In college, you only spend 2 hours a day in class usually. You are expected to spend about 3 hours out of class per hour in class working/reading. That's only 8 hours a day 5 days a week. (for 12h of classes)
If you have dynamic DNS on a broadband connection, then you can just reconnect for a different IP every time they block it.
It's pretty hard to get a dynamic DNS on a broadband connection. Usually, one of the main boasts (I don't know why as they don't allow servers) of broadband providers is that you get a 'static IP address'.
If John was maimed, there wasn't any particular reason to save him... because Harry could take over the plowing without any interruption.
I find it somewhat hard to believe that, before the indistrial revolution, humans cared so little for each other that they would freely allow an injured person to die. In fact, I don't believe it at all. Apes and other creatures have a natural instinct to care for their own, and humans most certainly do.
Which isn't to say we're not "supposed" to be individuals; I'm simply pointing out that it's not basic human nature.
A non sequitur. Even if humans didn't care for each other, I don't see how it would make us act less as individuals; ie. generally care about OUR fate more than that of the group.
And, as for a Borg-like hive mind, what's still the leading OS in our business community? And why?
The leading OS is Windows, because there isn't seen to be a viable alternative (just yet). The OS monopoly is a natural one, because it's easier to develop all software for one platform, and has very little to do with a herd-like mentality.
Does everyone drive a Ford? Why not? A large number of other people do, don't they?
In the end this will all have been a great living history lesson. Growing up, I never could imagine how a society could allow slavery, the massacre of indigenous people, or internment of its own citizens. Now I see how truly evil the tide of complacency can be. I mean, as long as it's not me, right?
Fabulous quote. Also, for complacency, also read indifference, ignorance and laziness.
If it's not an already moot point it will be soon. MS licenses bought with computers not only won't be legal to use on another machine, they won't be possible to use either.
What about other MS software though? Is your copy of Works, Encarta, or Word that was bundled similarly crippled? If they aren't now they will be soon.
What do you think: beginning of the exodus from MS to non-MS software, or beginning of the end of reasonable PC use?
I'm not in China. However, from what I can gather, China *was* seriously threatening to block Google unless Google removed sites from its listing deemed by the Chinese government to be 'inappropriate', which Google promptly did. So whilst they haven't blocked Google, they've forced it to restrict its search results, which is just as bad.
Disclaimer: This probably doesn't apply to the main Google as accessed from a reasonable (non-blocking) country, and probably only happens if you're accessing it from China.
It's interesting how the author drives the point home that the Chinese are different from westerners, then tries to apply western ethics to them. The Chinese are just as ethical as any other group of people, but their ethics are not ours. The culture is different. It values the group over the individual, which explains why most of the "observations" of the author seem so unethical at first glance.
Maybe the author was just trying to indicate that Chinese ethics are plain stupid. If humans were really meant to always act as a group and never consider the rights of the individual, wouldn't we have evolved with a Borg-like hive mind? No, we can think for ourselves. So why try and curb our abilities to the whim of the leadership of some group??
Yahoo's results do seem to be improved since last time I used it. They don't give you only results from their directory first anymore.
Actually, that was the thing I liked most about Yahoo!. With most search engines you got automatically indexed pages, crap and all, but with Yahoo!, you knew that the first batch of pages had been vetted by actual humans, and not only that, but they were in the elite of sites added to the Yahoo! directory. Do away with that, and they become just another search engine.
Advertising is stupid. And the people who advocate are even stupider, because they believe there's some sort of obligation for people to look at the ads.
You clearly don't have a clue about advertising.
This is one reason why I like Googles system - it's links to products that (99% of the time) related to what I'm searching for. Like a directory listing, more than an advertisement.
That is *still advertising*, so please at least learn what advertising IS before you contradict yourself by saying that 'advertising is stupid'.
Nah. I suspect that most shows that have made it in the past (The Simpsons?) have started out being ad-funded. Sure, people might be willing to pay for video/DVD collections NOW that it is popular, but I doubt it would have grown if i9t hadn't been forced onto the air with the help of advertising.
With websites, it's even harder. To get people to pay for website content is extremely difficult, and the chances of enough people visiting a new website *and paying to view it* to keep it in business, bearing in mind that with no advertising, EVERY website would have to be directly paid for, is remote in my opinion. If you think otherwise, you're not being realistic.
If you're against advertising, I think what you're really wanting is for the current large companies/websites to maintain a stranglehold on things (for they are the only people that would have enough of a customer/view base to stay afloat through subscriptions) and for no new ones to emerge. That's not what I want.
I can check my POP mail accounts very quickly but checking my hotmail account either by hotmail.com or using Outlook is unbearable.
Just as a matter of interest, why is it unbearable using Outlook? You can use Outlook to check POP e-mail accounts. I use OE to check mine, and find it pretty fast.
Maybe the first practical application of Artificial Intelligence will be the comprehensive recognition and disposal of advertisements and spam:)
And the next step will be the comprehensive disposal of your favorite websites unless you pay significant amounts of money per month to view them. Fuck people like you. (although I agree on the spam thing)
I've never clicked on a Google 'sponsered link' or ad. I just automatically ignore them, and look at my search results. OTOH, I've occasionally clicked on banner ads that intrigued me. Banner ads have the ability to jump out more at me, and get me interested. So, I guess it depends on the person as to whether you are more likely to click on a boring text link or an intersting banner ad. (yes banner ads can be annoying too, as well as lame flash ads, just take a look at fucking msn.com)
Google also is successful because it doesn't have pay-for-placement results.
I really don't think you can draw a significant line between 'pay for placement' and 'ad that appears at top of search results'. OK, they're in a different color, but that's it. Google *DOES* offer pay-for-placement ads, the placement offered is at the top of the search results!
I've had to make 2 seperate trips to Acronym Finder whilst reading your post, and several others whilst reading this thread. Could people PLEASE give us the meaning of unovbious acronyms in their posts?? Just once? Like: ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) or EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation). Otherwise it really is like reading another language.
The bigger problem is that most people did not vote - democracy works only as well as the voters.
No, the bigger problem is that who becomes the president isn't decided by the true number of voters, it's decided by a grossly unfair weighting system that gives sparsely populated areas ludicrous amounts of power, because they whined that it was unfair for places who have vastly more population than them to have vastly more power.
And many of the drivers *I* installed on Windows XP caused that 'unsigned driver' bullshit, yet I have had no driver problems whatsoever, probably because they were perfectly good drivers but most were bought before I got Windows XP!
Slashdot Mirror
In college, you only spend 2 hours a day in class usually. You are expected to spend about 3 hours out of class per hour in class working/reading. That's only 8 hours a day 5 days a week. (for 12h of classes)
:-)
I take it you didn't do higher level math.
If you have dynamic DNS on a broadband connection, then you can just reconnect for a different IP every time they block it.
It's pretty hard to get a dynamic DNS on a broadband connection. Usually, one of the main boasts (I don't know why as they don't allow servers) of broadband providers is that you get a 'static IP address'.
I'm currently using my college's crippled internet access:
Access to this web page is restricted at this time.
Reason:
The Websense category "Proxy Avoidance" is filtered.
----
URL:
http://www.anonymizer.com/
If John was maimed, there wasn't any particular reason to save him... because Harry could take over the plowing without any interruption.
I find it somewhat hard to believe that, before the indistrial revolution, humans cared so little for each other that they would freely allow an injured person to die. In fact, I don't believe it at all. Apes and other creatures have a natural instinct to care for their own, and humans most certainly do.
Which isn't to say we're not "supposed" to be individuals; I'm simply pointing out that it's not basic human nature.
A non sequitur. Even if humans didn't care for each other, I don't see how it would make us act less as individuals; ie. generally care about OUR fate more than that of the group.
And, as for a Borg-like hive mind, what's still the leading OS in our business community? And why?
The leading OS is Windows, because there isn't seen to be a viable alternative (just yet). The OS monopoly is a natural one, because it's easier to develop all software for one platform, and has very little to do with a herd-like mentality.
Does everyone drive a Ford? Why not? A large number of other people do, don't they?
In the end this will all have been a great living history lesson. Growing up, I never could imagine how a society could allow slavery, the massacre of indigenous people, or internment of its own citizens. Now I see how truly evil the tide of complacency can be. I mean, as long as it's not me, right?
Fabulous quote. Also, for complacency, also read indifference, ignorance and laziness.
"Dancing on the streets of Washington as Arab coalition forces liberate the people of America!"
The new owners are forced to buy their own lawn care contract. ... from Pedro.
If it's not an already moot point it will be soon. MS licenses bought with computers not only won't be legal to use on another machine, they won't be possible to use either.
What about other MS software though? Is your copy of Works, Encarta, or Word that was bundled similarly crippled? If they aren't now they will be soon.
What do you think: beginning of the exodus from MS to non-MS software, or beginning of the end of reasonable PC use?
I'm not in China. However, from what I can gather, China *was* seriously threatening to block Google unless Google removed sites from its listing deemed by the Chinese government to be 'inappropriate', which Google promptly did. So whilst they haven't blocked Google, they've forced it to restrict its search results, which is just as bad.
Disclaimer: This probably doesn't apply to the main Google as accessed from a reasonable (non-blocking) country, and probably only happens if you're accessing it from China.
It's interesting how the author drives the point home that the Chinese are different from westerners, then tries to apply western ethics to them. The Chinese are just as ethical as any other group of people, but their ethics are not ours. The culture is different. It values the group over the individual, which explains why most of the "observations" of the author seem so unethical at first glance.
Maybe the author was just trying to indicate that Chinese ethics are plain stupid. If humans were really meant to always act as a group and never consider the rights of the individual, wouldn't we have evolved with a Borg-like hive mind? No, we can think for ourselves. So why try and curb our abilities to the whim of the leadership of some group??
Yahoo's results do seem to be improved since last time I used it. They don't give you only results from their directory first anymore.
Actually, that was the thing I liked most about Yahoo!. With most search engines you got automatically indexed pages, crap and all, but with Yahoo!, you knew that the first batch of pages had been vetted by actual humans, and not only that, but they were in the elite of sites added to the Yahoo! directory. Do away with that, and they become just another search engine.
Erm, silly me, what I meant was 12,294 bytes (~12kb).
i dont want to load 10kb of bloat every time i enter a keyword to search for.
You better find a Gopher-based search engine then; I make Google's homepage to be at least 12,294kb including the image.
Advertising is stupid. And the people who advocate are even stupider, because they believe there's some sort of obligation for people to look at the ads.
You clearly don't have a clue about advertising.
This is one reason why I like Googles system - it's links to products that (99% of the time) related to what I'm searching for. Like a directory listing, more than an advertisement.
That is *still advertising*, so please at least learn what advertising IS before you contradict yourself by saying that 'advertising is stupid'.
Nah. I suspect that most shows that have made it in the past (The Simpsons?) have started out being ad-funded. Sure, people might be willing to pay for video/DVD collections NOW that it is popular, but I doubt it would have grown if i9t hadn't been forced onto the air with the help of advertising.
With websites, it's even harder. To get people to pay for website content is extremely difficult, and the chances of enough people visiting a new website *and paying to view it* to keep it in business, bearing in mind that with no advertising, EVERY website would have to be directly paid for, is remote in my opinion. If you think otherwise, you're not being realistic.
If you're against advertising, I think what you're really wanting is for the current large companies/websites to maintain a stranglehold on things (for they are the only people that would have enough of a customer/view base to stay afloat through subscriptions) and for no new ones to emerge. That's not what I want.
I can check my POP mail accounts very quickly but checking my hotmail account either by hotmail.com or using Outlook is unbearable.
Just as a matter of interest, why is it unbearable using Outlook? You can use Outlook to check POP e-mail accounts. I use OE to check mine, and find it pretty fast.
Maybe the first practical application of Artificial Intelligence will be the comprehensive recognition and disposal of advertisements and spam :)
And the next step will be the comprehensive disposal of your favorite websites unless you pay significant amounts of money per month to view them. Fuck people like you. (although I agree on the spam thing)
I've never clicked on a Google 'sponsered link' or ad. I just automatically ignore them, and look at my search results. OTOH, I've occasionally clicked on banner ads that intrigued me. Banner ads have the ability to jump out more at me, and get me interested. So, I guess it depends on the person as to whether you are more likely to click on a boring text link or an intersting banner ad. (yes banner ads can be annoying too, as well as lame flash ads, just take a look at fucking msn.com)
Google also is successful because it doesn't have pay-for-placement results.
I really don't think you can draw a significant line between 'pay for placement' and 'ad that appears at top of search results'. OK, they're in a different color, but that's it. Google *DOES* offer pay-for-placement ads, the placement offered is at the top of the search results!
Question is, if the Nazis had won the war, would the world Europe is living in today have more or less freedoms?
I can't except that argument...
I've had to make 2 seperate trips to Acronym Finder whilst reading your post, and several others whilst reading this thread. Could people PLEASE give us the meaning of unovbious acronyms in their posts?? Just once? Like: ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) or EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation). Otherwise it really is like reading another language.
The bigger problem is that most people did not vote - democracy works only as well as the voters.
No, the bigger problem is that who becomes the president isn't decided by the true number of voters, it's decided by a grossly unfair weighting system that gives sparsely populated areas ludicrous amounts of power, because they whined that it was unfair for places who have vastly more population than them to have vastly more power.
Do you know how much money it would cost to take a case up to the European Court of Human Rights? It's a rather theoretical safeguard.
And many of the drivers *I* installed on Windows XP caused that 'unsigned driver' bullshit, yet I have had no driver problems whatsoever, probably because they were perfectly good drivers but most were bought before I got Windows XP!