Because technology has yet to come up with a solution maybe?
Technology is great, but abused technology doesn't seem to be able to fight for itself. How many people in the world actually like spam? The rest of us have been complaining for years about it. Spamblockers kind of work, but they don't completely solve the problem.
Spam is a pretty specific term. From Mail-AbuseAn electronic message is "spam" IF: (1) the recipient's personal identity and context are irrelevant because the message is equally applicable to many other potential recipients; AND (2) the recipient has not verifiably granted deliberate, explicit, and still-revocable permission for it to be sent; AND (3) the transmission and reception of the message appears to the recipient to give a disproportionate benefit to the sender.
How would this let the state control what goes in your inbox? Only unwanted messages. If something unsolicited yet important did make it to my inbox, I would probably treat it like the rest of the messages I get from unknown sources.. delete it. And I think most people do just the same.
The bottom line is technology by itself seems to be helpless against it. Maybe laws will thwart some of the 120+ spam e-mails I get every day, allowing me to be more productive in my work.
Now, regarding the loonies that think it should be a jailable offense...
As a semi-retired musician, I fly to gigs once in a while, and never trust the baggage folks with my basses, so I carry on. This always makes me a super high risk, for some reason.... I suppose the electronics. No big deal.
After 9/11, I flew for a show and went through the usual motions. Upon returning home and clearing out my luggage carry on, I noticed a full sized pair of scissors in a side pocket... EASILY detected by the scanners. But it got through two of them. So I called security at the airport here, just to let them know they seem to have a problem with their employees at the checkpoints. The person I spoke to got terribly defensive, and I kept saying "I'm just calling to help." She wouldn't have any of it, and eventually hung up on me.
Security is a joke... and we're talking about major airports here.... IAH was my departure airport.
You make a strong point. However, imagine Cuba, where the cars people drive are leftovers from the days before embargos against them. Everyone drives vehicles from the 50's. But those cars are still running, and you can imagine alternators don't last 50 years.
Hit eBay, and see how many 486 procs come up in a query. Better yet, hit www.pcsurplusonline.com. There is a plethora of spare parts from out of date computers for sale everywhere here. So ship some old boxen, and some spare parts. I mean, sure we have the accumulation of 10 years of these parts. Send them along too. I just saw 486 procs for $5 on eBay. If the proc in a simputer frags, what do you suppose the repair will cost? $5 or less? Hardly. And it doesn't take an expert, or even someone with a saudering iron to maintain a PC. However, the smaller form factors, laptops, handhelds, are much more difficult to upgrade/repair because a good portion of the hardware is integrated. P1's weren't so long ago that an "expert in the old ways" would be necessary. They mobo's look the same, RAM goes in the same way, peripherals (IDE?) the same. They're a far cry from a maintenance nightmare.
Given that it's a tool to be used by many people, do you honestly think 2 AA batteries will power it for a month? I would love to have that kind of technology myself.
I keep revisiting it, but everyone that's posted back to this keeps ignoring the price issue. That undersized computer would cost them the equivalent of $8,000 US. Hell, why don't they just get a palm pilot and a modem card for $120 instead of this thing for $250 ($300 for color)? Because there's no money in the overhead for the company that's producing these things.
Yes, smaller and battery powered is cooler. But if you can't afford it, it's of no use whatsoever.
It just did in the block of FCC's changes. I can't find it right now, but there's an image of Trent Lott and Tom Daschle from a couple of days ago speaking on the senate floor, with a huge stack of paper. It turns out that's a printout of the web petition signed by thousands of angry people.
Aaaahhhhhhhh..... I was wondering when the MS spin would get posted on this one;)
Just kidding. as a developer, it's difficult to write code that assumes all possibilities in use with the end product. Hence QA teams. When I write code, I do spend time trying to think of how a user could possibly screw it up, but I never sit there and think "what if they open and close this thing 100 times in 3 seconds." Bugs happen, that's why there's versioning.
Actually, I did read the article. $250-$300 for a palm pilot with some interactive software on it. Woo-friggin-hoo. That's different from a computer with the same software on it.. how?
The bottom line is it's too expensive. Besides, have you ever tried to educate yourself with a palm pilot? Not easy to read a book at 200 or less characters per page. 64MB of RAM and 32MB of flash RAM. Wow. All for the low price of $250? That would help those people a lot, considering it's still tied to a modem line. Not mobile, small amount of memory, and small. Once again, for much less, they could have a PC tied to that modem line, running linux, and have much more capability. I think it's throwing money in the wrong direction to help people.
Exactly! That's the point I was trying to make. This "effort" to make computers for the poor is half-hearted at best. There are MANY more CHEAPER ways to do it. But of course, the profit margin in selling used pc's isn't quite the same as making some new ones and selling them for whatever you want to.
I was given two P-Pro 266's by a former employer who would have had to pay to get rid of them. Two used 30GB HD's and two 128MB sticks of PC-133 later (to the tune of $100) and they're now "servers" on my home network (to test distributed objects). Much cheaper than the $300 option these guys are talking about. If all you want to do is hit the web, a P-Pro 266 isn't a bad option at all.
With that I agree wholeheartedly. Having access to the information on the internet is a privelage that shouldn't be focused only on the wealthy.
I just don't think this particular effort is newsworthy. To me it's just another half-hearted attempt to do the right thing, but make a buck or two hundred in the process.
That makes sense, but that $200 PC ($2,960.63) that these guys are saying will be more like $300-400 ($4,440.95-5,921.26) isn't going to help in the least. They'd be better off with the ads you find in the computer section of the greensheet hyping "internet ready" PC's (translate, a 486 or P1 with a small hard drive, modem, and crappy 15" monitor) for $100. They would have the ability to get online, and still be able to afford dinner.
What those GDP numbers fail to show is disposable income. If my $37,600/yr salary provides $10,000/yr of disposable income because all of my housing/food/clothing needs are met, then I'm in good shape. But if their $2,540 only provides for $300/yr in disposable income, then the computer is priced even more out of their range.
Yes, it makes sense to provide the worlds largest collection of knowledge (and porn ads) to impoverished people (of course, that is not to say that everyone in India is impoverished). But it doesn't make any sense to attempt to provide that at a cost that most will deem out of their purchasing ability.
It's all about what a person deems important and affordable. Food - check. Roof - check. Computer - maybe next year.
Let's not discount the fact that the per capita GDP in India is $2,540, which would make a $200 PC in India worth $2960.63 in US dollars (US per capita GDP = $37,600).
Being a Texan, I can say two things about it. One, the districts are all jerrymandered all over the place from the last time the Democrats here did the very same thing (. Two, The 2000 Census required Texas to redraw the lines, and it hasn't been done yet.
Remember, the media is generally liberally biased, and will side with the dem's on issues such as this one. Changes to data in censii (is that a word?) require redistricting in Texas.
The last redistricting was forced by a panel of judges because the two parties couldn't agree. It turns out that is illegal in the Texas constitution, so it didn't hold water anyway.
So if blaming Bush makes you comfortable, then I guess go ahead. But in all honesty, it has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with political partisanship.
p.s. I'm neither a democrat or republican. I think the two party system is stone age, and with modern communication both it and the electoral college should go away.
Someone with a sick sense of purpose could write a compiler that compiles VB to machine code too.. making it possible to write an OS (albeit a very crappy one) in VB as well. The original point was related to using the right tool for the right job. I don't write RAD database apps in Lisp, and I wouldn't write IDE's in Java.
Feel free to point out every Java app you know of and describe it as speedy. The bottom line, however, is it has a runtime (which makes it slower than a compiled app), and Sun doesn't seem to think too highly of that runtime.
Since Ford is an SAP shop the transition shouldn't be a painful one at all, other than the possibility of end users filling up the help desk cue with mundane requests.
Slashdot Mirror
Because technology has yet to come up with a solution maybe?
Technology is great, but abused technology doesn't seem to be able to fight for itself. How many people in the world actually like spam? The rest of us have been complaining for years about it. Spamblockers kind of work, but they don't completely solve the problem.
Spam is a pretty specific term. From Mail-Abuse An electronic message is "spam" IF: (1) the recipient's personal identity and context are irrelevant because the message is equally applicable to many other potential recipients; AND (2) the recipient has not verifiably granted deliberate, explicit, and still-revocable permission for it to be sent; AND (3) the transmission and reception of the message appears to the recipient to give a disproportionate benefit to the sender.
How would this let the state control what goes in your inbox? Only unwanted messages. If something unsolicited yet important did make it to my inbox, I would probably treat it like the rest of the messages I get from unknown sources.. delete it. And I think most people do just the same.
The bottom line is technology by itself seems to be helpless against it. Maybe laws will thwart some of the 120+ spam e-mails I get every day, allowing me to be more productive in my work.
Now, regarding the loonies that think it should be a jailable offense...
Mod this one up +5 Informative.
Interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing how the spammers abuse the law, and how (hopefully) they strengthen the law in the future.
Well said!
enacted individually by the states
....thereby making it Federal in nature (and almost by definition).
you forgot to add
As a semi-retired musician, I fly to gigs once in a while, and never trust the baggage folks with my basses, so I carry on. This always makes me a super high risk, for some reason.... I suppose the electronics. No big deal.
After 9/11, I flew for a show and went through the usual motions. Upon returning home and clearing out my luggage carry on, I noticed a full sized pair of scissors in a side pocket... EASILY detected by the scanners. But it got through two of them. So I called security at the airport here, just to let them know they seem to have a problem with their employees at the checkpoints. The person I spoke to got terribly defensive, and I kept saying "I'm just calling to help." She wouldn't have any of it, and eventually hung up on me.
Security is a joke... and we're talking about major airports here.... IAH was my departure airport.
Um.... since the Uniform Commercial Code was enacted?
You make a strong point. However, imagine Cuba, where the cars people drive are leftovers from the days before embargos against them. Everyone drives vehicles from the 50's. But those cars are still running, and you can imagine alternators don't last 50 years.
Hit eBay, and see how many 486 procs come up in a query. Better yet, hit www.pcsurplusonline.com. There is a plethora of spare parts from out of date computers for sale everywhere here. So ship some old boxen, and some spare parts. I mean, sure we have the accumulation of 10 years of these parts. Send them along too. I just saw 486 procs for $5 on eBay. If the proc in a simputer frags, what do you suppose the repair will cost? $5 or less? Hardly. And it doesn't take an expert, or even someone with a saudering iron to maintain a PC. However, the smaller form factors, laptops, handhelds, are much more difficult to upgrade/repair because a good portion of the hardware is integrated. P1's weren't so long ago that an "expert in the old ways" would be necessary. They mobo's look the same, RAM goes in the same way, peripherals (IDE?) the same. They're a far cry from a maintenance nightmare.
and can be run off 2 AA batteries for a month
Given that it's a tool to be used by many people, do you honestly think 2 AA batteries will power it for a month? I would love to have that kind of technology myself.
I keep revisiting it, but everyone that's posted back to this keeps ignoring the price issue. That undersized computer would cost them the equivalent of $8,000 US. Hell, why don't they just get a palm pilot and a modem card for $120 instead of this thing for $250 ($300 for color)? Because there's no money in the overhead for the company that's producing these things.
Yes, smaller and battery powered is cooler. But if you can't afford it, it's of no use whatsoever.
It just did in the block of FCC's changes. I can't find it right now, but there's an image of Trent Lott and Tom Daschle from a couple of days ago speaking on the senate floor, with a huge stack of paper. It turns out that's a printout of the web petition signed by thousands of angry people.
Aaaahhhhhhhh..... I was wondering when the MS spin would get posted on this one ;)
Just kidding. as a developer, it's difficult to write code that assumes all possibilities in use with the end product. Hence QA teams. When I write code, I do spend time trying to think of how a user could possibly screw it up, but I never sit there and think "what if they open and close this thing 100 times in 3 seconds." Bugs happen, that's why there's versioning.
Actually, I did read the article. $250-$300 for a palm pilot with some interactive software on it. Woo-friggin-hoo. That's different from a computer with the same software on it.. how?
The bottom line is it's too expensive. Besides, have you ever tried to educate yourself with a palm pilot? Not easy to read a book at 200 or less characters per page. 64MB of RAM and 32MB of flash RAM. Wow. All for the low price of $250? That would help those people a lot, considering it's still tied to a modem line. Not mobile, small amount of memory, and small. Once again, for much less, they could have a PC tied to that modem line, running linux, and have much more capability. I think it's throwing money in the wrong direction to help people.
Hell, let them eat cake!
Exactly! That's the point I was trying to make. This "effort" to make computers for the poor is half-hearted at best. There are MANY more CHEAPER ways to do it. But of course, the profit margin in selling used pc's isn't quite the same as making some new ones and selling them for whatever you want to.
I was given two P-Pro 266's by a former employer who would have had to pay to get rid of them. Two used 30GB HD's and two 128MB sticks of PC-133 later (to the tune of $100) and they're now "servers" on my home network (to test distributed objects). Much cheaper than the $300 option these guys are talking about. If all you want to do is hit the web, a P-Pro 266 isn't a bad option at all.
With that I agree wholeheartedly. Having access to the information on the internet is a privelage that shouldn't be focused only on the wealthy.
I just don't think this particular effort is newsworthy. To me it's just another half-hearted attempt to do the right thing, but make a buck or two hundred in the process.
That makes sense, but that $200 PC ($2,960.63) that these guys are saying will be more like $300-400 ($4,440.95-5,921.26) isn't going to help in the least. They'd be better off with the ads you find in the computer section of the greensheet hyping "internet ready" PC's (translate, a 486 or P1 with a small hard drive, modem, and crappy 15" monitor) for $100. They would have the ability to get online, and still be able to afford dinner.
What those GDP numbers fail to show is disposable income. If my $37,600/yr salary provides $10,000/yr of disposable income because all of my housing/food/clothing needs are met, then I'm in good shape. But if their $2,540 only provides for $300/yr in disposable income, then the computer is priced even more out of their range.
Yes, it makes sense to provide the worlds largest collection of knowledge (and porn ads) to impoverished people (of course, that is not to say that everyone in India is impoverished). But it doesn't make any sense to attempt to provide that at a cost that most will deem out of their purchasing ability.
It's all about what a person deems important and affordable. Food - check. Roof - check. Computer - maybe next year.
What's the point when for $200 the "poor" could by a Linux pc from Wal-Mart.
Let's not discount the fact that the per capita GDP in India is $2,540, which would make a $200 PC in India worth $2960.63 in US dollars (US per capita GDP = $37,600).
Some help that is...
Is this record industry official unaware that there are legal music download sites?
Being a Texan, I can say two things about it. One, the districts are all jerrymandered all over the place from the last time the Democrats here did the very same thing (. Two, The 2000 Census required Texas to redraw the lines, and it hasn't been done yet.
Remember, the media is generally liberally biased, and will side with the dem's on issues such as this one. Changes to data in censii (is that a word?) require redistricting in Texas.
The last redistricting was forced by a panel of judges because the two parties couldn't agree. It turns out that is illegal in the Texas constitution, so it didn't hold water anyway.
So if blaming Bush makes you comfortable, then I guess go ahead. But in all honesty, it has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with political partisanship.
p.s. I'm neither a democrat or republican. I think the two party system is stone age, and with modern communication both it and the electoral college should go away.
2003-09-10 17:56:38 Plugged In: Making a Video Screen Out of Thin Air (articles,science) (rejected)
Well, you're spoiling the joke :)
Someone with a sick sense of purpose could write a compiler that compiles VB to machine code too.. making it possible to write an OS (albeit a very crappy one) in VB as well. The original point was related to using the right tool for the right job. I don't write RAD database apps in Lisp, and I wouldn't write IDE's in Java.
An interesting article that discusses the misrepresentation that companies have the same rights that people do under the Constitution.
It's the JRE that's slow.
Feel free to point out every Java app you know of and describe it as speedy. The bottom line, however, is it has a runtime (which makes it slower than a compiled app), and Sun doesn't seem to think too highly of that runtime.
Actually, I do code in java. I like the language, but the runtime is still a bit sloppy, if you ask me.
but seriously, a good, fast OS could be written in java
I hope you meant IDE, because it would be as impossible to write an OS in Java as it would be in VB.... read Runtime.
I'll give Java more credit when things like this stop showing up.
Since Ford is an SAP shop the transition shouldn't be a painful one at all, other than the possibility of end users filling up the help desk cue with mundane requests.
How about Cobol.NET?