Man, I just don't know where to start. Lessig is a visionary and he is working so that you can benefit from other people's desire to share and cooperate. Who the hell cares about his health insurance??? No one is forcing you to give away your work. CC licenses allow you to share your work under more permissive licenses if and only if *you* feel like it.
Thank god at least one in a few thousand people like this are subsidized so that anyone can actually afford to think instead of going to work inside a cubicle every freaking day. What's wrong with that?
Dude you just can't compare Yahoo to Google. Do you remember the Internet in the Altavista/Yahoo days? It was the most freaking useless thing ever (maybe second to a horn on a plane). Google made the Internet you know these days possible, and brings *any* information you want to your screen in seconds. Yahoo never did this.
Google is the detonator of the web revolution, the engine that made it possible for it to take off. Your grand children will read about Google in their textbooks, as the world will never be the same as before it.
Google's impact on the world's dynamics are only comparable to, I don't know, relativity? People keep saying "ooo there's so much information on the intarweb, it's so much better than Encarta 97!". The Internet was nothing before Google. A part of the information was there, but it was useless. Remember "bookmarks"? Well, those were actually useful. You had to create your own personal index of the small portion of the Internet you happened to bump into while surfing.
Today Google will find the information you want in seconds. *Everything* is out there. Every guy and his cat has a website where he can post whatever he wants. The explosion of the Internet was only made possible by Google.
Altavista could barely get 3 results when searching for "altavista". It *sucked*. If you honestly think that nothing has changed since Altavista, then I take it you didn't use Altavista much.
Let's use a 2-dimensional metaphor I read on Sci. American a while ago. Grab a rubber ballon. Blow some air into it. The surface of this balloon is now your 2-dimensional universe. It has some properties that we couldn't really tell about our universe - i.e, it's closed in the sense that you can go around it and end up un the same place.
Now you use a pen to draw 2 points in the surface of the balloon. There's a particular distance between them over the surface of the "universe". Now, you blow more air inside the balloon. Tada - universe expansion. Every point is moving apart from the others and this mimics pretty well the behaviour of the universe we live in.
It's not a traditional concept. Space can stretch. Time can dilate. Viva la relativity:)
Yep, same here. I've had it happen with a 50x drive and a cheapo MITSUI CD-R. I remember the drive sounded like a car accelerating when speeding up, with gear shifting an everything. It was amazing. Then one day it sounded like a car crash and there were little plastic pieces all over the case.
Of course, it won't work. I just wanted to point out that the problem that the parent mentioned was related to point sources of light, and projectos such as this are nowhere near point sources when projecting on a small sphere.
OTOH I think you could solve what you suggest using a correct grad filter that levels out the light on the different areas (darker in the center), right?
No, actually it's perfectly doable. This is different from seeing the horizon in that you eye is waaay smaller than the Earth.
For this scenario all you have to do is have a light source and lens bigger than the sphere you are projecting onto. With an infinitely large lens you could also project on the *whole* sphere, from any given (fixed) distance, not just half of it. That's if you manage to focus it correctly, though.
There must be something in the air. Maybe the spring or something. I posted a comment to a guy's blog the other day, we engaged in not-so-nice argument, and 2 days later, *shock*, an apology from him, to my e-mail and posted in the blog! The IntarWeb is not what it used to be...
Would you mind enlightening me on this aspect? I have never suceeded in getting sane behaviour out of apache/mod_python when developing other than having a bash script looping over "true" that restarts apache and waits for a keypress to do it again. And I do this quite a while.
Dude, mod_python sucks in precisely that aspect. Have you ever used it at all? You can't reload code without restarting Apache or using PITA code such as Vampire. PHP kicks python's ass in this respect.
No, actually the reason you don't put power plants in the middle of nowhere is because those cables are ridiculously expensive to make and deploy (because the longer the distance, the higher you want the tension to be in order to reduce resistive losses, and the higher the tension, the bigger the towers to keep the conductors apart) and this is just economically speaking. Nobody wants to live near HV towers, if you live in city, because you have heard that they give you cancer, and if you live elsewhere, you like your landscape enough to have it ruined by ugly structures and cables. Therefore it requires a lot of lobbying and convincing people.
Don't know, maybe something productive out of you saturday? I'm not the one implying that Apple is t3h 3v1l because if you "just need 10GB" they FORCE YOU into buying 30!!!
Man, a given trivial Java program might be faster than the Python equivalent, but it sure as hell won't take less memory. Java is way more bloated than Python.
The whole point of open sourcing java is to get more widespread use for it. "Hey, if you won't use my product, then that's your problem" - mmmmnope. It's Sun's problem when they miss a huge potential market like that.
The fact that you are perceiving benefit doesn't mean you are not getting screwed. It just means that your are not aware of it or can't avoid it for other reasons.
Examples ----------------
* Unawareness
- Hey, i'll buy you that nice post stamp of yours for a buck! - [begin homer mode] Cool, a buck [end homer mode] - (Thinks: Mwhahahah! I'll sell this for a grand at the next collector meeting!)
* Can't-avoid-it-ness
- I want to sell my gold wedding ring. - Ok here's a hundred! - But, this ring is worth at least $200! I have to bring food to my kids! - Oh, I see. Here's a fifty then!
Whenever someone benefits from the laws of the market (such as offer & demand, or simply the fact that someone is in a hurry to sell or buy something), there is some screwingness involved that's inherent to the system. Yes, you sell your gold wedding ring for $50 because you *have* to feed your children, so you perceive a benefit. Still, you are getting screwed. The buyer will make a profit out of this transaction (and a real profit, not a perceived one) by selling this to another person who says "hey, a gold ring for a hundred bucks, what a bargain!". The actual market value of that ring is way higher than $100 (thus the comment of the buyer), but the original seller is being screwed so badly that it allows 2 whole persons to make a nice profit out of his disgrace.
you have failed to even have enough enough of Adam Smith
So what? Capitalism is still capitalism no matter what Adam Smith said. It's a more fundamental concept than Smith's idea of a working system. It's not because he was the first who wrote down a somewhat serious model based on capitalism that only his conception is to be called that way.
If you remove all government "interference" the corporations, cartels and monopolies will themselves become the interference. The government can protect both parties, without the government protections the little guy is screwed to death and the entire economy in question destablizes and then collapses.
Let me see if I get your reasoning:
Complete lack of gov. regulations cause the "failure" of a capitalist model (observation)
The capitalist model doesn't "fail" (observation)
Therefore:
There is no complete lack of regulations in a capitalist model (deduction)
I for one can't agree on any of the premises. Is it your position that the world-wide capitalist model works?
Pure capitalism is exactly that, pure. No one is saying it works.
unlimited laissez-faire really worked... at causing the great depression
Funny, I was under the impression that right before the great depression there was a period of états providence rather than liberals. Anyway, just keep an eye on the oil prices for a few years, and see if it was just the "unlimited" part that caused economic instability.
I stopped reading your...
You seem to have a problem with other people replying to you. What's the point of a discussion forum then? Just explain your point of view, no need to dismiss other people's replies.
Mmm no, capitalism in it's pure form is exactly "laissez faire". Your idea of government regulated trades would make real capitalists cry in bed.
In pure capitalism the government doesn't mess with the economy, it lets the market run freely. The idea is that whenever someone gets crushed, the -theoretically- healthy system can reabsorb him somewhere else. It works at some places and at some times, it's the case of many asian enterprises that outsource their work: when something is wrong down the chain, they get rid of it and factories are closed. The employees are then put somewhere else (because they are growing economies) and no one gets hurt.
About your problems with the term "socialism". Many so-called socialist governments today do exist. They do not own the factories, but they share some fundamental conceptions with historical socialists. Terms such as this evolve as the world changes.
a fair transaction is a mutually beneficial one
Yeah right. There's no such thing. Unless you are printing bills your are not creating any wealth (even then you aren't). It only goes from one hand to another, and in that process someone gets screwed. That's how it works. How much you screw or get screwed depends on your position and negotiating abilities. And yes, the PBI of your country most likely grows every year, but the $ goes down every year too. Capitalism plays on greed and selfishness that are pretty much builtin on every person. Every one does the best he can in his situation, no matter how many he has to crush to do se. There's a reason it's cheaper to outsource your jobs to India, someone somewhere *is* getting screwed.
Slashdot Mirror
Your plot is disturbingly rational. I am sending the FBI to your place now. You must be terminated.
Man, I just don't know where to start. Lessig is a visionary and he is working so that you can benefit from other people's desire to share and cooperate. Who the hell cares about his health insurance??? No one is forcing you to give away your work. CC licenses allow you to share your work under more permissive licenses if and only if *you* feel like it.
Thank god at least one in a few thousand people like this are subsidized so that anyone can actually afford to think instead of going to work inside a cubicle every freaking day. What's wrong with that?
Dude you just can't compare Yahoo to Google. Do you remember the Internet in the Altavista/Yahoo days? It was the most freaking useless thing ever (maybe second to a horn on a plane). Google made the Internet you know these days possible, and brings *any* information you want to your screen in seconds. Yahoo never did this.
Google is the detonator of the web revolution, the engine that made it possible for it to take off. Your grand children will read about Google in their textbooks, as the world will never be the same as before it.
Google's impact on the world's dynamics are only comparable to, I don't know, relativity? People keep saying "ooo there's so much information on the intarweb, it's so much better than Encarta 97!". The Internet was nothing before Google. A part of the information was there, but it was useless. Remember "bookmarks"? Well, those were actually useful. You had to create your own personal index of the small portion of the Internet you happened to bump into while surfing.
Today Google will find the information you want in seconds. *Everything* is out there. Every guy and his cat has a website where he can post whatever he wants. The explosion of the Internet was only made possible by Google.
Altavista could barely get 3 results when searching for "altavista". It *sucked*. If you honestly think that nothing has changed since Altavista, then I take it you didn't use Altavista much.
It's not flying. It's expanding.
:)
Let's use a 2-dimensional metaphor I read on Sci. American a while ago. Grab a rubber ballon. Blow some air into it. The surface of this balloon is now your 2-dimensional universe. It has some properties that we couldn't really tell about our universe - i.e, it's closed in the sense that you can go around it and end up un the same place.
Now you use a pen to draw 2 points in the surface of the balloon. There's a particular distance between them over the surface of the "universe". Now, you blow more air inside the balloon. Tada - universe expansion. Every point is moving apart from the others and this mimics pretty well the behaviour of the universe we live in.
It's not a traditional concept. Space can stretch. Time can dilate. Viva la relativity
Those of us in the rest of the world understand that when someone says "our moon" they are actually including you and me.
Yep, same here. I've had it happen with a 50x drive and a cheapo MITSUI CD-R. I remember the drive sounded like a car accelerating when speeding up, with gear shifting an everything. It was amazing. Then one day it sounded like a car crash and there were little plastic pieces all over the case.
Of course, it won't work. I just wanted to point out that the problem that the parent mentioned was related to point sources of light, and projectos such as this are nowhere near point sources when projecting on a small sphere.
OTOH I think you could solve what you suggest using a correct grad filter that levels out the light on the different areas (darker in the center), right?
No, actually it's perfectly doable. This is different from seeing the horizon in that you eye is waaay smaller than the Earth.
For this scenario all you have to do is have a light source and lens bigger than the sphere you are projecting onto. With an infinitely large lens you could also project on the *whole* sphere, from any given (fixed) distance, not just half of it. That's if you manage to focus it correctly, though.
There must be something in the air. Maybe the spring or something. I posted a comment to a guy's blog the other day, we engaged in not-so-nice argument, and 2 days later, *shock*, an apology from him, to my e-mail and posted in the blog! The IntarWeb is not what it used to be...
Would you mind enlightening me on this aspect? I have never suceeded in getting sane behaviour out of apache/mod_python when developing other than having a bash script looping over "true" that restarts apache and waits for a keypress to do it again. And I do this quite a while.
Dude, mod_python sucks in precisely that aspect. Have you ever used it at all? You can't reload code without restarting Apache or using PITA code such as Vampire. PHP kicks python's ass in this respect.
No, actually the reason you don't put power plants in the middle of nowhere is because those cables are ridiculously expensive to make and deploy (because the longer the distance, the higher you want the tension to be in order to reduce resistive losses, and the higher the tension, the bigger the towers to keep the conductors apart) and this is just economically speaking. Nobody wants to live near HV towers, if you live in city, because you have heard that they give you cancer, and if you live elsewhere, you like your landscape enough to have it ruined by ugly structures and cables. Therefore it requires a lot of lobbying and convincing people.
Debian Packages that work for everything.
I have a 1 gig Sandisk. Couldn't be happier.
43 libraries of congress per quick-defrost-of-a-chicken-on-a-microwave-second.
No, actually is the other way around. Once you are educated (on Slashdot or anywhere else) you start ranting about consumerism and capitalism.
Don't know, maybe something productive out of you saturday?
I'm not the one implying that Apple is t3h 3v1l because if you "just need 10GB" they FORCE YOU into buying 30!!!
Man, a given trivial Java program might be faster than the Python equivalent, but it sure as hell won't take less memory. Java is way more bloated than Python.
The whole point of open sourcing java is to get more widespread use for it. "Hey, if you won't use my product, then that's your problem" - mmmmnope. It's Sun's problem when they miss a huge potential market like that.
You know, when you think you *only need* 10GB from a music player, they have already won.
The fact that you are perceiving benefit doesn't mean you are not getting screwed. It just means that your are not aware of it or can't avoid it for other reasons.
Examples
----------------
* Unawareness
- Hey, i'll buy you that nice post stamp of yours for a buck!
- [begin homer mode] Cool, a buck [end homer mode]
- (Thinks: Mwhahahah! I'll sell this for a grand at the next collector meeting!)
* Can't-avoid-it-ness
- I want to sell my gold wedding ring.
- Ok here's a hundred!
- But, this ring is worth at least $200! I have to bring food to my kids!
- Oh, I see. Here's a fifty then!
Whenever someone benefits from the laws of the market (such as offer & demand, or simply the fact that someone is in a hurry to sell or buy something), there is some screwingness involved that's inherent to the system. Yes, you sell your gold wedding ring for $50 because you *have* to feed your children, so you perceive a benefit. Still, you are getting screwed. The buyer will make a profit out of this transaction (and a real profit, not a perceived one) by selling this to another person who says "hey, a gold ring for a hundred bucks, what a bargain!". The actual market value of that ring is way higher than $100 (thus the comment of the buyer), but the original seller is being screwed so badly that it allows 2 whole persons to make a nice profit out of his disgrace.
No, you could create them yourselves. Never heard of subsistence farmers?
You've got to be kidding.
So what? Capitalism is still capitalism no matter what Adam Smith said. It's a more fundamental concept than Smith's idea of a working system. It's not because he was the first who wrote down a somewhat serious model based on capitalism that only his conception is to be called that way.
If you remove all government "interference" the corporations, cartels and monopolies will themselves become the interference. The government can protect both parties, without the government protections the little guy is screwed to death and the entire economy in question destablizes and then collapses.
Let me see if I get your reasoning:
- Complete lack of gov. regulations cause the "failure" of a capitalist model (observation)
- The capitalist model doesn't "fail" (observation)
Therefore:I for one can't agree on any of the premises. Is it your position that the world-wide capitalist model works?
Pure capitalism is exactly that, pure. No one is saying it works.
unlimited laissez-faire really worked
Funny, I was under the impression that right before the great depression there was a period of états providence rather than liberals. Anyway, just keep an eye on the oil prices for a few years, and see if it was just the "unlimited" part that caused economic instability.
I stopped reading your...
You seem to have a problem with other people replying to you. What's the point of a discussion forum then? Just explain your point of view, no need to dismiss other people's replies.
Mmm no, capitalism in it's pure form is exactly "laissez faire". Your idea of government regulated trades would make real capitalists cry in bed.
In pure capitalism the government doesn't mess with the economy, it lets the market run freely. The idea is that whenever someone gets crushed, the -theoretically- healthy system can reabsorb him somewhere else. It works at some places and at some times, it's the case of many asian enterprises that outsource their work: when something is wrong down the chain, they get rid of it and factories are closed. The employees are then put somewhere else (because they are growing economies) and no one gets hurt.
About your problems with the term "socialism". Many so-called socialist governments today do exist. They do not own the factories, but they share some fundamental conceptions with historical socialists. Terms such as this evolve as the world changes.
a fair transaction is a mutually beneficial one Yeah right. There's no such thing. Unless you are printing bills your are not creating any wealth (even then you aren't). It only goes from one hand to another, and in that process someone gets screwed. That's how it works. How much you screw or get screwed depends on your position and negotiating abilities. And yes, the PBI of your country most likely grows every year, but the $ goes down every year too. Capitalism plays on greed and selfishness that are pretty much builtin on every person. Every one does the best he can in his situation, no matter how many he has to crush to do se. There's a reason it's cheaper to outsource your jobs to India, someone somewhere *is* getting screwed.