1) People decide to be anarchists. Everyone is happy for a little while. They all do their own thing without fear of reprisal from the government.
2) Someone decides he wants someone else's car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick. Since there is no property, he takes it. But the person he took it from spent months making said car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick, and wants it back. So he takes it back.
3) Both sides get people who agree with them and they fight over who gets to use the car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick.
4) After a while, they decide that they should just make a rule. One simple rule: Don't take other people's stuff. If you do, you'll get tied to a tree/fed to the lion/put in jail/your hands cut off. And there you have government.
So, you see, people create government because of asshats. Our best bet is to create a system where being an asshat, while annoying, won't affect other people./. sorta has the idea with the mod system. (I haven't seen a GNAA post in a few months.) That way, nice people like you and I can go about our lives without worrying about the asshat next door stealing our things because "there's no property."
You'll take my Powerbook when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
A wise man once said: "If everyone listened to [their high school guidance counselor], there'd be no janitors, because no one would clean shit up if they had a million dollars.]
Does the article seem to drop off? There was a great question about outsourcing, but Rheingold only got two sentences in before the end of the article. I'd like to hear more about this. Does he think there will be a migration to places with a lower cost of living? Because that's the only way this 'network' economy could work; I can't live in America what a web developer in India could live on, so I either get outcompeted, or I move somewhere cheaper, since I can do my job from anywhere with an Internet connection.
I also got the distinct feeling he visited Slashdot once and got this idea, without sticking around to see how it doesn't work sometimes. (GNAA, I'm looking in your direction...)
I had thoughts like that once, too. I thought that if everyone would just see that we depend on everyone else for everything; that the "market economy" is more of an ecosystem where everyone in interdependent, that they could just do their jobs because everyone is depending on them.
But then I looked around and all I saw was people clawing their way to the top, stepping on each other in a futile grab for something they couldn't reach: "enough." Nobody ever has enough in this society. Nobody has enough money, enough respect or enough love. We are a society of maximizers, always worried about what we're giving up for having something else. "I could take a sick day now, but I have to make my car payment." "I don't like my job, but I'll stay there and be miserable because other jobs don't pay enough."
It won't work on a global scale. All it would take is one person taking advantage of another for the whole thing to collapse.
I should rephrase: I don't have the money to leave the US yet. I just graduated college, and I have a negative net worth. Once I get out of debt and a few years of experience under my belt, I'll be looking for a tech position in Denmark.
Where I really want to go is Mars. I can't afford it, and my country won't send me.
Why Mars? Because I'll be able to archive civilization while the rest of you destroy it.
Just to clarify, I'm not knocking the registry, just wondering if there is a better way to do it. I'm a Mac user and have never had to deal with a registry in my life. (Extension conflicts, kernel panics, and PRAM zaps I'm familiar with.) Apple puts a lot of information into various XML files scattered throughout the system.
Why the heck would you keep that in there? Why not as an XML file somewhere? The last thing you need is something that writes to the registry each time a program is launched. If said program crashes, it could corrupt your registry, which is not a good thing.
Of course, nobody ever said Windows was designed for stability.
I just wasn't gonna let you get away with saying that France provided all these nifty services with the same level of taxation as the US 'cuz France has one of the highest tax burdens in the world (~45% of GDP in France vs. ~30% of GDP in the US).
Maybe the tax is higher on the richest people, making the % of GDP higher, but keeping similar tax rates for the middle class.
maybe in the US since we work so much harder, we have less sympathy for people who are less well-off
Maybe we in the US don't share their value systems. We may be concerned with having the latest gadgets or the biggest house or the fastest car, but in France they see those as extraneous and therefore worthy of heavy taxation. They see family time, good food, and overall well-being as more valuable than money, and tax appropriately.
I'm not saying either of these systems are right or wrong, just different. The problem arises when people in one country (me in the US) want to move to a country that shares their values, but don't have the money to do so.
That's all well and good, but not paying your taxes only hurts yourself. And (under our current system of health care) so does having a cholesterol level over 200.
However, leaving your PC open to spyware/adware affects everyone. It spreads the filth over the Internet, and could become a zombie for DDoS attacks that could cripple our entire economy.
There is a public interest in limiting the damage any one person could do on their computer. Ideally, OS's should not allow things to be installed without the user's permission or authorization. They should also have their firewall enabled by default, and should prevent DDoS attacks at a hardware level.
Apple used KHTML because the resources required to write a rendering engine from scratch are immense, and while they have a lot of manpower, they don't have enough to write and maintain a (good) engine themselves. Hyatt himself basically said this was the reasoning. It has nothing to do with a love of free software.
They may not like free software, but it's a great investment for them. They have a vested interest in further development of KHTML and FreeBSD, so both of those projects will benefit from having the great coders at Apple looking at their source.
Nothing happens. Or at least nothing has happened to me in 10 years of Mac use, and through college. Usually, I just get a warning saying I can't reach the site because I'm using a Mac. Occasionally, I get an alert asking if I want to download something. If I click "Yes", it'll download to my hard drive as an exe, and if I try to open it, my Mac won't know what to do with it.
The way Macs function, you need admin privileges just to move something into the/Library/Startupitems folder. So you'd have to get authorization to do so, and even then it's pretty easy to get rid of it, simply by finding all the files (using something like grep or find or locate) and then sudo rm.
Not that that's happened to me, but a hosed copy of iPhoto made me do some research into removing programs that had files buried all over the HD.
If I were going to be using the computer in a sound studio, I'd get extension cords and move the PC to a neighboring room. No need for a silent PC, just a nice, thick wall.
Okay, so an experimental car made of fiberglass got crushed by a mini van. What does this have to do with Hummers?
I'm as green as the next tree-hugging dirt worshipper, but I don't see how we can blame this on GM for making disgustingly huge wastes of resources or on the people who buy them. If this guy had been on a bike, would this have made it to the front page? Of course not.
Let's stow the "Hummers are wasteful" arguments and just recognize that a brave person lost their life in an experimental vehicle. Let's save these arguments for a topic where it actually matters.
I had a similar reaction when I switched from C++ to Java. There are so many things that need done before you can even start programming that it's no wonder you need so many people to do stuff. (I had started school learning C++, but they switched to Java half way through.)
Luckily, I found PHP before I got totally turned off by the prospect of web programming.
How do they define battery? Could one use a flywheel to store the power generated by a human?
Re:basic... very basic.
on
You've Got PC
·
· Score: 1
So AOL worth an extra $56.79? I think not...
Tell that to my parents. They had AOL for as long as I can remember (back when it fit on a floppy!). The service sucked, and I hated having to use it, but it was all we had. My parents never used the Internet for more than email.
When I went to college, they finally got Comcast's broadband service. My dad figured that $20/month for an extra phone line and $25 for AOL (plus the hassle of dial up) would be more expensive than the $25/month initial offering.
What do they use their 3Mb line for? AOL. I tried to get them to use Firefox, but was told that it 'didn't work.' Then an upgrade of AOL fried Internet Exploder. So now they use AOL over a broadband connection and pay $75/month. Just so my mom can have her own email address.
The moral of the story: Non-geeks don't understand why not to use AOL because they don't care or are used to it.
I would think that a continuous flow of oxygenated blood would provide greater efficiency than a pulsed flow. That is, unless you need the pause to give time for the oxygen transfer.
All people would need to see is a number. 5 is bigger than 2, so you buy the phone with a level 5 antenna instead of a level 2 antenna. Most people don't understand the factors that go into a car's EPA rating, and how it can vary based on driving conditions. However, this doesn't mean it's not helpful in choosing a car.
Cell phone companies should be forced to label their "phones" to help people make better decisions. They should show 1) Antenna gain, 2) Standby battery life and 3) Talk time on every phone, very clearly, just like mileage on cars. If cell phones are going to be important parts of our communication system, people should make decisions based on criteria that MATTER instead of mindless feature creep.
It's about revitalizing rural communities and easing pressures on cities and suburs. Where would you rather live, a 1/4 acre lot with the neighbor's dog barking and traffic whizzing by, or 2 or 3 acres with fewer neighbors. I'd choose the latter, but only if I had broadband, because I need it for my job, to telecommute and transfer files back and forth.
I guess it's hard for someone to understand if they haven't seen it. If you can, take a trip through the coal region of PA. All these little towns are dying because there is no industry, no hope of a job for anyone. All the young people have moved away. Broadband availability could help to bring companies into these regions (where the cost of living and of land are very, very low). This would bring these communities back to life, getting the people in them off of welfare and other government programs. Eventually, people won't need it. It's like running electricity or paved roads into a town; it's an economic improvement, instead of a handout.
Contrary to what many 'pundits' think, people want to work and feel useful. Getting government handouts is what most people do to survive, but they don't want to live on it.
1) It's in our national interest to provide as many people with broadband as possible.
2) Telcos don't see profit in getting broadband into rural areas
3) Therefore, the government should subsidize broadband for rural communities.
The only question is if you think statement 1 is true. Personally, I think that if more rural communities had broadband, people would be more willing to move out there for quality of life. I, for example, would love to build a home out in the country, but only if I get broadband. Without that, there's no way for me to telecommute.
Slashdot Mirror
1) People decide to be anarchists. Everyone is happy for a little while. They all do their own thing without fear of reprisal from the government.
2) Someone decides he wants someone else's car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick. Since there is no property, he takes it. But the person he took it from spent months making said car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick, and wants it back. So he takes it back.
3) Both sides get people who agree with them and they fight over who gets to use the car/horse/house/tent/pointed stick.
4) After a while, they decide that they should just make a rule. One simple rule: Don't take other people's stuff. If you do, you'll get tied to a tree/fed to the lion/put in jail/your hands cut off. And there you have government.
So, you see, people create government because of asshats. Our best bet is to create a system where being an asshat, while annoying, won't affect other people. /. sorta has the idea with the mod system. (I haven't seen a GNAA post in a few months.) That way, nice people like you and I can go about our lives without worrying about the asshat next door stealing our things because "there's no property."
You'll take my Powerbook when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Ahh... memory lane.
I also got the distinct feeling he visited Slashdot once and got this idea, without sticking around to see how it doesn't work sometimes. (GNAA, I'm looking in your direction...)
But then I looked around and all I saw was people clawing their way to the top, stepping on each other in a futile grab for something they couldn't reach: "enough." Nobody ever has enough in this society. Nobody has enough money, enough respect or enough love. We are a society of maximizers, always worried about what we're giving up for having something else. "I could take a sick day now, but I have to make my car payment." "I don't like my job, but I'll stay there and be miserable because other jobs don't pay enough."
It won't work on a global scale. All it would take is one person taking advantage of another for the whole thing to collapse.
I should rephrase: I don't have the money to leave the US yet. I just graduated college, and I have a negative net worth. Once I get out of debt and a few years of experience under my belt, I'll be looking for a tech position in Denmark.
Where I really want to go is Mars. I can't afford it, and my country won't send me.
Why Mars? Because I'll be able to archive civilization while the rest of you destroy it.
Just to clarify, I'm not knocking the registry, just wondering if there is a better way to do it. I'm a Mac user and have never had to deal with a registry in my life. (Extension conflicts, kernel panics, and PRAM zaps I'm familiar with.) Apple puts a lot of information into various XML files scattered throughout the system.
Of course, nobody ever said Windows was designed for stability.
Maybe the tax is higher on the richest people, making the % of GDP higher, but keeping similar tax rates for the middle class.
maybe in the US since we work so much harder, we have less sympathy for people who are less well-off
Maybe we in the US don't share their value systems. We may be concerned with having the latest gadgets or the biggest house or the fastest car, but in France they see those as extraneous and therefore worthy of heavy taxation. They see family time, good food, and overall well-being as more valuable than money, and tax appropriately.
I'm not saying either of these systems are right or wrong, just different. The problem arises when people in one country (me in the US) want to move to a country that shares their values, but don't have the money to do so.
However, leaving your PC open to spyware/adware affects everyone. It spreads the filth over the Internet, and could become a zombie for DDoS attacks that could cripple our entire economy.
There is a public interest in limiting the damage any one person could do on their computer. Ideally, OS's should not allow things to be installed without the user's permission or authorization. They should also have their firewall enabled by default, and should prevent DDoS attacks at a hardware level.
They may not like free software, but it's a great investment for them. They have a vested interest in further development of KHTML and FreeBSD, so both of those projects will benefit from having the great coders at Apple looking at their source.
The way Macs function, you need admin privileges just to move something into the /Library/Startupitems folder. So you'd have to get authorization to do so, and even then it's pretty easy to get rid of it, simply by finding all the files (using something like grep or find or locate) and then sudo rm.
Not that that's happened to me, but a hosed copy of iPhoto made me do some research into removing programs that had files buried all over the HD.
If I were going to be using the computer in a sound studio, I'd get extension cords and move the PC to a neighboring room. No need for a silent PC, just a nice, thick wall.
I'm as green as the next tree-hugging dirt worshipper, but I don't see how we can blame this on GM for making disgustingly huge wastes of resources or on the people who buy them. If this guy had been on a bike, would this have made it to the front page? Of course not.
Let's stow the "Hummers are wasteful" arguments and just recognize that a brave person lost their life in an experimental vehicle. Let's save these arguments for a topic where it actually matters.
That might not be such a bad idea...
Luckily, I found PHP before I got totally turned off by the prospect of web programming.
In other news, Steve Jobs is richer than Bill Gates, and Apple has 50% of Microsoft's market share
Googlefight != research.
How do they define battery? Could one use a flywheel to store the power generated by a human?
Tell that to my parents. They had AOL for as long as I can remember (back when it fit on a floppy!). The service sucked, and I hated having to use it, but it was all we had. My parents never used the Internet for more than email.
When I went to college, they finally got Comcast's broadband service. My dad figured that $20/month for an extra phone line and $25 for AOL (plus the hassle of dial up) would be more expensive than the $25/month initial offering.
What do they use their 3Mb line for? AOL. I tried to get them to use Firefox, but was told that it 'didn't work.' Then an upgrade of AOL fried Internet Exploder. So now they use AOL over a broadband connection and pay $75/month. Just so my mom can have her own email address.
The moral of the story: Non-geeks don't understand why not to use AOL because they don't care or are used to it.
I resent that remark. Saying I have the people skills of a rat assumes that rats have people skills. I, sir, have the people skills of a phicus plant.
I would think that a continuous flow of oxygenated blood would provide greater efficiency than a pulsed flow. That is, unless you need the pause to give time for the oxygen transfer.
All people would need to see is a number. 5 is bigger than 2, so you buy the phone with a level 5 antenna instead of a level 2 antenna. Most people don't understand the factors that go into a car's EPA rating, and how it can vary based on driving conditions. However, this doesn't mean it's not helpful in choosing a car.
Cell phone companies should be forced to label their "phones" to help people make better decisions. They should show 1) Antenna gain, 2) Standby battery life and 3) Talk time on every phone, very clearly, just like mileage on cars. If cell phones are going to be important parts of our communication system, people should make decisions based on criteria that MATTER instead of mindless feature creep.
Then you won't mind if we cut Oil subsidies or Stadium Subsidies.\
I guess it's hard for someone to understand if they haven't seen it. If you can, take a trip through the coal region of PA. All these little towns are dying because there is no industry, no hope of a job for anyone. All the young people have moved away. Broadband availability could help to bring companies into these regions (where the cost of living and of land are very, very low). This would bring these communities back to life, getting the people in them off of welfare and other government programs. Eventually, people won't need it. It's like running electricity or paved roads into a town; it's an economic improvement, instead of a handout.
Contrary to what many 'pundits' think, people want to work and feel useful. Getting government handouts is what most people do to survive, but they don't want to live on it.
2) Telcos don't see profit in getting broadband into rural areas
3) Therefore, the government should subsidize broadband for rural communities.
The only question is if you think statement 1 is true. Personally, I think that if more rural communities had broadband, people would be more willing to move out there for quality of life. I, for example, would love to build a home out in the country, but only if I get broadband. Without that, there's no way for me to telecommute.