I write code, I use Linux, I'm happy enough doing so. But I'm not real interested in selling Linux to the masses. If the masses want it then great, but it's not my job to make it nice for them. I'll make it nice for me, and if that works for them that's bonus. If not, I don't really care.
Yes, that's what's wrong with the Linux community. It's also what it's built on.
Hmmm. I neither need or want your pity. I haven't forgotten the torture and the killing. I can see the darker side of China and it disgusts me. But I can also see people who are slowly opening their eyes to other possibilities. I'm saying that if the *people* can change their country then there's a chance for change and for true progress - not the kind where unhappy voice are silenced to make the current administration think they look better.
Below the threshold of conscious perception. Used of stimuli. is from The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, and similar definitions are provided by Websters and others.
When most folks see The Italian Job, they don't realise the Minis are there as advertising. They see a neat little car with cool people driving fast - they are not conscious of being subjected to advertising, compared to say TV where they can consciously "switch off" when the ads come on. That's why I say "subliminal". Sure, it's not Coke ads flashing bewteen frames, but many people are unaware that it is happenning.
Technically, you are correct about the legality. The FCC said in 1974 only that it was contrary to the public interest.
Seriously, product placement will probably be the next big wave - since one goal of an ad is to get you to remember the product.
I can remember seeing a programme about HIV too - doesn't mean I want it. That I remembered these placements (ok, I Googled for some of 'em) means little when it's because I thought the concept was stupid. Had I remembered it and thought "Cool, I want a Jeep" (or better yet, not remembered and thought the same thing) then they'd be on to something.
None of you stupid ass clowns know anything about China or the Chinese people or Chinese history now fuck off and go talk about Linux or something.
Maybe not, being a Pacific Island whiteboy and all, but I know that condescending attitude pretty well.
If you know so much about China, Chinese people and Chinese history, how about schooling us all up about it instead of giving us shit about our obvious ignorance. Or maybe all you know is what your government propaganda class has taught you?
In Europe, many relatively small groups of people people were more exposed to different ideas and cultures. China was relatively introspective on a large scale, both due to politics and culture (is there a difference?). I think that has more to do with the decline than any other reasons.
I won't claim to be a historian, but Mongolia isn't what it used to be, Japan is still a small group of islands, and Hong Kong aside, Europe is still in Europe. Despite pockets of defeat, China did ok dealing with the other reasons.
No. I mean, 'I watched some of the above movies but they didn't make me want to go and buy stuff.'
I've seen it written that if you notice advertising in movies, it's too obvious. I don't know if that's true because if you miss it, maybe you won't buy it later... but that aside, just because I see something doesn't mean I want it. Possibly that works on teens, but late-20's geeks need a little more. "Cool" isn't enough.
Frankly, the US is not well placed to criticize those in other countries for trying to conserve their power by improper means.
I hope you don't think I'm American do you? Anyway, no system works forever, and the political structure needs to reflect that. In my country we've moved through a couple of methods already, because that what the people wanted. Amazing stuff, and nobody even got overthrown.
Firstly, and most important, there is no single Chinese people.
No kidding. I have friends who are Mongolian, and friends from Beijing. Yes, things is different.
On that note, take a look at the EU, and imagine that being run in a totalitarian manner. No, it won't work, yet the Chinese government want it to work in China. Hmmm, no, not a good idea. But maybe using the provincial governments better could work, if central government was prepared to relinquish some power... Let the people elect their own representatives who then have voice in the central government.
Very likely, but it assumes that one places stability above some degree of self rule. It also assumes that there can only be change though violent conflict, and unfortunately I think this is a given in China. Georgia just had a "velvet revolution" - a non violent coup. I doubt the same could happen in China, not just because of the people or the numbers involved, but because the government would roll out the tanks and start it up themselves. There's no respect for the will of the people, only expectation that they should do as they are told.
Regarding democracy, I wouldn't expect a billion people to be able to vote effectly for a single party central government, however I would expect them to be able to vote for provincial leaders. Use a multi-party government and run the country based on provincial votes - it's not rocket science to provide a fair and balanced government.
Also, I strongly disagree that "not all countries need, or want, the freedom," because history has shown repeately that societies where leaders are not held accountable to the people results in corruption and oppression. China included. However you seem to hold an extreme view of the concept - no country I've yet seen has "total, uncontrollable, unrestricted freedom" and perhaps that is representative of the offical view and fear of democracy. Any society needs rules and controls to avoid chaos - but it's the openness and accountability of the rules and those who enforce them that make it work.
You sound like a product of Chinese (re)education.
Which is exactly why those in power in China don't want the Chinese people exposed to free thinking and the outside world.
Quick story. Six hundred years ago, China kicked ass in pretty much everything. Zheng He's fleet of ships discovered the world in Junks that were probably 500 years ahead of anything anyone else had* - so when they got back, China decided the world had nothing to offer them and prmptly closed up the borders... Anyway, my point is that Chinas leaders have a history of overly controlling it's people and it's a strategy that clearly doesn't work. In those 600 years, the world has caught up and China is renowned for cheap labour. Nice going guys. Imagine where both the world and China would be today if the borders had been open and knowledge flowed freely. Imagine the world a couple of hundred years from now - that's where we might have been if a bunch of old men hadn't got it wrong.
China has a billion people, many of whom could do amazing things given the opportunity, but some small minded politicians are too scared of losing power money control and face, that they oppress and brainwash the masses into thinking it's for the best. Nice plan, but it won't work for ever - it never works for ever.
I hope the Chinese people take control back soon, so China can regain some of its former glory.
* Had floodable compartments for fishing / washing, navigated with a compass, huge hull size, etc, etc.
Non intuitive? Depends on your mindset. To me, if I get a free (either usage) resource I don't think "Oooh, I can exploit this!" I think "Sweet, share the wealth." Obviously the business community has the former perspective and it's going to take a few court cases for them to work stuff out. Perhaps the term "Open Source" should be used instead of "Free Software" more often.
It's quite old, but The Wheelie episode was pretty cool. I remember the boys getting all amped up over pulling wheelies in a converted ambulance, with Jesse pulling wheelies on an old chopper bicycle early in the piece. And a bunch of prefessional mechanics unable to get the motor running... Good fun.
You can download from an unspecified source, but you can't actually upload in the first place. And the "cost" of this copyright violation is already covered by existing law and taxes on CD blanks, while the actual cost of transmission is already covered by existing ISP fees?
Can someone please explain to me why this new legislation is even needed?
Maybe some politician have a kid who wants to be a rockstar or something...
That's an issue that will have to be sorted out once people are in a position to stake their claim - it'll be the wild west all over again, except it'll be mega-corporations rather than men on horses.
The wording of the international agreement was that "no state" could own planets or moons, but nobody said anything about people. Unfortunately, pointing at something and saying "mine" doesn't make it so. If it does, then I own the Sun and am going to chage the world taxes for using it.
When people actually get to these places, the validity of those bogus "ownership" claims will fall apart. And people with the balls to colonise other worlds will own the land they stand on and make habitable - not some delusional crackpot exploiting 60's document phrasing and people's gulibility.
You can do remote logging via syslog, and there are interfaces to redirect to remote databases via ssh tunnel and so on - maybe to a dedicated logging box running OpenBSD and Postgres or something...
Should it come to that, I don't think that money would be an issue. I mean, who wouldn't donate to see Darl and his SCOundrels crushed?
Straight up.
If Linus decides to go there, I'm sure those companies he works with would offer funding, and even if they don't, then you, me, and thousands of other geeks would be there with cash for him.
Linus mate, if you want to step up, we'll be there with you.
Yup, virtual desktops are cool, but 3D virtual desktop selection is even cooler, and surpisingly fast if you have a decent video card: http://desk3d.sourceforge.net/screenshots.php
Slashdot Mirror
Maglev trains and Flying Cars.
Ok the Moller thing is a stretch, but 500+ kph trains are a reality.
I wonder if they would sell me, or license me, the right to use my info.
Probably not. I'm sure they'll happily license the right to use your info to a marketing company though.
Ummm... Why?
I write code, I use Linux, I'm happy enough doing so. But I'm not real interested in selling Linux to the masses. If the masses want it then great, but it's not my job to make it nice for them. I'll make it nice for me, and if that works for them that's bonus. If not, I don't really care.
Yes, that's what's wrong with the Linux community. It's also what it's built on.
Hmmm. I neither need or want your pity. I haven't forgotten the torture and the killing. I can see the darker side of China and it disgusts me. But I can also see people who are slowly opening their eyes to other possibilities. I'm saying that if the *people* can change their country then there's a chance for change and for true progress - not the kind where unhappy voice are silenced to make the current administration think they look better.
No, I used the word intentionally.
Below the threshold of conscious perception. Used of stimuli. is from The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, and similar definitions are provided by Websters and others.
When most folks see The Italian Job, they don't realise the Minis are there as advertising. They see a neat little car with cool people driving fast - they are not conscious of being subjected to advertising, compared to say TV where they can consciously "switch off" when the ads come on. That's why I say "subliminal". Sure, it's not Coke ads flashing bewteen frames, but many people are unaware that it is happenning.
Technically, you are correct about the legality. The FCC said in 1974 only that it was contrary to the public interest.
Sorry you see it that way.
I totally agree there's no easy solution, but I'm just not real good at accepting the status quo.
It's probably for the best... The shame of the intellectual defeat would be too much. ;-)
Seriously, product placement will probably be the next big wave - since one goal of an ad is to get you to remember the product.
I can remember seeing a programme about HIV too - doesn't mean I want it. That I remembered these placements (ok, I Googled for some of 'em) means little when it's because I thought the concept was stupid. Had I remembered it and thought "Cool, I want a Jeep" (or better yet, not remembered and thought the same thing) then they'd be on to something.
None of you stupid ass clowns know anything about China or the Chinese people or Chinese history now fuck off and go talk about Linux or something.
Maybe not, being a Pacific Island whiteboy and all, but I know that condescending attitude pretty well.
If you know so much about China, Chinese people and Chinese history, how about schooling us all up about it instead of giving us shit about our obvious ignorance. Or maybe all you know is what your government propaganda class has taught you?
In Europe, many relatively small groups of people people were more exposed to different ideas and cultures. China was relatively introspective on a large scale, both due to politics and culture (is there a difference?). I think that has more to do with the decline than any other reasons.
I won't claim to be a historian, but Mongolia isn't what it used to be, Japan is still a small group of islands, and Hong Kong aside, Europe is still in Europe. Despite pockets of defeat, China did ok dealing with the other reasons.
No. I mean, 'I watched some of the above movies but they didn't make me want to go and buy stuff.'
I've seen it written that if you notice advertising in movies, it's too obvious. I don't know if that's true because if you miss it, maybe you won't buy it later... but that aside, just because I see something doesn't mean I want it. Possibly that works on teens, but late-20's geeks need a little more. "Cool" isn't enough.
Frankly, the US is not well placed to criticize those in other countries for trying to conserve their power by improper means.
I hope you don't think I'm American do you? Anyway, no system works forever, and the political structure needs to reflect that. In my country we've moved through a couple of methods already, because that what the people wanted. Amazing stuff, and nobody even got overthrown.
Firstly, and most important, there is no single Chinese people.
No kidding. I have friends who are Mongolian, and friends from Beijing. Yes, things is different.
On that note, take a look at the EU, and imagine that being run in a totalitarian manner. No, it won't work, yet the Chinese government want it to work in China. Hmmm, no, not a good idea. But maybe using the provincial governments better could work, if central government was prepared to relinquish some power... Let the people elect their own representatives who then have voice in the central government.
China's problems are complex.
Nice cop-out.
More detail.
A good route.
An old NYT take on it
I'll agree that they didn't find blue water too often, but they sure could have.
The question is, is it subliminal or not (read illegal)? And does it even work? Personally, I've gotten very good at filtering advertising...
Very likely, but it assumes that one places stability above some degree of self rule. It also assumes that there can only be change though violent conflict, and unfortunately I think this is a given in China. Georgia just had a "velvet revolution" - a non violent coup. I doubt the same could happen in China, not just because of the people or the numbers involved, but because the government would roll out the tanks and start it up themselves. There's no respect for the will of the people, only expectation that they should do as they are told.
Regarding democracy, I wouldn't expect a billion people to be able to vote effectly for a single party central government, however I would expect them to be able to vote for provincial leaders. Use a multi-party government and run the country based on provincial votes - it's not rocket science to provide a fair and balanced government.
Also, I strongly disagree that "not all countries need, or want, the freedom," because history has shown repeately that societies where leaders are not held accountable to the people results in corruption and oppression. China included. However you seem to hold an extreme view of the concept - no country I've yet seen has "total, uncontrollable, unrestricted freedom" and perhaps that is representative of the offical view and fear of democracy. Any society needs rules and controls to avoid chaos - but it's the openness and accountability of the rules and those who enforce them that make it work.
You sound like a product of Chinese (re)education.
Which is exactly why those in power in China don't want the Chinese people exposed to free thinking and the outside world.
Quick story. Six hundred years ago, China kicked ass in pretty much everything. Zheng He's fleet of ships discovered the world in Junks that were probably 500 years ahead of anything anyone else had* - so when they got back, China decided the world had nothing to offer them and prmptly closed up the borders... Anyway, my point is that Chinas leaders have a history of overly controlling it's people and it's a strategy that clearly doesn't work. In those 600 years, the world has caught up and China is renowned for cheap labour. Nice going guys. Imagine where both the world and China would be today if the borders had been open and knowledge flowed freely. Imagine the world a couple of hundred years from now - that's where we might have been if a bunch of old men hadn't got it wrong.
China has a billion people, many of whom could do amazing things given the opportunity, but some small minded politicians are too scared of losing power money control and face, that they oppress and brainwash the masses into thinking it's for the best. Nice plan, but it won't work for ever - it never works for ever.
I hope the Chinese people take control back soon, so China can regain some of its former glory.
* Had floodable compartments for fishing / washing, navigated with a compass, huge hull size, etc, etc.
Non intuitive? Depends on your mindset. To me, if I get a free (either usage) resource I don't think "Oooh, I can exploit this!" I think "Sweet, share the wealth." Obviously the business community has the former perspective and it's going to take a few court cases for them to work stuff out. Perhaps the term "Open Source" should be used instead of "Free Software" more often.
It's quite old, but The Wheelie episode was pretty cool. I remember the boys getting all amped up over pulling wheelies in a converted ambulance, with Jesse pulling wheelies on an old chopper bicycle early in the piece. And a bunch of prefessional mechanics unable to get the motor running... Good fun.
Many of us don't need VR to do that! Hurrah for the weekend!
Just so we're clear...
You can download from an unspecified source, but you can't actually upload in the first place. And the "cost" of this copyright violation is already covered by existing law and taxes on CD blanks, while the actual cost of transmission is already covered by existing ISP fees?
Can someone please explain to me why this new legislation is even needed?
Maybe some politician have a kid who wants to be a rockstar or something...
That's an issue that will have to be sorted out once people are in a position to stake their claim - it'll be the wild west all over again, except it'll be mega-corporations rather than men on horses.
The wording of the international agreement was that "no state" could own planets or moons, but nobody said anything about people. Unfortunately, pointing at something and saying "mine" doesn't make it so. If it does, then I own the Sun and am going to chage the world taxes for using it.
When people actually get to these places, the validity of those bogus "ownership" claims will fall apart. And people with the balls to colonise other worlds will own the land they stand on and make habitable - not some delusional crackpot exploiting 60's document phrasing and people's gulibility.
You can do remote logging via syslog, and there are interfaces to redirect to remote databases via ssh tunnel and so on - maybe to a dedicated logging box running OpenBSD and Postgres or something...
Nah, it's just that rooted Windows boxen aren't news anymore.
More seriously though, it's proof that hetrogeneious networks are a good idea. Eg, Debian x86 got rooted, but Debian Sparc apparently didn't.
Should it come to that, I don't think that money would be an issue. I mean, who wouldn't donate to see Darl and his SCOundrels crushed?
Straight up.
If Linus decides to go there, I'm sure those companies he works with would offer funding, and even if they don't, then you, me, and thousands of other geeks would be there with cash for him.
Linus mate, if you want to step up, we'll be there with you.
And Solaris x86 for that matter.
Yup, virtual desktops are cool, but 3D virtual desktop selection is even cooler, and surpisingly fast if you have a decent video card: http://desk3d.sourceforge.net/screenshots.php