lockpicking, which I suspect the submitter ganked this story from) and in the midst of pissing and moaning (and rightfully so) it's pointed out that the pins on the Kryptonite locks have a much smaller length span than in most locks. Also, it only takes a quarter turn of the Kryptonite lock to unlock it, whereas more secure tubular locks must be turned farther. (posting from memory, so adequately, but not completely accurate)
You missed one. "...the binary distro's"
The binary distro's what?
>> Again...maybe you don't want others (even if they're your friends) joining in on your party for the night.
Er...in that case, wouldn't you just skip the whole 'txt the server' part, and leave no one the wiser?
Which isn't to say that your point is invalid: I'd like to see 'privacy' implemented as some sort of access lists: you've got a standard list of friends it forwards the message to, and then maybe you've got an extended list (for the big parties), etc. Of course, you should be able to include/exclude anyone at will; the lists are there so that you don't HAVE to contact them all individually.
Totally didn't catch that. My take on it was that in stage terms, "exit stage left" means go off the RIGHT side of the stage from the audience's point of view. My "vantage point" during this section of narrative was basically above the center console, almost between the two seats, so for me "exit stage left" fit perfectly well =) Incidentally, as I don't have the book with me, what country was this in, and have you verified that the seating is the opposite of the USA?
...was the Command Line has got to be one of the best informative essays I have read. Nominally he's talking about operating systems, but he manages to throw in Batmobiles, Disney World, quake-proofing San Fran, and the venerable Hole Hawg drill. Quite entertaining even if you've already got the knowledge.
See? Now I'm reading it again instead of sleeping.
> Hey man I was on a role there
This is either a brilliant pun or a spelling error. My guess is the latter.
Of course IT matters! Haven't you been reading? IT will revolutionize personal travel! Entire cities will be built with IT in mind! Pedestrians will virually disappear as IT becomes our primary mode of transportation.
I swear all this was already covered...is this another dupe?
In addition to that, when posting here in geekland you might also want to be aware of the issue that there really is no such beast as centripetal force, as it is in fact simply intertia and not a force by any means.
Err...I think you're referring to centrifugal force. That's the fictitious one. Unless you know something I don't, which is quite possible, and I'd like to be made aware of it if that is the case.
The rings aren't very visible in the first image, and I wondered at its validity. But the second image, taken at a later time of day so that the rings show up better, I assume, really clears everything up. All doubt is gone from my mind.