Anyone who has bought CDs knows each CD is engineered to have 2-3 good tracks and the rest as mediocre filler songs.
That is a highly subjective statement. I can name over a hundred cd's where at least half of the tracks are good. I can name a dozen or so where nearly all the tracks are good. Of course, YMMV.
We won't pay for crap. Instead of an artist releasing 20 tracks a year, they could release half a dozen extremely high quality, worthwhile songs,...
How did this get modded insightful? Crap is in the ear of the listener. Aside from corporate whores like Britney Spears, I like to think that some (if not most) musicians/bands think of their music first and business second. They create the music for themselves. This implies that in their opinion, few or none of the tracks are crap --- they are self-expression. How could they know a priori which tunes will be hits and which ones will flop? And even if they could know, just how many stellar popular tunes does an artist/band have in them?
Uh, I'm pretty sure the guy is referring to math like calculus, advanced geometry, statistics, etc.
You think so? I can tell you that after teaching subjects like introduction to math and beginning algebra for the last ten years at various colleges, I have come to the conclusion that a rather large cross section of the adult American population cannot do arithmetic with integers, much less fractions and decimals. I think that reading and mathematics are equally important.
I agree that reading and writing is much more important than math and science in the real world...
Your employer does too. That way he can pay you for 30 hours when you work 40, and you'll never know the difference. And let's not EVEN get into telephone bills.
Nuclear/Chemical/Biological attacks are much more critical to stop, as they can be society ending. From what we've been told today's terrorists are aiming for those types of attacks. We have to prevent a much higher percentage of those types of attacks for society to survive.
And the best way to prevent those types of attacks is to keep our nose out of other countries' affairs and withdraw our troops from foreign soil. We swat at a hornets' nest and then complain when we get stung. Big surprise.
Utterly offtopic, but... I've occasionally fantasized about rubbing the proverbial genie lamp and making a wish. My wish changes as the years go by; but my current one is that whenever someone lies, their forehead turns a flourescent red, and that everyone would know what that means. The world would be a totally different place.
Incidentally, this is a great part of what is wrong with American thinking these days. That play-to-win attitude fosters cheating on exams, lying during interviews, taking steroids before participating in athletic events, etc. Morality and integrity lie dead on the side of the road traveled by the winners.
Whatever. I've succesfully been handling diverse student populations for over a decade at several campuses. But, increasingly one's ability to do a job is far less important to a prospective employer than one's ability to navigate a labyrinth of bullshit questions that are totally irrelevant to the type of work to be done.
No, this is an issue of public health, of transmissible dieases, where it not only affects what or who has it, it also threatens others who may catch it.
So is socialized medicine --- but I don't hear too many free-market type people in favor of that.
Furthermore, the organism is likely incapable of creating a god any greater than itself. Most deities seem to have all the wonderful flaws of character that humans have --- jealousy, anger, hatred, etc.
Once I applied for a teaching position at a community college in Washington State. One of the essay questions on the application was "Please describe how you are equipped as an instructor to deal with a diverse student body with different socio-economic backgrounds and ethnicities," or some such nonsense. I was honest, and replied that such factors didn't matter in my classroom, and that everyone would be evaluated on the quality of their work. Needless to say, that's the wrong answer. Next time I'll be snotty and reply that I will take bribes from poor students for a good grade while the rich students get a free ride; and that after years of research I have established a skin-pigmentation scale to adjust grades to take ethnicity into account.
But, but, what you propose would interfere with that most holy of holies --- the Free Market. Please, won't someone think of the stockholders? A few million lives is a small price to pay for corporate megabucks and a strong economy. Fnord.
Nahh. They send e-mails filled with viruses, trojans, & worms. Shortly afterwards they send another e-mail saying "See, this is what happens when you don't upgrade!"
They are not stealing it. I don't know about the law down under, but in the states, if you receive a copy from someone who made the copy, not only have you not stolen it, you also have not received stolen goods nor violated copyright law. Please explain this whole stealing business.
Well, unfortunately I don't have a solution. It will take a better man than me to come up with one.
However, I believe that human civilization is stuck in a rut. Are we at the end of the line as a species? Is conquering, exploiting, and trading the end-all be-all of human achievement?
For practical purposes the law has to draw a line somewhere
What practical purpose would that be, hmmm? To offer up the most convenient scapegoat for reasons of political expediency? If little Johnny steals a piece of bubblegum or writes his name in the wet cement, the public wouldn't stomach seeing the child standing before the judge or toiling in the field to pay some fine --- ergo, the parents are at fault. But if little Johnny murders some people in cold blood, why he has somehow transcended childhood and is responsible for his own actions.
The ability of the human mind to conceive of such logical gymnastics continues to amaze me.
It's not a hard concept to grasp. It is merely an irrational and absurd one that has no basis in an understanding of human psychology.
Apparently, some governments agree --- hence, juveniles may be tried as an adult if they are guilty of offenses like homicide. Do you see any inconsistency here?
Really? Let me ask you this: when are children capable of exercising independent thought? I have a couple of kids, and I can tell you that it begins at a very early age. So, given that, it is to be expected that if a sample of 100 children are raised under identical circumstances at home, there will be a great deal of variance in their behaviors. Some will do exactly what they are told, some will explore the boundaries, and some will disobey every chance they get. How can any rational person conclude that the parents are culpable? Furthermore, how can any rational person believe that at 18 a person is mature enough to be responsible with tobacco, or that they become responsible in their consumption of alcohol at age 21? I read plenty of cases of people over 21 getting liquored up and driving, engaging in fights, and all sorts of other anti-social, irresponsible behavior ---- which gives lie to the assumption at a certain age people just automagically grow up.
Since my first reply was modded troll, I'll try again. Here's where your line of thinking leads: Charles Manson isn't responsible for his actions, his parents were. But whose fault was it that they were bad parents? Their parents, of course! The buck never stops.
How about this --- maybe, just maybe children are capable of independent thought, and at some point decide what they are going to do regardless of how they were raised.
Yep. Stupid parents forgot to give their kid her daily dose of mind control serum. Children should never be expected to think for themselves, but blindly follow the commands and advice of their parents, church, school officials, and government leaders ---- even when they contradict each other.
Well, to continue the analogy, the customer runs outside, stands by the door, and tells all the other customers about it. Then he calls all his friends and family on his cell phone and tells them to come grab some cheap pickles.
OK, so what's your point? In things where people have varied tastes, like pickles, your argument of "big business bad!" falls flat on its face. But what *this* example lacks is the "badness." In the case of OSes and office productivity software, people don't want "boutique" and "gourmet," they want "works" and "compatible with everyone else." So, for your example to have any meaning, you'd need to explain how the lack of variety that most consumers don't even care about aside from vague, anti-Microsoft (because it's fashionable to talk trash about the big guy) sentiments is really detrimental. And I don't mean "bad" in some metaphysical, cosmic justice-y "share the wealth, mannn!" way, either. How does it negatively impact the consumer?
The mere fact that you post to slashdot indicates that you should be more than aware of the negative impact of MS products on the consumer. When Joe 6-pack sits down at his computer, he pushes START followed by IE and sits back to relax. Unfortunately, he is also infesting his computer with viruses and trojans, and probably spamming the rest of the internet as well. So, not only is he negatively impacted (popups, spyware, keystroke loggers) but so are his neighbors (spam, DDOS attacks).
What nobody has yet been able to answer me is this: if it's "wise" and "frugal" for an individual, or a mom & pop business to do it, when does it become "ruthless" and "evil?" When mom & pop have not just their one quaint store, but 2? 5? 20? When?
I'll tell you when: when the entity not only resorts to breaking the law to maximize profits, but starts paying for the law to be written in its favor and subverting the governmental process --- as only deep pockets can do. Mom and Pop aren't beholden to stockholders; corporations are --- they are legally bound to maximize profit. Often this trumps all other concerns.
Anyway, the goal of the *system* is to provide an environment where individuals can freely, without fear of fraud or theft, engage in trade.
Anthropomorphizing *systems* doesn't help your argument. Systems don't have goals: people do. Who obtains maximum benefit from the capitalistic system? Those with the most capital. Go preach your sermon about fulfilling peoples' needs and providing happiness to the homeless & destitute. I think we can do better.
I also believe in the fundamental worth and dignity of an individual, and that we ought to help out those who are less fortunate in life, and those who are less fortunate in the circumstances in to which they were born.
Slashdot Mirror
and read intestinal parasites?
Anyone who has bought CDs knows each CD is engineered to have 2-3 good tracks and the rest as mediocre filler songs.
That is a highly subjective statement. I can name over a hundred cd's where at least half of the tracks are good. I can name a dozen or so where nearly all the tracks are good. Of course, YMMV.
We won't pay for crap. Instead of an artist releasing 20 tracks a year, they could release half a dozen extremely high quality, worthwhile songs,...
How did this get modded insightful? Crap is in the ear of the listener. Aside from corporate whores like Britney Spears, I like to think that some (if not most) musicians/bands think of their music first and business second. They create the music for themselves. This implies that in their opinion, few or none of the tracks are crap --- they are self-expression. How could they know a priori which tunes will be hits and which ones will flop? And even if they could know, just how many stellar popular tunes does an artist/band have in them?
Uh, I'm pretty sure the guy is referring to math like calculus, advanced geometry, statistics, etc.
You think so? I can tell you that after teaching subjects like introduction to math and beginning algebra for the last ten years at various colleges, I have come to the conclusion that a rather large cross section of the adult American population cannot do arithmetic with integers, much less fractions and decimals. I think that reading and mathematics are equally important.
I agree that reading and writing is much more important than math and science in the real world...
Your employer does too. That way he can pay you for 30 hours when you work 40, and you'll never know the difference. And let's not EVEN get into telephone bills.
Bird flu. Don't forget the bird flu.
Nuclear/Chemical/Biological attacks are much more critical to stop, as they can be society ending. From what we've been told today's terrorists are aiming for those types of attacks. We have to prevent a much higher percentage of those types of attacks for society to survive.
And the best way to prevent those types of attacks is to keep our nose out of other countries' affairs and withdraw our troops from foreign soil. We swat at a hornets' nest and then complain when we get stung. Big surprise.
Utterly offtopic, but ... I've occasionally fantasized about rubbing the proverbial genie lamp and making a wish. My wish changes as the years go by; but my current one is that whenever someone lies, their forehead turns a flourescent red, and that everyone would know what that means. The world would be a totally different place.
But you have to know how to play to win, right?
Incidentally, this is a great part of what is wrong with American thinking these days. That play-to-win attitude fosters cheating on exams, lying during interviews, taking steroids before participating in athletic events, etc. Morality and integrity lie dead on the side of the road traveled by the winners.
Whatever. I've succesfully been handling diverse student populations for over a decade at several campuses. But, increasingly one's ability to do a job is far less important to a prospective employer than one's ability to navigate a labyrinth of bullshit questions that are totally irrelevant to the type of work to be done.
No, this is an issue of public health, of transmissible dieases, where it not only affects what or who has it, it also threatens others who may catch it.
So is socialized medicine --- but I don't hear too many free-market type people in favor of that.
Furthermore, the organism is likely incapable of creating a god any greater than itself. Most deities seem to have all the wonderful flaws of character that humans have --- jealousy, anger, hatred, etc.
Once I applied for a teaching position at a community college in Washington State. One of the essay questions on the application was "Please describe how you are equipped as an instructor to deal with a diverse student body with different socio-economic backgrounds and ethnicities," or some such nonsense. I was honest, and replied that such factors didn't matter in my classroom, and that everyone would be evaluated on the quality of their work. Needless to say, that's the wrong answer. Next time I'll be snotty and reply that I will take bribes from poor students for a good grade while the rich students get a free ride; and that after years of research I have established a skin-pigmentation scale to adjust grades to take ethnicity into account.
But, but, what you propose would interfere with that most holy of holies --- the Free Market. Please, won't someone think of the stockholders? A few million lives is a small price to pay for corporate megabucks and a strong economy. Fnord.
Nahh. They send e-mails filled with viruses, trojans, & worms. Shortly afterwards they send another e-mail saying "See, this is what happens when you don't upgrade!"
They are not stealing it. I don't know about the law down under, but in the states, if you receive a copy from someone who made the copy, not only have you not stolen it, you also have not received stolen goods nor violated copyright law. Please explain this whole stealing business.
Yes, I know it's not "the same thing" -- software piracy & murder are vastly different.
Give it time. Many already refer to copyright infringement as theft.
Well, unfortunately I don't have a solution. It will take a better man than me to come up with one.
However, I believe that human civilization is stuck in a rut. Are we at the end of the line as a species? Is conquering, exploiting, and trading the end-all be-all of human achievement?
For practical purposes the law has to draw a line somewhere
What practical purpose would that be, hmmm? To offer up the most convenient scapegoat for reasons of political expediency? If little Johnny steals a piece of bubblegum or writes his name in the wet cement, the public wouldn't stomach seeing the child standing before the judge or toiling in the field to pay some fine --- ergo, the parents are at fault. But if little Johnny murders some people in cold blood, why he has somehow transcended childhood and is responsible for his own actions.
The ability of the human mind to conceive of such logical gymnastics continues to amaze me.
Consume. Breed. Sleep.
It's not a hard concept to grasp. It is merely an irrational and absurd one that has no basis in an understanding of human psychology.
Apparently, some governments agree --- hence, juveniles may be tried as an adult if they are guilty of offenses like homicide. Do you see any inconsistency here?
Really? Let me ask you this: when are children capable of exercising independent thought? I have a couple of kids, and I can tell you that it begins at a very early age. So, given that, it is to be expected that if a sample of 100 children are raised under identical circumstances at home, there will be a great deal of variance in their behaviors. Some will do exactly what they are told, some will explore the boundaries, and some will disobey every chance they get. How can any rational person conclude that the parents are culpable? Furthermore, how can any rational person believe that at 18 a person is mature enough to be responsible with tobacco, or that they become responsible in their consumption of alcohol at age 21? I read plenty of cases of people over 21 getting liquored up and driving, engaging in fights, and all sorts of other anti-social, irresponsible behavior ---- which gives lie to the assumption at a certain age people just automagically grow up.
Since my first reply was modded troll, I'll try again. Here's where your line of thinking leads: Charles Manson isn't responsible for his actions, his parents were. But whose fault was it that they were bad parents? Their parents, of course! The buck never stops.
How about this --- maybe, just maybe children are capable of independent thought, and at some point decide what they are going to do regardless of how they were raised.
Yep. Stupid parents forgot to give their kid her daily dose of mind control serum. Children should never be expected to think for themselves, but blindly follow the commands and advice of their parents, church, school officials, and government leaders ---- even when they contradict each other.
Well, to continue the analogy, the customer runs outside, stands by the door, and tells all the other customers about it. Then he calls all his friends and family on his cell phone and tells them to come grab some cheap pickles.
OK, so what's your point? In things where people have varied tastes, like pickles, your argument of "big business bad!" falls flat on its face. But what *this* example lacks is the "badness." In the case of OSes and office productivity software, people don't want "boutique" and "gourmet," they want "works" and "compatible with everyone else." So, for your example to have any meaning, you'd need to explain how the lack of variety that most consumers don't even care about aside from vague, anti-Microsoft (because it's fashionable to talk trash about the big guy) sentiments is really detrimental. And I don't mean "bad" in some metaphysical, cosmic justice-y "share the wealth, mannn!" way, either. How does it negatively impact the consumer?
The mere fact that you post to slashdot indicates that you should be more than aware of the negative impact of MS products on the consumer. When Joe 6-pack sits down at his computer, he pushes START followed by IE and sits back to relax. Unfortunately, he is also infesting his computer with viruses and trojans, and probably spamming the rest of the internet as well. So, not only is he negatively impacted (popups, spyware, keystroke loggers) but so are his neighbors (spam, DDOS attacks).
What nobody has yet been able to answer me is this: if it's "wise" and "frugal" for an individual, or a mom & pop business to do it, when does it become "ruthless" and "evil?" When mom & pop have not just their one quaint store, but 2? 5? 20? When?
I'll tell you when: when the entity not only resorts to breaking the law to maximize profits, but starts paying for the law to be written in its favor and subverting the governmental process --- as only deep pockets can do. Mom and Pop aren't beholden to stockholders; corporations are --- they are legally bound to maximize profit. Often this trumps all other concerns.
Anyway, the goal of the *system* is to provide an environment where individuals can freely, without fear of fraud or theft, engage in trade.
Anthropomorphizing *systems* doesn't help your argument. Systems don't have goals: people do. Who obtains maximum benefit from the capitalistic system? Those with the most capital. Go preach your sermon about fulfilling peoples' needs and providing happiness to the homeless & destitute. I think we can do better.
I also believe in the fundamental worth and dignity of an individual, and that we ought to help out those who are less fortunate in life, and those who are less fortunate in the circumstances in to which they were born.
On that much, we can agree.