I take it you weren't around during the McCarthy administration, when exactly that kind of thing went on.
What is it about Americans that makes them incapable of seeing the things that go on in their own country? And once you successfully point out to them how badly the US steps on the rights of citizens, the American in question immediately points out that the US is better than Libya or China. As if Americans can sleep better at night knowing that there's still a few countries where rights are less respected. Never mind that western Europeans, Australians, and Canadians ALL live better and have their rights respected.
I think you are seriously underestimating the ability of a beauracracy to make life unpleasant for pepole. Hell, that's practically the _only_ thing beauracracies ever do. Believe me, if Japan's civil beauracracy wants people to be hassled, vast amounts of hassling will occur.
Exactly. I mean, consider the fact that guns have to be registered and tracked. Now consider the fact that dogs many more people than guns do in any given year. This is despite the fact that there far, far more guns in the US than there are dogs (feel free to repeat this argument for cars). And it takes serious effort to make a dog dangerous -- years of systematic abuse. The idea of not tracking animals that are substantially MORE dangerous and are naturally aggressive is insane.
Unions don't make sense for a lot of types of skilled labour. Professional associations are often superior (although they have their own problems -- check out the chronic shortage of nurses in Canada).
It's a shame that no one has come up with a way to do better, combining the best aspects of a free labour market with worker empowerment.
The GUI is the one big problem with Java. Swing is a dog, despite being a considerable improvement over AWT (which is a dessicated undead dog from the paleozoic). Azureus is pretty good in general for the simple reason that it is very minimalistic with the GUI. It keeps things simple, and so it doesn't suffer.
Really? Can provide a few REAL world examples? Can you name one? Personally, I'm running Azureus and Netbeans right now, and they're not perceptably different from C++ desktop applications like KDevelop or OpenOffice.
Because if someone goes to the trouble of invalidating the technology, it implies that they want to do more. And that's something to be afraid of. Plus it costs the airport time and money in closure, inconveniences lots of people, etc.
You'd probably agree that destroying some infrastructure, even if not populated, qualifies as a terrorist act right? Blowing up an unoccupied power station? No one dies, but it causes big problems.
Terrorist acts aren't just about death -- they're about making people _afraid_, so that they capitulate to some political end.
Facilities that deploy this technology will almost undoubtedly:
a) invest in high quality cleaning technology,
b) renovate so as to ensure that all surfaces are relatively easy to clean.
Besides, someone "chaffing" an airport is the kind of event would sufficiently rare as to warrant a several days of airport closure and a heavy duty cleaning. After all, it's basically a terrorist act, ableit one with no human casualties -- but it would certainly spread terror, wouldn't you agree?
Strictly speaking, "computer science" is a branch of mathematics. So no, it isn't a science. Sciences are inductive and empirical, whereas mathematics is deductive and rational.
Henry Rollins has been doing this too, although unofficially. He has always encouraged people to copy and trade his albums, as well as bootlegs of his shows. In his own words: "I'd rather have your time than your money."
P2P sharing of copyrighted works is an old and well established custom. What else would you call loaning someone else one of your books? Even centralized sharing of copyrighted works is an established Human custom -- what else would you call libraries?
P2P sharing of copyrighted material has always been an accepted human activity. The RIAA's attempts to convince people otherwise is just a horrible cash grab at the expense of the legal system, and it brings all law into contempt for those who must violate the law to do what they believe is perfectly acceptable. It's prohibition all over again: a bunch of uptight assholes making life miserable for other people and creating an entire society of criminals.
I think that's only partially true. As I understand it, the derivative software will only have to allow the source code to be accessed if the original did as well. In other words, if google creates UltraSearch.com and licenses it as GPL3 AND includes a mechansism to download the source, then anyone who creates a derivative work would have to retain that mechanism or a comparable one. But if google had kept their sources private, then anyone who created a derivative work would presumably be allowed to keep their source private too. Of course, this is all confined to web-apps. Any software that is actually distributed will still have all the normal GPL conditions applying to it.
That might just be more of a question of where and how they're made available. If the laptops are kept in schools, that would allow whoever is in charge of these things to retain some control. I'm sure China will find a way to try and make it work. Obstacles seem to be a concept that China is unaware of these days.
A very good point. Not all of us are land-reclamation experts, water-purification engineers, or solar-power experts of any kind. If computer technology experts are trying to help in their own way, that's pretty commendable. And maybe having computers will help the disadvantaged folk in question improve their lot enough to afford their own land-reclamation gear, water-purification systems, and solar-power collectors, rather than having to wait around for us to give such things to them. Or enough to access the information necessary to start making their own.
Water purification in particular is quite doable with even limited resources, assuming you have the know-how (although not necessarily in the huge quantities that richer nations can afford). And computers are superb tools for accessing and sharing know-how.
I somehow doubt that nations with serious starvation problems will be giving out many of these laptops -- especially to people who are starving. Programs like this are more oriented towards areas where food is already being taken care of (like China), but the local government wants to accomplish more than simply keeping people alive. Your point is well made, but there's probably no actual conflict here between food and technology.
The teaching issue is really a separate concern, and is a problem in most scientific/mathematical fields (that is, fields where teaching isn't the primary vocation of graduates). Universities have a lot of trouble separating their need to teach from their need to innovate and publish.
You see similar problems in many areas -- the penal system has constant problems because they're torn between the concerns of rehabilitation and punishment, governments are torn between the concerns of social support and economic freedom and national strength -- all concerns that are unrelated and often conflicting.
The university I went to allowed students to evaluate their professors and TAs after every course. As a result, we usually had fairly good teachers, at least until we ran into the tenured ones who could teach any course they wanted (who are still sometimes good, but often not so much).
You know what? Everytime I cross a bridge, ride an elevator, or fail to be crushed by a collapsing building, I'm thankful that engineering schools work the living crap out of engineers.
Engineering is too important to be easy. The right way to get more engineers into circulation would be better pay -- it's basic supply and demand. When demand exceeds supply, prices must go up.
It's funny how corporations love economics right up until the point where it involves paying intelligent people higher wages.
It's probably just taken this long for a lot of governments to realize that alternatives existed. Microsoft and other big software companies are much better at proselytizing their wares than the free software movement.
Fearmongering?! Are you for real? Only morons trust their government. I'd go so far as to say that people who trust the government are traitors to their nation.
Slashdot Mirror
What is it about Americans that makes them incapable of seeing the things that go on in their own country? And once you successfully point out to them how badly the US steps on the rights of citizens, the American in question immediately points out that the US is better than Libya or China. As if Americans can sleep better at night knowing that there's still a few countries where rights are less respected. Never mind that western Europeans, Australians, and Canadians ALL live better and have their rights respected.
That's pretty interesting, I intend to read a bit more about this. You've given us a lot to mull.
I think you are seriously underestimating the ability of a beauracracy to make life unpleasant for pepole. Hell, that's practically the _only_ thing beauracracies ever do. Believe me, if Japan's civil beauracracy wants people to be hassled, vast amounts of hassling will occur.
Exactly. I mean, consider the fact that guns have to be registered and tracked. Now consider the fact that dogs many more people than guns do in any given year. This is despite the fact that there far, far more guns in the US than there are dogs (feel free to repeat this argument for cars). And it takes serious effort to make a dog dangerous -- years of systematic abuse. The idea of not tracking animals that are substantially MORE dangerous and are naturally aggressive is insane.
It's a shame that no one has come up with a way to do better, combining the best aspects of a free labour market with worker empowerment.
The GUI is the one big problem with Java. Swing is a dog, despite being a considerable improvement over AWT (which is a dessicated undead dog from the paleozoic). Azureus is pretty good in general for the simple reason that it is very minimalistic with the GUI. It keeps things simple, and so it doesn't suffer.
Really? Can provide a few REAL world examples? Can you name one? Personally, I'm running Azureus and Netbeans right now, and they're not perceptably different from C++ desktop applications like KDevelop or OpenOffice.
You'd probably agree that destroying some infrastructure, even if not populated, qualifies as a terrorist act right? Blowing up an unoccupied power station? No one dies, but it causes big problems.
Terrorist acts aren't just about death -- they're about making people _afraid_, so that they capitulate to some political end.
Facilities that deploy this technology will almost undoubtedly: a) invest in high quality cleaning technology, b) renovate so as to ensure that all surfaces are relatively easy to clean. Besides, someone "chaffing" an airport is the kind of event would sufficiently rare as to warrant a several days of airport closure and a heavy duty cleaning. After all, it's basically a terrorist act, ableit one with no human casualties -- but it would certainly spread terror, wouldn't you agree?
No, but that certainly is a disturbing practice. But I'm refering more to recent political and journalistic tendencies.
Strictly speaking, "computer science" is a branch of mathematics. So no, it isn't a science. Sciences are inductive and empirical, whereas mathematics is deductive and rational.
It's probably fair to summarize that Free music isn't exactly new as of 2005.
Henry Rollins has been doing this too, although unofficially. He has always encouraged people to copy and trade his albums, as well as bootlegs of his shows. In his own words: "I'd rather have your time than your money."
P2P sharing of copyrighted material has always been an accepted human activity. The RIAA's attempts to convince people otherwise is just a horrible cash grab at the expense of the legal system, and it brings all law into contempt for those who must violate the law to do what they believe is perfectly acceptable. It's prohibition all over again: a bunch of uptight assholes making life miserable for other people and creating an entire society of criminals.
I think that's only partially true. As I understand it, the derivative software will only have to allow the source code to be accessed if the original did as well. In other words, if google creates UltraSearch.com and licenses it as GPL3 AND includes a mechansism to download the source, then anyone who creates a derivative work would have to retain that mechanism or a comparable one. But if google had kept their sources private, then anyone who created a derivative work would presumably be allowed to keep their source private too. Of course, this is all confined to web-apps. Any software that is actually distributed will still have all the normal GPL conditions applying to it.
Welcome to the capitalist world, where justice is something that you purchase by the hour, not something that you have an inalienable right to.
That might just be more of a question of where and how they're made available. If the laptops are kept in schools, that would allow whoever is in charge of these things to retain some control. I'm sure China will find a way to try and make it work. Obstacles seem to be a concept that China is unaware of these days.
Water purification in particular is quite doable with even limited resources, assuming you have the know-how (although not necessarily in the huge quantities that richer nations can afford). And computers are superb tools for accessing and sharing know-how.
I somehow doubt that nations with serious starvation problems will be giving out many of these laptops -- especially to people who are starving. Programs like this are more oriented towards areas where food is already being taken care of (like China), but the local government wants to accomplish more than simply keeping people alive. Your point is well made, but there's probably no actual conflict here between food and technology.
You see similar problems in many areas -- the penal system has constant problems because they're torn between the concerns of rehabilitation and punishment, governments are torn between the concerns of social support and economic freedom and national strength -- all concerns that are unrelated and often conflicting.
The university I went to allowed students to evaluate their professors and TAs after every course. As a result, we usually had fairly good teachers, at least until we ran into the tenured ones who could teach any course they wanted (who are still sometimes good, but often not so much).
Nevertheless, your point is well made.
Engineering is too important to be easy. The right way to get more engineers into circulation would be better pay -- it's basic supply and demand. When demand exceeds supply, prices must go up.
It's funny how corporations love economics right up until the point where it involves paying intelligent people higher wages.
It's probably just taken this long for a lot of governments to realize that alternatives existed. Microsoft and other big software companies are much better at proselytizing their wares than the free software movement.
Fearmongering?! Are you for real? Only morons trust their government. I'd go so far as to say that people who trust the government are traitors to their nation.
+5 Funny just isn't enough for such a great comment.
So what you're saying is, MMOGs are almost exactly like real life?