So what you're saying is the lowest earning 80% of the nation has more control over the government than the highest paid 20%? The poor and middle class are holding are government hostage?
The Government's, especially the federal government's, primary responsibility, after self-preservation, is ensuring that the wealthy elite are allowed to control the rest of us. Their wealth is meaningless without a strong government to protect it. Yes, they may have "earned" it, or "innovated" for it, but if you want to have something in life you have to have the guns to protect it. If you don't have the guns then it's not yours, this is not some exception it's the rule. It would be hard for them to pay too much in taxes since if the government wasn't there no one would take orders from them or allow them to hoard land and resources. So taxes are collected to pay for a massive military and spy network which allows our wealthy citizens and corporations to carry out exploitation, err... business here and abroad(and a related bureaucracy). Any social services offered by the government are just there to make up for the pathologies of unfettered capitalism. These aren't favors and they're not given out of kindness. Just like the 40 hour work week had to be paid for with the blood of striking workers. If these little fixes to capitalism like "the new deal" weren't enacted then there would have been a revolution and then the rich would have lost everything. The US doesn't even offer that much in terms of public social services. And Social Security the most widespread social program in the country comes directly out of the pockets of workers. Half is ostensibly paid by the employers but in reality the employee is just paid less an amount equal to what the employer gives the government. We don't even have universal health care, so how can you say the poorest 80% are mandating government spending?
Also, to say that the lowest earning 80% pay very little in taxes is disingenuous. If I make $20,000 a year whether I pay $5k in that in taxes or not is going to directly my physical comfort. I could buy a car with that money, go on a vacation, whatever it's a big deal. After a certain point, once you've got the luxury car, the house, the summer house, the yacht, additional money is just abstract and doesn't affect you.
Also, in 1934 the total receipts for the federal government were 4.8% of the GDP, it rose to 20% in 1945, then dipped down to 13% in 1950, then continuing steady up to 19% today.
http://w3.access.gpo.gov/usbudget/fy2002/hist.ht ml
Anyway, I'm all for cutting taxes, especially on the rich(since they pay so much.) By all means do that-- it will hasten their demise.
"No matter your race it takes a ton of work to get from the lower eschelon's of society to the upper... and if you are truely determined and willing to go the distance the only thing that can stop you is yourself."
So you're saying black people and minorities are lazy? Everyone that's poor is poor because they just don't work hard enough. Could we all live in mansions if we would just get a little more training and put in a few more hours?
The system is setup to be a pyramid with only a few spots on top and a lot on the bottom. Yes it is possible for certain individuals to rise from the bottom ranks to the top, however there is still pressure from those at the top to retain their positions. There is not room for everyone, so people ARE competing with others, not just themselves as you said.
You can't deny that nearly all positions of power in America are held by White Males. That's just a fluke? Or again it's because blacks, other minorities and women are just lazy whiners?
What's important to remember here is that it's a song, not a position paper. There really aren't that many words in it, so for you to so precisely decern what he means is just not possible. It's open for interpretation. My interpretation is just that he's comparing his situation to that of whites. There was then and there still is a wide division between the living conditions of blacks and whites. That's what he's talking about and that's true no matter how you slice it.
I'm white. I don't feel hurt, put upon or misrepresented by reading "whitey's on the moon." All the men that landed on the moon WERE white. I'm not offended by the song-- why be so sensitive?
The Muslims kept math alive during the dark ages when Christians were busy burning each other at the stake. You think the 0 (zero) is useful? The muslims brought it to the west. Without them we wouldn't be using computers right now, we owe them a great debt.
A lot of people, mainly outside the west, are engaged in revolutionary struggles to create theocracys. That's what our good friend osama wants to do. Anarchists would like to get rid of the government completely, democracy or no. We can say all these people are just crazys who if they weren't so brain washed would wanted liberal democracys, and they probably are, but doesn't that sound pretty assinine?
Yes, you're right, if wireless tech can be widely proliferated "under the radar" then there's a chance of organizing people to resist. We should be careful with our language, saying "community 'net," not "the FU-feds-free-net" =) There's so much media trickery and misinformation out there that "the people" aren't always going to make the right decisions. Imagine if the feds started spreading stories about terrorists using wireless networking. Plus, I hate spam, but I'm frightened by government moves towards making it illegal and trying to crack down because of the increased governmental involvment in the internet that it would lead to. The people could be tricked into thinking that we must have govermental supervision of networks inorder for them to function properly. I believe it's important to get rid of the "digital divide" and get more networked computers in the hands of the minority communities. African-americans have been getting dicked by our government from the start so they already don't trust it and would make a good foundation for a free-network movement.
As far as "what it would take." hmmm There's already a fairly wide proliferation of WAPs which could be used to provide "last meter" service. More wireless point-to-point links, of course. Local governments are easier to handle and control than state and federal and could play a vital role in gaining access to choice locations to put antennas. For example, where I live in St. Louis there is an abandoned tower owned by the city which used to be used to store excess water from a water resevoir. It would make an ideal central hub for wireless since it has line of sight with everything within a 20+ mile radius. If smart blimps were cheap they could be used as radio/microwave towers...that is unless they are outlawed as possible poor-man's cruise missiles. I know that the Bush administration has been trying to outlaw or at least heavily regulate drone aircraft technologies.
IMHO the biggest hurdle to overcome is the routing and content search protocols. If users could seamlessly take advantage of all the resources that the global internet has and the ones that their local or national free-net has then the free-net could grow organically from just a few connections.
" The strange thing is, the levers of democracy do work. It sometimes takes a while, but wrongs get righted. The Jim Crow laws were abolished. Discontent with the VietNam war forced Lyndon Johnson from office. "
So after 12 years, millions of dollars, 4 million dead asians, 60 thousand dead americans the war finally ends with an entire country laid to waste by more bombs than were dropped during the second world war, and you say democracy works? What planet are you living on? If democracy worked Nixon, Johnson and Kissinger would have been tried for crimes against humanity and put to death.
As for jim crow laws: just because black people now get to take part in the rape of the planet by the US government doesn't mean we have a [functioning] democracy.
The people always have had and will have the power it's only a trick that governments play to make them think otherwise. Every period of social change in the US has involved violence between the government and workers. Nothing has ever been given up without a fight. The supposedly peaceful civil rights movement would never have accomplished anything without the threat of violence from the Black Panthers and other revolutionary groups. Anyway, there are lots of creative ways that force can be applied, no one seriously contemplates fighting a revolution in the 21st century the way the American Revolution was fought. A cardinal rule of guerrilla warfare is that you don't fight your enemy where he's strong, but where he's weak. And our military really is only effective against 3rd world armies. The US bombing of Yugoslavia had virtually no effect due to clever use of decoys and well placed SAMs and AAA. If those pussys fought some europeans or americans it wouldn't be such a shut out.
Technical matters aren't the question...of course it's all possible.
The moment that community wi-fi(or whatever) networks starts challenging corporate power they will be made illegal. Adding non-standard antennas to 802.11 equipment is already against FCC rules.
(Also, the interstate highways were completely subsidized by the government. They aren't an example of something occuring organically-- it's not an example that community networks can emulate.)
Virtual Reality will make physical travel unnecessary. Wireless computers will only be used by police and delivery men. Humans will become more machine like, not machines more human(i.e. wireless)....IMHO.
> War is bad but there are plenty of things that are worse. Ask any survivor of the concentration camps who was liberated by the Allied Expeditionary Force whether they think war is 'cool.'
The plight of the jews had NOTHING to do with the US or the allies fighting that war.
Re:For the success of any ad-hoc multi-hop network
on
Wireless Mesh Networks
·
· Score: 1
That problem will be solved in the next release. Transmission speeds are increasing all the time.
fuzzy results aren't good enough for ALMOST EVERYTHING we use computers for. If I want to calculate a number I want that same result EVERY TIME I do the same calculation and not something in the ballpark.
Don't you really mean that you want the same result to a certain accuracy?
Slashdot Mirror
For the Apple IIe.
Yeah, it's amazing how immersed you can get in a world that's contained on a couple of low density 5.25" floppys.
All those things you mentioned are the responsibility of parents, not software publishers.
So what you're saying is the lowest earning 80% of the nation has more control over the government than the highest paid 20%? The poor and middle class are holding are government hostage?
t ml
The Government's, especially the federal government's, primary responsibility, after self-preservation, is ensuring that the wealthy elite are allowed to control the rest of us. Their wealth is meaningless without a strong government to protect it. Yes, they may have "earned" it, or "innovated" for it, but if you want to have something in life you have to have the guns to protect it. If you don't have the guns then it's not yours, this is not some exception it's the rule. It would be hard for them to pay too much in taxes since if the government wasn't there no one would take orders from them or allow them to hoard land and resources. So taxes are collected to pay for a massive military and spy network which allows our wealthy citizens and corporations to carry out exploitation, err... business here and abroad(and a related bureaucracy). Any social services offered by the government are just there to make up for the pathologies of unfettered capitalism. These aren't favors and they're not given out of kindness. Just like the 40 hour work week had to be paid for with the blood of striking workers. If these little fixes to capitalism like "the new deal" weren't enacted then there would have been a revolution and then the rich would have lost everything. The US doesn't even offer that much in terms of public social services. And Social Security the most widespread social program in the country comes directly out of the pockets of workers. Half is ostensibly paid by the employers but in reality the employee is just paid less an amount equal to what the employer gives the government. We don't even have universal health care, so how can you say the poorest 80% are mandating government spending?
Also, to say that the lowest earning 80% pay very little in taxes is disingenuous. If I make $20,000 a year whether I pay $5k in that in taxes or not is going to directly my physical comfort. I could buy a car with that money, go on a vacation, whatever it's a big deal. After a certain point, once you've got the luxury car, the house, the summer house, the yacht, additional money is just abstract and doesn't affect you.
Also, in 1934 the total receipts for the federal government were 4.8% of the GDP, it rose to 20% in 1945, then dipped down to 13% in 1950, then continuing steady up to 19% today.
http://w3.access.gpo.gov/usbudget/fy2002/hist.h
Anyway, I'm all for cutting taxes, especially on the rich(since they pay so much.) By all means do that-- it will hasten their demise.
"No matter your race it takes a ton of work to get from the lower eschelon's of society to the upper... and if you are truely determined and willing to go the distance the only thing that can stop you is yourself."
So you're saying black people and minorities are lazy? Everyone that's poor is poor because they just don't work hard enough. Could we all live in mansions if we would just get a little more training and put in a few more hours?
The system is setup to be a pyramid with only a few spots on top and a lot on the bottom. Yes it is possible for certain individuals to rise from the bottom ranks to the top, however there is still pressure from those at the top to retain their positions. There is not room for everyone, so people ARE competing with others, not just themselves as you said.
You can't deny that nearly all positions of power in America are held by White Males. That's just a fluke? Or again it's because blacks, other minorities and women are just lazy whiners?
What's important to remember here is that it's a song, not a position paper. There really aren't that many words in it, so for you to so precisely decern what he means is just not possible. It's open for interpretation. My interpretation is just that he's comparing his situation to that of whites. There was then and there still is a wide division between the living conditions of blacks and whites. That's what he's talking about and that's true no matter how you slice it.
I'm white. I don't feel hurt, put upon or misrepresented by reading "whitey's on the moon." All the men that landed on the moon WERE white. I'm not offended by the song-- why be so sensitive?
The Muslims kept math alive during the dark ages when Christians were busy burning each other at the stake. You think the 0 (zero) is useful? The muslims brought it to the west. Without them we wouldn't be using computers right now, we owe them a great debt.
A lot of people, mainly outside the west, are engaged in revolutionary struggles to create theocracys. That's what our good friend osama wants to do. Anarchists would like to get rid of the government completely, democracy or no. We can say all these people are just crazys who if they weren't so brain washed would wanted liberal democracys, and they probably are, but doesn't that sound pretty assinine?
Violence is to dictatorship as
propaganda is to democracy.
There are more and better was to control men than violence alone. "None are so enslaved as those that think they are free."
Yes, you're right, if wireless tech can be widely proliferated "under the radar" then there's a chance of organizing people to resist. We should be careful with our language, saying "community 'net," not "the FU-feds-free-net" =) There's so much media trickery and misinformation out there that "the people" aren't always going to make the right decisions. Imagine if the feds started spreading stories about terrorists using wireless networking. Plus, I hate spam, but I'm frightened by government moves towards making it illegal and trying to crack down because of the increased governmental involvment in the internet that it would lead to. The people could be tricked into thinking that we must have govermental supervision of networks inorder for them to function properly. I believe it's important to get rid of the "digital divide" and get more networked computers in the hands of the minority communities. African-americans have been getting dicked by our government from the start so they already don't trust it and would make a good foundation for a free-network movement.
As far as "what it would take." hmmm There's already a fairly wide proliferation of WAPs which could be used to provide "last meter" service. More wireless point-to-point links, of course. Local governments are easier to handle and control than state and federal and could play a vital role in gaining access to choice locations to put antennas. For example, where I live in St. Louis there is an abandoned tower owned by the city which used to be used to store excess water from a water resevoir. It would make an ideal central hub for wireless since it has line of sight with everything within a 20+ mile radius. If smart blimps were cheap they could be used as radio/microwave towers...that is unless they are outlawed as possible poor-man's cruise missiles. I know that the Bush administration has been trying to outlaw or at least heavily regulate drone aircraft technologies.
IMHO the biggest hurdle to overcome is the routing and content search protocols. If users could seamlessly take advantage of all the resources that the global internet has and the ones that their local or national free-net has then the free-net could grow organically from just a few connections.
" The strange thing is, the levers of democracy do work. It sometimes takes a while, but wrongs get righted. The Jim Crow laws were abolished. Discontent with the VietNam war forced Lyndon Johnson from office. "
So after 12 years, millions of dollars, 4 million dead asians, 60 thousand dead americans the war finally ends with an entire country laid to waste by more bombs than were dropped during the second world war, and you say democracy works? What planet are you living on? If democracy worked Nixon, Johnson and Kissinger would have been tried for crimes against humanity and put to death.
As for jim crow laws: just because black people now get to take part in the rape of the planet by the US government doesn't mean we have a [functioning] democracy.
http://www.indymedia.org
The Association of Computing Machinery(ACM) The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers(IEEE)
The people always have had and will have the power it's only a trick that governments play to make them think otherwise. Every period of social change in the US has involved violence between the government and workers. Nothing has ever been given up without a fight. The supposedly peaceful civil rights movement would never have accomplished anything without the threat of violence from the Black Panthers and other revolutionary groups. Anyway, there are lots of creative ways that force can be applied, no one seriously contemplates fighting a revolution in the 21st century the way the American Revolution was fought. A cardinal rule of guerrilla warfare is that you don't fight your enemy where he's strong, but where he's weak. And our military really is only effective against 3rd world armies. The US bombing of Yugoslavia had virtually no effect due to clever use of decoys and well placed SAMs and AAA. If those pussys fought some europeans or americans it wouldn't be such a shut out.
Technical matters aren't the question...of course it's all possible.
The moment that community wi-fi(or whatever) networks starts challenging corporate power they will be made illegal. Adding non-standard antennas to 802.11 equipment is already against FCC rules.
(Also, the interstate highways were completely subsidized by the government. They aren't an example of something occuring organically-- it's not an example that community networks can emulate.)
In case you needed a reminder...you don't own your body.
That's nice, too bad no one uses Macs.
Reverse psychology.
Remind me never to buy any of these products.
Virtual Reality will make physical travel unnecessary. Wireless computers will only be used by police and delivery men. Humans will become more machine like, not machines more human(i.e. wireless)....IMHO.
Your *wife* wouldn't let you use a coffee can antenna? Pussy whipped...
> War is bad but there are plenty of things that are worse. Ask any survivor of the concentration camps who was liberated by the Allied Expeditionary Force whether they think war is 'cool.' The plight of the jews had NOTHING to do with the US or the allies fighting that war.
That problem will be solved in the next release. Transmission speeds are increasing all the time.
>As for how "annoying 'victimized' OSS authors can act", you have to have created something to understand the pain of someone else taking it away.
No one took anything away. You can't steal information.
Don't you really mean that you want the same result to a certain accuracy?