I havn't read Shadow of the Hegemon yet, but in Ender's Shadow, the title was meant to indicate Bean's existance as a shadow of Ender, always seen as less important than Ender was.
Good point. And in Shadow of the Hegemon bean is secondary to the Hegemon.
From the book review on Amazon.com:
"...just as [Bean] played second to Ender during the Bugger war, Bean must again step into the shadow of another, the one who will be Hegemon. "
Whether or not I agree with your opinion of card, I must disagree with your reasoning.
The merit of an author is should not be based on the overall themes that may connect his/her books, but on how they tell the story. Who are the characters? Can you relate to them? What happens to them? How are they affected/changed by their experiences? Is their world realistic and believable?
By your reasoning, Ender's Game and Memory of Earth should be exactly the same book, while in reality they are very very different. The characters are different, the setting is different, and the events are different.
The themes you describe apply to a majority of the stories written as well. Take the script for Armageddon for instance. Characters with trouble in their lives? Check. Run into trouble (asteroid, planetary death)? Check. Omnipresent controlling influence? Check. Defeated evil by the end of the book, or is dead but has still been victorious? Double Check.
Card may not author great literay works like Dickens or Flaubert, but he is a great storyteller. And in my book that's the better of the two.
Card consistently manages to write good novels, something that eludes way to many popular authors now adays.
Although I agree that it would be educational to have access to the logs, keep in mind that NASA is a government agency. As such, all information given to the public must be reviewed and approved beforehand. It's just the way that governments work, and they aren't going to change anytime soon.
Everytime someone announces a new VR/3D environment, GUI, or WM I am reminded of a scene from Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash that really stuck in my mind when I read it..
I don't have the book available to quote it, but in this scene the main character has to hack the 3D world (which he was one of the main programmers for) so he can spy on the bad guys unseen. So he logs into the world, hops on the VR subway to his house, goes into his VR room, sits down at his VR desk and (drum roll please) switches over to a 2D UI.
It's a small section, only about 2 pages long. The reason why is something like it being preferred by true hackers because it is the fastest most efficent way to get work done.
Every major application that we use is 2D. Does it really matter if the windows or menus are cool 3D objects? Maybe there just needs to be more research done on the subject. But until then I will always think of this character who developed this VR world, but drops it in a second when real work needs to be done.
2 years ago, the licensing fees for Tekken 3 on playstation was *the*largest* single source of income for Sony corportion. A third party wrote the game.
Let me paraphrase this:
A single third party game made more money than any of sony's other products.
This easially makes up for money lost on console production, launches, and failing game companies.
For every game company that fails, there are two people out there that want to start one. Shortage of companies should not be an issue for a long time.
This topic was actually discussed on MSNBC last night as it came up after one of the elections carter was involved in. I forget which one.
The point is, an extensive study was done afterwards (by a number of separate academians) and it was found that the eastern results did not really affect the western vote in any significant way.
CNN is reporting a 54 to 42% win for Gore in california, a 12% win. I think this margin is too large for the voter sway you are descirbing.
So maybe winning florida swayed some people. But is was also a lone standout in a sea of red on the "map". Wouldn't that sway people in the other direction? Optically, bush was winning, and he was ahead in the electoral vote for most of the time before the west coast polls closed.
Except that Sega already has a very lucrative, cross-platform, games business. This is where game companies make their money, not the hardware. Sega's game income may dip a little bit, but it is in no danger of dying.
The advantage of owning the console as well is that you make licensing fees off of every game sold for that platform. in either 98 or 99 Tekken 3 for playstation was sony's best seller over all of its products (including tv's vcr's etc), and they didn't even write it.
maybe I'm a little bitter right now from the *definite* pro-gore slant of the previous slashdot articles (not just David Brin's screed either)...
Before everyone starts complaining about how Bush is assasinating Gore, keep in mind that Character assasination is performed by both sides, not just the GOP. The Gore compagin has been assasinating Bush's character since last year. How did they do this you might ask?
Bush's college/graduate school record is much better than Gore's. In fact, Gore never graduated from Vanderbilt.
The following Op-Ed appeared in the Boston Globe on september 7th. Before flaming this post (or the opposite), please take the time to read it.
Op-Ed
GORE'S DUBIOUS SCHOOL RECORD
JENNIFER C. BRACERAS
JENNIFER C. BRACERAS Jennifer C. Braceras is an attorney and research fellow at Harvard Law School. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.
When will the liberal media stop treating left-wing ideology as a
proxy for intelligence? For months the press has questioned the
intellect of Republican candidate George W. Bush, while describing Al
Gore as "serious," "intellectual" - even "wonkish."
The basis for the media's unfair attacks on Bush's intelligence is his
30-year-old Yale College transcript (purloined last fall and published by The New Yorker). Yet The Washington Post's subsequent revelation of Gore's
unimpressive academic record has done little to alter the media's false
portrayal of Gore as "the smartest kid in the class." It is a record
that is worth reviewing, if only to debunk the myth of Gore as a serious
student.
Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's,
including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science
course, and a C-plus in another. "In his sophomore year at Harvard,"
the Post reported, "Gore's grades were lower than any semester
recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale." Moreover, Gore's graduate
school record - consistently glossed over by the press - is nothing
short of shameful. In 1971, Gore enrolled in Vanderbilt Divinity
School where, according to Bill Turque, author of "Inventing Al
Gore," he received F's in five of the eight classes he took over the
course of three semesters. Not surprisingly, Gore did not receive a
degree from the divinity school. Nor did Gore graduate from
Vanderbilt Law School, where he enrolled for a brief time and
received his fair share of C's. (Bush went on to earn an MBA from
Harvard).
But whereas the liberal press has described Bush's college days as
a time of misspent youth, media accounts of Gore's undergraduate
years are grossly fawning. (The New York Times: "As Mr. Bush was
frolicking around Yale, a young man named Al Gore was studying at
Harvard"; "Harvard nurtured the part of [Gore] that is in love with
the world of ideas." The New Republic: "At Harvard, Gore set himself
formidable intellectual challenges.")
And then there is the laughable October issue of Psychology Today.
As part of a cover story20 entitled, "Gore and Bush on the Couch," the
magazine reports the results of a spurious "analysis" of 10 of the
candidates speeches and/or interviews. The authors claim that the
study "verifies" the popular stereotype that "Bush is not as deep a
thinker as Gore."
Two pages later, readers will be shocked - shocked! - to learn
that the magazine's (no doubt scientific) study of the candidates'
facial gestures reveals that Gore is the "more serious, constrained,
controlled, weighty, ponderous, [and] dominant of the two
candidates." More ponderous, perhaps . . . but, please, spare me the pop
psychology.
Biased reporters, however, are not the only ones to blame. Indeed,
the vice president himself has cultivated this genius persona (one of
many). Thus, he did not correct PBS News anchor Gwen Ifill when she
referred to him as a graduate of Vanderbilt Law School. Even more
significant was the line in Gore's convention acceptance speech in
which he stated, "I know my own imperfections. I know that sometimes
people say I'm too serious, that I talk too much substance and
policy." Poor Al, he's just too smart for the job.
Of course, the stereotyping of conservative candidates as dumb and
liberal candidates as "brilliant" is nothing new. During the 1950s,
the media lionized Democrat Adlai Stevenson as an intellectual,
while ridiculing Republican Dwight Eisenhower as an ineffectual
simpleton. Back the n, the members of the press knew full well that
Stevenson attended Harvard Law School and, yet, had not received a
degree. But the media gave Stevenson a pass. (Sound familiar?) Had
resourceful journalists investigated, they might have learned (as we
now know from Stevenson's biographer John Bartlow Martin) that
Harvard Law School Dean Erwin Griswold had hidden Stevenson's transcript
in a locked cabinet in his office. What was he hiding? Stevenson, the
so-called "thinking man's candidate," had, in fact, flunked out of Harvard Law.
In the end, neither intellect nor academic performance is an
especially importan criterion by which to judge our presidents.
Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman were no scholars, but they rank amon g
the best presidents in our country's history. And what about many
liberals' favorite president - Franklin Roosevelt? Social, popular,
and famously unserious as an undergraduate at Harvard, FDR had an
undistinguished academic record. Yet, later in life, Roosevelt's
charisma and his ability to persuade, compromise, and lead helped him
to become a "reformer with results."
This election is not an I.Q. test; it is about which candidate has
better judgment. And that is why, despite the media's love affair
with the celluloid image of Al Gore the policy-wonk, it is the
affable, authentic, and sensible Bush who would make the better
leader.
The quote bush has been tossing around the debates is that after his cut the richest 1% will be paying 1/3rd of the taxes at only 1/5th of the benefit. Current taxes are actually much higher.
Note: 1/5 1/3
The concept behind it is this: everyone in the united states works hard for their money. Therefore, if there is a cut, everyone should benefit.
So assume that the people who are smart enough and work hard enough to get to the top 1% are also smart enough to set up a foundation to protect the money they made. Who does that leave to be taxed? The remaining 99%.
I wish to comment on this issue because my grandmother, a farm owner, just completed the process to place her farm in a Limited Family Partnership to protect it and allow it to stay in the family.
I really do not think any of you understand the issue. Probably becuase you do not feel it relates to you, nor do you know anyone who has been hit by this problem. There are thousands of people in the US to whom the words "inheritence tax" and "probate" are as bad as the your doctor mentioning the word "cancer". The number of these people exceeds the number of people in the "richest 1%" of the population.
The basic summation of estate/inheritence taxes is that if the estate is worth less than $675,000 the tax is something like 1%.
If the estate is worth more than that, the tax is 40-50%
My grandparents were born in a rural community in northern maryland, and *worked*hard*all*their*lives*. My grandfather was a carpenter and a school teacher, my grandmother started working in a canning factory at 14 to help support her parents' farm, and later became a nurse. Eventually they saved enough to start their own business and were successfull retailers of wood stoves, and merry tillers.
When they were in their 50's, they had saved enough to buy 140 acres, to have a family farm of their own. This was their american dream. The farm is small, but the current cost of the land alone is over $1 million. Were the farm still in operation, the value would be much more.
If the family partnership did not exist, when my grandmothers dies, the farm that she worked for all their lives would dissapear for the sole reason that my family would not be able to afford the 40% estate tax, and the $50,000 in associated legal fees.
No, there is not an exemption for being a farmer.
This is not a story of the "richest 1%" of the population.
This is the story of 2 people who started out being what today would be caller poor, and through hard work and determination, managed to scrap together their dream.
Why should my grandparents, and my family lose what they worked for becuase of the inheritence tax?
It took two years of legal process (and great financial cost) to establish the family partnership. The result of which is that I never again have to see my grandmother cry at the thought of losing her land.
The concept of patron is ancient. There was a time (awhile ago) when artists and scientists were supported by rich patrons so that they could focus on their creative work.
The modern world would be much different if it were not for the discoveries and art of these men. (if someone could reply to this message with some names of these artists and scientists, it would be much appreciated. I cannot remember any at the moment...)
I have felt for a long time that free software development could benefit from this model.
How many great developers are out there who have to work 8 hours a day, before coming home exhausted to fit in 2 or 3 hours of coding between dinner and bedtime?
So here's the next point. Altough the wave of get rich quick startups that characterized the laste 90's is in decline, there are now 1000's of financially sufficent millionaire developers.
If you are one of there people, run down to your investment counselor and find out how you could donate a couple of grand a year to Open Source development. There's probably some loophole that would make it tax exempt or a deduction. Get together with some of your millionaire friends and pick a project to sponsor. It doesn't have to be perl, but a project that you feel could benefit your interests and hopfully the interests of the community by having a full time developer(s). Go to sourceforge and find one that looks cool. Perl, linux kernel development, freenet, maybe a game engine. It's your money, but you could use it to help us all.
1) A working title is not necessary the final title at all. It's just something the movie people use to give some kind of reference to the movie. This way they don't have to keep saying "that lucas film with the spaceships and that slug guy and the fuzzy little bears" all the time. They could call it "Fred" if they wanted. It's just to make their lives a little easier.
2) "Rise of The Empire" is no worse a title than "The Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi"
"We have just finished a tour, we played in Barcelona, the next day the entire performance was up on Napster and three weeks later when we got to play in Israel the audience knew the words to all the new songs and it was wonderful." An interesting change from the Metallica look at things- hopefully more artists will follow their lead."
Ok, so I'm a little tired of all this Metallica bashing.
I took the time to read the major press releases and watch the wonderful piece of pulitzer prize winning journalism that was the MTv news special.
Granted that Lars is not one of the great orators of the 21st/22nd century, so it takes a little digging to find out what he was saying.
Metallica does not object to bootlegging. In fact they greatly support it. So the comment above about Radiohead's view being different from Metallica's is not correct.
Metallica objects to having their studio recorded digital masters released on the internet without their permission. The straw that broke the camels back was being able to download their MI2 single from Napster before they had even finished recording it. (technically for this to happen someone first had to actually steal a copy of the song from the studio. This is not the "grey" area of mp3's but the black area of actual larceny)
Metallica went to Napster and asked them to restrict the trading of Metallica's studio mastered songs (*not* the bootlegged live concerts). Since Napster was designed to share live music, they should not have object to this.
Napster refused, essentially saying "ha ha prove it you morons". (Note: do not dare a rock star to do anything, especially when they survived a decade of chugging Jagermeister)
This lead to the media circus we all know and love. After the circus, Napster banned 300,000 users.
This ban is not what Metallica asked for, nor was it what they wanted. Lars has stated this publicly again and again. Metallica basically asked for a filter to be applied to Napster searches. If they had done this comparatively simple task, Metallica and the people that Napster alienated would be on the side of Napster instead of against them.
Given Napsters actions to date, I am not surprised by their story of being shut down:
everyone (including napster) keeps saying that the judge ordered napster to be shut down. this is not the case. the judge ordered them to make sure no one is trading copyrighted material, and the result is that napster is telling everyone they've been ordered to shut down
Also, Apple is known for designing solid and well performing hardware.
To the best of my knowledge, a powerPC based server with Apple's knowledge of scsi and firwire should perform as well as, or better than, a comparable intel based system.
Why port to Intel/WinNT when you can more easilly port to OSX and get better performance to boot?
who are working longer hours, taking fewer and shorter vacations (when they do go away, they take their cells, Palms and laptops along) and say they are more stressed than any other segment of the population.
I only stress out when my cable connection at home goes down. It went off at 9pm one day for maintenence. I honestly didn't know what to do.
Listen, I code for a living, I code for fun. But I also put effort into getting plenty of exercise and sunshine. It's all about finding the balance that works well for you. Find that balance and your stress will go away.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
Quite frankly, most web users in the world are using windows with netsacpe or IE.
Current versions of netsacpe and IE either: 1) ship with these plugins (if they are popluar enough) or 2) will automatically down and install them without the user having to do anything (not even a reboot!)
Sure html is great. I remember writing up pages back in the day with notepad.
But in this day and age where a lot of money is put into designing cool sites that will bring people back, designers are going to go with whatever lets them create glitz and flash. Especially when 95+% of their users have or can easily get the necessary plugins.
How important are these plugins? I have a very knowledgeable friend that designs web pages usign flash script. Bright guy, geek, runs linux at home etc. Last month he point blank told me that "Flash 4.0 will bury html"
You can complain about it all you want, but it isn't going away. Maybe mozilla will have some kind of easy plugin porting layer so *nix users can get plugins faster.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I was at home depot today picking up parts to turn our pool into a hot tub, and needed some pvc...
you can get 10' lengths of 1 1/2" pvc for around 2.50, and the joints are about 50 cents to $1 each. The pvc rig you're talking about shouldn't be more than $20-30
A good 4'x8' sheet of 1/2" plywood is about $20, and 2x4's are about 2.40 each.
I always built my desks completely out of 2x4's with screws so you can take it apart easy. Never underestimate the power of 2x4's and a good coat of woodstain to look nice.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I write a little digital audio mixing program (see link below), and I chose Option 2. I have yet to be flamed for anything, and have actually recieved a patch from one person (thanks owen), and suggested patches from another...
For me it's a matter of pride in my work. In order for other people to use my project, which I've sweated and bled for (cut myself installing a soundcard...), I feel that it should be: 1) stable as I can make it 2) clean, so others can understand it 3) have a certain feature set and core API. Currently I am the only one who knows what features are needed. Could others help out? sure. but the code base is so new, that to have even 3 people poking around in it could mess it up for the other developers. But until the code reaches a point where I feel it is ready for others to add to, I'm going to keep all development on my home system. Also, the other developers may not understand the final goal, and may start adding features that are unneeded and hinder the achivement of the ultimate goal. 4) Have the proper clean and organized directory structure and file setup. Otherwise, the entire tree could easilly become convoluted and hinder development. 5) all the docs are ready. this includes architecture specs so that future developers will not need to reverse engineer anything.
The other thing is that this may be Open Source, but it is "my baby". It's my name on the copyright. Using the GPL means that the code is free, but it is still owned by me and I can do whatever I want with it. I am under no moral obligation or compunction to release code. I release the code because I want to. I am feel that I am performing a service to the community, and quite frankly getting an email from some kid in germany thanking me for my work makes it all worth while. And I want my baby as perfect as it can be before someone else tries to use it.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I believe tat this is because GTK+ was written in C. here is the relevant section from Havoc Pennington's GTK+/Gnome Application Development:
"Why is GTK+ written in C?
First and foremost: asking this question in any public forum is strongly discouraged. Don't do it. Check the archives for several extended off-topic flamefests if you're interested.
Here are some reasons:
The original authors wanted to write it in C, and now many C-only applications are based on it. The current authors enjoy C.
GTK+ handles types and objects much more flexibly than C++; it is runtime-oriented, more like Java or Objective C than C++ system. This is convenient for GUI builders and language bindings.
C is the lingua franca of UNIX development; most people know how to code in it.
There are already nice toolkits for languages such as Java and Objective C. There are C++ wrappers for GTK+; several, in fact.
C is more portable than C++; ANSI C++ is not yet widely implemented, so only an ill-defined subset of C++ can actually be used.
When GTK+ development first started, there was no free, working C++ compiler.
Again: do not ask this question on any mailing lists, because people will not be amused. "
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
Slashdot Mirror
I havn't read Shadow of the Hegemon yet, but in Ender's Shadow, the title was meant to indicate Bean's existance as a shadow of Ender, always seen as less important than Ender was.
Good point. And in Shadow of the Hegemon bean is secondary to the Hegemon.
From the book review on Amazon.com:
"...just as [Bean] played second to Ender during the Bugger war, Bean must again step into the shadow of another, the one who will be Hegemon. "
Sig:
Whether or not I agree with your opinion of card, I must disagree with your reasoning.
The merit of an author is should not be based on the overall themes that may connect his/her books, but on how they tell the story. Who are the characters? Can you relate to them? What happens to them? How are they affected/changed by their experiences? Is their world realistic and believable?
By your reasoning, Ender's Game and Memory of Earth should be exactly the same book, while in reality they are very very different. The characters are different, the setting is different, and the events are different.
The themes you describe apply to a majority of the stories written as well. Take the script for Armageddon for instance. Characters with trouble in their lives? Check. Run into trouble (asteroid, planetary death)? Check. Omnipresent controlling influence? Check. Defeated evil by the end of the book, or is dead but has still been victorious? Double Check.
Card may not author great literay works like Dickens or Flaubert, but he is a great storyteller. And in my book that's the better of the two.
Card consistently manages to write good novels, something that eludes way to many popular authors now adays.
Sig:
Although I agree that it would be educational to have access to the logs, keep in mind that NASA is a government agency. As such, all information given to the public must be reviewed and approved beforehand. It's just the way that governments work, and they aren't going to change anytime soon.
Sig:
Everytime someone announces a new VR/3D environment, GUI, or WM I am reminded of a scene from Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash that really stuck in my mind when I read it..
I don't have the book available to quote it, but in this scene the main character has to hack the 3D world (which he was one of the main programmers for) so he can spy on the bad guys unseen. So he logs into the world, hops on the VR subway to his house, goes into his VR room, sits down at his VR desk and (drum roll please) switches over to a 2D UI.
It's a small section, only about 2 pages long. The reason why is something like it being preferred by true hackers because it is the fastest most efficent way to get work done.
Every major application that we use is 2D. Does it really matter if the windows or menus are cool 3D objects? Maybe there just needs to be more research done on the subject. But until then I will always think of this character who developed this VR world, but drops it in a second when real work needs to be done.
Sig:
2.5 Terabytes? Piff. That's not enough ram. Tell those boys to call back when they're ready to play.
Sig:
2 years ago, the licensing fees for Tekken 3 on playstation was *the*largest* single source of income for Sony corportion. A third party wrote the game.
Let me paraphrase this:
A single third party game made more money than any of sony's other products.
This easially makes up for money lost on console production, launches, and failing game companies.
For every game company that fails, there are two people out there that want to start one. Shortage of companies should not be an issue for a long time.
Sig:
This topic was actually discussed on MSNBC last night as it came up after one of the elections carter was involved in. I forget which one.
The point is, an extensive study was done afterwards (by a number of separate academians) and it was found that the eastern results did not really affect the western vote in any significant way.
CNN is reporting a 54 to 42% win for Gore in california, a 12% win. I think this margin is too large for the voter sway you are descirbing.
So maybe winning florida swayed some people. But is was also a lone standout in a sea of red on the "map". Wouldn't that sway people in the other direction? Optically, bush was winning, and he was ahead in the electoral vote for most of the time before the west coast polls closed.
Except that Sega already has a very lucrative, cross-platform, games business. This is where game companies make their money, not the hardware. Sega's game income may dip a little bit, but it is in no danger of dying.
The advantage of owning the console as well is that you make licensing fees off of every game sold for that platform. in either 98 or 99 Tekken 3 for playstation was sony's best seller over all of its products (including tv's vcr's etc), and they didn't even write it.
maybe I'm a little bitter right now from the *definite* pro-gore slant of the previous slashdot articles (not just David Brin's screed either)...
Before everyone starts complaining about how Bush is assasinating Gore, keep in mind that Character assasination is performed by both sides, not just the GOP. The Gore compagin has been assasinating Bush's character since last year. How did they do this you might ask?
Bush's college/graduate school record is much better than Gore's. In fact, Gore never graduated from Vanderbilt.
The following Op-Ed appeared in the Boston Globe on september 7th. Before flaming this post (or the opposite), please take the time to read it.
Op-Ed
GORE'S DUBIOUS SCHOOL RECORD
JENNIFER C. BRACERAS
JENNIFER C. BRACERAS Jennifer C. Braceras is an attorney and research fellow at Harvard Law School. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.
When will the liberal media stop treating left-wing ideology as a
proxy for intelligence? For months the press has questioned the
intellect of Republican candidate George W. Bush, while describing Al
Gore as "serious," "intellectual" - even "wonkish."
The basis for the media's unfair attacks on Bush's intelligence is his
30-year-old Yale College transcript (purloined last fall and published by The New Yorker). Yet The Washington Post's subsequent revelation of Gore's
unimpressive academic record has done little to alter the media's false
portrayal of Gore as "the smartest kid in the class." It is a record
that is worth reviewing, if only to debunk the myth of Gore as a serious
student.
Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's,
including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science
course, and a C-plus in another. "In his sophomore year at Harvard,"
the Post reported, "Gore's grades were lower than any semester
recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale." Moreover, Gore's graduate
school record - consistently glossed over by the press - is nothing
short of shameful. In 1971, Gore enrolled in Vanderbilt Divinity
School where, according to Bill Turque, author of "Inventing Al
Gore," he received F's in five of the eight classes he took over the
course of three semesters. Not surprisingly, Gore did not receive a
degree from the divinity school. Nor did Gore graduate from
Vanderbilt Law School, where he enrolled for a brief time and
received his fair share of C's. (Bush went on to earn an MBA from
Harvard).
But whereas the liberal press has described Bush's college days as
a time of misspent youth, media accounts of Gore's undergraduate
years are grossly fawning. (The New York Times: "As Mr. Bush was
frolicking around Yale, a young man named Al Gore was studying at
Harvard"; "Harvard nurtured the part of [Gore] that is in love with
the world of ideas." The New Republic: "At Harvard, Gore set himself
formidable intellectual challenges.")
And then there is the laughable October issue of Psychology Today.
As part of a cover story20 entitled, "Gore and Bush on the Couch," the
magazine reports the results of a spurious "analysis" of 10 of the
candidates speeches and/or interviews. The authors claim that the
study "verifies" the popular stereotype that "Bush is not as deep a
thinker as Gore."
Two pages later, readers will be shocked - shocked! - to learn
that the magazine's (no doubt scientific) study of the candidates'
facial gestures reveals that Gore is the "more serious, constrained,
controlled, weighty, ponderous, [and] dominant of the two
candidates." More ponderous, perhaps . . . but, please, spare me the pop
psychology.
Biased reporters, however, are not the only ones to blame. Indeed,
the vice president himself has cultivated this genius persona (one of
many). Thus, he did not correct PBS News anchor Gwen Ifill when she
referred to him as a graduate of Vanderbilt Law School. Even more
significant was the line in Gore's convention acceptance speech in
which he stated, "I know my own imperfections. I know that sometimes
people say I'm too serious, that I talk too much substance and
policy." Poor Al, he's just too smart for the job.
Of course, the stereotyping of conservative candidates as dumb and
liberal candidates as "brilliant" is nothing new. During the 1950s,
the media lionized Democrat Adlai Stevenson as an intellectual,
while ridiculing Republican Dwight Eisenhower as an ineffectual
simpleton. Back the n, the members of the press knew full well that
Stevenson attended Harvard Law School and, yet, had not received a
degree. But the media gave Stevenson a pass. (Sound familiar?) Had
resourceful journalists investigated, they might have learned (as we
now know from Stevenson's biographer John Bartlow Martin) that
Harvard Law School Dean Erwin Griswold had hidden Stevenson's transcript
in a locked cabinet in his office. What was he hiding? Stevenson, the
so-called "thinking man's candidate," had, in fact, flunked out of Harvard Law.
In the end, neither intellect nor academic performance is an
especially importan criterion by which to judge our presidents.
Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman were no scholars, but they rank amon g
the best presidents in our country's history. And what about many
liberals' favorite president - Franklin Roosevelt? Social, popular,
and famously unserious as an undergraduate at Harvard, FDR had an
undistinguished academic record. Yet, later in life, Roosevelt's
charisma and his ability to persuade, compromise, and lead helped him
to become a "reformer with results."
This election is not an I.Q. test; it is about which candidate has
better judgment. And that is why, despite the media's love affair
with the celluloid image of Al Gore the policy-wonk, it is the
affable, authentic, and sensible Bush who would make the better
leader.
9/7/00 BOSTONG A15
The quote bush has been tossing around the debates is that after his cut the richest 1% will be paying 1/3rd of the taxes at only 1/5th of the benefit. Current taxes are actually much higher.
Note: 1/5 1/3
The concept behind it is this: everyone in the united states works hard for their money. Therefore, if there is a cut, everyone should benefit.
So assume that the people who are smart enough and work hard enough to get to the top 1% are also smart enough to set up a foundation to protect the money they made. Who does that leave to be taxed? The remaining 99%.
I wish to comment on this issue because my grandmother, a farm owner, just completed the process to place her farm in a Limited Family Partnership to protect it and allow it to stay in the family.
I really do not think any of you understand the issue. Probably becuase you do not feel it relates to you, nor do you know anyone who has been hit by this problem. There are thousands of people in the US to whom the words "inheritence tax" and "probate" are as bad as the your doctor mentioning the word "cancer". The number of these people exceeds the number of people in the "richest 1%" of the population.
The basic summation of estate/inheritence taxes is that if the estate is worth less than $675,000 the tax is something like 1%.
If the estate is worth more than that, the tax is 40-50%
My grandparents were born in a rural community in northern maryland, and *worked*hard*all*their*lives*. My grandfather was a carpenter and a school teacher, my grandmother started working in a canning factory at 14 to help support her parents' farm, and later became a nurse. Eventually they saved enough to start their own business and were successfull retailers of wood stoves, and merry tillers.
When they were in their 50's, they had saved enough to buy 140 acres, to have a family farm of their own. This was their american dream. The farm is small, but the current cost of the land alone is over $1 million. Were the farm still in operation, the value would be much more.
If the family partnership did not exist, when my grandmothers dies, the farm that she worked for all their lives would dissapear for the sole reason that my family would not be able to afford the 40% estate tax, and the $50,000 in associated legal fees.
No, there is not an exemption for being a farmer.
This is not a story of the "richest 1%" of the population.
This is the story of 2 people who started out being what today would be caller poor, and through hard work and determination, managed to scrap together their dream.
Why should my grandparents, and my family lose what they worked for becuase of the inheritence tax?
It took two years of legal process (and great financial cost) to establish the family partnership. The result of which is that I never again have to see my grandmother cry at the thought of losing her land.
As if I didn't have enough things to be paranoid about *before*...
If anyone needs me, I'll be under my bed.
Hopfully, the radiation from my cell phone will kill me off first.
The concept of patron is ancient. There was a time (awhile ago) when artists and scientists were supported by rich patrons so that they could focus on their creative work.
The modern world would be much different if it were not for the discoveries and art of these men. (if someone could reply to this message with some names of these artists and scientists, it would be much appreciated. I cannot remember any at the moment...)
I have felt for a long time that free software development could benefit from this model.
How many great developers are out there who have to work 8 hours a day, before coming home exhausted to fit in 2 or 3 hours of coding between dinner and bedtime?
So here's the next point. Altough the wave of get rich quick startups that characterized the laste 90's is in decline, there are now 1000's of financially sufficent millionaire developers.
If you are one of there people, run down to your investment counselor and find out how you could donate a couple of grand a year to Open Source development. There's probably some loophole that would make it tax exempt or a deduction. Get together with some of your millionaire friends and pick a project to sponsor. It doesn't have to be perl, but a project that you feel could benefit your interests and hopfully the interests of the community by having a full time developer(s). Go to sourceforge and find one that looks cool. Perl, linux kernel development, freenet, maybe a game engine. It's your money, but you could use it to help us all.
I always knew Mario could kick Sonic's @$$.
1) A working title is not necessary the final title at all. It's just something the movie people use to give some kind of reference to the movie. This way they don't have to keep saying "that lucas film with the spaceships and that slug guy and the fuzzy little bears" all the time. They could call it "Fred" if they wanted. It's just to make their lives a little easier.
2) "Rise of The Empire" is no worse a title than "The Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi"
"We have just finished a tour, we played in
Barcelona, the next day the entire performance was up on Napster and
three weeks later when we got to play in Israel the audience knew the
words to all the new songs and it was wonderful." An interesting change
from the Metallica look at things- hopefully more artists will follow their
lead."
Ok, so I'm a little tired of all this Metallica bashing.
I took the time to read the major press releases and watch the wonderful piece of pulitzer prize winning journalism that was the MTv news special.
Granted that Lars is not one of the great orators of the 21st/22nd century, so it takes a little digging to find out what he was saying.
Metallica does not object to bootlegging. In fact they greatly support it. So the comment above about Radiohead's view being different from Metallica's is not correct.
Metallica objects to having their studio recorded digital masters released on the internet without their permission. The straw that broke the camels back was being able to download their MI2 single from Napster before they had even finished recording it. (technically for this to happen someone first had to actually steal a copy of the song from the studio. This is not the "grey" area of mp3's but the black area of actual larceny)
Metallica went to Napster and asked them to restrict the trading of Metallica's studio mastered songs (*not* the bootlegged live concerts). Since Napster was designed to share live music, they should not have object to this.
Napster refused, essentially saying "ha ha prove it you morons". (Note: do not dare a rock star to do anything, especially when they survived a decade of chugging Jagermeister)
This lead to the media circus we all know and love. After the circus, Napster banned 300,000 users.
This ban is not what Metallica asked for, nor was it what they wanted. Lars has stated this publicly again and again. Metallica basically asked for a filter to be applied to Napster searches.
If they had done this comparatively simple task, Metallica and the people that Napster alienated would be on the side of Napster instead of against them.
Given Napsters actions to date, I am not surprised by their story of being shut down:
everyone (including napster) keeps saying that the judge ordered napster to be shut down. this is not the case. the judge ordered them to make sure no one is trading copyrighted material, and the result is that napster is telling everyone they've been ordered to shut down
Also, Apple is known for designing solid and well performing hardware.
To the best of my knowledge, a powerPC based server with Apple's knowledge of scsi and firwire should perform as well as, or better than, a comparable intel based system.
Why port to Intel/WinNT when you can more easilly port to OSX and get better performance to boot?
who are working longer
hours, taking fewer and shorter vacations (when they do go
away, they take their cells, Palms and laptops along) and say they are more
stressed than any other segment of the population.
I only stress out when my cable connection at home goes down. It went off at 9pm one day for maintenence. I honestly didn't know what to do.
Listen, I code for a living, I code for fun. But I also put effort into getting plenty of exercise and sunshine. It's all about finding the balance that works well for you. Find that balance and your stress will go away.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
Quite frankly, most web users in the world are using windows with netsacpe or IE.
Current versions of netsacpe and IE either:
1) ship with these plugins (if they are popluar enough) or
2) will automatically down and install them without the user having to do anything (not even a reboot!)
Sure html is great. I remember writing up pages back in the day with notepad.
But in this day and age where a lot of money is put into designing cool sites that will bring people back, designers are going to go with whatever lets them create glitz and flash. Especially when 95+% of their users have or can easily get the necessary plugins.
How important are these plugins? I have a very knowledgeable friend that designs web pages usign flash script. Bright guy, geek, runs linux at home etc. Last month he point blank told me that "Flash 4.0 will bury html"
You can complain about it all you want, but it isn't going away. Maybe mozilla will have some kind of easy plugin porting layer so *nix users can get plugins faster.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
currently showing on Cartoon network at 4pm and 12am eastern time...
The DVD's are supposed to start coming out this month, but at 5 episodes per DVD (out of, like, 50) at $25 a pop it gets a little pricey...
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
This is kinda off topic, but for a while now I've been wondering, how does napster make any money?
I mean, assuming they got venture capital to start with, they have to have some sort of business plan...
But the client is free...
And I have yet to see advertising on their website or within the client itself... (other than ads for themselves...)
What's up? Who's paying their legal bills?
Or am I missing something obvious?
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I was at home depot today picking up parts to turn our pool into a hot tub, and needed some pvc...
you can get 10' lengths of 1 1/2" pvc for around 2.50, and the joints are about 50 cents to $1 each. The pvc rig you're talking about shouldn't be more than $20-30
A good 4'x8' sheet of 1/2" plywood is about $20, and 2x4's are about 2.40 each.
I always built my desks completely out of 2x4's with screws so you can take it apart easy. Never underestimate the power of 2x4's and a good coat of woodstain to look nice.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I write a little digital audio mixing program (see link below), and I chose Option 2. I have yet to be flamed for anything, and have actually recieved a patch from one person (thanks owen), and suggested patches from another...
For me it's a matter of pride in my work. In order for other people to use my project, which I've sweated and bled for (cut myself installing a soundcard...), I feel that it should be:
1) stable as I can make it
2) clean, so others can understand it
3) have a certain feature set and core API. Currently I am the only one who knows what features are needed. Could others help out? sure. but the code base is so new, that to have even 3 people poking around in it could mess it up for the other developers. But until the code reaches a point where I feel it is ready for others to add to, I'm going to keep all development on my home system. Also, the other developers may not understand the final goal, and may start adding features that are unneeded and hinder the achivement of the ultimate goal.
4) Have the proper clean and organized directory structure and file setup. Otherwise, the entire tree could easilly become convoluted and hinder development.
5) all the docs are ready. this includes architecture specs so that future developers will not need to reverse engineer anything.
The other thing is that this may be Open Source, but it is "my baby". It's my name on the copyright. Using the GPL means that the code is free, but it is still owned by me and I can do whatever I want with it. I am under no moral obligation or compunction to release code. I release the code because I want to. I am feel that I am performing a service to the community, and quite frankly getting an email from some kid in germany thanking me for my work makes it all worth while. And I want my baby as perfect as it can be before someone else tries to use it.
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
Web browser?
file manager?
Document viewer?
Customizable?
Uh... so they want to be Emacs? (somebody had to say it =) )
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
I believe tat this is because GTK+ was written in C. here is the relevant section from Havoc Pennington's GTK+/Gnome Application Development:
"Why is GTK+ written in C?
First and foremost: asking this question in any public forum is strongly discouraged. Don't do it. Check the archives for several extended off-topic
flamefests if you're interested.
Here are some reasons:
The original authors wanted to write it in C, and now many C-only applications are based on it. The current authors enjoy C.
GTK+ handles types and objects much more flexibly than C++; it is runtime-oriented, more like Java or Objective C than C++ system. This
is convenient for GUI builders and language bindings.
C is the lingua franca of UNIX development; most people know how to code in it.
There are already nice toolkits for languages such as Java and Objective C. There are C++ wrappers for GTK+; several, in fact.
C is more portable than C++; ANSI C++ is not yet widely implemented, so only an ill-defined subset of C++ can actually be used.
When GTK+ development first started, there was no free, working C++ compiler.
Again: do not ask this question on any mailing lists, because people will not be amused. "
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2