In an ideal world with a non-corrupt government, it doesn't seem like that big of a problem to give them the ability to track our every day movements. In this case, all the arguments like "if I have nothing to hide, what should I worry about" make sense.
However, in the real world, all governments have some level of corruption. We may be comfortable with the level as it is *now*, but the scary thing is what happens if we give our government all these ways to track us, and then the level of corruption increases?
That's a scary thought. Besides, just because you are a good citizen and don't typically break the law doesn't mean you want to be tracked and have someone else know where you are. There's something nice about anonymity.
And to address all the people saying that driving cars shouldn't be a right - that's great, but cars are one of the easiest ways for an *individual* to get around (esp. in big countries like the US) without being tracked. The allow you complete freedom to drive from point a to point b stopping anywhere along the way that you desire, which is not something that's possible with public transportation. Maybe it's okay to use public transport on you day to day trips to the office, but if you want to go out and explore your world, then you really need a car.
"I hate to offer this as prior art, but Everquest has had time-dependent transparency for over a year. I personally think it's a pain in the ass, but it works."
However, Mac OS X has been out (with transparency) since the public beta in Sept. of 2000, which is more than four years ago (nearly five now).
I do remember an extension for Mac OS 9 which made transparent windows however, and this was way back in 1995 or 1996 - something like that... Don't remember what it was called.
Actually, this is not quite true. For example, MCE offers internal optical drive upgrades for PowerBooks and iBooks.
Processor upgrades are harder to come by, but Other World Computing offers many different accelerator choices for Macs. I believe the most recent PowerBook you can accelerate is the G3 Pismo which originally came in 400MHz and 500MHz varieties. For $279, you can upgrade it to a 500MHz G4 chip - not too bad.
If you happen to have a PowerBook (not an iBook), then you can also upgrade to things like USB 2 via the PCMCIA card slot.
So, yes, they're not as upgradeable as desktops. But I'll bet they're more upgradeable than PC laptops - never seen an accelerator for one of those!
"There is soooo much less polution from nuclear reactors given the probability of worst case scenarios versus the diesel they are currently using. Why are we still burning [fossil] fuels!@!#!@!#"
Except for the one big problem that nuclear reactors produce radioactive waste which has to be transported and stored in a dump somewhere with the possibility of contaminating ground water, air, etc. For example, at Yucca Mountain, they are trying to build a containment facility which will last for more than 10,000 years. This seems like a very hard and expensive task.
You can pollute a little now with fossil fuels, or you can create a problem for your great great grandchildren by using nuclear.
AFAIK, the iPod is the only device which plays the AAC formatted songs which means you need an iPod if you use the iTunes Music Store.
Hopefully other (cheaper) MP3 players will also support AAC in the future.
I agree - this seriously worries me that *any* nuke plant would use a Microsoft operating system for a critical safety monitoring task. Microsoft and safety just don't mix too well in my mind. Reminds me of the Navy test warship which was running a Microsoft OS - a divide by zero error brought down the entire ship and made it dead in the water. Not good.
No - you should have the right to run one copy at a time. It's not fair to assume that people will be able to pay for a separate license for every computer they own. With a program like photoshop and the several computers around my house, that would add up to nearly $1000. It's much more reasonable to only allow one copy to run on the network at once.
Have you driven a Toyota Prius? If so , do you like the Civic Hybrid better? I've heard from some people that the Civic is supposed to handle better on turns, but other than that (and the fact that it looks more like a normal car), I haven't heard much pro or con discussion between the Civic and Prius...
Well, the "friggin' news" is not in the business for public service.. They're trying to make a "buck or two," so it makes sense that they try to come up with their own "brand."
Assuming that we use hydrogen, this pretty much guarantees that it would come in the form of disposable cartridges. If you have to use a new cartridge every 10 hours or so, this seems like it would generate a fair amount of waste. Imagine millions of people throwing their cartridges out every few days.
Therefore, it seems that some sort of recycling program would have to be initiated in order to use hydrogen cartridges. Perhaps this is a good reason to stick with liquid fuels for laptops - assuming that they would not have to be compressed and that the cartridges could be user-refilled.
First of all, from what I've heard, they *won't* last 30 times longer - more like twice as long max.
Second, you mention "if they're going to replace As Cs and Ds..." but that's not the idea. On a fuel cell powered laptop, you wouldn't replace the "fuel cell," but rather, you'd refill the fuel tank, or replace a fuel cartridge. The cell itself (or stack of cells) is what processes the fuel - you don't replace it.
As long as the donation says "this money may only be used to do the following..." that seems completely ethical to me. If someone wants to donate money and have it used only for certain purposes, that's fine. However, if they donate money and then say "in order to accept this money, you must not do the following..." that seems unethical.
Therefore, as long as the donation doesn't bar the school from using their other sources of funding to purchase Microsoft/whatever products, then it seems fine.
How is this different from someone donating a few million dollars for the express purpose of building an aquatics center or new recreation hall for example?
Slashdot Mirror
In an ideal world with a non-corrupt government, it doesn't seem like that big of a problem to give them the ability to track our every day movements. In this case, all the arguments like "if I have nothing to hide, what should I worry about" make sense. However, in the real world, all governments have some level of corruption. We may be comfortable with the level as it is *now*, but the scary thing is what happens if we give our government all these ways to track us, and then the level of corruption increases? That's a scary thought. Besides, just because you are a good citizen and don't typically break the law doesn't mean you want to be tracked and have someone else know where you are. There's something nice about anonymity. And to address all the people saying that driving cars shouldn't be a right - that's great, but cars are one of the easiest ways for an *individual* to get around (esp. in big countries like the US) without being tracked. The allow you complete freedom to drive from point a to point b stopping anywhere along the way that you desire, which is not something that's possible with public transportation. Maybe it's okay to use public transport on you day to day trips to the office, but if you want to go out and explore your world, then you really need a car.
"I hate to offer this as prior art, but Everquest has had time-dependent transparency for over a year. I personally think it's a pain in the ass, but it works."
However, Mac OS X has been out (with transparency) since the public beta in Sept. of 2000, which is more than four years ago (nearly five now).
I do remember an extension for Mac OS 9 which made transparent windows however, and this was way back in 1995 or 1996 - something like that... Don't remember what it was called.
Actually, this is not quite true. For example, MCE offers internal optical drive upgrades for PowerBooks and iBooks.
Processor upgrades are harder to come by, but Other World Computing offers many different accelerator choices for Macs. I believe the most recent PowerBook you can accelerate is the G3 Pismo which originally came in 400MHz and 500MHz varieties. For $279, you can upgrade it to a 500MHz G4 chip - not too bad. If you happen to have a PowerBook (not an iBook), then you can also upgrade to things like USB 2 via the PCMCIA card slot. So, yes, they're not as upgradeable as desktops. But I'll bet they're more upgradeable than PC laptops - never seen an accelerator for one of those!
Fossil makes a Palm OS compatible watch. See this page at Amazon although they seem to be out of stock..
"There is soooo much less polution from nuclear reactors given the probability of worst case scenarios versus the diesel they are currently using. Why are we still burning [fossil] fuels!@!#!@!#" Except for the one big problem that nuclear reactors produce radioactive waste which has to be transported and stored in a dump somewhere with the possibility of contaminating ground water, air, etc. For example, at Yucca Mountain, they are trying to build a containment facility which will last for more than 10,000 years. This seems like a very hard and expensive task. You can pollute a little now with fossil fuels, or you can create a problem for your great great grandchildren by using nuclear.
AFAIK, the iPod is the only device which plays the AAC formatted songs which means you need an iPod if you use the iTunes Music Store. Hopefully other (cheaper) MP3 players will also support AAC in the future.
I agree - this seriously worries me that *any* nuke plant would use a Microsoft operating system for a critical safety monitoring task. Microsoft and safety just don't mix too well in my mind. Reminds me of the Navy test warship which was running a Microsoft OS - a divide by zero error brought down the entire ship and made it dead in the water. Not good.
No - you should have the right to run one copy at a time. It's not fair to assume that people will be able to pay for a separate license for every computer they own. With a program like photoshop and the several computers around my house, that would add up to nearly $1000. It's much more reasonable to only allow one copy to run on the network at once.
Interesting.. I really used to enjoy TNG, and I think Enterprise is even better. It's less hokey and more realistic.
Have you driven a Toyota Prius? If so , do you like the Civic Hybrid better? I've heard from some people that the Civic is supposed to handle better on turns, but other than that (and the fact that it looks more like a normal car), I haven't heard much pro or con discussion between the Civic and Prius...
Well, the "friggin' news" is not in the business for public service.. They're trying to make a "buck or two," so it makes sense that they try to come up with their own "brand."
- CRT's are hard on the eyes. I can stare at an LCD for hours without getting a headache.
- CRT's suck way more power than LCD's.
- CRT's are huge and tend to take over desks.
- CRT's are heavy and hard to move around.
Enough reasons for you?Assuming that we use hydrogen, this pretty much guarantees that it would come in the form of disposable cartridges. If you have to use a new cartridge every 10 hours or so, this seems like it would generate a fair amount of waste. Imagine millions of people throwing their cartridges out every few days.
Therefore, it seems that some sort of recycling program would have to be initiated in order to use hydrogen cartridges. Perhaps this is a good reason to stick with liquid fuels for laptops - assuming that they would not have to be compressed and that the cartridges could be user-refilled.
First of all, from what I've heard, they *won't* last 30 times longer - more like twice as long max. Second, you mention "if they're going to replace As Cs and Ds..." but that's not the idea. On a fuel cell powered laptop, you wouldn't replace the "fuel cell," but rather, you'd refill the fuel tank, or replace a fuel cartridge. The cell itself (or stack of cells) is what processes the fuel - you don't replace it.
As long as the donation says "this money may only be used to do the following ..." that seems completely ethical to me. If someone wants to donate money and have it used only for certain purposes, that's fine. However, if they donate money and then say "in order to accept this money, you must not do the following ..." that seems unethical.
Therefore, as long as the donation doesn't bar the school from using their other sources of funding to purchase Microsoft/whatever products, then it seems fine.
How is this different from someone donating a few million dollars for the express purpose of building an aquatics center or new recreation hall for example?